I’m completely against the war in Iraq. Our soldiers should never have been sent over there to die over poor intelligence at the very least, and old grudges and power plays at the very worst. That being said, you’re still acting like a real prick in those threads. It’s like if a PETA fanatic came in and bitched about the enslavement and slaughter of innocent animals in every MPSIMS thread about cooking and summer barbecues. No, you may not think the examples are equivalent, but I suspect many PETA members would - and it’d be just as fucking annoying to the people reading those threads.
Can I start lots of threads for the brave men that get killed fighting US soldiers whom are trying to kill them? They also fit the “epitome of bravery”, yes?
Or maybe 11000+ threads remembering the innocents that have een killed by Allied bombs and bullets. cite
Sure, start all the threads you want to start. People may read them if they choose.
The problem most folks have with the OP here is that he was jumping into threads started by someone else and pissing all over them. That’s considered rude in most circles.
Olentzero, you are quite clearly being a dick in those threads. The place for pissing on somebody else’s point of view is the Pit, not MPSIMS.
"Hey Mr. Moto, you sick fucking ghoul. "
Great first line for a Rock/Metal song, though.
Put it to music, dude.
Mr. Moto, thank you for your service to our country, and for highlighting the bravery and self-sacrifice of those who are fighting in the cause of freedom.
God bless America, and all freedom-loving people everywhere.
Regards,
Shodan
On a semi-related tangent, would it be possible to merge all of these threads and keep it to one? I’m not sure how much we need a new thread for each person.
Robin
I disagree. Warriors respect warriors. The Red Baron was a heroic and brave pilot. There is now a thread in MPSIMS about a kick-ass pilot for the Nazis. There was a mythical pilot in Vietnam (not sure he was real) who was damned good, and garnered respect by both sides. Rommel was a tactical genius for the Third Reich. Politicians get these wars started. The guys slugging it out are doing a nasty job, and those who do it exceptionally well get kudos.
If an Iraqi General made some genius move and and his Iraqi Army unit decimated a US unit where and when they were least expecting it, I would mourn their loss, and respect that General.
Olentzero = dumbass
STFU.
I do, as a matter of fact. I am not pointing the Finger of Outrage & Blame at the soldiers, and I’ve said so quite clearly in at least one of Mr. Moto’s threads. The whole problem I have is that these threads are saying “Well, at least something good is coming out of this war” when clearly that ‘good’ comes with a price tag that is barely acknowledged, and in the most carefully inoffensive terms if that. I understand they have no choice in the matter (except in signing up, but that’s not the point here). Saying “Sure, this war is a Mongolian clusterfuck of epic proportions, but look how bravely our boys are fighting” is like saying “Sure, I let my rabid dog run loose, but at least he keeps the kids out of the street so they don’t get hit by cars”. (And frankly, I’m not even sure Mr. Moto does feel the war is an epic Mongolian clusterfuck, although he hasn’t said one way or the other.) Sure, you can tease something relatively good out of any situation, but that doesn’t mean that it’s good in and of itself. And with six out of seven (so far) citations for bravery involving further loss of life, the record for “good in and of itself” in these Damn Fool Wars ain’t looking too great.
Olentzero, check your e-mail.
Robin
Very interesting; I can’t really criticize this position, but it utterly baffles me. Do you mean to say that you’d praise Sadir in the following circumstances?
**The US army discovers a hideout of a group of insurgents; these are insurgents who (for the sake of argument) haven’t been bombing civilians, but have been successfully ambushing US convoys. The US moves in on their position.
Sadir, seeing the ambush early on and understanding the hopelessness of the situation, nevertheless grabs a rocket-propelled grenade launcher and bulls-eyes a Humvee full of troops, killing a dozen. In the resulting confusion, he manages to blow up another Humvee before a US soldier finally shoots him dead.**
If someone came onto our boards and lauded Sadir for his heroism in an act that killed two dozen US soldiers, you’d support that post?
Like I said, I’m baffled by this.
Daniel
Oh shut the fuck up, you self righteous asshole. Mr. Moto posted a thread detailing a military citation for bravery. He did not editorialize in any way, merely posted the reason for the letter accompanying the citation. For some reason, you think this is wrong. Tell me, is the thread wrong or is the citation itself wrong? Should the military stop giving citations all together if the events involved involved the loss of life? Perhaps we should posthumously revoke Sergeant York’s Medal of Honor from WWI. He did kill a lot of Germans after all.
Well, here is our problem, isn’t it. To recognize courage, gallantry and initiative is a fine and proper thing to do. To somehow use that bravery and gallantly to illuminate and enhance the policies that put those people in a position to be brave and courageous is a different matter. While Mr Motto’s postings are on their face benign, they come dangerously close to the knee jerk “support the troops” position advocated by too many politicians looking for cover for mistaken, ill-advised and poorly executed policy. That some or all of the service people in Iraq have done well and served honorably (a debatable proposition in view of disclosures) does not make the cause they serve better than it is.
Remember that some on these board have had the opportunity to be invited by a grateful government to go to strange places and be shot at by strangers. The men and women in Iraq and in Afghanistan wear on their shoulder the same unit patches that we wore . We know under what circumstances combat decorations are awarded (and that once in a while they are awarded for doing something really dumb) and have all respect for the people who earned them. That however does not transform this foreign adventure into some sort of noble cause. It doesn’t make any difference. As some one else said, probably better, a lie is still a lie no matter how much you fancy it up, it just becomes a bright and shining lie. In the last analysis a pig, even when you put it in a calico dress, apply lip stick and call it Florence, is still a pig.
All honor to the young men an women who serve honorably and well. Damnation to the corrupt cause they serve. Contempt for the short sighted and venial men who sent them into harm’s way.
Whoa-HOH! ZING!!! Took you all day to come up with that one, did it?
This pitting has backfired so spectacularly, I almost hesitate to wade in. But I would like to add a couple of points.
First, like I said before, I chose to place the threads in MPSIMS because I didn’t think there was much about the bravery of these servicemembers that could be a subject of debate. And the attendant controversies of war policy don’t matter one bit when it comes to discussing heroism in combat.
After all, it’s possible to act heroically in a conflict many don’t believe in. It’s evcen possible to do so in a conflict you yourself don’t believe in. This is the position John Kerry took on his own combat record, and it’s one I basically respect. I have many political issues with John Kerry, but I have always paid due respect to his genuine heroism under similar fire.
Secondly, I’m hardly a ghoul for recognizing these men for their heroism. The citations I’m reprinting are documents of the United States Government. The medals granted to these men have a meaning codified in law, and honored by both military and civilian custom.
The thanks I’m giving to these men, on these boards, has already been given to them on behalf of us all, in the form of the Navy Cross, Distinguished Service Cross or Air Force Cross.
Lastly, it must be said that Olentzero’s extreme reaction to these threads is a minority view, to say the least. Most people would see this heroism as what it is, and pay due respect to it.
Minority views should be given due regard, though, and I had done so by debating these points with Olentzero in another thread. I had tried, honestly, to respect his viewpoint by arguing fairly, in accordance with the written and unwritten rules of this board.
That was repaid by Olentzero by, basically, stalking me. He made a game out of getting his little protest into those threads ahead of everyone, without adding anything of value to the discussion. And now he calls me a “sick fucking ghoul” without any evidence to back that charge up.
I’m certainly willing to put it behind me. I can understand how an extreme political position can make emotions run high. But I’ll post the last two War Heroes threads, as promised. Olentzero’s welcome to link other threads from there if he wishes. That’s much more appropriate than his past behavior.
If he doesn’t like that, he can just pound sand.
The threads. Spavined Gelding and lambchops have elaborated my position quite eloquently, and I strongly suggest you re-read their posts.
That makes no sense, though. The OP’s in the threads are nothing but the citations, with very little attendant commentary.
The violence, death and destruction you have an issue with are in the original government citation.
Why can’t you just admit that you have an issue with the granting of Navy Crosses, Air Force Crosses, and Distinguished Service Crosses. All I was doing was pointing out that these medals had been recently won.
That’s marginally better, but I still think it’s idiotic. All Mr. Moto did was report the facts regarding the medals (in MPSIMS, not great debates). Again, he did not editorialize in any way. So, I have another question for you.
Would you still take issue if it was a newspaper reporting the same facts?
As to lambchops’ assertion that "by lauding these soldiers for bravery in achieving their mission in Iraq, you are supporting their mission in Iraq. ", I find it beyond ridiculous. Civilians don’t hand out medals, the military does… for the stated purpose of aknowledging heroism. It even says “heroism” in the letter. To call a civilian reporting who the military gave the award to “a ghoul” is absurd.
Gee. Guess he should have posted this in the Pit, then.
Oh, wait.
:rolleyes: