As a matter of fact…
I understand, and we can always hope you step in front of a bus.
Marc
No, because I’m not a thug.
Not at all; I have no objections to a military being used for self defense, or for actually liberating people like WW2. I do object to a military that engages in aggressive wars. I’m not anti-military; I’m anti the US military right now.
This would mostly sum up my opinion as well.
So I guess my question is, why do you place the responsibility for selecting conflicts on the soldiers? If you think they ought to evaluate this action as bad and conscientiously object en masse, I guess that’s somewhat understandable. You don’t have much of an army if every action is subject to review by the enlisted, but whatever.
You’re trying to hold the moral high ground after *wishing death *on thousands of people because you don’t agree with their choice of job?
Der Trihs, keep this sort of talk in the Pit. It’s not appropriate for IMHO.
Oakminster, do not threaten or wish violence or death against another poster.
You, too.
To all: Der Trihs, is, as noted above, being Pitted. Those who wish to address him rather than the OP may go there.
Apropos of nothing, this thread through about post #9 was a major *dejas vu *moment for me. Whew.
Because they volunteered?
I’m moving this one to the Pit, as it’s not really conducive to lighthearted opinions. And a mere debate has already been squashed by the tone of the responses.
Let it all hang out.
samclem
And I should have previewed. Frank already issued warnings when it was an IMHO thread. I’ll confer with him, but I think leaving it in the Pit is the right thing.
Frank, Der Trihs should be banned for wishing death on other posters. We have active duty military on this board, and Der Trihs just wished for them to be killed. Ban the motherfucker already.
Frank, I know this is touchy but, no wishing violence? That’s a new one. There are many many posts in the Pit where people walk right up to that line of wishing death (I hope a rusty chainsaw … may a thousand plagues … etc.) without going over it. Just a point of clarification.
Well, I was trying to include threatening violence and wishing death in the same sentence. You’re right - it didn’t parse well.
Oakminster was threatening violence against a specific poster; MGibson was wishing death on a specific poster. Neither is good.
Agreed. This offense has happened multiple times. Oakminster’s threat was at least veiled.
Der Trihs was wishing death on posters. Yeah, a general category of posters. But if someone said “I voted for Bush” and I replied, “I hope people who voted for Bush are killed”, then I’ve wished for them to die.
Seriously, this is pathetic. Der Trihs deserves an instaban for this.
No, I wasn’t. I invited him to repeat that statement within arms reach of me. Did not say what might happen next. That ain’t a threat, it’s an invitation.
I’ll plead guilty to one count of issuing an innapropriate invitation, and try to avoid repeat occurences. Maybe you can arrange for Lynn to give me a spanking?
If **Monty **and I were arguing about the LDS Church and I said “All Mormons are immoral scum and I hope each one of them is murdered,” I would get smacked down post haste. I’ve asked for a ruling. Interested parties are invited to do the same.
To try to get the thread back on track (and maybe back in IMHO): I have a friend who mustered out of the Navy a while ago, with great relief. But he had a wife and three kids to support, and wasn’t able to find a job better than security guard for about a year. He eventually re-enlisted, in the Army: that’s where the pay and the job training was. He’s in Iraq now, firmly inside the Green Zone in a non-combat position, thank goodness.
Altogether it was a bad set of choices he had to make. I don’t think less of him for having to do it, although I wish he had had more options - more education, more family support, or something.
That said, I am not a military person, and cannot understand the perspective one must have to be *willing *to point a gun at someone, especially if you’re not absolutely certain you’re doing it for a just cause. But that’s a personal philosophical stance - it just means I can’t *understand *a soldier’s mindset, not that I look down on him.
What are you, nuts? Of course it was a threat. Personally, I find Der Trihs’s opinion on this subject appalling, but I think it’s even more appalling to endorse responding to such an opinion with physical violence.
At least Der Trihs is only endorsing the murder of people he believes are attempting murder themselves—i.e., he thinks it’s more fair for the iraqis to kill invading American soldiers than vice versa. You, on the other hand, are endorsing physical violence towards somebody who isn’t attempting any physical violence, merely expressing an unpopular and shocking opinion.
Okay, now you’re just being childish. Still, it’s reassuring insofar as it shows that you’re not actually willing to stand by an endorsement of physical violence against people who are non-violently expressing revolting opinions.
If someone said “An armed murderer is breaking into my neighbor’s house in order to shoot him” and you replied “I hope your neighbor manages to kill the intruder before the intruder kills him”, would you deserve banning?
Look, I don’t agree with Trihs’s assumption that US servicepersons automatically equal murderers, and I’m not defending it. But if he does honestly hold that opinion, then ISTM it is not particularly unreasonable or immoral for him to hope that murderers get killed by their intended victims rather than the other way around.