This thread simply confirms my opinion. I’ve hurt no one, yet I am being talked about as if I’m some sort of monster. As someone who deserves some sort of torment or death.
So now you claim the majority of Americans are sadists ?
I am neither dead, nor have I killed anyone. A rather important difference.
[QUOTE=silenus
]
No, he is a lot different. A Buddhist who immolates himself in protest I respect. A homicide bomber I respect. I don’t agree with them or their beliefs, but I respect their commitment to them (I am still waffling on the bombers, though. I think most of them are just frustrated and brainwashed. YMMV.) Der Trihs is just scum.
[/QUOTE]
Nice to know that murderers get more repect than non-murderers. What makes you think I want the respect of someone like you, who thinks murder or suicide is better than criticism ?
I get called over the top for claiming we are nasty and brutal, and get nasty and brutal replies. If you people meant to convince me I’m wrong, you’ve done the opposite. It says a lot about America that the guy who’s not calling for the brutalization and death of his opponents is considered the extremist.
No, you get called on being a dumb fuck who is quick to attribute the worst to America and its military and the best to people who want to blow up them and innocent Iraqis. This is evidenced by the disgust you have with those who are in harm’s way, calling them rapists and murderers nearly every chance you have.
No, you cause people to want to spit on you because you spit on these young men and women who risk their lives and limbs in service for this country that guarantees you the right to utter your stupidity. And I mean figuratively you dumb fuck. Because I know you wouldn’t have the balls to do anything to anyone face-to-your uglyfuckingface.
No, you disgust, disappoint, and anger people because you burst their bubble that no one could be so unappreciative of men and women who risk it all day in, day out; that no one could be so insensitive to kids that will be coming back without all their body parts. I’d give my car to see you talk your shit to some kid coming back with one arm and then see him take off his prosthetic and slap you with it till you shit in your pants and cried for mommy, or mao.
You are deserving of contempt because you want to rob from the parents , wives, and husbands of these kids the comfort they find—rightly so—in the nobility of the service of their loved ones.
You make people want to piss on you because you don’t understand that it is possible to detest this war and still respect our troops. You, the scumbag Columbia professor DeGenova, who wished a “million Mogadishus” on our troops, and the anarchist scumbags from ANSWER who carry signs saying “We support our troops, who kill their officers” deserve to start your own country—preferrably in the Middle East—where your "enlightened " society would last about one week. I do not wish you harm there, and certainly not beheading, as it wold be no loss. What I wish you is simply the misery of yor own making. the misery your “enlightened” ideals would guarantee you. And you wouldn’t have to ever worry about U.S. troops raping and murdering anyone in Dershitzistan because we wouldn’t want to send them there and offend your “enlightened” sensibilities.
You are smug dumbass, who like smug dumbasses the world over think they are much smarter and “enlightened” than they actually are. You are a mentally stunted moron who thinks that by grabbing onto a theoretical ideal that you actually have ideals. You don’t. All you have is a fetid, diseased mind and blistering hate for those that serve this country.
You are an ignorant ass who doesn’t even understand the role of the military and its necessity. You don’t understand the idea of answering to anyone else than your own jerk-off fantasies of the world holding hands singing Kubaya. You don’t understand the importance of the nation state, the boon it is, and what we have to do to protect it.
Your syphillated brain is incapable of processing patriotism and sacrifice, at least when the U.S. flag is involved.
But there is one thing you excel at. And that is being the most detestable, stupidest, scummiest scumbag on these boards, and I would bet, in any group you are a part of. You know, someone in every group has to hold that title. And congratufuckinglations asshole, it’s you.
Can you not see that you are reviled? Think about it. SDMB is a fairly left lean leaning board, with some posters being rather extremely to the left, yet no one has come to your defense—to their great credit.
I was encouraged to pit you before, but I didn’t want to waste time having to do with you. But I’m glad Rune pitted you and gave me the opportunity to purge myself of all thoughts der shit.
Why don’t you just stay under your rock, for now. Wait to the lion’s share of troops are home and there’s a larger chance that some of them might be in your neighborhood bar. Then go there and spout your ignorant "enlightened bullshit. I’ll tell you what, the beers are on me.
Magellan01, thank you for again proving my point. There are far worse and far stupider people than me all over, yet because I don’t fall into line and praise “the troops” I’m some sort of demonic evil. I don’t even threaten anyone, and you people talk like I’m a confessed child cannibal.
Ok Der Trihs, I’m going to attempt to explain this one to you with no insults, derogatory remarks, etc. I agree with you, that any soldier, airman, seaman, or marine who rapes, murders someone in cold blood, or otherwise beats/abuses anyone is reprehensible, deserves no respect what-so-ever, and deserves the most severe punishment possible. I may catch a little flack for this statement, but I happen to believe that it is acceptable for our servicemen to die to help secure the freedoms of others, even if they are not Americans. I’d rather hear about dead military personal than dead civilians. At the least those in the military chose to put themselves in harm’s way.
The point you’re missing is that the portrayal you are making of those who serve our country only covers about 0.01% of our troops. The overwhelming majority of those in uniform do not commit any of the atrocities that you are talking about. Hell, we have a general telling our troops that if they see anyone else’s troops performing these acts to step in and stop them. They support the rules of war and desire nothing more than to provide safety and security to those who need it. They are trying to give a group of people the chance to choose their own destiny, something they have not had. Then they want to come home.
What about the medic that does not carry a rifle into battle? The corpsman that runs through a firefight to remove non-combatants from the field of fire? Are they too painted with the same brush that rightfully so condemns the actions of a select few?
Excellent post kinoons, I tried 3 times to frame a post like this and I failed.
Der Trihs Every time you paint any group with the broad brush, you will generally give the appearance of lower intelligence.
When I served my country, it was in a non-violent way with almost no chance of violence. I have never shot a gun in my life and I don’t plan to. I am honest enough to say that if someone threatened my family or friends I would be willing to use any means possible to protect them up to deadly force. I would in all likelihood fail in my attempt due to a lack of training but I would try.
I honestly believed bringing an end to the Soviet Union was a good cause worth fighting for. My method of fighting was as a non-combatant as an Electrician in the Navy. Instead of killing people, I occasionally helped save a few lives.
In your postings, you would seem to think I was a murdering and raping man and it would have been fine if a terrorist blew me up while I was on a liberty briefly in the Philippines or Thailand or Korea. Instead I am a very peaceful man who strongly believed in my country and democracy vs. Soviet Dictators.
Thank you for condemning myself and many friends and several relatives. My Niece’s Fiancée served in Sarajevo on a useful peacekeeping mission. Is he also a horrible person? Now he is a professional Fireman, sounds more like a person that believes in helping others in a very active way.
No they don’t. They talk like you’re an uncouth, arrogant twit. Which you are.
You are personally insulting people and their loved ones. You can’t reasonably expect to get any other reaction. I suspect you’re doing on purpose, because you like feeling all put-upon and martyrish.
I wouldn’t go as far as Der Trihs has in accusing the common soldiers, but at what point is it necessary to hold people to account for the wrongs they help perpetuate?
Der Trihs is too critical. Most Americans aren’t critical enough.
I’m going to offer a defense of Der Trihs here, cost me what it may. I don’t get this line of argument that says that the war is wrong, but only the brass bear the blame. We’re not a nation of conscripts anymore. We’re free agents, and we have the choice to enlist or not enlist. That’s where moral agency is exercised – not when you’re standing in Iraq with bullets raining down. Even if you enlisted before the war began – because you’re a patriot, because you wanted to defend your country – you’re not absolutely obligated to take part in a war that you find reprehensible. There are ways out, even if it means getting court-martialed. Which is worse, after all – getting court-martialed, or playing along and finding out to your horror that you’ve killed a couple of civilians by accident?
And make no mistake – we as Americans care a lot more about the Marine who gets killed than we care about the civilians caught in the crossfire. We’ve killed tens thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan, just as we killed about a million in Indochina. We obsess about our own dead – we count them and name them individually, we treat their bodies with loving care. But the others? The taxi containing a civilian family that blundered too close to one of our patrols, and got wasted? We never care to count them or know their names. They just join that undifferentiated mass of the unfortunate, with no one here to call them brave or honorable or patriotric.
This kind of casual racism is embedded in the nature of war. You can’t join the military without being accepting of this notion that your buddies matter than a thousand ragheads or slopes or gooks or Japs. And all the ritualized kowtowing to our military – of which this thread provides perfectly good examples – really means nothing more than that we’re giving a pass to militaristic and anti-humanistic attitudes.
If war – and especially this war – is wrong, then it’s wrong, full stop. And it’s equally wrong to give our soldiers a free pass from any sort of responsibility or accountability.
The fact that this is your defense should say something to you.
I’d think about it.
Do you think that the only way to cause damage in this world is through violence? What would you say of someone who speaks in support of racism, bias against women or gays, or pedophelia? What do you think of Goebbels? He was just getting out an idea, right?
I want to thank tomndebb for helping debunk that debunking nonsense. Now I can go back to believing my own lying eyes. I didn’t actually see spittle fly, but I did see shoving and a punch thrown at the Philadelphia airport. It’s impossible for me to believe that all across the nation there were incidents of shoving, taunting and fighting, but no one ever thought to spit. If anyone doubts the rancor, just read the sentiments magellan01 compiled. They read like placards from a 30 year old time capsule.
I just heard an interview with Scott Ritter on the radio. He was extremely critical of the war, blamed both Clinton and Bush for it, called it an essentially illegal war, and said that the easiest way to get out would be to get out–quit discussing it, quit bloviating, and just get out.
When he talked about the harm of the war, he referred to the deaths of our sons and daughters. Here he is, talking about an illegal war in which tens of thousands of civilians have died, and they don’t merit a single word.
The death of a soldier in an unnecessary war is a tragedy, but the death of a civilian in an unnecessary war is an atrocity. If a soldier believes that this war is justified, then I believe she is mistaken. If a soldier believes that this war is unjustified but continues to fight in it, then I believe that she is behaving in a monstrously immoral fashion.
Unless you are willing to say that ALL wars are wrong and that we should NEVER fight them, so we don’t even need a military then this is just a load of nonsense. Because if you believe that we might someday fight a war you approve of, maybe one of strict defense, then you have to have a m ilitary in place. If you would like it to be effective and vitorious, thay have to be well trained. And for a war to be prosecuted effectively, and even trained, you need a strict hierarchy and chain of command. Soldiers have to follow orders. Sometimes they necessarily won’t know “why” they are doing something, only that it needs to be done. You cannot have every soldiers weighing the strategic and moral wisdom of every single order.
This is not to say that soldiers have NO responsibility for their actions, only that unless confronted with a specific order that violates the rules of war or our own military code of conduct, or his own morality, he must simply assume that the action is legitimate, justifiable, and correct. If a soldier operates outside of the rules (Abu Ghraib) he should not expect his uniform to shield him from justice.
War is, by definiton, ugly. People die in war. Innocent people die in war. That’s why we should never go to war except as a last resort. People will draw that line in different places in different instances, and we may disagree with it in a particular instance, but if you are a member of the U.S. military you have agreed—and sworn—to carry out the duties you have been assigned. To expect every soldier to weigh every order during a time of war is ridiculous. Oftentimes he doesn’t even have all the information required to make a full assessmnet of the situation. Here we are safe and sound in the States playing on a debate board. There are many people who have the time, inclination, and know-how to get enormous amounts of information concerneing every aspect of the war. And not even all of them agree on what should be done in every situation. And this is just one board of many.
No, we NEED a military, and an effective one. That means the certain realities are going to have to be accepted. We should work to minimize them, as our soldiers are doing right now in Iraq. But we should not expect to eliminate them. The soldiers who are serving US have chosen to do an honorable thing by putting themselves in harm’s way. They deserve our respect and understanding. They deserve that we give them the benefit of the doubt.
And the families that the soldiers left behind here—our neighbors, friends, and coworkers—they have the right to expect something from us, as well: an understandinig and appreciation of their sacrifice. Empathy. And the acknowledgement that days, lives and limbs that will be lost will be lost in an act of honor of the highest order.
This is an example of what I meant when I complained about giving our soldiers a pass on the morality of their actions. The way you have laid it out, so long as the commanders decide on an action, the troops are completely absolved. And the reason we grant the commanders this authority, you say, is because we have to have a military, because we may need it for self-defense. But there’s a huge disconnect here, and it has to do with the fact that when our military is engaged, it is usually not for self-defense. In the 20th century, I’ll give you World War II, and maybe World War I, but Vietnam? Korea? The Philippines? Grenada? Haiti? The Dominican Republic? Gulf War I?
"War is, by definiton, ugly. People die in war. Innocent people die in war. " Exactly. That’s why I object when you and others paint military service as “an act of honor of the highest order.” Let’s make the ugliness of war the central fact about it, and not some peripheral objection.
