What crime are you talking about?
Regards,
Shodan
The rape.
If your buddy sits doing me a good deed while you rape me, is he absolved of all blame in watching me get raped and doing nothing about it?
Because it seems that some people were saying that fixing some roads and handing out some food absolves thosee occupation troops who haven’t actually shot anyone from any moral culpability. I was disagreeing.
It’s no fun insulting someone who is too dim to realize it.
Regards,
Shodan
colour me woooshed, your sophisticated wit just went right by me.
Did I say anything against self defense ? No, I did not. I am not anti military; I simply oppose a military that steals ( your oil arguement ), conquers, rapes and tortures. Stopping aggression is one thing; abusing people while you do it is another, and so is a land grab like Iraq.
There’s no reason that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing children and women while breaking their historical customs and dirtying their Persian rugs.
Yeah, but starving medics are of use to no one.
So the folks fighting in the Pacific in WW2 were okay but the ETO was filled with nasty Americans? And the folks who were in Somalia and Desert Storm were murdering thugs?
No, for the same reason that the Republican party shouldn’t adopt a plank stating that capital punishment is wrong.
Daniel
We don’t steal oil. We demand the right to buy it. We’d be much cozier if we just stole it. Rape and torture is against our military policy. Individuals in the military do it, but that does not mean that it is legal. Just as individual citizens do horrendous crimes, it does not mean that all citizens should be condemned. Your land grab accusation is silly. We will not hold onto a square inch of Iraqi land.
:rolleyes:
What crimes? Those deemed so by the rules of war and the U.S. code of military conduct? Or those things considered crimes by Sal Ammoniac and der shit? How many times is too often? What is the number? Or is it a percent? Should these numbers be weighted against the good done? How do we measure the good? Who makes the final assessment?
Sure I can. Because I’m also aware of the immense good the military has done. War sucks. But there are times when no war sucks a whole lot more.
Are you saying that the only just use of the military is after we’re attacked. That we need to wait to be the victim, and then retaliate?
Are you saying that each soldier should be held accountable for collateral damage?
Yes. Because that is both right and the only way we can continue to have an effective military.
You need to get your head out of your ass and look at the real world. The “policy” you refer to is necessary. But you know that. You just want the military to go away because they do icky things.
GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS. I didn’t think anyone could be so detached from reality or utter something this stupid. I’ve come to the conclusion that you’re even a dumber fuck then der shit. A CSI-type investigation into every civilian death?! Have the investigation not be done by the military?! Well, just who, pray tell, would you have do it. And who would you like to secure the crime scene so no evidence can be disturbed? Oh wait, we could send David Caruso over there. He must be tired of Miami by now. :rolleyes:
Because we balance it with all the good our military has done. Have you ever heard of a person called Adolf Hitler?
Well, at least now the cat is out of the bag. You want the military to never kill an innocent civilian and are willing to get rid of the military to do it. Please tell me you’re like, ten-years-old and have hippie parents who pipe Lennon’s “Imagine” throhgt the house all day long. Because child protective services should know about that, and none of this would be your fault.
If you’re over ten, you’re the one who needs to think. And do a lot of it. Let’s start with a little game. Imagine what posible negative consequences might result from either saddling our people in our military with the unreasonable degree of responsibility you propose? Or elimiinatiing the military altogether.
He said an insurgent.
And that’s why we don’t call it a wonderful day in the park. That’s why we call it war. And that is why we judge a soldier’s actions in war differently then yours or mine.
Would you say that 9/11 negatively effected out economy? If we didn’t have a strong military do you think that the likelihood of further attacks would be greater or less? Do you prefer that we did not have the ability to go into Afghanistan they way we did?
Inasmuch as a cook is feeding a medic rather than a combat trooper, su much less moral negativity attaches to him.
Are you saying that doing anything else doesn’t make you a bully?
Oh, for fuck’s sake - I doubt more than 10 persons on this board fought in WWII, you do not get to drape yourself in that flag forever.
I’d say the likelihood of attacks would be a lot less. It’s your military prescence in Saudi that riled ol’ Bin Laden up in the first place. Reap, meet Sow.
I’d prefer if the US did not have the means, or else the will, to project its force beyond its own borders unilaterally. I’d wish the same for every nation.
Magellan, it’s obliging of you to act as the poster child for my argument. Your staggering callousness about civilian casualties is far more eloquent on the point than I ever could be.
No. But doing something else doesn’t necessarily make you a bully. If we got wind of the attack on Pearl Harbor the day before and attacked their planes 100 miles off their coast, would that have justifiable? Would that have been wise? Prudent? How about if we heard a week before? A month? You are talking about pre-emption. And back just before we went into Iraq, Joe Biden put his reasonable position very well. He said that if he believed that Iraq was a grave threat to us even one year from now, that he would support pre-emptive action in Iraq.
Oh, for fuck’s sake—what does actually haviing served in WWII have to do in anything? Most people haven’t, yet we can still discuss it. Same for Iraq. Very few of SDMB posters have served there, yet it makes perfect sense for us to discuss it, doesn’t it?
This riles you because it is a clear case of the military doing good. And everyone knows it. Everyone (sane) knows that the world is MUCH better off that Germany and Japan were defeated. And that just get’s under your hate-the-military, blame-the-big-bad-U.S. skin. Too fucking bad. It’s called reality.
And you are wrong. We can and should feel pride about the role our military played in WWII. Million—no, billions—of people enjoy the results of their noble efforts every single day.
And if there not? Do you think it wise to gamble with the security of our nation?
And herein lies the problem. Your no-military fantasy is just as utopian in theory and hellish in reality as communism. Do you really think it is realistic that All nations will ever go non-military? EVER? Here in the real world, I mean. Because it certainly wouldn’t be good of all—except one—decided to go that route, would it?
What, specifically, are you refering to?
And the reality for the less ignorant among us is that Stalin had much more to do with the defeat of Nazi Germany than we did. Are you now going to offer an impassioned defense of Papa Joe’s soldiers?
What, exactly, are you talking about?
BTW, you might want to fall back and obey this site’s rules regarding posting in a language other than English.
Doesn’t mean your assertion actually makes sense. That just means you think it does.
Ah, I see it now. Feeding someone = Immoral; killing civilians = moral, unless of course it’s an accidental killing of a civilian by the US military and then it’s immoral.
He also gets riled up when women wear pants.
There is nothing we can do to ensure that no one will ever be mad at us.
magellan01, inability to project force does not equal no military. I have no objection to a purely defensive professional force. I mean, really, you have the bomb, no other nation-state’s actually going to invade you, are they?
As to the WWII thing, yes, the American military was good and just for most of WWII. So Fucking What does that have to do with its participation in an unjust war? Are you really telling me your position is:
“Anything bad the military does is excused because we used to be good guys - once, 60 years ago”
Tell me that’s not what you’re saying. even if yo make it Korea, or Kosovo, same difference.
How soon they forget - but then, I’d understand if you would want to.
Thanks, Mr Modera…oh, wait, you aren’t one any more, are you. What’s the guideline about junior modding, again, Jr.? Rules only apply to me, do they?
Must admit, there’s no rule about English in the registration agreement. There is one guideline in a sticky, but if it burns you up so much, I’ll stick to English insults only from now on.
nope, killing civilians = immoral no matter who does it. Never said any different.