[quote]malonetd wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
It’s disturbing how many chest-thumping neocons we have here who just lap up anything Fox News puts out.
I find it disturbing how many people misuse terms like “neo-con”.
Oh, come on. You’re just being a neo-neo-con.[/quote]
[quote]lixy wrote:
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but it’s Kudos vs. Kang everytime. Particularly so with regards to foreign policy. [/quote]
You mean Kodos vs. Kang.
I’m disappointed in you.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Politicians make the decision to go to war, not the troops.
[/quote]
Politicians decide to go to war, but the troops agree to participate. The have the freedom to disobey. Nazis operating under Hitler could have voluntarily refused to comply. Those who didn’t cannot use the excuse that they were operating under the orders of the Third Reich. Soldiers are responsible for the atrocities they commit. Period.
Troops make the decision to agree to kill for the government regardless of the cause. The agree to participate no matter how unjustifiable or atrocious the operation. They agree to surrender their conscience and their minds and blindly follow without question.
[quote]Gael wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Politicians make the decision to go to war, not the troops.
Politicians decide to go to war, but the troops agree to participate. The have the freedom to disobey. Nazis operating under Hitler could have voluntarily refused to comply. Those who didn’t cannot use the excuse that they were operating under the orders of the Third Reich. Soldiers are responsible for the atrocities they commit. Period.
Troops make the decision to agree to kill for the government regardless of the cause. The agree to participate no matter how unjustifiable or atrocious the operation. They agree to surrender their conscience and their minds and blindly follow without question.[/quote]
What is your point?
My point is that “Politicians make the decision to go to war, not the troops” is empty rhetorical bullshit, for the reasons I stated.
It’s a variation of “You may disagree with the cause and hate the politicians, but you should respect the troops for what they are doing.”
You guys do realize that US troops have done awful stuff in WWI, WWII, Korea, and Vietnam as well? This is not isolated events this is “Man”.
You should read about some of the sick stuff both sides did during the Civil War. We did it to our own people.
Liberals want you to believe in the goodness of man but Malcomb Muggeridge said it best
�??The depravity of man is at once, the most empirically verifiable reality. Yet at the same time, it is the most intellectually resisted fact.�??
The horror of what man is capable of either hasn’t been realized or has been forgotten by most in this country. The affulence of the US will be its undoing.
[quote]will to power wrote:
Freedom, security, whatever, how were Iraqi’s threatening you exactly?[/quote]
We all know that Pakistan has the bomb. North Korea has the bomb. Iran wants the bomb and everyone who hates the US and the west thinks this is a great idea.
Do you think the world would have been a safer place if Saddam did have nukes? Maybe we should have left him alone to develop them like everyone else. What do you think of this idea?
There was fear that he would hand nuclear technology over to al-Qaeda. I am not saying it can not be done by the Chechens (who get their hands on some nuclear material) in Russia or by the Pakistanis or North Koreans, I am just stating our reasons for invading Iraq.
That is what I mean by “security”.
[quote]Gael wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Politicians make the decision to go to war, not the troops.
Politicians decide to go to war, but the troops agree to participate. The have the freedom to disobey. Nazis operating under Hitler could have voluntarily refused to comply. Those who didn’t cannot use the excuse that they were operating under the orders of the Third Reich. Soldiers are responsible for the atrocities they commit. Period.
Troops make the decision to agree to kill for the government regardless of the cause. The agree to participate no matter how unjustifiable or atrocious the operation. They agree to surrender their conscience and their minds and blindly follow without question.[/quote]
Who said the war was an atrocity and illegal? It is sanctioned by the U.S. Any soldier who commits a crime and is convicted will be punished.
I really hate comparisons to Nazis. It’s such a been-done go to and usually doesn’t fit, as it doesn’t here.
Soldiers are under orders that they must follow unless it would be a crime.
Lixy, it is just the attitude of tarring the soldiers such as in the original post… did you read it?
Will to Power, I was responding to you dragging in the Iraq war.
Regular Gonzales it is the attitude of the woman in the original post.
This thread is so off the original course
“Who said the war was an atrocity and illegal? It is sanctioned by the U.S.”
OG, the point is that at least some wars are unethical(in spite of their legality), and as such a good moral person would object regardless of the circumstances. The U.S executive branch cannot make actions right by “sanctioning” them.
[quote]gkchesterton wrote:
“Who said the war was an atrocity and illegal? It is sanctioned by the U.S.”
OG, the point is that at least some wars are unethical(in spite of their legality), and as such a good moral person would object regardless of the circumstances. The U.S executive branch cannot make actions right by “sanctioning” them.[/quote]
this isn’t that case
and who’s ethics? I hate all the subjective junk, I doubt if your morals and ethics are directly in line with mine in everything. Neither better nor worse, just not the same.
I will step out now, this is a whole political cluster fuck when it didn’t need to be
why exactly did this thread turn into a war thread
isnt this about some sicko throwing a puppy off a cliff.
in my eyes just because the dudes over there dosent mean anything.
besided the fact that maybe he was driven crazy from the stress of his job over there but still tahts about it
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Gael wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Politicians make the decision to go to war, not the troops.
Politicians decide to go to war, but the troops agree to participate. The have the freedom to disobey. Nazis operating under Hitler could have voluntarily refused to comply. Those who didn’t cannot use the excuse that they were operating under the orders of the Third Reich. Soldiers are responsible for the atrocities they commit. Period.
Troops make the decision to agree to kill for the government regardless of the cause. The agree to participate no matter how unjustifiable or atrocious the operation. They agree to surrender their conscience and their minds and blindly follow without question.
Who said the war was an atrocity and illegal? It is sanctioned by the U.S. Any soldier who commits a crime and is convicted will be punished.
I really hate comparisons to Nazis. It’s such a been-done go to and usually doesn’t fit, as it doesn’t here.
Soldiers are under orders that they must follow unless it would be a crime.
[/quote]
Do you try to be this dim? I compared nothing to the Nazis, and said nothing of legality. It seems you failed to comprehend all that you read.
im sorry i just dont get why everyone is so hung up on this whole “theyre protecting our freedom” bullshit. man, no on signed up in 5 years that wanted to protect our freedom. these guys are out there for a paycheck and thats it. dont lie to yourselves people most the people out there were like shit i can either do this, go to jail, or work some shitty ass job and hopefully make manager in 5 years. and just for clearification i know a bunch of people in various branches of the service
Agreed. This soldier fetishism has to stop. Hero worship is almost always bullshit, and this is no exception.
[quote]Gael wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Gael wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Politicians make the decision to go to war, not the troops.
Politicians decide to go to war, but the troops agree to participate. The have the freedom to disobey. Nazis operating under Hitler could have voluntarily refused to comply. Those who didn’t cannot use the excuse that they were operating under the orders of the Third Reich. Soldiers are responsible for the atrocities they commit. Period.
Troops make the decision to agree to kill for the government regardless of the cause. The agree to participate no matter how unjustifiable or atrocious the operation. They agree to surrender their conscience and their minds and blindly follow without question.
Who said the war was an atrocity and illegal? It is sanctioned by the U.S. Any soldier who commits a crime and is convicted will be punished.
I really hate comparisons to Nazis. It’s such a been-done go to and usually doesn’t fit, as it doesn’t here.
Soldiers are under orders that they must follow unless it would be a crime.
Do you try to be this dim? I compared nothing to the Nazis, and said nothing of legality. It seems you failed to comprehend all that you read.[/quote]
"Nazis operating under Hitler could have voluntarily refused to comply. Those who didn’t cannot use the excuse that they were operating under the orders of the Third Reich. "
“The(sic) have the freedom to disobey.”
Nooooo, not really. Only in the specific cases where following orders would constitute a crime. Even then there is a jurisdiction and circumstance that would have to be considered before they could or should disobey.
dim… I guess the whole personal attack is to buttress your argument?
[quote]LiveFromThe781 wrote:
im sorry i just dont get why everyone is so hung up on this whole “theyre protecting our freedom” bullshit. man, no on signed up in 5 years that wanted to protect our freedom. these guys are out there for a paycheck and thats it. dont lie to yourselves people most the people out there were like shit i can either do this, go to jail, or work some shitty ass job and hopefully make manager in 5 years. and just for clearification i know a bunch of people in various branches of the service[/quote]
Perhaps that is true of the military personnel that you know, not the ones I know. A person attracts the type of people they are, the whole birds of a feather thing.
I have family and friends that are in it for more than a paycheck.
I have no doubts that there are some that are in there just for the benefits and the paycheck. So long as they are putting in their effort and good service they deserve every benefit and all the pay they’ve earned.
[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Gael wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Gael wrote:
OctoberGirl wrote:
Politicians make the decision to go to war, not the troops.
Politicians decide to go to war, but the troops agree to participate. The have the freedom to disobey. Nazis operating under Hitler could have voluntarily refused to comply. Those who didn’t cannot use the excuse that they were operating under the orders of the Third Reich. Soldiers are responsible for the atrocities they commit. Period.
Troops make the decision to agree to kill for the government regardless of the cause. The agree to participate no matter how unjustifiable or atrocious the operation. They agree to surrender their conscience and their minds and blindly follow without question.
Who said the war was an atrocity and illegal? It is sanctioned by the U.S. Any soldier who commits a crime and is convicted will be punished.
I really hate comparisons to Nazis. It’s such a been-done go to and usually doesn’t fit, as it doesn’t here.
Soldiers are under orders that they must follow unless it would be a crime.
Do you try to be this dim? I compared nothing to the Nazis, and said nothing of legality. It seems you failed to comprehend all that you read.
"Nazis operating under Hitler could have voluntarily refused to comply. Those who didn’t cannot use the excuse that they were operating under the orders of the Third Reich. "
“The(sic) have the freedom to disobey.”
Nooooo, not really. Only in the specific cases where following orders would constitute a crime. Even then there is a jurisdiction and circumstance that would have to be considered before they could or should disobey.
[/quote]
You are ALWAYS free to disobey orders, even if this means going to prison as a result of your disobedience. I don’t care whether following the orders constitutes a crime. Most of the atrocities in history did not constitute punishable crimes. On the contrary, most were embraced by the perpetrating society as a good thing. If you follow orders that require you to go against your conscience, you are not a hero. You are a moral coward.
Yours is the very mindset that enables the worst sins against humanity in history. Hitler is responsible for the holocaust, but so is each and every single person at every rank under him who participated. To pretend otherwise is blind.
Were you a young man in Germany in the 40s, you and most the other people in this thread would have gladly and blindly and patriotically participated in the genocide.
And, no, I’m not comparing the Iraq war to the holocaust, in case you wish to point out again that such comparisons are stupid.
HAHAHA cadence I remember-
I went to the curchyard where all the crazies play
I pulled out my (weapon of choice) and blew em all away
I went to east green where all the hippies play
I pulled out my (weapon of choice) and blew em all away
I went to the schoolyard where all the kiddies play
I pulled out my (weapon of choice) and blew em all away
anyway cant remember anymore but sang that around campus a few times.
But honestly who cares its a fucking dog, I like to think of them as four legged plates of korean beef
[quote]Gael wrote:
You are ALWAYS free to disobey orders, even if this means going to prison as a result of your disobedience. I don’t care whether following the orders constitutes a crime. Most of the atrocities in history did not constitute punishable crimes. On the contrary, most were embraced by the perpetrating society as a good thing. If you follow orders that require you to go against your conscience, you are not a hero. You are a moral coward.
Yours is the very mindset that enables the worst sins against humanity in history. Hitler is responsible for the holocaust, but so is each and every single person at every rank under him who participated. To pretend otherwise is blind.
Were you a young man in Germany in the 40s, you and most the other people in this thread would have gladly and blindly and patriotically participated in the genocide.
And, no, I’m not comparing the Iraq war to the holocaust, in case you wish to point out again that such comparisons are stupid.[/quote]
Fella, I get the point you are trying to make, but it isn’t the same as what I stated.
If a soldier chooses to disobey a lawful order he will be punished. If a soldier determines that his orders would be considered a criminal action he may decide to not follow those orders.
First, there is no inherent onus upon anyone to do anything. Forget this whole moral imperative crap. As I mentioned in another post, whose morality? Yours or mine?
Hitler this, holocaust that. Man buy a new record.
My mentality is just fine… and again with the personal attacks.
Try to consider that there is also the mentality of those who fought against all those atrocities you like to trot out. The military who fought those wars, defended the freedoms also have a mentality.
Just because someone doesn’t blindly agree with you, doesn’t mean they are wrong and a mindless drone, it means they don’t agree with you and think for themselves.
[quote]Gael wrote:
Were you a young man in Germany in the 40s, you and most the other people in this thread would have gladly and blindly and patriotically participated in the genocide.[/quote]
Were I a young German man in the 40’s I’d be thinking “wait a second, my country is trying to exterminate a race of people”. I’d then move to another country and proceed to have efficient German sex with the women of whatever country I moved to.