Forums > Social Discussion > Things people say
Login/Join to ParticipateEnter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
Posted:
Someone printed off this email, I kinda liked it. Ohh and if you see any errors, they are my fault, I couldnt copy and paste this it was typed haha that took a few minutes.
"On my way to work last week, I stopped behind a purple Geo Metro with my least favorite bumper sticker ever plasterd across the back. It read: "It'll be a great day when the shcools have all the money they need and the Air Force has to have a bake sale to buy a bomber."
At that moment, I realized who the most udervalued and under-appreciated segment of societ is. And it ain't the teachers. Teachers, I believe, rank second on that list. Heading the list are the men and women of the armed forces, who, thought history, have protected our cournty from the Hihtlers and Stalin's-then who would have had our white children marching to the school bus in jackboots and our minority children locked up in laboratories and labor camps.
The U.S. military--the most powerful and influential group of people in the world, hands-down--gets an awfully bad rap these days. Many Americans seem to think that simply because the communist Soviet Union no longer exists, the world is as safe as Beaver Cleaver's neighborhood. This, of course, ignores three facts:
1) Dozens of countries have nuclear weapons that could take out millions of people with the turn of a key
2) Leaders of several countries (e.g. North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Lebanon and perhpas China and Russia) would love to see the U.S. and its people blown to pieces.
3) The U.S. has the greates collection of human, economic, natural and technological resources anywhere on Earth, making it the greates natural target for military agression. Though some would like to fashion the U.S. of the 21st Century as a flowery feel-good fantasy where war and violence are mere after thoughts of a time gone by, that can never be the case. As bad as our crime and drug problems are we're still considerd the jewel of the planet by the half of the world that has yet to make its first phone call.
In ancient Greece, the people of Athens were unparalleled world leaders in art, philosophy and technology. Their rivals in Sparta were not; instead, the Spartans built massive, well-trained armies. When the two countries fought, who won? Sparta. And guess who lost their entire civilization because they didn't think it was important to build an appropriate amry? Athens! Right now, the U.S. has the best of Athens and Sparta: we are the most cultured and most well-defended country in the world. As we continue to lower our defenses by devaluing the military we open ourselves wider and wider to a takeover. A takeover of the U.S.?
Ridiculous, one might say. But why does it seem so unlikely? Because the power and protection of the U.S. military has been so overwhelming in the last century that Americans have been free to enjoy a comfort level unlike any in the world. We all take it for granted that we will never be invaded by another counrty, but foew other countries can afford to be so sure of themselves. It's not only Americans who can go to bed feeling safe.
Children everywhere from Israel to England, from Brazil to Japan know that, if their country is attacked, the U.S. will be there to hoelp. On TV, the military is often represented by stiff, buttoned-down generals or the occasional drill sergeant who is accused of feeling up a female recruit. In reality, things are much different. The men and women of the armed forces, are in most ways, just like everyone else: they are mechanics, pilots, cooks, photographers, engineers, secretaries and X-ray technicians. They work form 6 to 5 and then come home to their families. The one difference comes when the U.S. or any of its allies is threatened by a foreign power. In that case, military people pack up and ship out, off to fight -- and many times die -- so the rest of the country, including teachers, can continue their lives without interruption.
Teachers mold young minds into intelligent, independent people, and they should be admired for the job they do; however, I don't know any teachers who are required to catch bullets and swallow shrapnel if so ordered by the principal. So, old-fashioned as it may seem, I'm happy to give my taxes to the military and tell the tots and teachers to fire up any oven if they want extra dough. Make muffins, cookies and candy and be happy you're allowed to. Because, as the old saying goes, if it wasn't for the U.S. military, we'd all be speakin' German now."
"It is easy to take liverty for granted, when you have never had it taken from you."
--Dick Cheney
Someone printed off this email, I kinda liked it. Ohh and if you see any errors, they are my fault, I couldnt copy and paste this it was typed haha that took a few minutes.
"On my way to work last week, I stopped behind a purple Geo Metro with my least favorite bumper sticker ever plasterd across the back. It read: "It'll be a great day when the shcools have all the money they need and the Air Force has to have a bake sale to buy a bomber."
At that moment, I realized who the most udervalued and under-appreciated segment of societ is. And it ain't the teachers. Teachers, I believe, rank second on that list. Heading the list are the men and women of the armed forces, who, thought history, have protected our cournty from the Hihtlers and Stalin's-then who would have had our white children marching to the school bus in jackboots and our minority children locked up in laboratories and labor camps.
The U.S. military--the most powerful and influential group of people in the world, hands-down--gets an awfully bad rap these days. Many Americans seem to think that simply because the communist Soviet Union no longer exists, the world is as safe as Beaver Cleaver's neighborhood. This, of course, ignores three facts:
1) Dozens of countries have nuclear weapons that could take out millions of people with the turn of a key
2) Leaders of several countries (e.g. North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Lebanon and perhpas China and Russia) would love to see the U.S. and its people blown to pieces.
3) The U.S. has the greates collection of human, economic, natural and technological resources anywhere on Earth, making it the greates natural target for military agression. Though some would like to fashion the U.S. of the 21st Century as a flowery feel-good fantasy where war and violence are mere after thoughts of a time gone by, that can never be the case. As bad as our crime and drug problems are we're still considerd the jewel of the planet by the half of the world that has yet to make its first phone call.
In ancient Greece, the people of Athens were unparalleled world leaders in art, philosophy and technology. Their rivals in Sparta were not; instead, the Spartans built massive, well-trained armies. When the two countries fought, who won? Sparta. And guess who lost their entire civilization because they didn't think it was important to build an appropriate amry? Athens! Right now, the U.S. has the best of Athens and Sparta: we are the most cultured and most well-defended country in the world. As we continue to lower our defenses by devaluing the military we open ourselves wider and wider to a takeover. A takeover of the U.S.?
Ridiculous, one might say. But why does it seem so unlikely? Because the power and protection of the U.S. military has been so overwhelming in the last century that Americans have been free to enjoy a comfort level unlike any in the world. We all take it for granted that we will never be invaded by another counrty, but foew other countries can afford to be so sure of themselves. It's not only Americans who can go to bed feeling safe.
Children everywhere from Israel to England, from Brazil to Japan know that, if their country is attacked, the U.S. will be there to hoelp. On TV, the military is often represented by stiff, buttoned-down generals or the occasional drill sergeant who is accused of feeling up a female recruit. In reality, things are much different. The men and women of the armed forces, are in most ways, just like everyone else: they are mechanics, pilots, cooks, photographers, engineers, secretaries and X-ray technicians. They work form 6 to 5 and then come home to their families. The one difference comes when the U.S. or any of its allies is threatened by a foreign power. In that case, military people pack up and ship out, off to fight -- and many times die -- so the rest of the country, including teachers, can continue their lives without interruption.
Teachers mold young minds into intelligent, independent people, and they should be admired for the job they do; however, I don't know any teachers who are required to catch bullets and swallow shrapnel if so ordered by the principal. So, old-fashioned as it may seem, I'm happy to give my taxes to the military and tell the tots and teachers to fire up any oven if they want extra dough. Make muffins, cookies and candy and be happy you're allowed to. Because, as the old saying goes, if it wasn't for the U.S. military, we'd all be speakin' German now."
"It is easy to take liverty for granted, when you have never had it taken from you."
--Dick Cheney
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
addict
522 posts
Location: Berlin
522 posts
Location: Berlin
Posted:
That is the biggest pile of nonsense I have heard for a long long long time.
edit- just to add, its people like him that make the world a horrible place to live in.
That is the biggest pile of nonsense I have heard for a long long long time.
edit- just to add, its people like him that make the world a horrible place to live in.
Your life is ending one minute at a time...
So live it.
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,009 posts
Location: Bristol, UK
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,009 posts
Location: Bristol, UK
Posted:
What a most stirring, patriotic essay that is! I was reading it wondering what drove the person to write it, then I actually laughed when I read who it was attributed to! However I seriously doubt it's written by the Vice-President as the mention of China and Russia is enough to jepodise several lucrative business deals. Rather I think it's the work of a narrow-minded, ignorant individual who's view is heavily influenced by, or benefits from, the US's military and neo-imperialist policies. Hang on, maybe it is Dick
Firstly the sentiment of "if it weren't for us the world would be speaking German" fits exactly with the current US publicity statement of: "If it weren't for us the world would be wearing bedsheets and riding around on mules". It's trying to gain support for US policy by instilling a ignorant fear into it's readers.
The U.S. military ... gets an awfully bad rap these days.
Not strictly true. What has a shocking awful reputation (with actions to back it up) are the governments of the US and UK who have waged war and threatened countries in all corners of the world. The military are representations of a government, and enforcers of its will, who choose to represent their country's policies. Unfortunately the military are the people in the firing line, the one's who face the anger and disrespect felt towards the country they represent. Back home the politicians sit comfortably sipping brandy at fund raising dinners where oil executives persuade them that US presence in another country will make that pipeline easier and earn Mr. President more money.
And from what I hear the US military in gets respect in the US. If they had no respect would there be increasing opposition against the military occupation of Iraq every time yet another soldier is killed? No, the people of the US care about the military enough to say - bring our children home and stop them getting killed.
"Many Americans seem to think that simply because the communist Soviet Union no longer exists, the world is as safe as Beaver Cleaver's neighborhood."
I doubt that as the US government has done an excellent job of instilling Arabophobia into the hearts of it's citizens and thereby allowing a huge hike in military spending. This statement is just another of many designed to strengthen that policy.
1) Dozens of countries have nuclear weapons that could take out millions of people with the turn of a key
Er, yes, most of them are our allies or people we're happy to let have weapons. Every country with nuclear weapons has them because of the Cold War instilled philosophy that nuclear weapons makes a country a player in international politics. I don't know how to end this cycle but surely getting ourselves and our allies to stop producing more and more nukes is a good start?
2) Leaders of several countries (e.g. North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Lebanon and perhaps China and Russia) would love to see the U.S. and its people blown to pieces.
Actually most of them just want the US to stop interfering with their own country.
3) The U.S. has the greatest collection of human, economic, natural and technological resources anywhere on Earth...
Not true. This paragraph makes the US sound like it has everything in the world, and is the pinnacle of human achievement. It's arrogance at it's greatest.
we are the most cultured ... country in the world.
Sorry, I take back my last statement. THAT is arrogance at it's greatest! The arguments against this are lengthy, I really don't think I need to go into them.
As we continue to lower our defenses by devaluing the military we open ourselves wider and wider to a takeover. A takeover of the U.S.?
Rubbish! This is scare mongering aimed at non-thinkers. Even if the US cut it's military in half (and remember this budget has grown a lot recently) it would still be powerful enough to defend itself. No country has an army or resources capable of taking over a country as big as the US, just as the US would be incapable of taking over a country such as China.
With a cut in military spending money maybe the US could afford to do things that more culturally and spiritually advanced nations do, like look after their sick and poor, increase it's literacy levels (did you know that Iraq used to have better health care and literacy rates than the US).
"It is easy to assume you have liberty when your government thinks for you"
Yep, I was bored at work this evening
What a most stirring, patriotic essay that is! I was reading it wondering what drove the person to write it, then I actually laughed when I read who it was attributed to! However I seriously doubt it's written by the Vice-President as the mention of China and Russia is enough to jepodise several lucrative business deals. Rather I think it's the work of a narrow-minded, ignorant individual who's view is heavily influenced by, or benefits from, the US's military and neo-imperialist policies. Hang on, maybe it is Dick
Firstly the sentiment of "if it weren't for us the world would be speaking German" fits exactly with the current US publicity statement of: "If it weren't for us the world would be wearing bedsheets and riding around on mules". It's trying to gain support for US policy by instilling a ignorant fear into it's readers.
The U.S. military ... gets an awfully bad rap these days.
Not strictly true. What has a shocking awful reputation (with actions to back it up) are the governments of the US and UK who have waged war and threatened countries in all corners of the world. The military are representations of a government, and enforcers of its will, who choose to represent their country's policies. Unfortunately the military are the people in the firing line, the one's who face the anger and disrespect felt towards the country they represent. Back home the politicians sit comfortably sipping brandy at fund raising dinners where oil executives persuade them that US presence in another country will make that pipeline easier and earn Mr. President more money.
And from what I hear the US military in gets respect in the US. If they had no respect would there be increasing opposition against the military occupation of Iraq every time yet another soldier is killed? No, the people of the US care about the military enough to say - bring our children home and stop them getting killed.
"Many Americans seem to think that simply because the communist Soviet Union no longer exists, the world is as safe as Beaver Cleaver's neighborhood."
I doubt that as the US government has done an excellent job of instilling Arabophobia into the hearts of it's citizens and thereby allowing a huge hike in military spending. This statement is just another of many designed to strengthen that policy.
1) Dozens of countries have nuclear weapons that could take out millions of people with the turn of a key
Er, yes, most of them are our allies or people we're happy to let have weapons. Every country with nuclear weapons has them because of the Cold War instilled philosophy that nuclear weapons makes a country a player in international politics. I don't know how to end this cycle but surely getting ourselves and our allies to stop producing more and more nukes is a good start?
2) Leaders of several countries (e.g. North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Lebanon and perhaps China and Russia) would love to see the U.S. and its people blown to pieces.
Actually most of them just want the US to stop interfering with their own country.
3) The U.S. has the greatest collection of human, economic, natural and technological resources anywhere on Earth...
Not true. This paragraph makes the US sound like it has everything in the world, and is the pinnacle of human achievement. It's arrogance at it's greatest.
we are the most cultured ... country in the world.
Sorry, I take back my last statement. THAT is arrogance at it's greatest! The arguments against this are lengthy, I really don't think I need to go into them.
As we continue to lower our defenses by devaluing the military we open ourselves wider and wider to a takeover. A takeover of the U.S.?
Rubbish! This is scare mongering aimed at non-thinkers. Even if the US cut it's military in half (and remember this budget has grown a lot recently) it would still be powerful enough to defend itself. No country has an army or resources capable of taking over a country as big as the US, just as the US would be incapable of taking over a country such as China.
With a cut in military spending money maybe the US could afford to do things that more culturally and spiritually advanced nations do, like look after their sick and poor, increase it's literacy levels (did you know that Iraq used to have better health care and literacy rates than the US).
"It is easy to assume you have liberty when your government thinks for you"
Yep, I was bored at work this evening
Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
Posted:
Your right Dom, it wasnt written by the VP, that was just his quote used at the end. The guy who wrote that... heck I dont know who it was I would have to look at the email.
KoB, you live in this world, if it so bad why dont you do something productive to change it?
Neo-imperialist... so what exactly is that?
Then again England is the only empire left in the world isnt it?
Firstly the sentiment of "if it weren't for us the world would be speaking German" fits exactly with the current US publicity statement of: "If it weren't for us the world would be wearing bedsheets and riding around on mules". It's trying to gain support for US policy by instilling a ignorant fear into it's readers.
An ignorant fear... no sorry mate the truth of the matter, in WWII, a war the US tried to stay out of, if it wasnt for the US Europe would have been lost to the Germans. Russia on the other hand would have survived for a little while but when the Germans got control of what would be left of the Brittish industries, it would be game over. Then they would continue West and try to invade the US. However the Japanesse were already trying this and we all know how that went.
So, in fact the US is the reason why Germans speek German and yadda yadda yadda.
The U.S. military ... gets an awfully bad rap these days. Not strictly true. What has a shocking awful reputation (with actions to back it up) are the governments of the US and UK who have waged war and threatened countries in all corners of the world. The military are representations of a government, and enforcers of its will, who choose to represent their country's policies. Unfortunately the military are the people in the firing line, the one's who face the anger and disrespect felt towards the country they represent. Back home the politicians sit comfortably sipping brandy at fund raising dinners where oil executives persuade them that US presence in another country will make that pipeline easier and earn Mr. President more money.
Yep that is pretty much the truth. Everyone has a hidden agenda and it is the military that gets shat on. Then again we are here to make life better for Americans, and the Brittish military is there to make life better for the Brits. Thats the way it is.
While the US people do say "Bring our Military home" it isnt out of protest for them being overseas and in harms way. While nobody wants their sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, sons and daughters getting shot at, they are not protesting them being over there. Those that have family in the military would rather their family get the job done and risk getting killed, verses leaving early and not getting killed.
I doubt that as the US government has done an excellent job of instilling Arabophobia into the hearts of it's citizens and thereby allowing a huge hike in military spending. This statement is just another of many designed to strengthen that policy.
Are you honestly trying to paint all US citizens as racists? Arabphobia... please.
2) Leaders of several countries (e.g. North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Lebanon and perhaps China and Russia) would love to see the U.S. and its people blown to pieces.
So, would you like to play a game of what ifs? Lets play anyhow... What if the US pulled completly out of all countries around the world? What would happen. Hell lets go to the extreem. What if the US adopted an Isolationist attitude? What would happen to the world econimy?
Even N. Korea and China benifit from the US and its high consumer rates.
we are the most cultured ... country in the world.
Well we have people from every walk of life, from every country in the world living in the US, we have their culture. How are we not cultured.
As we continue to lower our defenses by devaluing the military we open ourselves wider and wider to a takeover. A takeover of the U.S.?
Rubbish! This is scare mongering aimed at non-thinkers. Even if the US cut it's military in half (and remember this budget has grown a lot recently) it would still be powerful enough to defend itself. No country has an army or resources capable of taking over a country as big as the US, just as the US would be incapable of taking over a country such as China.
You're right, no ONE country in the world could take over the US. We are not worried about one country. Ohh and we could destroy the Chinesse military, taking over a population of over 1 billion people... thats another story.
You cant deny the fact that the military has a place, you may not like the policies of the government, you may not like the fact that the military exists, but you can not deny the fact that it is needed.
You may be a peacemonger, but what peace would you have if there wasnt a guy with a gun keeping out all those who would take your peace away?
Your right Dom, it wasnt written by the VP, that was just his quote used at the end. The guy who wrote that... heck I dont know who it was I would have to look at the email.
KoB, you live in this world, if it so bad why dont you do something productive to change it?
Neo-imperialist... so what exactly is that?
Then again England is the only empire left in the world isnt it?
Firstly the sentiment of "if it weren't for us the world would be speaking German" fits exactly with the current US publicity statement of: "If it weren't for us the world would be wearing bedsheets and riding around on mules". It's trying to gain support for US policy by instilling a ignorant fear into it's readers.
An ignorant fear... no sorry mate the truth of the matter, in WWII, a war the US tried to stay out of, if it wasnt for the US Europe would have been lost to the Germans. Russia on the other hand would have survived for a little while but when the Germans got control of what would be left of the Brittish industries, it would be game over. Then they would continue West and try to invade the US. However the Japanesse were already trying this and we all know how that went.
So, in fact the US is the reason why Germans speek German and yadda yadda yadda.
The U.S. military ... gets an awfully bad rap these days. Not strictly true. What has a shocking awful reputation (with actions to back it up) are the governments of the US and UK who have waged war and threatened countries in all corners of the world. The military are representations of a government, and enforcers of its will, who choose to represent their country's policies. Unfortunately the military are the people in the firing line, the one's who face the anger and disrespect felt towards the country they represent. Back home the politicians sit comfortably sipping brandy at fund raising dinners where oil executives persuade them that US presence in another country will make that pipeline easier and earn Mr. President more money.
Yep that is pretty much the truth. Everyone has a hidden agenda and it is the military that gets shat on. Then again we are here to make life better for Americans, and the Brittish military is there to make life better for the Brits. Thats the way it is.
While the US people do say "Bring our Military home" it isnt out of protest for them being overseas and in harms way. While nobody wants their sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, sons and daughters getting shot at, they are not protesting them being over there. Those that have family in the military would rather their family get the job done and risk getting killed, verses leaving early and not getting killed.
I doubt that as the US government has done an excellent job of instilling Arabophobia into the hearts of it's citizens and thereby allowing a huge hike in military spending. This statement is just another of many designed to strengthen that policy.
Are you honestly trying to paint all US citizens as racists? Arabphobia... please.
2) Leaders of several countries (e.g. North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Lebanon and perhaps China and Russia) would love to see the U.S. and its people blown to pieces.
So, would you like to play a game of what ifs? Lets play anyhow... What if the US pulled completly out of all countries around the world? What would happen. Hell lets go to the extreem. What if the US adopted an Isolationist attitude? What would happen to the world econimy?
Even N. Korea and China benifit from the US and its high consumer rates.
we are the most cultured ... country in the world.
Well we have people from every walk of life, from every country in the world living in the US, we have their culture. How are we not cultured.
As we continue to lower our defenses by devaluing the military we open ourselves wider and wider to a takeover. A takeover of the U.S.?
Rubbish! This is scare mongering aimed at non-thinkers. Even if the US cut it's military in half (and remember this budget has grown a lot recently) it would still be powerful enough to defend itself. No country has an army or resources capable of taking over a country as big as the US, just as the US would be incapable of taking over a country such as China.
You're right, no ONE country in the world could take over the US. We are not worried about one country. Ohh and we could destroy the Chinesse military, taking over a population of over 1 billion people... thats another story.
You cant deny the fact that the military has a place, you may not like the policies of the government, you may not like the fact that the military exists, but you can not deny the fact that it is needed.
You may be a peacemonger, but what peace would you have if there wasnt a guy with a gun keeping out all those who would take your peace away?
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
addict
522 posts
Location: Berlin
522 posts
Location: Berlin
Posted:
i the all powerful, shall click my fingers and make all the nasty things in the world go away!!!
click...
(pause)
bugger.
PS ray, since when did you become the all-knowing scholar of WW2?
you have no clue of what would have happened
oh, and it would be impossible for the us to take a totally isolationist attitude- they have there hands way too deep into other countries' pockets to just pull out and lose it all.
stop talking nonsense.
i the all powerful, shall click my fingers and make all the nasty things in the world go away!!!
click...
(pause)
bugger.
PS ray, since when did you become the all-knowing scholar of WW2?
you have no clue of what would have happened
oh, and it would be impossible for the us to take a totally isolationist attitude- they have there hands way too deep into other countries' pockets to just pull out and lose it all.
stop talking nonsense.
Your life is ending one minute at a time...
So live it.
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,617 posts
Location: Berlin, Ireland
Carpal \'Tunnel
2,617 posts
Location: Berlin, Ireland
Posted:
Again....I won't waste my time.
Very weak arguments and the more I read the more one sided my opinions come. Very sad indeed.
Again....I won't waste my time.
Very weak arguments and the more I read the more one sided my opinions come. Very sad indeed.
I live in a world of infinite possibilities.
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
the essay's main point is 'soldiers are both more important and more undervalued than teachers'.
i'd like to know who did write it originally (rank, name and number would do)...
quote:this comment encapsulates the tone of all of your arguments for me here ray.
Originally posted by Raymund Phule:
Ohh and we could destroy the Chinesse military, taking over a population of over 1 billion people...
the essay's main point is 'soldiers are both more important and more undervalued than teachers'.
i'd like to know who did write it originally (rank, name and number would do)...
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
mULti-torTOISe
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
Posted:
Wow. I am weak-kneed with admiration. Ray, I haven't read anything I found more ludicrous in a long time, thank you. As I read it through, I was bubbling with things I wanted to write... and then I found that Dom had pretty much said them all for me. All the replies to those arguments were extremely ill-considered and totally unconvincing. Do you even know what is happening in the world these days? It would be easy to bring in an overwhelming wave of statistics proving the United States' role as the largest, greediest oppressor at large in the world today, shovelling resources into itself at the price of the rest of an impoverished planet (with England, admittedly, yapping at its heels for any table scraps), but I probably can't be bothered. Ray, can you really be so naive as to imagine that US society and politics in their current state is anything but a disaster for the rest of the planet and most of its people? Let me know if you really think this, and I'll dig out some statistics for you. Dom, good reply... KoB, good effort there, I had faith.
Wow. I am weak-kneed with admiration. Ray, I haven't read anything I found more ludicrous in a long time, thank you. As I read it through, I was bubbling with things I wanted to write... and then I found that Dom had pretty much said them all for me. All the replies to those arguments were extremely ill-considered and totally unconvincing. Do you even know what is happening in the world these days? It would be easy to bring in an overwhelming wave of statistics proving the United States' role as the largest, greediest oppressor at large in the world today, shovelling resources into itself at the price of the rest of an impoverished planet (with England, admittedly, yapping at its heels for any table scraps), but I probably can't be bothered. Ray, can you really be so naive as to imagine that US society and politics in their current state is anything but a disaster for the rest of the planet and most of its people? Let me know if you really think this, and I'll dig out some statistics for you. Dom, good reply... KoB, good effort there, I had faith.
The Confusion Squid has many tentacles
mULti-torTOISe
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
Posted:
P.S: In your Athens / Sparta analogy, surely the States gets to play the role of Sparta? Weapons spending as a proportion of budget has recently exceeded the proportion of high-school graduates who are even LITERATE. How can you call this cultured? People interviewed in the ruined streets of Iraq have espoused complex, considered and well-read opinions on the state of the world, surprisingly forgiving toward the immeasurable slaughter we have committed there. People I met in the states asked me whether I'd driven across from England, or whether Saudi Arabia "was where Hitler lived"...
It now looks as though I'm going down the well trodden route of anti-Americanism. Let me assure you that I feel just as strongly about the role that England played in the butchery of Iraq, about our shameless leader and the lengths he'll go to for a headline... I took part in the demonstrations, but I think I've pretty much given up on changing anything. One in thirty people in England actually took to the streets at some point or other to protest our involvement, which went ahead anyway. What possible use to us is democracy? Forget all this. I feel very sad. Raymond, please please open your eyes and look around you. The United States is not a jewel. The litany of atrocities committed by the States and its allies over the last ten years makes me weary and despairing. Amongst those that the Satates counts as its allies are regimes which have been proven to commit the following:
The torture, mutilation and boiling alive of untried political prisoners.
The castration and execution of homosexuals.
The stoning to death of women for "wearing provocative clothing"
Hooray for the Coalition of The Willing, and all its good deeds!
These are not the left-wing lies of some confused hippy, or the propoganda of an unswervingly anti-american. I have lived and travelled extensively in the States, in fact I was there for the last "election", and I met lots of charming, well-read and sophisticated Americans. The implication there, of course, is that I also met many who were none of those things...
I also spent two months in the Middle East earlier this year, and I was in The Sultanate of Oman (about a long day's hard driving from Baghdad) during the hostilities. People in tiny, out of the way little villages would invite me into their houses for coffee and dates, and despite my abysmal (and irritatingly arrogant) lack of Arabic, I never received anything but friendship. I wonder what sort of welcome Arabic people who spoke no English would have received, wandering around the States in their national dress during that period?
The very though of trying to write down everything that ought to be said here makes me tired. Maybe I'm becomming apathetic.
[ 24. October 2003, 02:28: Message edited by: joe_sixsteps ]
P.S: In your Athens / Sparta analogy, surely the States gets to play the role of Sparta? Weapons spending as a proportion of budget has recently exceeded the proportion of high-school graduates who are even LITERATE. How can you call this cultured? People interviewed in the ruined streets of Iraq have espoused complex, considered and well-read opinions on the state of the world, surprisingly forgiving toward the immeasurable slaughter we have committed there. People I met in the states asked me whether I'd driven across from England, or whether Saudi Arabia "was where Hitler lived"...
It now looks as though I'm going down the well trodden route of anti-Americanism. Let me assure you that I feel just as strongly about the role that England played in the butchery of Iraq, about our shameless leader and the lengths he'll go to for a headline... I took part in the demonstrations, but I think I've pretty much given up on changing anything. One in thirty people in England actually took to the streets at some point or other to protest our involvement, which went ahead anyway. What possible use to us is democracy? Forget all this. I feel very sad. Raymond, please please open your eyes and look around you. The United States is not a jewel. The litany of atrocities committed by the States and its allies over the last ten years makes me weary and despairing. Amongst those that the Satates counts as its allies are regimes which have been proven to commit the following:
The torture, mutilation and boiling alive of untried political prisoners.
The castration and execution of homosexuals.
The stoning to death of women for "wearing provocative clothing"
Hooray for the Coalition of The Willing, and all its good deeds!
These are not the left-wing lies of some confused hippy, or the propoganda of an unswervingly anti-american. I have lived and travelled extensively in the States, in fact I was there for the last "election", and I met lots of charming, well-read and sophisticated Americans. The implication there, of course, is that I also met many who were none of those things...
I also spent two months in the Middle East earlier this year, and I was in The Sultanate of Oman (about a long day's hard driving from Baghdad) during the hostilities. People in tiny, out of the way little villages would invite me into their houses for coffee and dates, and despite my abysmal (and irritatingly arrogant) lack of Arabic, I never received anything but friendship. I wonder what sort of welcome Arabic people who spoke no English would have received, wandering around the States in their national dress during that period?
The very though of trying to write down everything that ought to be said here makes me tired. Maybe I'm becomming apathetic.
[ 24. October 2003, 02:28: Message edited by: joe_sixsteps ]
The Confusion Squid has many tentacles
Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
Posted:
Hehe
No Coleman, the essay's main point really has little to do with teachers. Ohh BTW my dad is a teacher so dont think I was out to rip on teachers. You are reading into things wrong.
Im not a politician and frankly I dont know any that I like. Sure they can up with a few good one-liners but big deal. Seen as how not but a few centuries ago England was the biggest baddes MoFo on the block. They had their hands in everything. Especially slave trade to the colonies. Talk about a lack of human rights. A few centuries befor that you had the Roman Empire. So now that the US is getting their piece of the pie, you see people comming out of the wood works complaining.
Why dont you take a look in the mirror, look at your own country.
I admit there are some dumb people in the US. Is it the governments fault if somebody doesnt apply themselves? Actually the US government encourages lazyness by having things like welfare and whatnot. Heck when an illeagle immagrant can come to the US get a drivers licence and live on welfare, there are problems. I will never deny that. Things arnt perfect.
If the US isnt a jewel, why dont people immagrate to Russia, China, hell the US deals with more immagrants than any other country!
Really how were the Irish treated a few decades ago? Starving to death? How were the Scots treated a few centuries ago? Dont talk to me about how people are treated. The Brittish, French and Romans have done far worse than the US.
I spent 2 months in Korea, and over a year in Japan, while some were welcoming to us, we were still met with hostilities.
The butchery of Iraq was not done by the coalition forces, it was done by its own leaders. Remember the almost half million Kurds murderd? Where were you then?
In truth the only people who get off their asses and do something about the condition of the world or when crisis happens are underpaid civil servents.
Hate the military and hate the US all you want, your econimies depend on us Your very livlyhood in the past has depended on us and may very well depend on us again.
You're right democracy doesnt work too well, but its the best thing we have. What do you reccomend?
Hehe
No Coleman, the essay's main point really has little to do with teachers. Ohh BTW my dad is a teacher so dont think I was out to rip on teachers. You are reading into things wrong.
Im not a politician and frankly I dont know any that I like. Sure they can up with a few good one-liners but big deal. Seen as how not but a few centuries ago England was the biggest baddes MoFo on the block. They had their hands in everything. Especially slave trade to the colonies. Talk about a lack of human rights. A few centuries befor that you had the Roman Empire. So now that the US is getting their piece of the pie, you see people comming out of the wood works complaining.
Why dont you take a look in the mirror, look at your own country.
I admit there are some dumb people in the US. Is it the governments fault if somebody doesnt apply themselves? Actually the US government encourages lazyness by having things like welfare and whatnot. Heck when an illeagle immagrant can come to the US get a drivers licence and live on welfare, there are problems. I will never deny that. Things arnt perfect.
If the US isnt a jewel, why dont people immagrate to Russia, China, hell the US deals with more immagrants than any other country!
Really how were the Irish treated a few decades ago? Starving to death? How were the Scots treated a few centuries ago? Dont talk to me about how people are treated. The Brittish, French and Romans have done far worse than the US.
I spent 2 months in Korea, and over a year in Japan, while some were welcoming to us, we were still met with hostilities.
The butchery of Iraq was not done by the coalition forces, it was done by its own leaders. Remember the almost half million Kurds murderd? Where were you then?
In truth the only people who get off their asses and do something about the condition of the world or when crisis happens are underpaid civil servents.
Hate the military and hate the US all you want, your econimies depend on us Your very livlyhood in the past has depended on us and may very well depend on us again.
You're right democracy doesnt work too well, but its the best thing we have. What do you reccomend?
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
starring Skippy the green llama
1,148 posts
Location: Seattle, WA
1,148 posts
Location: Seattle, WA
Posted:
and just when you think it couldn't get any worse...
That email sounds like the type of military propoganda/hype that is sent amongst the troops to keep up morale in times like these where the US foreign policy makes many of us americans cringe. The writer shows his ignorance right off by misinterpreting the pun of the bumper sticker, being the fact that most schools in the US are forced to raise money through alternative means, conserve and moniter their budget, and suffer cutbacks every year while the military justifies gross budgets(ie exorbitant prices for common goods/services and overpaid defense contractors) that suck up money needed for more important things(read education, healthcare, employment opportunities, etc) in the country. And while the military may get a bad rap these days due to confusion of administration/enforcer, a collection of unrelated, pompous and ignorant statements like this ain't gonna make the world love the military any better. Especially for those well informed enough to know the facts behind say, the US involvement in WW2.
And while the current administration has put much effort into 'instilling arabophobia' into US hearts, there are quite a few of us who see quite clearly through a thinly veiled attempt to justify such a huge excess of money to occupy a country with no rational proof of why we are there, or a 'war on terror' that strips more civil rights from us daily, for example. Protests, demonstrations, yah, they're there, but that's our current administration. You could hear the national IQ dropping the day Bush cruised into office, even with evidence of foul play readily available(online yet not allowed in the more available, ie tv, radio, etc), and yet only a handful of the population were privvy to the information because the release of that information was quelled until recently, and yet the streets are still clear of any protest to an election that is quite clearly a farce. I just pray the next one isn't. Knowing how the new e-ballot systems are being built, unfortunately I think it's only going to get worse.
In response to the comment of the US society and politics being a disaster for the rest of the world. I agree to a certain extent regarding the current US administration, but to paint the US society as being a disaster for the rest of the world, heh, is crap. Attitudes like the one voiced in the email make me wish that more of the money spent on pushing our noses and guns in places that they don't belong would have been spent on schooling, so people like that might be educated, and our VP could spell liberty
brits telling us about atrocities
Oh, and Ray, better education isn't always simply a matter of one person applying themself, better education systems are. Moving from the West coast to the deep south taught me that.
Well funded, high caliber education system = better educated populace
Under funded, low grade education system = dumb population.
And unfortunately, a greater part of the US public school system is under funded. And Bush has the nerve to try and justify to us public funds going towards religious private schools
And before it gets said, yeah, I'm planning on moving
[ 24. October 2003, 18:21: Message edited by: musashii ]
and just when you think it couldn't get any worse...
That email sounds like the type of military propoganda/hype that is sent amongst the troops to keep up morale in times like these where the US foreign policy makes many of us americans cringe. The writer shows his ignorance right off by misinterpreting the pun of the bumper sticker, being the fact that most schools in the US are forced to raise money through alternative means, conserve and moniter their budget, and suffer cutbacks every year while the military justifies gross budgets(ie exorbitant prices for common goods/services and overpaid defense contractors) that suck up money needed for more important things(read education, healthcare, employment opportunities, etc) in the country. And while the military may get a bad rap these days due to confusion of administration/enforcer, a collection of unrelated, pompous and ignorant statements like this ain't gonna make the world love the military any better. Especially for those well informed enough to know the facts behind say, the US involvement in WW2.
And while the current administration has put much effort into 'instilling arabophobia' into US hearts, there are quite a few of us who see quite clearly through a thinly veiled attempt to justify such a huge excess of money to occupy a country with no rational proof of why we are there, or a 'war on terror' that strips more civil rights from us daily, for example. Protests, demonstrations, yah, they're there, but that's our current administration. You could hear the national IQ dropping the day Bush cruised into office, even with evidence of foul play readily available(online yet not allowed in the more available, ie tv, radio, etc), and yet only a handful of the population were privvy to the information because the release of that information was quelled until recently, and yet the streets are still clear of any protest to an election that is quite clearly a farce. I just pray the next one isn't. Knowing how the new e-ballot systems are being built, unfortunately I think it's only going to get worse.
In response to the comment of the US society and politics being a disaster for the rest of the world. I agree to a certain extent regarding the current US administration, but to paint the US society as being a disaster for the rest of the world, heh, is crap. Attitudes like the one voiced in the email make me wish that more of the money spent on pushing our noses and guns in places that they don't belong would have been spent on schooling, so people like that might be educated, and our VP could spell liberty
brits telling us about atrocities
Oh, and Ray, better education isn't always simply a matter of one person applying themself, better education systems are. Moving from the West coast to the deep south taught me that.
Well funded, high caliber education system = better educated populace
Under funded, low grade education system = dumb population.
And unfortunately, a greater part of the US public school system is under funded. And Bush has the nerve to try and justify to us public funds going towards religious private schools
And before it gets said, yeah, I'm planning on moving
[ 24. October 2003, 18:21: Message edited by: musashii ]
First intention, then enlightenment..
Ars Pyronomica
" Life is programmed. Whether death is programmed or not is yet to be determined."
Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
Posted:
WB Musashii, long time no see ehh?!?
Anyhow, all form of media is propiganda, so yes by that definition it is. Let me ask you this, what is better, high moral or low moral?
Okay Mr. History, what was the US's involment in WWII? I am sure that there were plans to take over the world back then with our two working A bombs (that were already used up).
If you dont like the current administration, why dont you get off your butt and find out how you can change things? If you really want to prevent something like the last election happening again... VOTE!!!!!
Umm the misspelling was probably my fault, I had to type that message as it was printed out and I couldnt copy/paste it. Look at my disclaimer at the top
I feel that there is nothing wrong with giving some funds to privet schools (religious or not).
Also I will agree that the US military gets more money than it really needs. Well... lets just say I have seen some serius waste going on. Frankly there are some things that would be best if we scrubbed them entirly, mainly because there are new and better systems out there. Haha I could go on and on how the military could be cut and it would actually mean an improvment. The money could go to other places like schools. Then again, there are places in public and privet schools that are over funded *cough* football *cough* Those who are from the midwest know what I am talking about!
WB Musashii, long time no see ehh?!?
Anyhow, all form of media is propiganda, so yes by that definition it is. Let me ask you this, what is better, high moral or low moral?
Okay Mr. History, what was the US's involment in WWII? I am sure that there were plans to take over the world back then with our two working A bombs (that were already used up).
If you dont like the current administration, why dont you get off your butt and find out how you can change things? If you really want to prevent something like the last election happening again... VOTE!!!!!
Umm the misspelling was probably my fault, I had to type that message as it was printed out and I couldnt copy/paste it. Look at my disclaimer at the top
I feel that there is nothing wrong with giving some funds to privet schools (religious or not).
Also I will agree that the US military gets more money than it really needs. Well... lets just say I have seen some serius waste going on. Frankly there are some things that would be best if we scrubbed them entirly, mainly because there are new and better systems out there. Haha I could go on and on how the military could be cut and it would actually mean an improvment. The money could go to other places like schools. Then again, there are places in public and privet schools that are over funded *cough* football *cough* Those who are from the midwest know what I am talking about!
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
starring Skippy the green llama
1,148 posts
Location: Seattle, WA
1,148 posts
Location: Seattle, WA
Posted:
wazza Ray
As far as the US involvement in WW2, the tactics used to enter the war(ala pearl harbor, and bearing an uncanny resemblance to the beginnings of the war in afghanistan) were just as bad as some of the atrocities committed before we entered the war. And if the the versailles treaty had been effectively upheld, the war would not have happened in the first place. But that blame doesn't lie entirely on our shoulders either.
heh, didn't see the disclaimer.
If you agree with the fact that the military gets more money than it needs, then we must be in agreement that the proposed email was, what WAS that word..ahh, rubbish. Simply because the speaker made his point on the grounds of money = support, yah? And if you're worried about support from a populace, I don't see many problems either. I live right near a base, and to date there have been 3 care package campaigns, 2 benefits, and several homecoming celebrations. There have also been demonstrations against the war, but I think in all honesty we know who the demonstrations are against(again, administration/enforcer eh). I think the shame of the mistreatment of vietnam vets still leaves a lump in too many throats for those who remember it for that sort of thing to be repeated.
oh, n football I HATE football
ah, n if you're a military history buff you'll enjoy this
wazza Ray
quote:High moral, of course. But not at the risk of deluding our citizens or armed forces as to whats really going on. I understand alot of the training methods employed by the military to produce what is needed of a soldier, ie unwaivering loyalty, an ability to execute orders without question, etc etc; however I've never agreed with it's 'information management' policies that are used on it's soldiers and, to the same effect, it's citizens.
what is better, high moral or low moral?
As far as the US involvement in WW2, the tactics used to enter the war(ala pearl harbor, and bearing an uncanny resemblance to the beginnings of the war in afghanistan) were just as bad as some of the atrocities committed before we entered the war. And if the the versailles treaty had been effectively upheld, the war would not have happened in the first place. But that blame doesn't lie entirely on our shoulders either.
quote:I've voted since I was old enough, and I'll continue to. I've attended peaceful demostrations, taken part in letter writing campaigns to diff senators and representatives, what else eh? The point I was trying to make is that if such a poorly rigged election suceeded last time, what's to stop it again? And the new e-ballots are being built on such an unsecure platform(NO mention of crypto, digital or bio signatures, or even stop checks), it seems that that our wonderful democratic ideals are slowly slipping down the drain.
If you dont like the current administration, why dont you get off your butt and find out how you can change things? If you really want to prevent something like the last election happening again... VOTE!!!!!
heh, didn't see the disclaimer.
quote:Eh? When the public school system needs it so much more? Most if not all private schools have a tuition that their students pay, public schools barely make back the cost of books each year when they charge for those each year. Let the private schools use their tuition for their needs, and concern ourselves with educating the masses, not the priveleged masses. And keep religious agendas out of the state, they don't belong there.
I feel that there is nothing wrong with giving some funds to privet schools (religious or not).
If you agree with the fact that the military gets more money than it needs, then we must be in agreement that the proposed email was, what WAS that word..ahh, rubbish. Simply because the speaker made his point on the grounds of money = support, yah? And if you're worried about support from a populace, I don't see many problems either. I live right near a base, and to date there have been 3 care package campaigns, 2 benefits, and several homecoming celebrations. There have also been demonstrations against the war, but I think in all honesty we know who the demonstrations are against(again, administration/enforcer eh). I think the shame of the mistreatment of vietnam vets still leaves a lump in too many throats for those who remember it for that sort of thing to be repeated.
oh, n football I HATE football
ah, n if you're a military history buff you'll enjoy this
First intention, then enlightenment..
Ars Pyronomica
" Life is programmed. Whether death is programmed or not is yet to be determined."
mULti-torTOISe
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
Posted:
Ray, can you not tell how ready I am to condemn British atrocities, our long and utterly repellent history, the shameless lies and barefaced butchery perpetrated by our leaders... man, if you want to turn this thread into a "isn't England shocking" rant then not only will I join in whole-heartedly, I'll damn well applaud. Only don't try and claim that the States is any better. I am ashamed to be English, when I look at what has been done in my name. Perhaps that is the difference between us: you look at the same things, and it seems to make you proud.
Ray, can you not tell how ready I am to condemn British atrocities, our long and utterly repellent history, the shameless lies and barefaced butchery perpetrated by our leaders... man, if you want to turn this thread into a "isn't England shocking" rant then not only will I join in whole-heartedly, I'll damn well applaud. Only don't try and claim that the States is any better. I am ashamed to be English, when I look at what has been done in my name. Perhaps that is the difference between us: you look at the same things, and it seems to make you proud.
The Confusion Squid has many tentacles
BRONZE Member
member
70 posts
Location: USA
member
70 posts
Location: USA
Posted:
I was busy reading through this post when I realized I've seen this arguement several places before. I find that it quite honestly doesn't matter what the US foriegn policy is or how much our government is messed up. When it comes down to it, it was us Americans who put the peanuts in office and if you say you didn't vote then you are equally as guilty. There is a flip side to every coin. The way the US foriegn policy works is we put someone in power, they screw us over, we kill them/run them into some unknown cave, put someone else in power and start the cycle all over again. Its a vicious cycle that I don't see ending anytime soon.
In the matter of education. It is not just the school systems fault, or the governments, there is a substantial lack in motivation of students. They don't want to learn therefore the best of school systems and teachers can't make them. I think we should make school voluntary after middle school. Teach them all they need to know and let them move on to higher education of thier own free will. The people there will want to learn there fore the quality of education will rise. As far as differences in education in the south vs. north as musashii brought up I don't think the problem is the quality of education but the lack of ....class. I was educated in the south and recieved quite a good education. Not to pat my own back..well ok yes to pat my own back,I am very intelligent and gained alot through my southern education it has a certain flavor that the north lacks. (Yes I have experience northern education) We do need to better pay and better train teachers. A better educated country is a more prosperous country.
That phrase about the Air Force and the bake sale does piss me off. Being a military brat I find great use for the military. If it weren't for them education would by far not be our biggest worry. I do find the $400 hammers a bit ridiculous but over all I find the military quite useful.
In its defense, though our government needs some revamping, it does do a lot for us. Think about all the government assistance programs we've had to use before. Welfare, social security, unemployment. It is flawed as anything human is....but it still functions.
I was busy reading through this post when I realized I've seen this arguement several places before. I find that it quite honestly doesn't matter what the US foriegn policy is or how much our government is messed up. When it comes down to it, it was us Americans who put the peanuts in office and if you say you didn't vote then you are equally as guilty. There is a flip side to every coin. The way the US foriegn policy works is we put someone in power, they screw us over, we kill them/run them into some unknown cave, put someone else in power and start the cycle all over again. Its a vicious cycle that I don't see ending anytime soon.
In the matter of education. It is not just the school systems fault, or the governments, there is a substantial lack in motivation of students. They don't want to learn therefore the best of school systems and teachers can't make them. I think we should make school voluntary after middle school. Teach them all they need to know and let them move on to higher education of thier own free will. The people there will want to learn there fore the quality of education will rise. As far as differences in education in the south vs. north as musashii brought up I don't think the problem is the quality of education but the lack of ....class. I was educated in the south and recieved quite a good education. Not to pat my own back..well ok yes to pat my own back,I am very intelligent and gained alot through my southern education it has a certain flavor that the north lacks. (Yes I have experience northern education) We do need to better pay and better train teachers. A better educated country is a more prosperous country.
That phrase about the Air Force and the bake sale does piss me off. Being a military brat I find great use for the military. If it weren't for them education would by far not be our biggest worry. I do find the $400 hammers a bit ridiculous but over all I find the military quite useful.
In its defense, though our government needs some revamping, it does do a lot for us. Think about all the government assistance programs we've had to use before. Welfare, social security, unemployment. It is flawed as anything human is....but it still functions.
Always Beautiful
Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
Posted:
Sorry, I have never looked at an atrocity and seen it as a good thing. To be honest though I can admire a well planned and well exicuted strike, IE Pearl Harbor. That right there was as close to a perfect strike as you can get. (especially with the limited technology that was around.) Horrible, but beautiful in its own right.
Hahaha $400 hammers arnt bought that often, it is the $10/marker, whiteboard marker that gets me!
Sorry, I have never looked at an atrocity and seen it as a good thing. To be honest though I can admire a well planned and well exicuted strike, IE Pearl Harbor. That right there was as close to a perfect strike as you can get. (especially with the limited technology that was around.) Horrible, but beautiful in its own right.
Hahaha $400 hammers arnt bought that often, it is the $10/marker, whiteboard marker that gets me!
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
member
14 posts
Location: Christchurch
14 posts
Location: Christchurch
Posted:
sounds familiar, maybe its Moe of the simpsons.
quote:illeagle immagrant, where where?
Heck when an illeagle immagrant can come to the US get a drivers licence and live on welfare, there are problems
sounds familiar, maybe its Moe of the simpsons.
We live in the land of the long white cloud..
and in the city with the giant cone..
-someone on RDU
Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
Posted:
Umm I dont think Moe was an immagrant, of course I might have missed that one
Umm I dont think Moe was an immagrant, of course I might have missed that one
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
Posted:
hehehe
Frosty you're so funny.
France has twice lost their country, twice the US has been the turn of the tied. While it is true, you do see the US comming into the WW's later than almost everyone, you do have to take into account that WWI and WWII started in... anyone know? Europe!! Thats right, and of course during the time between WWI and WWII the US tried its hand at being neutral, well you can see where that got us.
So Dec 7th 1941 rolls around and we get cought with our pants down. Okay that stung, it was unprevoked, and a truly excellent attack (from an objective point of view). So the US decides to go into the war effort full force. We took on two fronts, a Pacific Theater and the Europian Theater. Though in truth the US was part of the war effort befor we sent troops to the war.
Now the US was once again dieing so that Europe may be free, even though a few hundred years ago it was Europe who was trying to repress the colonies. We didnt care, it wasnt importent anymore.
Anyhoo... enough history for one day.
hehehe
Frosty you're so funny.
quote:Umm what were they dieing for? Hmm we were 3,000+ miles away how was it our war? How ere the people of Europe dieing for us?
instead they let the people of europe die for them.
France has twice lost their country, twice the US has been the turn of the tied. While it is true, you do see the US comming into the WW's later than almost everyone, you do have to take into account that WWI and WWII started in... anyone know? Europe!! Thats right, and of course during the time between WWI and WWII the US tried its hand at being neutral, well you can see where that got us.
So Dec 7th 1941 rolls around and we get cought with our pants down. Okay that stung, it was unprevoked, and a truly excellent attack (from an objective point of view). So the US decides to go into the war effort full force. We took on two fronts, a Pacific Theater and the Europian Theater. Though in truth the US was part of the war effort befor we sent troops to the war.
Now the US was once again dieing so that Europe may be free, even though a few hundred years ago it was Europe who was trying to repress the colonies. We didnt care, it wasnt importent anymore.
Anyhoo... enough history for one day.
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
mULti-torTOISe
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
Posted:
I can remember when I used to think that there was something "cool" about guns and fighting, and I might have probably been juvenile enough to agree with the idea that a particularly thorough attack had something beautiful to it. I believe I grew out of that sometime around puberty.
Let's take a "well-planned and well-executed strike" that has occurred more recently, and see if we can find anything "beautiful" about it. We don't have to look far: the detonation of two Fuel Air Explosives (FAEs) over the convoy fleeing Basra in the first gulf war. From the point of view of the US High Command, it was a perfect opportunity: the convoy undoubtedly contained many soldiers, who if allowed to flee or surrender would no doubt fight for Saddam again in any future conflict. (A reasonable guess, given that, despite promises to the contrary, all parties knew already that no credible effort to depose him would be attempted at that time, but that the oil supplies he controlled were desperately needed by hundreds of fuel-greedy voters back home). In addition, it gave the Air Force a perfect opportunity to test their new multi-billion dollar toy.
A shame that the convoy contained so many civilians. But so it goes, eh? Two FAEs were dropped, exploding several hundred metres above the convoy, and turning the very air into fire. Those below, including families, children, old men and women and other non-combatants (as well as the fleeing remnants of a conscripted army) burned alive.
FAEs qualify as weapons of mass destruction under every categorisation system ever used. The pyhric effect means that there is little damage to armour or weapons systems - in fact the only real use of these weapons is against large groups of unprotected human beings, or in the systematic scorching of cities or forests.
Let's get this straight. What we're talking about here is undoubtedly a "well-planned and well-executed strike". Do you see anything beautiful about it, Ray? The way people's skin blackend and charred, the way their flesh carbonised as they burned to death... a beautiful picture? The way the fire roared in through the windows of their cars, licking at the unprotected skin of children, the way their eyeballs popped with the heat before they died... beautiful? Ray?
The weapons used there were amongst the many dubious things that the armed forces budget gets spent on. The question above seems to be: should we spend money on our children's education, or buy more weapons so we can massacre other peoples' children. And you think we should go for the weapons... Hooray for military spending! Aye, forget those teachers and their ridiculous demands for whiteboard markers. Lets buy some more bombs! BIGGER ONES! Maybe if we spend another three and a half billion, we can come up with something that'll kill TWICE AS MANY people!
But sarcasm gets us nowhere, and I'm sorry for being sarcastic. I see the whole thing as being painfully, horribly obvious. I also find your view that Anglo-American foreign policy is in any way forgivable so hideously sickening, given what I know to be happening in the world, that it is hard not to be rude.
Essentially, my position is this:
It has been agreed above that governments are frequently malign and untrustworthy, and that armies are little more than their tools. However, neither the US nor Britain uses conscripted armies, so every willing little soldier boy clutching his nasty little toy and marching forward to the slaughter VOLUNTEERED to be there. I have little sympathy. In fact, I find the morality of anyone who would volunteer for such a thing so questionable that even if the forces were to be armed with rubber chickens and armoured with aprons, I doubt I'd buy anything from their bake sale.
It's a hard one. I can find you a massive range of statistics which will show you the absolute moral bankruptcy of the military (both US and British), recomend you books that detail great catalogues of the crimes committed by them... but you can always tell yourself that these are lies, misinformation... propoganda. If you want to live with your head in the sand, no-one can stop you. All we can offer you is the truth.
I can remember when I used to think that there was something "cool" about guns and fighting, and I might have probably been juvenile enough to agree with the idea that a particularly thorough attack had something beautiful to it. I believe I grew out of that sometime around puberty.
Let's take a "well-planned and well-executed strike" that has occurred more recently, and see if we can find anything "beautiful" about it. We don't have to look far: the detonation of two Fuel Air Explosives (FAEs) over the convoy fleeing Basra in the first gulf war. From the point of view of the US High Command, it was a perfect opportunity: the convoy undoubtedly contained many soldiers, who if allowed to flee or surrender would no doubt fight for Saddam again in any future conflict. (A reasonable guess, given that, despite promises to the contrary, all parties knew already that no credible effort to depose him would be attempted at that time, but that the oil supplies he controlled were desperately needed by hundreds of fuel-greedy voters back home). In addition, it gave the Air Force a perfect opportunity to test their new multi-billion dollar toy.
A shame that the convoy contained so many civilians. But so it goes, eh? Two FAEs were dropped, exploding several hundred metres above the convoy, and turning the very air into fire. Those below, including families, children, old men and women and other non-combatants (as well as the fleeing remnants of a conscripted army) burned alive.
FAEs qualify as weapons of mass destruction under every categorisation system ever used. The pyhric effect means that there is little damage to armour or weapons systems - in fact the only real use of these weapons is against large groups of unprotected human beings, or in the systematic scorching of cities or forests.
Let's get this straight. What we're talking about here is undoubtedly a "well-planned and well-executed strike". Do you see anything beautiful about it, Ray? The way people's skin blackend and charred, the way their flesh carbonised as they burned to death... a beautiful picture? The way the fire roared in through the windows of their cars, licking at the unprotected skin of children, the way their eyeballs popped with the heat before they died... beautiful? Ray?
The weapons used there were amongst the many dubious things that the armed forces budget gets spent on. The question above seems to be: should we spend money on our children's education, or buy more weapons so we can massacre other peoples' children. And you think we should go for the weapons... Hooray for military spending! Aye, forget those teachers and their ridiculous demands for whiteboard markers. Lets buy some more bombs! BIGGER ONES! Maybe if we spend another three and a half billion, we can come up with something that'll kill TWICE AS MANY people!
But sarcasm gets us nowhere, and I'm sorry for being sarcastic. I see the whole thing as being painfully, horribly obvious. I also find your view that Anglo-American foreign policy is in any way forgivable so hideously sickening, given what I know to be happening in the world, that it is hard not to be rude.
Essentially, my position is this:
It has been agreed above that governments are frequently malign and untrustworthy, and that armies are little more than their tools. However, neither the US nor Britain uses conscripted armies, so every willing little soldier boy clutching his nasty little toy and marching forward to the slaughter VOLUNTEERED to be there. I have little sympathy. In fact, I find the morality of anyone who would volunteer for such a thing so questionable that even if the forces were to be armed with rubber chickens and armoured with aprons, I doubt I'd buy anything from their bake sale.
It's a hard one. I can find you a massive range of statistics which will show you the absolute moral bankruptcy of the military (both US and British), recomend you books that detail great catalogues of the crimes committed by them... but you can always tell yourself that these are lies, misinformation... propoganda. If you want to live with your head in the sand, no-one can stop you. All we can offer you is the truth.
The Confusion Squid has many tentacles
mULti-torTOISe
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
Posted:
quote:Or, in the case of both of our governments... no morals?
Originally posted by Raymund Phule:
Let me ask you this, what is better, high moral or low moral?
The Confusion Squid has many tentacles
Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
Posted:
It was probably my fault that you went on this morality rant. More than likly a spelling error on my part.
Moral(sp) being the happienes of someone is what I was talking about.
You were talking about morals, in other words what someone believe to be right and wrong.
Who ever said that the military was perfect. We strive for perfection, but just like the rest of the world we fall short. Innocents are killed, it is a tragidy that should never have happend.
Obviusly you dont know what objective thinking is. So let me break it down for you, Target destroied, friendly casualties 0. That is the idea of a perfect strike, yes that I do find beautiful.
Here is the question, was the intent to kill those families? I would bet dollars to pesos that the answer is No. Tragidies exist in every day life.
You can show me statistics of morality all you want, but I can show you the men and women who have better morals than probably anybody in the world. Dont forget morals change person to person. I know that militaries from centuries back have commited atrocities. But then again, you dont need to be in the military to commit an atrocity.
It was probably my fault that you went on this morality rant. More than likly a spelling error on my part.
Moral(sp) being the happienes of someone is what I was talking about.
You were talking about morals, in other words what someone believe to be right and wrong.
Who ever said that the military was perfect. We strive for perfection, but just like the rest of the world we fall short. Innocents are killed, it is a tragidy that should never have happend.
Obviusly you dont know what objective thinking is. So let me break it down for you, Target destroied, friendly casualties 0. That is the idea of a perfect strike, yes that I do find beautiful.
Here is the question, was the intent to kill those families? I would bet dollars to pesos that the answer is No. Tragidies exist in every day life.
You can show me statistics of morality all you want, but I can show you the men and women who have better morals than probably anybody in the world. Dont forget morals change person to person. I know that militaries from centuries back have commited atrocities. But then again, you dont need to be in the military to commit an atrocity.
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
member
64 posts
Location: Cardiffy, Londony places
64 posts
Location: Cardiffy, Londony places
Posted:
I'd steer very clear of anything that resembles the 'America saved your hides in two world wars' seas, its a huegly flawed subject on its own with no real answer, especially as there is still secret government information concerning the intellegnce battles and covert operations that happened on all sides. Whatever the case, the US can't claim any form of debt from it (as Ms. Rice did from the French, pre-Iraq. Boy did that ruffle feathers on this side of the Atlantic!), and I would recomend they look closely at exactly what they contributed to the European war and there succes beyond a shed load of troops, as we should do with every country.
Comparing Empres from the ages is also slightly flawed in that the reasons are so different, the Romans fought for stability, the Spanish fought for Material Wealth, andthe English and French vied for Trade. I think the biggest misconception is that Empire building for whatever reason is a thing of the past. It was very recently that a bunch crazy people who were last responsible for Empire building and ethnic cleansing (I'm thinking WW2 specifically), but then this year we fought a war politcally for a super power's trade Empire, and only a few years earlier we were fighting in the Balkans to prevent ethnic cleansing, and before that we were defending Kuwait against Iraqi Imperialism.
But in teh same stroke lets not condemn Empires either. THe romans brough with them a culture that has influenced the planet since their demise, and lead the field in domestic peace and technology in their day. I often find it hard to believe that they came way before Vikings Plantagenats(sp) and Tudors all things considered.
The English have a lot of blame on their doorstep, but then they were the first of the Empiral advocates to try and ban slavery (and were by no means the worst slavers either. The French and Belgian reputations at the time were far worse), and using their naval might quelled the piracy that was rife for more than 400 years inthe Atlantic. It was also they who opposed the Nazis first with any real success, so it may be worth asking if they were responisble for making WW2 victory possible. Think of what might of happened if Churchill hadn't decided to stop an upity fascist nation from marching across Poland and the REst of Europe, remembering that Hitler had no pre-war intention of attacking England to my knowledge).
So Empires have there pros and cons (like everything, and so what if it's America's turn and no-one likes it! Undoubtedly theres a lot they're doing wrong but at the same time, they're fighting Drug cartels in Northern SOuth America, they're responsible for most progress in domestic environments, they are the worlds most powerful econonic country and with that comes the responsibility to carry the wieght evenly (lest more countries follow Argentina's economic demise). Having said this, there have been more wars this century than in the rest of history (allegedly) and I'd wager America has had a finger in every one somewhere, so it'd be well worth quesitoning the geo-political morals of the worlds 'friendliest' superpower and international morale of every country that has to live in it's shadow.
So take the good with the bad, and wait for when it's the Arab countries turn to rule the planet and see what payback they meet out on the Anglo-American 'democracies' that has unashamedly and ignorantly stuck its armed forces into a hornets nest of discontent and malice that is now plaguing their attempts to build a starbucks on every high street! (now that was a big sentence)
I'd steer very clear of anything that resembles the 'America saved your hides in two world wars' seas, its a huegly flawed subject on its own with no real answer, especially as there is still secret government information concerning the intellegnce battles and covert operations that happened on all sides. Whatever the case, the US can't claim any form of debt from it (as Ms. Rice did from the French, pre-Iraq. Boy did that ruffle feathers on this side of the Atlantic!), and I would recomend they look closely at exactly what they contributed to the European war and there succes beyond a shed load of troops, as we should do with every country.
Comparing Empres from the ages is also slightly flawed in that the reasons are so different, the Romans fought for stability, the Spanish fought for Material Wealth, andthe English and French vied for Trade. I think the biggest misconception is that Empire building for whatever reason is a thing of the past. It was very recently that a bunch crazy people who were last responsible for Empire building and ethnic cleansing (I'm thinking WW2 specifically), but then this year we fought a war politcally for a super power's trade Empire, and only a few years earlier we were fighting in the Balkans to prevent ethnic cleansing, and before that we were defending Kuwait against Iraqi Imperialism.
But in teh same stroke lets not condemn Empires either. THe romans brough with them a culture that has influenced the planet since their demise, and lead the field in domestic peace and technology in their day. I often find it hard to believe that they came way before Vikings Plantagenats(sp) and Tudors all things considered.
The English have a lot of blame on their doorstep, but then they were the first of the Empiral advocates to try and ban slavery (and were by no means the worst slavers either. The French and Belgian reputations at the time were far worse), and using their naval might quelled the piracy that was rife for more than 400 years inthe Atlantic. It was also they who opposed the Nazis first with any real success, so it may be worth asking if they were responisble for making WW2 victory possible. Think of what might of happened if Churchill hadn't decided to stop an upity fascist nation from marching across Poland and the REst of Europe, remembering that Hitler had no pre-war intention of attacking England to my knowledge).
So Empires have there pros and cons (like everything, and so what if it's America's turn and no-one likes it! Undoubtedly theres a lot they're doing wrong but at the same time, they're fighting Drug cartels in Northern SOuth America, they're responsible for most progress in domestic environments, they are the worlds most powerful econonic country and with that comes the responsibility to carry the wieght evenly (lest more countries follow Argentina's economic demise). Having said this, there have been more wars this century than in the rest of history (allegedly) and I'd wager America has had a finger in every one somewhere, so it'd be well worth quesitoning the geo-political morals of the worlds 'friendliest' superpower and international morale of every country that has to live in it's shadow.
So take the good with the bad, and wait for when it's the Arab countries turn to rule the planet and see what payback they meet out on the Anglo-American 'democracies' that has unashamedly and ignorantly stuck its armed forces into a hornets nest of discontent and malice that is now plaguing their attempts to build a starbucks on every high street! (now that was a big sentence)
Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
Posted:
Mr. Hands, you have done nothing to make me like you, but what you have just done has commanded even more respect from me. I was truly shocked to read what you just wrote.
DOWN WITH STARBUCKS!! GET RID OF COFFEE!! DRINK DR. PEPPER!!
My what a shamless plug
Mr. Hands, you have done nothing to make me like you, but what you have just done has commanded even more respect from me. I was truly shocked to read what you just wrote.
DOWN WITH STARBUCKS!! GET RID OF COFFEE!! DRINK DR. PEPPER!!
My what a shamless plug
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
mULti-torTOISe
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
Posted:
Well, looks like I've got two replies to make. Mr Hands, I agree that you've got to look at the good with the bad. Some of the examples that you have chosen for "good points" I might take issue with, but the principle stands.
However, it is perfectly justified to condemn whichever bad aspects we can identify. How does the argument that "other people have done worse at other times" justify transgressions today? At no point have I said that either the British or the American governments should be overthrown or anything like that, just that both are guilty of such a huge string of unjustifiable (not to say illegal) actions that they are hard to defend on any sort of moral ground.
Ray, I have very great doubts as to whether YOU know what objective thinking is. Objective (as opposed to subjective) thinking would probably mean as detached from one's own point of view as possible. Whether this is what you think it means... it's hard to tell. Seems to have little to do with the sentence that follows it, but I could be mistaken.
The US High Command knew full well that civilians were in that convoy: they had been warned by several aid workers that the convoy contained women, children and non-combatants. The death of those civilians was NOT an accident. A tragedy, yes, but one perpetrated by the US military, not one that they were "accidentally" responsible for. Hell, if you drop fire bombs on civilian vehicles you can expect civilian casualties.
By your new, refined definition ("target destroyed, friendly casualties = 0") the slaughter committed on the road out of Basra would still count as a "perfect strike," and therefore beautiful. Try and be consistent.
No one is asking the military to be perfect. If you didn't fire bomb unarmed civilians, that would probably be enough for me.
I don't feel that your reply in any way answers the majority of the points made in my last post. The statistics I mentioned do not refer to the military of centuries back, they refer to the armed forces of today.
I agree that you don't need to be in the military to commit an atrocity. Only, if you are, then you get a medal instead of a jail sentence.
Well, looks like I've got two replies to make. Mr Hands, I agree that you've got to look at the good with the bad. Some of the examples that you have chosen for "good points" I might take issue with, but the principle stands.
However, it is perfectly justified to condemn whichever bad aspects we can identify. How does the argument that "other people have done worse at other times" justify transgressions today? At no point have I said that either the British or the American governments should be overthrown or anything like that, just that both are guilty of such a huge string of unjustifiable (not to say illegal) actions that they are hard to defend on any sort of moral ground.
Ray, I have very great doubts as to whether YOU know what objective thinking is. Objective (as opposed to subjective) thinking would probably mean as detached from one's own point of view as possible. Whether this is what you think it means... it's hard to tell. Seems to have little to do with the sentence that follows it, but I could be mistaken.
The US High Command knew full well that civilians were in that convoy: they had been warned by several aid workers that the convoy contained women, children and non-combatants. The death of those civilians was NOT an accident. A tragedy, yes, but one perpetrated by the US military, not one that they were "accidentally" responsible for. Hell, if you drop fire bombs on civilian vehicles you can expect civilian casualties.
By your new, refined definition ("target destroyed, friendly casualties = 0") the slaughter committed on the road out of Basra would still count as a "perfect strike," and therefore beautiful. Try and be consistent.
No one is asking the military to be perfect. If you didn't fire bomb unarmed civilians, that would probably be enough for me.
I don't feel that your reply in any way answers the majority of the points made in my last post. The statistics I mentioned do not refer to the military of centuries back, they refer to the armed forces of today.
I agree that you don't need to be in the military to commit an atrocity. Only, if you are, then you get a medal instead of a jail sentence.
The Confusion Squid has many tentacles
Enter a "Title" here:
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
2,905 posts
Location: San Diego California
Posted:
Well... I am going to be perfectly honest with you, I HAVE NO CLUE WHAT STRIKE YOUR TALKING ABOUT!! I was all of 8 years old when the first gulf war happend, and wasnt near a TV when the second one happend. If this happend recently then all news of it has been blocked out by the small fires here in San Diego. I am sorry to say that for all I know you could be talking out your rear! I am just giving you my opinion. If you dont like it, thats cool man.
I am sure you know all about the military and how one gets a medal. It isnt the pilots fault, you must try to understand how the chain of command works. For all the pilots knew it was a convoy of soldiers.
Remember the family that was shot when they tried to run a baracade? Just a day prior a car had run a baracade and had a scuicide bomber in it, the attack killed Americans. The next day a car come flying at the blockade. Tell me, what is a soldier on the ground supposed to think? Should they wait to find out if it is an innocent family, or should they just follow orders, just in case it is a scuicide bomber and they might just save the lives of those around them. In that case it is kill or be killed.
In your case, for all the pilots could have known that there were soldiers in those convoys trying to get to a postition where they could kill our allies. Odd how the "high command" knew about it, I am not up on all our intell stuff, but how in the world did the guys in Washington know about it and the pilots not? Unless there was something in with the civilians, there would be no way that they would drop on them. I just dont see it happening. You dont just climb in a jet that just happens to be armed and look for a target to blow up. Things just arnt run that way. And yes I am a position where I know about these things. I work with pilots. I see what they have to go through to take off with a jet, and I have seen the real live gun cams.
You know a story, you dont know what really happend. You know about what someone else said, in all honesty it is hersey. I am not saying that it didnt happen, I am just saying that there could, COULD, be more to this than you or I know.
Well... I am going to be perfectly honest with you, I HAVE NO CLUE WHAT STRIKE YOUR TALKING ABOUT!! I was all of 8 years old when the first gulf war happend, and wasnt near a TV when the second one happend. If this happend recently then all news of it has been blocked out by the small fires here in San Diego. I am sorry to say that for all I know you could be talking out your rear! I am just giving you my opinion. If you dont like it, thats cool man.
I am sure you know all about the military and how one gets a medal. It isnt the pilots fault, you must try to understand how the chain of command works. For all the pilots knew it was a convoy of soldiers.
Remember the family that was shot when they tried to run a baracade? Just a day prior a car had run a baracade and had a scuicide bomber in it, the attack killed Americans. The next day a car come flying at the blockade. Tell me, what is a soldier on the ground supposed to think? Should they wait to find out if it is an innocent family, or should they just follow orders, just in case it is a scuicide bomber and they might just save the lives of those around them. In that case it is kill or be killed.
In your case, for all the pilots could have known that there were soldiers in those convoys trying to get to a postition where they could kill our allies. Odd how the "high command" knew about it, I am not up on all our intell stuff, but how in the world did the guys in Washington know about it and the pilots not? Unless there was something in with the civilians, there would be no way that they would drop on them. I just dont see it happening. You dont just climb in a jet that just happens to be armed and look for a target to blow up. Things just arnt run that way. And yes I am a position where I know about these things. I work with pilots. I see what they have to go through to take off with a jet, and I have seen the real live gun cams.
You know a story, you dont know what really happend. You know about what someone else said, in all honesty it is hersey. I am not saying that it didnt happen, I am just saying that there could, COULD, be more to this than you or I know.
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
mULti-torTOISe
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
Posted:
As stated above, the strike took place in the first gulf war. I am fairly sure that, as you say, the pilots hadn't been given full and detailed information about the civilians in the convoy. The point remains that whoever authorised that strike KNEW what was going to happen when it went ahead, and authorised it regardless.
As far as any semblance of morality goes, I rest my case.
In addition, if the military didn't have bombs like that to drop on convoys (this isn't an isolated incident: remember the aid convoy that was fired on in Bosnia? The wedding that was bombed in Afghanistan?) then slaughter like this wouldn't take place.
Less money on bombs, and more money on whiteboard markers. It's hard to kill many people with a whiteboard marker.
As stated above, the strike took place in the first gulf war. I am fairly sure that, as you say, the pilots hadn't been given full and detailed information about the civilians in the convoy. The point remains that whoever authorised that strike KNEW what was going to happen when it went ahead, and authorised it regardless.
As far as any semblance of morality goes, I rest my case.
In addition, if the military didn't have bombs like that to drop on convoys (this isn't an isolated incident: remember the aid convoy that was fired on in Bosnia? The wedding that was bombed in Afghanistan?) then slaughter like this wouldn't take place.
Less money on bombs, and more money on whiteboard markers. It's hard to kill many people with a whiteboard marker.
The Confusion Squid has many tentacles
mULti-torTOISe
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
310 posts
Location: Kent currently, Cornwall soon, New Zealand eventua...
Posted:
P.S: The FAE bombing of that convoy, amongst many other "incidents," is information that is actually fairly easy to get hold of. I was also very young during the first Gulf War, and most of what I know about it has come from reading about it since. Before I joined any organisation (can I add here that I applied for NZ citizenship several months ago, unable to tolerate any longer the things that my government does in my name), particularly one as involved and influential as the military, I would be very careful to examine in great detail what that organisation got up to. In this case, a matter of two or three hours on the net or at a decent library would surely convince you of the moral bankruptcy of US foreign policy, and would raise grave doubts about any organisation (such as the military) which enforces such policy.
P.S: The FAE bombing of that convoy, amongst many other "incidents," is information that is actually fairly easy to get hold of. I was also very young during the first Gulf War, and most of what I know about it has come from reading about it since. Before I joined any organisation (can I add here that I applied for NZ citizenship several months ago, unable to tolerate any longer the things that my government does in my name), particularly one as involved and influential as the military, I would be very careful to examine in great detail what that organisation got up to. In this case, a matter of two or three hours on the net or at a decent library would surely convince you of the moral bankruptcy of US foreign policy, and would raise grave doubts about any organisation (such as the military) which enforces such policy.
The Confusion Squid has many tentacles
member
1,591 posts
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada.
1,591 posts
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada.
Posted:
hehe if it wasn't for the us we would all be speaking german. Where the hell did you hear that ray? Oh yeah an american shool, sorry.
You do realize that the allies waited untill germany started loseing to the russians right?
The russians laid more soldiers on the line and destroyed more german equipment, killed more soldiers and spent more money and resources then anyone else in the war.
Secondly who the hell cares about anything that happened then. How many administrations went in and out of the whitehouse between then and now? How many massive social and cultural, economical changes happened in america and all over the world? ITS NOT THE SAME WORLD ANYMORE. STOP LIVING IN THE PAST.
[ 04. November 2003, 11:11: Message edited by: Astar ]
hehe if it wasn't for the us we would all be speaking german. Where the hell did you hear that ray? Oh yeah an american shool, sorry.
You do realize that the allies waited untill germany started loseing to the russians right?
The russians laid more soldiers on the line and destroyed more german equipment, killed more soldiers and spent more money and resources then anyone else in the war.
Secondly who the hell cares about anything that happened then. How many administrations went in and out of the whitehouse between then and now? How many massive social and cultural, economical changes happened in america and all over the world? ITS NOT THE SAME WORLD ANYMORE. STOP LIVING IN THE PAST.
[ 04. November 2003, 11:11: Message edited by: Astar ]
SILVER Member
Are we there yet?
1,897 posts
Location: australia
Are we there yet?
1,897 posts
Location: australia
Posted:
it assumes the world needs the US military
ba humbug, what a load of dungbeetle droppings
why not take the risk for peace?
why not assume that teaching our kids to be citizens that contribute to the world in a positive way is more important than building or flying a machine that can drop nuclear bombs in defence of lines drawn on a map?
give me an answer to that question ray, because I have far more respect for teachers who want to make citizens who can shape the world around them than those in the military that make bombs to blow people up or use guns to kill people
give teachers more money
give hospitals more money
give retired people and their accommodation services more money
put more money into peace research
put more money into building homes for all persons of the earth
put more money into finding food solutions for those less fortunate
give the military less
[ 06. November 2003, 16:22: Message edited by: Ade ]
quote:the alleged email is, from my point of view, coming from the wrong angle:
"It'll be a great day when the shcools have all the money they need and the Air Force has to have a bake sale to buy a bomber."
it assumes the world needs the US military
ba humbug, what a load of dungbeetle droppings
why not take the risk for peace?
why not assume that teaching our kids to be citizens that contribute to the world in a positive way is more important than building or flying a machine that can drop nuclear bombs in defence of lines drawn on a map?
give me an answer to that question ray, because I have far more respect for teachers who want to make citizens who can shape the world around them than those in the military that make bombs to blow people up or use guns to kill people
give teachers more money
give hospitals more money
give retired people and their accommodation services more money
put more money into peace research
put more money into building homes for all persons of the earth
put more money into finding food solutions for those less fortunate
give the military less
[ 06. November 2003, 16:22: Message edited by: Ade ]
member
1,591 posts
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada.
1,591 posts
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada.
Posted:
The concept of having a giant standing army only makes sense if there is a giant standing army that you are likely to have to defend yourself from (Which there isn't)
I find it funny how people who advocate americas stupidly oversized army by makeing references to ww2. ww2 was fought entirely with normally non-standing armies. They were armies raised in response to aggresion.
The "wrong" of ww2 was seeing germany raise an army (it was no secret they were doing this) and us not raising an army to match theirs and waiting untill they grew to be such a big country that they could threaten the worlds forces.
Im pretty nervous about chinas place in world affairs, they could very easily start expanding all over asia, They can't invade america though. Not with their current state. It is completly impossible for them to mobilize before NATO and the UN can respond.
What we really need is a super-project the world can unite on. The more money that's infested into something the less likely people are going to go to war and throw that money away. The space station hardly qualifies as a super project. Why don't we get together and brainstorm a way to build a tower/elevator to the space station or a serious plan to begin terraforming mars.
You can't spend ALL your money on education because educated men still go to war. They both cause, lead and fight wars.
The concept of having a giant standing army only makes sense if there is a giant standing army that you are likely to have to defend yourself from (Which there isn't)
I find it funny how people who advocate americas stupidly oversized army by makeing references to ww2. ww2 was fought entirely with normally non-standing armies. They were armies raised in response to aggresion.
The "wrong" of ww2 was seeing germany raise an army (it was no secret they were doing this) and us not raising an army to match theirs and waiting untill they grew to be such a big country that they could threaten the worlds forces.
Im pretty nervous about chinas place in world affairs, they could very easily start expanding all over asia, They can't invade america though. Not with their current state. It is completly impossible for them to mobilize before NATO and the UN can respond.
What we really need is a super-project the world can unite on. The more money that's infested into something the less likely people are going to go to war and throw that money away. The space station hardly qualifies as a super project. Why don't we get together and brainstorm a way to build a tower/elevator to the space station or a serious plan to begin terraforming mars.
You can't spend ALL your money on education because educated men still go to war. They both cause, lead and fight wars.
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com