NEWS: It's Fun to Shoot People?

Yeah, done. Thanks for your time


+1

[Edited on Feb 05, 2005 by kekaha]

Don't you try to fucking tell me I want war EVER.
I didn't make the mistake of voting any of the cocks into office who're there now.

I didn't ask if he is one, I asked if it's chickenhawk bullshit. Just a cicuitous was of calling him one, really.

For the same reason I wouldn't listen to a lecture about internal medicine by someone who isn't actually a doctor. This, of course, isn't quite the same as that, but stock isn't expressing an opinion, he's claiming to know things that he doesn't.

Not quite the same at all. This is getting way too literal and/or semantic. If that was your whole point, it translates to me that, much like what you said in reverse, you dismiss everything he says because you don't agree with it. Apparently you could pick the nits out af a flea's ass with that powerful analytic microscope of yours.

Patton's speech does not apply only because the situation is different. We have no set physical destination, so we cannot continue to drive forward until we get there. stockula's only opinion, which is probably not simply based on war movies, happens to be right this time. The nature of war remains the same: when it's time to fight, unflagging aggression is a powerful tool. How many people state things as fact on this board, but really only read about it on the internet? Stockula stated it as "this is this", and it really is just an opinion, because the definition of "nature of war" is subjective. If he had said "I think this is this", you would have said the same bullshit about "how do you know? you were never there". So how can a whipping boy express an opinion around here, is there some forms he has to fill out?

For the record: I am not one of those who discounts non-veterans' opinions about war- and combat-related matters with a "you wouldn't know, you've never been there". I have seen a few service members on this site do that, but (and this is literally true) I have seen it said even more times to stockula, by others who have never "been there" (I am not referring to troglodyte, I don't know his history, I seem to remember something about being a counselor at a christian youth camp, but my memory is imperfect when it comes to stuff that doesn't really matter), and it amuses the hell out of me.

I care, and so should anyone who thinks going to war should always be a last resort. Sending troops into harms way, risking and taking life, should never be something that's done under false pretenses. The end does not justify the means.


[Edited on Feb 05, 2005 by ThePassenger]

I never denied that. Scroll up. I commented on that earlier.

Sure I didn't research the topic well, but I do consider Vanity Fair somewhat of a good source.

And besides, this is all about opinions. Obviously. Sure I may have been a little harsh.

Maybe they got who they wanted as a leader. Though I doubt that, considering the ethnic diversity in the country, who aren't usually very civil to eachother. All I was saying was, at least for now, not much has changed. We still occupy their country, and yes, we have to, now. But we shouldn't have been there in the first place. Yeah, it is a step forward, giving them democracy. Well, shoving down their throats, really. And if our little imperialist way of going about things rub off on them at all, we don't have much to look forward to. By the way, if you research Wolfowitz' vision of turning the Mid-East into a 'greater-Zion,' you might have second thoughts about what we were doing.

Thank you, and good night.

whos life do you value more... yours? or the guy whos shooting at you trying to take yours?

i got that--in fact i said that your "exhilaration" post was an eloquent one. i was actually trying to open up a new line of discussion based on your post, not presuming that i had nailed one shut, when i raised the issue of just wars. i must not have done a very good job of expressing the direction in which i was thinking, however, if i got "no shit, sherlock" in response.

i applaud your optimism, and i hope you're right, but your characterization of the iraqi vote as yet another "mission accomplished" may be a bit premature. it's far too early to tell whether the consequences of the shiites' overwhelming dominance in the elections might not be another instance of "catastrophic success."

I must have took it the wrong way. You are right, I do agree with the thing you said. There is no joy in killing, only in living

WWPD?

WWGPD?

Generals lead soldiers in battle to kill....not give press conferences.

thanks, and no big deal. maybe we can discuss it again sometime.

He is a Marine general, soldiers are bred to kill, thats their job, I don't see why anyone is surprised he said that. Psshh ,talk anyone in the military they won't be shocked or appalled.

It is to me. Even if the law doesn't agree with me. If my mother were to be hit or any women who I am close with were beaten up, I would seriously consider killing the spineless fuck who did it.

VIA Attaturk at RISING HEGEMON

[Edited on Feb 06, 2005 3:28PM]

How come nobody wants to know what MacArthur would do...

How about that, the first war that we lost and are still losing. Back then we had my two favorite uncles fighting over there. One of which took a shitload of shrapnel and was hauled off the singing "Amazing Grace" at the top of his lungs.

What did that mistake in judgment about the repercussions of interfering in a foreign conflict provide my uncle? He got quite a few more good years and then the rest of his life followed a massive stroke from a peice of shrapnel lodged in his brain that left him partially paralyzed and delusional. Even then he played a brave face against what was of course the inevitable result of multiple stokes, blackouts, and brain surgeries—a grim and looming insanity.

The last couple of years he has finally lost the battle, nearly unable to communicate in any meaningful way with the family.

We were spared in Vietnam, seems like everybody hit the age thing just right.

*sigh*

War is not something that we should often decide ourselves into...we should only resort that when it is absolutely necessary. You fucking chickenhawks disgust me.

Military men are made for killing, on that I can agree and know without serving--but this rhetoric you throw around in justifying this war is simply jaw-droppingly pathetic.


[Edited on Feb 06, 2005 by tenmile]

Every person I've ever spoken to, including ex-war veterans have never prided themselves on the actual killing of the enemy. Sure they're usually proud that they served their country, but to say it's fun to kill another person is sick and twisted. When you've hit such a low on valuing human life, I think it's time to start questioning whether your fit to serve.