that isn't what he said. what he said was that not everyone is qualified to judge the soldiers' behavior. i'm not sure i agree that only those who've served in combat can possibly have the necessary qualifications, but it's certainly true that combat--especially extended periods in which combat is frequent and/or threatened--imposes changes on the human mind that require specialized knowledge to understand (to the extent that these changes can be understood by modern psychology).

everyone is entitled to their opinion. my opinion is that some opinions are flat-out incorrect--they are in conflict with factual information. i place greater value on opinions held by people with a strong grasp of the factual information related to their opinion; people with lesser grasps on the facts are certainly welcome to hold their own views--just as i am perfectly free to discount their views.

specifically, my opinion is that FTR's most recent post, concerning whether or not the troops in Iraq are keeping him safe, is frivolous and beside the point. i feel his post is a cheap attempt to shift attention away from his treatment of the soldiers in the video. that isn't to imply that i have any less respect for FTR--i enjoy reading his posts, even when he's wrong. he presents enough in the way of hard evidence that the occasional dirty pool he plays can be accepted as part of the presentation.

That wasn't why I called you a troll. Go back, look at it again.

I know. You called me a troll because I yawned at FTR's statement. It is always the same thing and is tiring. I had a long post ready in reply to his statement and decided it was just not worth it. So I yawned.

- Charlie Manson had family too. Having family doesn't preclude you from being a monster. Which said, I agree that treatment is in order.

- You're missing the point. It's your hypocrisy I'm going after. You are quite happy to describe someone as a pseudo-intellectual snob, on no evidence I can see, but you don't like it when civilians (who are a great majority in your democracy) have a bad opinion about soldiers' behaviour. Go look at it again. You're asking for a free pass.

Nothing prevented you from deleting your post. You chose to yawn. That's the point: If you haven't anything to say, keep quiet.

This thread wins the Disgusting Rationalizations Award for, like all time.

it is indeed fairly disgusting to rationalize circumstance and consequence out of the picture, when dealing with aberrant behaviors.

My hypocrisy? What planet are you from? The two cases are very different.

You keep bringing up the part about "pseudo-intellectual snob." What is the matter. Did I hit a hot button with you?

I am not asking for a free pass. To suggest that I am means you have no understanding of what I am posting; therefore, proving my point.

I have had enough of this stimulating discussion for the day. I have to go take care of RT.

Be Well.

I did have something to say. I said, "Yawn!!". A demonstration and expression of my feelings at the post.

You said, "If you haven't anything to say, keep quiet."

Who are you to tell me to be quiet? Now I am wondering if perhaps you aren't just another pseudo-intellectual elitist snob who walks around looking down on everyone he doesn't agree with or who doesn't agree with you.

My hypocrisy? What planet are you from? The two cases are very different.

You keep bringing up the part about "pseudo-intellectual snob." What is the matter. Did I hit a hot button with you?


Yes you did. You were rude to someone who you don't know, for no reason. Basic courtesy is a requirement to be taken seriously.

You assume your lack of understanding proves you right? Oh dear.

And you most certainly are asking for a free pass. I do understand what you're saying; which is exactly why I choose to demonstrate its underlying logic. Which, since you still haven't got it, is this:

"Soldiers do stuff nobody else does, and it's extremely stressful and produces disturbed behaviour."

"Because only soldiers do that stuff, only soldiers should be allowed to comment on it."

"But soldiers get to be rude to random people whose opinions they don't like."

Free pass.

When you get back, do address my points.

correct me if i'm wrong, SockPuppet, but i believe that you're saying that QuargWarrior is asking for a free pass for himself, not for the soldiers that at the center of the discussion. you're saying that QuargWarrior is being disparaging of people's inability/refusal to empathize with the soldiers in question, while he himself is--in your opinion--showing an inability/refusal to empathize with some of the posters here.

i'm not agreeing or disagreeing with either side of this particular point; it's an interpersonal disagreement that i hope can be resolved quickly--or taken elsewhere--so that there will be more room for broader discussion of the topics.

I hear there is an overabundance of kids in Africa that aren't being looked after too... maybe someone should go blow them up. When did "there are more where that one came from" become a reason to condone torturing a living thing? And the fact that other dogs are taken care of doesn't excuse their actions either. For the record, I think you've missed the point. The DOG is not the point, the depravity and moral vacuousness of the MORONS who thought it would be a good idea to torture it are the point.

Nope, I think you're confused. Guys like the soldiers and the idiots who defend them are the reason the rest of the world hates you.

Obviously, they need psychiatric help. Hopefully, they get it. But come on - people go through traumatizing experiences all the time and don't blow dogs up or go into hysterics about dogs getting accidentally blown up. There is something wrong with that, no matter what kind of spin you put on it. It reminds me of lawyers trying to explain that their murderous client really couldn't help himself because he was abused as a child, and he'll be a really swell guy if you just give him a chance.

I've read this entire thread, given each side the benefit of the doubt (a little forgiveness here and there), but can you please explain this post to me? How does having a negative reaction to an animal's suffering make people hate the US more--a country that has a profound historical record of not giving a fuck about human (let alone any) suffering?

circumstance does not provide an excuse for one's behavior. those soldiers acted improperly, and they deserve to be punished for their improper actions. they also deserve respect, which should buy them the benefit of the doubt with regards to their character sans the impact of their circumstance.

a murderer who was abused as a child has every chance of becoming a swell guy--if he receives proper treatment. regardless of his circumstance, however, he committed a crime, and the commission of a crime is something that must be punished for the good of society, no matter how swell a guy he becomes.

my statement to Shiny Metal Ass was uncalled for and arguably less than true. i apologize for making it. while circumstance--specifically, the disrespect i feel he showed to people who i feel deserve respect--led me to feel pretty angry, that doesn't excuse the inappropriate action i took as a response. i'm a pretty swell guy, once you get to know me.