fuck that. you don't have the first goddamn clue what a person will or will not sink to when the act of murder suddenly stops being the nadir of their moral compass. you flat-out lack the breadth of experience necessary to be able to make that kind of extrapolation.

quite possibly. that's something i'd have no problem condemning them for. to be clear, i would like to see these soldiers disciplined. i'd like to see them in counseling. i mean, for fucks' sake, we provide psychotherapeutic services to people who murder their fellow humans; i'd hope we're not going to just write off some guys whose worst crime is accidentally (in my opinion) blowing up a dog and laughing about it.

oh, for fuck's sake. stress--the kind of stress that causes problems when soldiers get home--does not magically appear only after the combat is over and the soldier is safe at home. it's there the whole time, and it pops up and causes problems and alterations in behavior right there on the battlefield. killing a helpless dog for 'jollies' is the least a soldier will do in a warzone, if not given proper guidance and supervision. part of the stress that these soldiers have to deal with, if and when they get home, is understanding how their conscience--their internal sense of right and wrong--could have gotten so twisted while they were serving.

my theory is that for most people, murder is the ultimate bad act. which is to say, most people think someone who kills people is worse than someone who (for instance) kills dogs. so when you're put in a situation where it's okay to kill people, where it's okay to murder--but only some people, and there are no clear ways to tell which people that might be--then things like, say, killing a dog (or even just laughing at one that dies) lose their negative moral connotations.

i think i'm dragging them back to where they should have been all along, yeah.

And you know that how, exactly? You do not know anything about we3 pirate except what's posted here, right?

I'd hope that as well.

Did you see I edited that comment after it was first posted?

I think what you're saying here is basically sound, but I suspect it doesn't address the roots of the problem.

what the fuck?



not funny unless you're really screwed up in the head.

in your scenario, either way you're killing an innocent animal and getting enjoyment out of it, and that is FUCKED UP. definitely not the kind of person i would want to be around, or even have anywhere near me and my family (which consists of my husband and our cats- they're like our CHILDREN!).

earlier this week i read a news story where a woman's small dog was murdered, cut open, and left in her front yard. the assholes who did it lured this poor dog from her backyard, and then killed it for just fun. the lady was single, couldn't have kids, and the ten year old dachshund was like her child. this kind of thing happens a lot, and people don't take it seriously enough. like many people have pointed out, it's a sign that someone is likely to do something similar to a human being someday.

nicely said.

i'm surprised that more people haven't mentioned the south african "corrective rape" thing as well.

that really makes me wanna barf. people are so fucked up, i will never understand it. those poor women. the worst thing is, i know some of them have probably been raped before, and now they have to deal with that...

sigh.

seriously,
everybody knows if you want to make skullbongs, you can get them at the bone room.

Just to note.. Iraqi's don't keep dogs as pets, pretty much all dogs are mangy disease riden wild pack dogs. I'm not saying it's fucked up, but do understand that people have an entirely different view on animals in that part of the world.

Source?

i know because what he says does not match up with reality. i don't know who we3 pirate is or what he's done, but i know what he's learned.

no, missed the edit until you pointed it out. i'm not sure the movement of these particular goalposts really matters, relative to what's being discussed. whether someone is fucked up in the head before they join, or whether they get fucked up during their service--fucked up is fucked up, and in either case, compassion and treatment are a better answer than derision and rejection.

yes. everyone here is in agreement on that point. where we differ is in our opinions on what should be done. i feel that these soldiers should be treated for the disabilities imposed upon and/or encouraged in them by the service they have volunteered to join, and that while their actions should not be accepted, they themselves should be. you, and others, feel that these soldiers should be called 'asshole fuckfaces' and tossed out the society that created and used them, ignoring the larger issues and root problems that spawn such behavior in the first place. i want to clean up and restore something of value, which happens to be buried under some pretty nasty muck; you want to throw it out because it's really grody, no matter how much it's worth under the dirt--and how well it's served you.

oh, i couldn't find it earlier, but i just wanted to say i look like a selfish prick, sitting there watching my TV.

Forget source, how about giving us a reason why this little factoid matters at all?

I'd also like to know if this entire argument is anything beyond the tired, old "what's the big deal, it's just an animal?" play, with a military twist. Because we strip away the standard issue CE dick waving, that's what I perceive to be left.

In the interest of full disclosure, I didn't actually watch the video in its entirety. As soon as I saw the dog trotting into view, the sense of dread was plenty to motivate me to move on. With a wife who works in animal care, I get to find out about the awesome things people do to these creatures we've genetically tweaked and twisted to have as companions on a daily basis.

The question that came up of "what if it was a baby?" cements my theory from a couple of paragraphs ago, seeing as that kind of question either implies or directly precedes something along the lines of "A lot of times, we treat animals better than humans". Well the only answer I could have to such a question is "it sure as shit wouldn't be on YouTube." and if animals are held in such high regard in our society, than wouldn't this video's existence represent a bit of a paradox?

I couldn't watch the video either. Dog trotting out was also enough for me.

Yeap,
several countries did offer and provide help, including Cuba... but like willam9 said it was turned down.

I've found that Iraqis are afraid of dogs. They throw rocks at them and stuff.

it's not about the animal, to me. it's about the soldiers, and about how there's no attempt being made to understand why they would act the way they've acted. there are two reasons that i think the "OMG THEYRE SICK" attitude being displayed on these boards is bad: one, it shows a lack of empathy and understanding on the part of the posters--which, ironically enough, is the same problem the soldiers have.

second, let's think about what kinds of responses to this sort of behavior are actually useful to us as a society. if even relatively minor amounts of aberrant behavior--and if you are not aware enough of how humans treat each other to recognize that laughing at a dog that gets blown up is, indeed, relatively non-aberrant, then i'm not sure you really belong in this conversation--are met with derision and rejection, what can a person with an aberrant psychology expect if she/he comes forward for help? derision and rejection encourage further abberrance; they solve nothing. christians, for all their many faults, have a very useful phrase: hate the sin, not the sinner.

the soldiers in this video fucked up, and are fucked up, no question. a person can choose to respond to their actions in such a way as to help these soldiers (and all the others like them) mend, or a person can choose to exacerbate the situation as a cheap way of making themselves feel better.

in light of that? yeah--it's just an animal.

Since Iraq is a Muslim country, I'm going to guess that Oskar and OhSoOrdinary are right.

I also think SixBoxes is correct to point out that it's not germaine to the discussion. These weren't Iraqi troops.

There's a summary here.

Singapore was one of the few countries whose aid (4 Chinooks and 45 rescue personnel, most with fresh experience from the Boxing Day tsunami) the U.S. accepted.