Ugh. This is all disgustingly repulsive. There is no glory in killing, even if it is necessary for survival. I have no hatred for the soldiers who are doing their jobs. But, if it isn't clear now that this entire war is a gigantic misadventure of tragic proportions, I don't know if it ever will be. Its the same mentality as Vietnam: "We had to destroy the village to save it."
I find your post disgustingly repulsive. To each his own. BTW your weak correlation to destroying a village to save it, makes zero sense...Then again some people think war is always bad, irregardless of the big piture. That is a right to think foolishly, and I welcome the demonstation.
Totally agree with what you're saying. It doesn't matter which side you're on--what matters is whoever (friend or foe) commits a war-crime should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. BTW Hayjon, since you seem to be interested in the Vietnam War, you might want to pick up the book "Tiger Force,"--its available at Amazon.com. It's a great read about the elite special forces unit in Vietnam. Thoroughly engrossing and you will learn a lot about what really happened during the war...
My repulsion is to glorification and enjoyment of taking another person's life. It may be necessary to kill at times, but it is always a tragedy no matter how you look at it. My correlation to that ironic quote from the Vietnam war makes some sense if you think about the tragic irony of killing tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians, destroying their infrastructure, and imposing them to the rule of a foreign occupying power in order to supposedly give them a better life Wars ARE always bad, by definition. Wars can be necessary for self-defense, however. My objection is to wars of choice, wars of aggression, and wars of empire.
this might be one of the many reasons people don't stop at road blocks and checkpoints: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060605/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
There's something strangely fitting in "Patience" dutifully responding to Roxran. Wonder how long that will last... haha
Nope. He suggested I commit suicide. It's funny how you rip O'Reilly for a misstatement while condoning Fisher's behavior. You are a very sick and morally bankrupt person, but that's what I expect from this place.
Once again, you are showing that you are ignorant of the O'Relly piece mentioned. It was not a misstatement. It is the SECOND time he used it. I don't rip him for misspeaking. I rip him for slandering dead WWII veterans. As for Fisher's statement, I understand that the ritual does commit suicide. But I also understand context. The context was that you had lost honor, and that was the main point. It obviously wasn't any kind of a serious request for you to kill yourself. As for my moral bankruptcy, that may or may not be, but you aren't who I will look to to make that judgement.
And you were criticizing Democrats for not keeping things civil? I agree Sam's comment regarding you committing Seppuku is stupid and petty and he should be called on it but you're not exactly taking the high road either.
There is no mention of US military checkpoints in that article. At best that article would show why the Iraqi's don't trust the Iraqi police. What you are looking for is an article on innocent Iraqis cooperating at a US military checkpoint and then being killed anyway. Good luck with that.
Yes, honor. I am not saying you did or did not lose it. I am saying that was the main point Sam was trying to make. As I said earlier, I don't condone anyone suggesting somebody else commit suicide. But for anyone who cares to read the whole exchange it is clear that the suicide wasn't the main point. That doesn't make it a good post or anything I agree with. But it isn't the main part, though that is what you latch on to.
I don't expect that. It's just funny as hell when your crowd whines about civility while tolerating SamFisher.
