← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Angler
Thread ID: 12592 | Posts: 23 | Started: 2004-03-01
2004-03-01 07:53 | User Profile
Someone on the VNN forum posted the following link to a video of a ZOG soldier executing a helpless, injured Iraqi militant:
[url]http://www.bushflash.com/crime.html[/url]
Isn't the bravery of "our" troops inspiring?
:furious:
2004-03-01 20:00 | User Profile
No worse than the IDF officer shooting a 15 year old Palestinian boy in the back infront of three members of the UN.........
2004-03-02 00:21 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]Someone on the VNN forum posted the following link to a video of a ZOG soldier executing a [COLOR=Red]helpless, injured Iraqi militant[/COLOR]:
[url]http://www.bushflash.com/crime.html[/url] [COLOR=Red] Isn't the bravery of "our" troops inspiring[/COLOR]?
:furious:[/QUOTE]Many times previous I have confessed to being in the lower quartile of this forum when measuring sterling moral character. I point out to [B]Angler[/B] that previous actions were not on film. Absolutely no sense of what this Iraqi may or may not have done is given.
I question if many members would have acted much differently. Blood lust surges after seeing your friends killed or maimed. This has happened in all wars, not just those of America. In fact we are quite kind compared to other nations and people. I wish members such as [B]Angler[/B] should experience just once in their life a bullet missing them by a few inches. I am sure he would not be quoting beatitudes.
2004-03-02 01:47 | User Profile
I point out to Angler that previous actions were not on film. Absolutely no sense of what this Iraqi may or may not have done is given. Whatever came before the film shown couldn't have been that bad, judging by the calm demeanor of the Marine and his buddies. If such danger was afoot, then why was the cameraman able to film the incident so calmly? And even if the shooting was somehow justified, which it obviously was not, then the fact that the soliders laughed and cheered about it afterward shows that their minds are quite warped. They'll make fine jack-booted thugs when they return to the States.
I question if many members would have acted much differently. I can't speak for others here, but I certainly would have acted differently. If I were a ZOG mercenary, I would have made an attempt to take the injured gunman prisoner, had him patched up, and then questioned him about the activities of other militants.
Blood lust surges after seeing your friends killed or maimed. Maybe that's why that Iraqi took up arms -- perhaps the US killed one of his friends or family. And let's not forget that we attacked Iraq, not vice versa, and that they are defending their land, while the US are invaders. Hence, any excuses you make for the US soldiers' actions apply at least as much to the Iraqi guerrillas.
This has happened in all wars, not just those of America. In fact we are quite kind compared to other nations and people. Well, we sure are kind to Israel. We recently dropped tons of bombs on one of their Mid East competitors, killing countless innocent people.
I wish members such as Angler should experience just once in their life a bullet missing them by a few inches. I am sure he would not be quoting beatitudes. I have indeed had a couple of very real brushes with violent death in my life. I've been assaulted with deadly weapons (but not firearms) and been beaten on by multiple assailants, ending up in the hospital with serious injuries. To tell you the truth, I'd rather be shot at any day -- especially while having an M16, body armor, and the most powerful military in the world on my side -- than go through one of those experiences again.
Furthermore, I wonder if you would be so forgiving of "our" troops' conduct if you could experience what the Iraqis have gone through: having the hell bombed out of your nation, seeing the women and children of your nation getting blown to bits as bombs fall in your neighborhood, then being occupied by the most powerful, high-tech military on the planet and having nothing to fight back with except whatever weapons one can scrounge up. Let's not forget that the Iraqi militants are fighting a much harder and more dangerous battle than the ZOG soldiers are, and they're doing it to keep the Zionists' paws off Iraqi oil and territory.
2004-03-02 02:07 | User Profile
Edward, I agree with you often on this topic.
Not this time.
That video shows a cold, calculated murder.
Based on your experience, is it normal for a soldier seeking vengenance on behalf of a fallen comrade to yuck it up with his buddies after dispatching the enemy?
2004-03-02 14:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]Edward, I agree with you often on this topic.
Not this time.
That video shows a cold, calculated murder.
[COLOR=Red]Based on your experience, is it normal for a soldier seeking vengenance on behalf of a fallen comrade to yuck it up with his buddies after dispatching the enemy[/COLOR]?[/QUOTE]I never saw this in person, but I had friends who had many times. "Yuck it up" is too strong a phrase. Perhaps grim satisfaction with some hints of glee and absolutely no remorse may be better. If a friend or valued squad member died, his buddies were looking for revenge many times over.
2004-03-02 16:06 | User Profile
[QUOTE=edward gibbon]I never saw this in person, but I had friends who had many times. "Yuck it up" is too strong a phrase. Perhaps grim satisfaction with some hints of glee and absolutely no remorse may be better. If a friend or valued squad member died, his buddies were looking for revenge many times over.[/QUOTE] That suggests they had gone beyond the simple, reactive revenge mode, and were deliberately wallowing in sadism and joy in the act of killing itself.
Someone killing strictly out of revenge strikes out in anger first, and tends to stay angry for some time after the fact.
I know if I had lost someone dear to me, and killed those responsible, I'd never feel like laughing or joking again - or certainly not for a long time, and never laugh about the act of revenge itself.
No, these folks weren't personally revenging themselves. They were enjoying their job, which in this context means being able to exercise the power of life and death over nameless others, without the usual consequences that follow such acts under ordinary civilized circumstances. There has been far, far too much information leaking out of Iraq to demonstrate that these are common acts, and not isolated revenge incidents.
Someone post that sick IR video of the helicopter blowing those Iraqi farmers away; it was all over the net a month or two ago. That was deliberate murder and a war crime if I ever saw one. But nothing will come of it because the Pentagon brass will always declare the victims to have been "terrorists" after the fact. We've given our men carte blanche to kill without regard for consequences, because effectively there are none.
2004-03-02 16:21 | User Profile
"The United States has the right, and ... the ... power, to penetrate to every part of the national domainââ¬Â¦. We will remove and destroy every obstacle - if need be, take every life, every acre of land, every particle of property, everything that to us seems proper." ~ Gen. W. T. Sherman
"This war must be pursued with a vim and vengeance until the rebellion is put down, if it exterminates from God's green earth every man, woman, and child south of Mason and Dixon's line." ~ William G. Brownlow
2004-03-02 16:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=grep14w]That suggests they had gone beyond the simple, reactive revenge mode, and were deliberately wallowing in sadism and joy in the act of killing itself.
Someone killing strictly out of revenge strikes out in anger first, and tends to stay angry for some time after the fact.
I know if I had lost someone dear to me, and killed those responsible, I'd never feel like laughing or joking again - or certainly not for a long time, and never laugh about the act of revenge itself.
No, these folks weren't personally revenging themselves. They were enjoying their job, which in this context means being able to exercise the power of life and death over nameless others, without the usual consequences that follow such acts under ordinary civilized circumstances.[/QUOTE]Precisely.
2004-03-02 18:47 | User Profile
[QUOTE=grep14w]That suggests they had gone beyond the simple, reactive revenge mode, and were deliberately wallowing in sadism and joy in the act of killing itself.
Someone killing strictly out of revenge strikes out in anger first, and tends to stay angry for some time after the fact.
I know if I had lost someone dear to me, and killed those responsible, I'd never feel like laughing or joking again - or certainly not for a long time, and never laugh about the act of revenge itself.
No, these folks weren't personally revenging themselves. They were enjoying their job, which in this context means being able to exercise the power of life and death over nameless others, without the usual consequences that follow such acts [COLOR=Red]under ordinary civilized circumstances[/COLOR]. There has been far, far too much information leaking out of Iraq to demonstrate that these are common acts, and not isolated revenge incidents.
Someone post that sick IR video of the helicopter blowing those Iraqi farmers away; it was all over the net a month or two ago. That was deliberate murder and a war crime if I ever saw one. But nothing will come of it because the Pentagon brass will always declare the victims to have been "terrorists" after the fact. [COLOR=Red]We've given our men carte blanche to kill without regard for consequences, because effectively there are none[/COLOR].[/QUOTE]Wars are tough. Men change. Civility and laws are very seldom, if ever, remembered. Young American men can be extremely brutish. So can others.
2004-03-02 19:08 | User Profile
The US has murdered hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. I guess that's just a foggy statistic.
2004-03-02 20:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Happy Hacker]The US has murdered hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. I guess that's just a foggy statistic.[/QUOTE]Countries have killed ([I]not murdered[/I]) and conquered for far less than oil. I am not now, nor have I ever defended any policy in the Middle East that required an invasion of an oil producing country. Yet I am aware that if we were faced with internal chaos or rebellion that the United States would invade. Then I suspect I would reluctantly go along.
The above may be a justification regarded seemly by the Baker, Scowcroft crowd. Remembering Burke, I feel the United States must put chains on our appetites and change.
[QUOTE][COLOR=Red][I]The US has murdered hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. I guess that's just a foggy statistic[/I][/COLOR][/QUOTE]I find this number to be a ludicrous guess that may satisfy some political leanings. The libertarian inclined crowd here has a great underlying belief that money explains all and somehow they are morally superior people. I do not share this view. I will be taking a survey soon on attitudes towards fighting and I will ask members to answer the questions.
2004-03-02 21:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=edward gibbon]Wars are tough. Men change. Civility and laws are very seldom, if ever, remembered. Young American men can be extremely brutish. So can others.[/QUOTE]So what precisely are we arguing about?
You seem rather defensive when we mention certain facts, then you doubt the facts, then you rationalize the facts, and then you shrug the facts off with a dismissal of "well, that's just the way things are, and besides, everyone does it", thus admitting we were right about the facts all along.
Thus I question what it is you want to argue with us about, anyway.
2004-03-03 14:15 | User Profile
I, for one, gather what Gibbon is getting at.
It's enough to say that our perch at the keyboard tends to get a little too comfortable for some arond here. Though I've never seen combat, I am willing to believe that there is a little Calley in all of us.
In any case, this is the war the neo-cons and sundry flag waivers lusted for, this is the ugliness that war always breeds, and we shouldn't waste this opportunity to rub their noses in it.
2004-03-03 16:02 | User Profile
[QUOTE=EDUMAKATEDMOFO]I, for one, gather what Gibbon is getting at.
It's enough to say that our perch at the keyboard tends to get a little too comfortable for some arond here. Though I've never seen combat, I am willing to believe that there is a little Calley in all of us.
Well, if we are going to get into a contest, I think most of us would admit there are some things we would be willing to fight, kill, and die for. Obviously, Eretz Israel ain't it.> In any case, this is the war the neo-cons and sundry flag waivers lusted for, this is the ugliness that war always breeds, and we shouldn't waste this opportunity to rub their noses in it.[/QUOTE]Ah, but we can't force them to watch those Iraqi farmers being turned into hamburger by an Apache 20mm gatling gun. We can't make them face up to the facts, and we certainly can't make the media do it.
2004-03-03 17:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=EDUMAKATEDMOFO]I, for one, gather what Gibbon is getting at.
It's enough to say that our perch at the keyboard tends to get a little too comfortable for some arond here. Though I've never seen combat, I am willing to believe that there is a little Calley in all of us.
In any case, this is the war the neo-cons and sundry flag waivers lusted for, this is the ugliness that war always breeds, and we shouldn't waste this opportunity to rub their noses in it.[/QUOTE]
I think what EG is getting at is that serving in the US military is the highest honor, and is more important than what or whom one is fighting for, and that the barbarity that often goes with it is natural and unimportant.
Apparently, he also considers anyone who doesn't wear their combat experience on their sleeve to be either a coward or not old enough to have served and thus too inexperienced to have thoughts on the matter.
Failure to properly revere his cliches sends him into homoerotic fantasies and the making of physical threats.
2004-03-03 17:53 | User Profile
My father just missed Vietnam, but he served. I actually have many family members who served, including both grandfathers. Both of them saw some really bad stuff in WWII.
Although I now think the US was on the wrong side of that war, that doesn't make them any less courageous, just like it doesn't make the German, Russian, and Japanese soldiers any less courageous.
I don't think anyone here is questioning the courage of people who serve in the US military -- at least not at the enlisted level or the level of the lower ranking officers. That's a straw man argument.
What we're dealing with in this instance is not an example of courage. It is an example of cowardice.
2004-03-03 19:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]edward gibbon:
[COLOR=Red]You often repeat the claim that Gulf War I and II were about securing our oil supply. While this is certainly a less naive view than "we are fighting for freedom and democracy,[/COLOR]" I don't believe that it accurately describes the real motives behind the neocon vendetta against Iraq. I still believe the confluence of three powerful forces drove us into Iraq. 1. The oil lobby concerned with controlling the price of oil and the world's greatest source of oil. 2. The Israeli lobby far more concerned with Israel than the United States. These thugs hold the lives of Jews much higher than the lives of Americans. 3. Wall Street realizes the average American has no clue to the horrendous consequences of our accumulated merchandise trade deficit and wishes to still control the flow of world trade.> [COLOR=Red]The fact of the matter is, Hussein's Iraq was more than happy to provide us with oil at market price[/COLOR]. What stood in the way was not Saddam Hussein but rather than neocon imposed EMBARGO against his regime and his country. [/QUOTE]Iraq intended to price its oil in Euros, [I][B]not[/B][/I] dollars. Please see #3 above.[QUOTE]Consequently, I see no reason to defend the actions of Israel's unwitting mercenaries in the Middle East. As far as I am concerned, they are not serving "America" but are the battering rams and cannon fodder for people named Kristol, Safire, Podhoretz, Frum, Ledeen, Wolfowitz, Schwartz, and Goldberg. [COLOR=Red]If they were truly brave and heroic, they would have given the administration a middle finger salute instead of volunteering to go overseas. [/COLOR] [/QUOTE] Obviously you have listened to a peace protester who believed he was brave. It takes absolutely no courage to extend the Middle Finger. None whatsoever. Facing enemy fire does require courage. Please get your definitions correct. American soldiers and marines are young and do what they are told.
I would strap Perle, Frum, Kristol and others on the fronts of tanks, and then march them through mine fields.
2004-03-03 20:05 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]I think what EG is getting at is that serving in the US military is the highest honor, and is more important than what or whom one is fighting for, and that the barbarity that often goes with it is natural and unimportant.[/QUOTE]The barbarity is a consequence of war. If you wish to consider it natural, do so. Many conquer their impulses toward barbarity; many do not.[QUOTE]Apparently, he also considers anyone who doesn't wear their combat experience on their sleeve to be either a coward or not old enough to have served and thus too inexperienced to have thoughts on the matter. [/QUOTE]I have confessed that I have been shot at and shot back, most probably killing somebody. Yet I was not in combat. Combat was far more severe than anything that I did. I esteem those who did fight. Obviously, I feel that you and many others are most likely cowards who would have no difficulties conjuring reasons as not to fight. You would let your betters show the guts that you do not have.[QUOTE]Failure to properly revere his cliches sends him into homoerotic fantasies and the making of physical threats.[/QUOTE] I was nasty to those who deserved what I wrote and much more. I did not make any threats. I merely asked that you and others send a private message to me so that in the future we may arrange a meeting. Make of that what you will. You have never thanked me for instructing you on the method of replicating yourself.
2004-03-03 20:29 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ruffin]I think what EG is getting at is that serving in the US military is the highest honor, and is more important than what or whom one is fighting for, and that the barbarity that often goes with it is natural and unimportant.
Apparently, he also considers anyone who doesn't wear their combat experience on their sleeve to be either a coward or not old enough to have served and thus too inexperienced to have thoughts on the matter.
Failure to properly revere his cliches sends him into homoerotic fantasies and the making of physical threats.[/QUOTE]
I don't know EG nearly well enough to discern whether these remarks are justified in his case, but I must say, you certainly have identified a 'type' we see a lot of on the internet (although more often allied to the neo-cons). They seem to have become more prevalent ever since Tom Clancy started writing novels in the mid-to-late 1980s. To my mind, there is nothing more effeminate than a man who unnecessarily apes the perceived use of miitary jargon and the like in order to demonstrate his, um, whatever it is he's trying to demonstrate by referring to aircraft as "bogies" or whatnot.
2004-03-03 20:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE]I would strap Perle, Frum, Kristol and others on the fronts of tanks, and then march them through mine fields.[/QUOTE]
My only quibble with this is that "Kristol" should be pluralized....
2004-03-04 17:53 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe][I]I don't know EG nearly well enough to discern whether these remarks are justified in his case[/I], but I must say, you certainly have identified a 'type' we see a lot of on the internet (although more often allied to the neo-cons). They seem to have become more prevalent [I]ever since Tom Clancy started writing novels in the mid-to-late 1980s. To my mind, there is nothing more effeminate than a man who unnecessarily apes the perceived use of miitary jargon and the like in order to demonstrate his, um, whatever it is he's trying to demonstrate by referring to aircraft as "bogies" or whatnot[/I].[/QUOTE]I must thank my Gods that Mr. O'Keefe is willing to reserve judgment. Never in my life did I think I would be compared to Tom Clancy.
Demonstrating qualities that led Celts to being pummeled from Western China through the steppes and into the hinterlands of Europe, Mr. O'Keefe esteemed what he knows as all important and dismissed what he does not know as not being important. Just like my thick-skulled relatives.
2004-03-04 20:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Demonstrating qualities that led Celts to being pummeled from Western China through the steppes and into the hinterlands of Europe, Mr. O'Keefe esteemed what he knows as all important and dismissed what he does not know as not being important. Just like my thick-skulled relatives.[/QUOTE]
Out of curiousity, to what are you referring?