47 dead in Iraq. This is getting insane.

Every day I check the news there are 20 dead in the Bronx. No one protests or whines about that. That would be practical. It's great to have your morality when everything you have is given to you. Even if Bush only caused this war to gain control of some Middle Eastern oil, that is still going to benefit the U.S. in the long run. He'll be hated and reviled, sure, but he may also guarantee the way of life we've all grown accustomed to. People may die, but who joins the armed forces without realizing that they may have to go to war?
 
[quote name='atreyue']Even if Bush only caused this war to gain control of some Middle Eastern oil, that is still going to benefit the U.S. in the long run. [/quote]

Because our continuing occupying presence in the Middle East could only lead to good things. Sheesh!

[quote name='atreyue']He'll be hated and reviled, sure,...[/quote]

done and done

[quote name='atreyue']...but he may also guarantee the way of life we've all grown accustomed to. [/quote]

Guaranteed for how long? 25 years? 50 years? 100 years? Fossil fuels are going to run out and unless we start looking at alternative fuels, we may have to start pedaling a generator to play our Xboxes.

[quote name='atreyue'] People may die, but who joins the armed forces without realizing that they may have to go to war?[/QUOTE]

Reservists, perhaps? "One weekend a month, two weeks a year" sound familiar? :lol:
 
[quote name='the3rdkey']http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/05/04/iraq.main/index.html

Everyday I notice at least 20 plus people are killed. I still am confused why our troops are over there. I am so sick of this.[/QUOTE]

i'm just thankful no troops were killed.

[quote name='atreyue']Every day I check the news there are 20 dead in the Bronx. No one protests or whines about that. That would be practical. It's great to have your morality when everything you have is given to you. Even if Bush only caused this war to gain control of some Middle Eastern oil, that is still going to benefit the U.S. in the long run. He'll be hated and reviled, sure, but he may also guarantee the way of life we've all grown accustomed to. People may die, but who joins the armed forces without realizing that they may have to go to war?[/QUOTE]

on the same note...why do some things make the news and some don't. like the chick in GA that ran away recently. does anyone think she is the only woman in the US to run away from her wedding. or like kids that go missing in FL, why do they get all the coverage when there are kids all over the US being abducted and molested? the news media and reporters love covering blood and gut shit fire and brimstone, but why focus on one event while it happens everywhere all the time. they should just have a ticker like the stock market with names of everyone who is murdered, raped, and kidnapped in the US, then we wouldn't need dumbass katie couric and [insert tv news entertainer] to point it out in a palatable manner so we can watch it while cooking dinner or eating breakfast.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']
Guaranteed for how long? 25 years? 50 years? 100 years? Fossil fuels are going to run out and unless we start looking at alternative fuels, we may have to start pedaling a generator to play our Xboxes.[/QUOTE]

It's not the president's job to guarantee 100 years, but more the immediate future. I'm sure that there's a very significant part of the budget going toward finding the next viable power source, but it would be irresponsible of the government to ignore current needs while they waited for the wave of the future.

[quote name='MrBadExample']Reservists, perhaps? "One weekend a month, two weeks a year" sound familiar? :lol:[/QUOTE]

If you don't realize what you're signing up for when you join the reserves, you're an idiot. No one can argue that. Now if they sent the Marine Boy Scouts or my grandmother's bowling team to Iraq, you'd have a point.

And I'm currently working on a solar panel-powered Xbox. Can't wait for that Ozone layer to hit the road, baby!

If that doesn't work my children will power the generator while I play. Now that Dr. Phil has said violent games are bad for kids my wife won't let me beat their asses and gloat nonstop about it, so they might as well serve some purpose.
 
[quote name='gaelan']i'm just thankful no troops were killed.



on the same note...why do some things make the news and some don't. like the chick in GA that ran away recently. does anyone think she is the only woman in the US to run away from her wedding. or like kids that go missing in FL, why do they get all the coverage when there are kids all over the US being abducted and molested? the news media and reporters love covering blood and gut shit fire and brimstone, but why focus on one event while it happens everywhere all the time. they should just have a ticker like the stock market with names of everyone who is murdered, raped, and kidnapped in the US, then we wouldn't need dumbass katie couric and [insert tv news entertainer] to point it out in a palatable manner so we can watch it while cooking dinner or eating breakfast.[/QUOTE]

It's the SEP engine.
 
[quote name='atreyue']It's not the president's job to guarantee 100 years, but more the immediate future. [/quote]

For all the billions we have spent already and the billions more it will cost, we should have something more concrete to show for it. Right now we have a fledgling democracy and a relentless insurgency there.

[quote name='atreyue']I'm sure that there's a very significant part of the budget going toward finding the next viable power source, but it would be irresponsible of the government to ignore current needs while they waited for the wave of the future.[/quote]

I'd like to hear Bush tell us how much we're investing in alternative sources of energy, but I doubt that he will since it will cheese off his oil buddies.

[quote name='atreyue']If you don't realize what you're signing up for when you join the reserves, you're an idiot. No one can argue that. Now if they sent the Marine Boy Scouts or my grandmother's bowling team to Iraq, you'd have a point.[/quote]

I was mostly joking about the Reservists. Yes, they should have known there was a possibility they would be sent to war, but I believe the lengths of duty they are having to pull is unprecedented for the Reserves. Between that and the stop-loss orders I think the military has been hoodwinked by this administration and they should expect recruitment drives to fall short of goals until this fades from memory.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']For all the billions we have spent already and the billions more it will cost, we should have something more concrete to show for it. Right now we have a fledgling democracy and a relentless insurgency there.[/QUOTE]

Let's chip in and send Bush a copy of the Idiot's Guide to Starting a Democracy in a Year. :D

[quote name='MrBadExample']I'd like to hear Bush tell us how much we're investing in alternative sources of energy, but I doubt that he will since it will cheese off his oil buddies.[\QUOTE]

I'm sure they'd be REALLY surprised. Probably cry a lot and call him a big meanie.


[quote name='MrBadExample']I was mostly joking about the Reservists. Yes, they should have known there was a possibility they would be sent to war, but I believe the lengths of duty they are having to pull is unprecedented for the Reserves. Between that and the stop-loss orders I think the military has been hoodwinked by this administration and they should expect recruitment drives to fall short of goals until this fades from memory.[/QUOTE]

Personally, I won't get upset until there are drafts. People always dislike it when they are put out at all. They thought that they could have it easy, which is true when there's no war. I'm not going to shed tears over people doing a job they willingly signed up for because they actually had to do that job.
 
[quote name='atreyue']Let's chip in and send Bush a copy of the Idiot's Guide to Starting a Democracy in a Year. :D [/quote]

I guess it's hard for him to switch gears from subverting democracy here with the Patriot Act and "Free Speech" zones and Jeff Gannon impersonating the media and GOP-only Presidential speeches, etc.

[quote name='atreyue']Personally, I won't get upset until there are drafts. People always dislike it when they are put out at all. They thought that they could have it easy, which is true when there's no war. I'm not going to shed tears over people doing a job they willingly signed up for because they actually had to do that job.[/QUOTE]

The Reservists just forgot to read the fine print that says "We will own your ass" before they signed.
 
At least he tries to stand for something, wrong or otherwise. The era of political correctness and making absolute moral relativism the new morality is has done nothing good for our nation or the world at large.
 
[quote name='atreyue']At least he tries to stand for something, wrong or otherwise. The era of political correctness and making absolute moral relativism the new morality is has done nothing good for our nation or the world at large.[/QUOTE]

You don't get points for standing for something when you're wrong most of the time.

I'd rather have a President who changes his mind when he is wrong or new facts emerge rather than one who makes up his mind regardless of facts and stubbornly refuses to change it.
 
It's a good thing you're not living during WWII, where 10's of thousands died in a given day...

We just happen to have a very connected world where every little thing is a news tick and you hear everything. Get used to it.
 
The problem is that its not as simple as just packing up the troops and equipment and heading home. Our military is the only thing stopping that country from becoming an all out anarchy/civil war. There's a power vacuum in Iraq and there will continue to be one until they have a decent/powerful government in place. If we leave now, the results would be even more disastorous than had we not invaded at all.

Do I wish we had never invaded? Pretty much. Do I think we could just pull out right now? Definetly not.

The biggest problem is that Bush had a very short sighted vision of invading Iraq. He looked at just whether or not we would win (which is ridiculous to think that we might actually lose) and not what would happen when we did win. That's basically what people are saying when they talk about having a viable exit strategy.
 
[quote name='MrBadExample']You don't get points for standing for something when you're wrong most of the time.

I'd rather have a President who changes his mind when he is wrong or new facts emerge rather than one who makes up his mind regardless of facts and stubbornly refuses to change it.[/QUOTE]

Let me rephrase. I admire/respect the fact that Bush is unafraid to voice his own opinion on many important and volatile matters. I wish that more people were willing to do the same. Then maybe he wouldn't feel the need to try to be America himself instead of representing America's interests. As for the war, there comes a point when it's too late to disengage, so you might as well do the best you can with the situation you have. As this moment, things are still salvageable. Pulling out now, though, would definitely constitute failure.
 
[quote name='atreyue']Let me rephrase. I admire/respect the fact that Bush is unafraid to voice his own opinion on many important and volatile matters. I wish that more people were willing to do the same. Then maybe he wouldn't feel the need to try to be America himself instead of representing America's interests. [/QUOTE]

I could respect him if his opinions weren't so often misguided, ill-informed, repressive and harmful.
 
Every belief is gonna be repressive or harmful to someone. I just don't know if deciding to have no beliefs in order to avoid this is ultimately a better way to go. I think that a lot of people struggle with this same idea, and that is why Kerry lost the election.
 
[quote name='atreyue']Every belief is gonna be repressive or harmful to someone. I just don't know if deciding to have no beliefs in order to avoid this is ultimately a better way to go. I think that a lot of people struggle with this same idea, and that is why Kerry lost the election.[/QUOTE]

No, not every belief is harmful or repressive.

I had my problems with Kerry, but I would much rather have a president who sees the gray rahter than one who only sees black & white. B&W may sell to the hoopleheads but it's not a good way to run the country.
 
Anyone can choose to take issue with anything, and, in this day and age, it is construed as harmful or repressive. No one can challenge their right to do what they want. Murder is explained away and pardoned by psychobabble. Moralilty means absolutely nothing. Everything has to be right or wrong 'for me'. Law is consistently made to serve the individual to the detriment of the group. If someone's got to be right, then there's someone out there who's wrong - the two neccessitate each other. But everyone feels they need to be uncomfortable with that idea and that it somehow flies in the face of democracy. That;s bullshit. Every society is built around the idea that some individual rights are traded in for the protection of the group. Trying to undermine that principle is what will lead to the fall of our Nation if left unchecked.
 
[quote name='atreyue']Anyone can choose to take issue with anything, and, in this day and age, it is construed as harmful or repressive. No one can challenge their right to do what they want. Murder is explained away and pardoned by psychobabble. Moralilty means absolutely nothing. Everything has to be right or wrong 'for me'. Law is consistently made to serve the individual to the detriment of the group. If someone's got to be right, then there's someone out there who's wrong - the two neccessitate each other. But everyone feels they need to be uncomfortable with that idea and that it somehow flies in the face of democracy. That;s bullshit. Every society is built around the idea that some individual rights are traded in for the protection of the group. Trying to undermine that principle is what will lead to the fall of our Nation if left unchecked.[/QUOTE]

So then how do you feel about this:

Marine cleared in mosque shootings probe
Military concludes 3 unarmed insurgents were killed in self-defense

By Jim Miklaszewski
Correspondent
NBC News
Updated: 7:29 p.m. ET May 4, 2005The U.S. military has cleared a Marine who shot three unarmed insurgents in a mosque at the height of fighting in Fallujah, Iraq, in November.

Marine commander Lt. Gen. John Sattler has ruled the soldier involved fired his weapon in self-defense — and no charges will be filed against him.

The shootings occurred at a mosque during an intense street-to-street battle for Fallujah. Caught on tape by an NBC camera, a squad of Marines entered the mosque to investigate reports of enemy gunfire. Inside, they found four enemy insurgents, wounded in a firefight the day before.

A Marine corporal who notices that one of the insurgents is still breathing raises his rifle and fires a single shot into the man’s head.

Military officials now report that the same corporal shot three of the unarmed insurgents inside the mosque.

But after an exhaustive five-month investigation, Sattler ruled the Marine had fired his weapon in self-defense.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7738733/

So I guess it's morally okay to kill unarmed, wounded men. I guess we should be fine with Iraqis killing U.S. hostages as well.
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']So then how do you feel about this:


So I guess it's morally okay to kill unarmed, wounded men. I guess we should be fine with Iraqis killing U.S. hostages as well.[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry, but I'm having real trouble seeing how any of this was relevant to the discussion we were having. Did you read the entire thread before you posted?It's a shame that the military covered up for a man that was so obviously in the wrong. I still don't see how this has anything to do with my post. Please explain how this is a response to what I've said so that I can intelligently answer.
 
[quote name='atreyue']I'm sorry, but I'm having real trouble seeing how any of this was relevant to the discussion we were having. Did you read the entire thread before you posted?It's a shame that the military covered up for a man that was so obviously in the wrong. I still don't see how this has anything to do with my post. Please explain how this is a response to what I've said so that I can intelligently answer.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='atreyue']Anyone can choose to take issue with anything, and, in this day and age, it is construed as harmful or repressive. No one can challenge their right to do what they want. Murder is explained away and pardoned by psychobabble. Moralilty means absolutely nothing. Everything has to be right or wrong 'for me'.[/quote]

.
 
You quote me saying something that shows that I wouldn't condone the actions of this military guy and you wonder why I'm confused? All the things you quoted were things I was saying were bad...
 
[quote name='atreyue']You quote me saying something that shows that I wouldn't condone the actions of this military guy and you wonder why I'm confused? All the things you quoted were things I was saying were bad...[/QUOTE]

I guess you weren't clear.
 
I was talking about the general public need to embrace moral relativism and it's harmful effects on society. You posted something that was just wrong that was pardoned (to cover the military's ass) in an effort to pretend that wrong was right. Unfortunately, moral relativism allows for this since it effectively puts everything in the gray area that MrBadExample referred to above.

So, in review, Moral relativism = people shooting others in the head for no reason = Bad :D
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']So then how do you feel about this:

Marine cleared in mosque shootings probe
Military concludes 3 unarmed insurgents were killed in self-defense

By Jim Miklaszewski
Correspondent
NBC News
Updated: 7:29 p.m. ET May 4, 2005The U.S. military has cleared a Marine who shot three unarmed insurgents in a mosque at the height of fighting in Fallujah, Iraq, in November.

Marine commander Lt. Gen. John Sattler has ruled the soldier involved fired his weapon in self-defense — and no charges will be filed against him.

The shootings occurred at a mosque during an intense street-to-street battle for Fallujah. Caught on tape by an NBC camera, a squad of Marines entered the mosque to investigate reports of enemy gunfire. Inside, they found four enemy insurgents, wounded in a firefight the day before.

A Marine corporal who notices that one of the insurgents is still breathing raises his rifle and fires a single shot into the man’s head.

Military officials now report that the same corporal shot three of the unarmed insurgents inside the mosque.

But after an exhaustive five-month investigation, Sattler ruled the Marine had fired his weapon in self-defense.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7738733/

So I guess it's morally okay to kill unarmed, wounded men. I guess we should be fine with Iraqis killing U.S. hostages as well.[/QUOTE]

And what if the wounded man had turned over and let go of a grenade? Then you would be mad that several more troops died. The fact is that the people there do stuff like that and by no means follow any of the conventions of war (such as wearing military uniforms, not targeting civilians, not "playing dead", not taking proper care of captured prisioners, etc etc). Theres a bit of a difference (and you KNOW it) from walking into a market and blowing yourself and 50 other people up and killing someone that could have ended up taking that man's squad out. There is a line of course - ie no flattening an entire town because one could be a terrorist - but what that Marine did did not cross that line.
 
That marine had killed 4 unarmed men in the mosque. You would think that after the first two or three that maybe something was not what they thought it was. But no, it's the the "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality. If we can't follow the Geneva Convention, then Dubya shouldn't have sent us over there. It's just made the rest of the world hate us.
 
[quote name='E-Z-B']That marine had killed 4 unarmed men in the mosque. You would think that after the first two or three that maybe something was not what they thought it was. But no, it's the the "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality. If we can't follow the Geneva Convention, then Dubya shouldn't have sent us over there. It's just made the rest of the world hate us.[/QUOTE]

Honestly, it's the fact that we're far richer than the rest of the world that has made them hate us. The other reason just sounds better.
 
[quote name='atreyue']Honestly, it's the fact that we're far richer than the rest of the world that has made them hate us. The other reason just sounds better.[/QUOTE]

If the common Arab cared about riches, then the poor inhabitants of Middle-East Muslim countries would rise up and overthrow the rich Princes and Sheiks. These are people that visit Mecca and get in a frenzy about a pillar they call "Satan".

In a country like Iraq, the people are fanatically nationalistic.

You really can't just say "they are just jealous of our big-swinging-dick leaders and large screen TVs". Middle-East Arabs are people who have seen their lives get progressively worse and worse with each wave of white people coming through and offering the next greatest western ideal, from christianity to colonialism to consumer culture.
 
[quote name='camoor']If the common Arab cared about riches, then the poor inhabitants of Middle-East Muslim countries would rise up and overthrow the rich Princes and Sheiks. These are people that visit Mecca and get in a frenzy about a pillar they call "Satan".

In a country like Iraq, the people are fanatically nationalistic.

You really can't just say "they are just jealous of our big-swinging-dick leaders and large screen TVs". Middle-East Arabs are people who have seen their lives get progressively worse and worse with each wave of white people coming through and offering the next greatest western ideal, from christianity to colonialism to consumer culture.[/QUOTE]

:-({|= another country done dirty by the good old U.S. of A. Ideals from other cultures always cause unrest. Why single out the U.S.? I think it's just part of how life works.
 
[quote name='the3rdkey']http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/05/04/iraq.main/index.html

Everyday I notice at least 20 plus people are killed. I still am confused why our troops are over there. I am so sick of this.[/QUOTE]

Originally, we went there because we were told that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction. Now because we toppled Saddam, there is a vaccum so if we leave now before a new government is setup, Iraq will be a prime target for new terrorist breeding ground.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top