Dead Terrorists

POSTED BY: Hero
UPDATED: Friday, June 30, 2006 06:11
VIEWED: 8309
PAGE 10 of 11

PREV PAGE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT PAGE

HKCAVALIER

Sunday, June 11, 2006 9:31 PM

It's really interesting to see communication break down between two very intelligent people; that a frame of reference can be so foreign to us that someone's intellingent comments can seem like gibberish.

Y'know, there's this idea we use to justify our overseas militarism "Better to fight them on the other side of the world than on our doorstep (or words to that effect)." I'm thinking from Rue's point of view, and certainly from my own, that that sort of thinking is actually kinda immoral. No, morally, it ain't better, 'cause war should never ever be a mere expedient. It shouldn't be used simply to make life easier for anyone anywhere. War should be on your doorstep before you get involved, because otherwise you really don't know what you're doing; too much possibility of being, as Rue says, "a dick."

So Rue's parents fought for their freedom and knew they were doing so, while we fight in Iraq and two thirds of the country has no real appreciation for why we're there. Geezer, coming from a military family, you have an advantage over most of us when it comes to understanding a real, grounded context for American militarism--doesn't make you right, but it might make you wonder what a lot of us are smoking. Here at home we're completely dependent on where we get our information, whom we trust, etc. Having to trust someone else's assessment of why we're at war is an impossible situation.

Just some thoughts, don't pretend to have all the answers.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

RUE

Sunday, June 11, 2006 9:32 PM

Quote:
I'm trying for a logical correlation as to how your ancestors fighting for freedom makes the US a dick, but can't find it.

The topic came up here:

Quote:
Yep.
Hero's friend died, my father and several relatives spent years fighting in WWII, my brother-in-law and many of my friends died in Vietnam, and I spent a year there...just so you could have the right to be sarcastic without the secret police taking you off to a cell and putting a bullet in your head.

You seem to think a pedigree is important. You seem to think that WWI, Vietnam, and (al la Zero) Iraq have something to do with US freedom. You can't even paste a coherent argument together. Good luck to you in your life.

KHYRON

Sunday, June 11, 2006 10:11 PM

Even when it comes to killing Zarqawi the US can't get its story straight:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5069186.stm

So first he died immediately during the strike, then it turns out he was alive and received medical treatment before dying (this version appearing only after eyewitnesses said he wasn't immediately dead). So why the need to lie in the first place, why say he died immediately when he didn't? I get the feeling that senior officials in the administration and military are so used to lying that they can't help it anymore.

Unless some of the numerous eyewitness reports that Zarqawi was severely beaten by US military before he died are true. In which case, you know, they did have a reason in trying to cover it up by lying about it.

Other people can occasionally be useful, especially as minions. I want lots of minions.

RUE

Sunday, June 11, 2006 10:33 PM

If they wanted information from him they would have tried to take him alive. But they bombed him, and when he survived the blast he died almost immediately under military care. My more cynical colleagues all said the same thing: "yeah, they shot him."

odd post (flakey connection)

GEEZER

Sunday, June 11, 2006 10:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Y'know, there's this idea we use to justify our overseas militarism "Better to fight them on the other side of the world than on our doorstep (or words to that effect)." I'm thinking from Rue's point of view, and certainly from my own, that that sort of thinking is actually kinda immoral. No, morally, it ain't better, 'cause war should never ever be a mere expedient. It shouldn't be used simply to make life easier for anyone anywhere. War should be on your doorstep before you get involved, because otherwise you really don't know what you're doing; too much possibility of being, as Rue says, "a dick."

This might have been true when wars were fought by armies in uniform and the fastest they moved was by ship, rail, truck, or on foot. Nowadays, "the other side of the world" is at our doorstep, and the people who would do us harm can get here from anywhere in a day, and don't declare themselves enemies until after they have struck.

Without arguing whether they are the results of past US foreign policy or not, the fact remains that there are lots of people out there who would be perfectly happy to repeat 9/11 as often as possible. No matter what we do policy-wise from this point on, they'll be there for years on end.

We could take the absolute moral high ground and say we won't do anything premptive or retaliatory overseas, only try to stop attacks within our borders, and probably have a massive increase in terror attacks, not just against the US, but against any of our allies. Or, we can take the battle to them, either attacking their bases, or drawing them to places where we can kill them. I'll take the second option, and feel no moral qualms.

Quote:
So Rue's parents fought for their freedom and knew they were doing so, while we fight in Iraq and two thirds of the country has no real appreciation for why we're there. Geezer, coming from a military family, you have an advantage over most of us when it comes to understanding a real, grounded context for American militarism--doesn't make you right, but it might make you wonder what a lot of us are smoking.

Actually, I don't come from a military family. My ancestors were citizen-soldiers who joined up when our country was at war and went back to civilian life after the wars were over. I guess you could call it a patriotic family, although all the ones I've known have a healthy distrust of the government. Guess they were wise enough to realize that governments come and go, but the people and the country are worth fighting for.

Quote:
Here at home we're completely dependent on where we get our information, whom we trust, etc. Having to trust someone else's assessment of why we're at war is an impossible situation.

But you always have to trust - or at least consider - someone else's assessment. Unless you're omniscient (in which case, Hi God) you always get the story second/third/fifth hand and filtered through somebody's lens. If we all knew the truth, we wouldn't be having these discussions here. As it is, we gather what we can and internally filter it based on our past history, our morals, our beliefs, and our desires. We come to different conclusions. Time will tell.

Apropos of nothing... When I was in Vietnam in 1972-73 I worked a good bit with ARVN troops. It was pretty obvious by that time that the US was trying to disengage, but my Vietnamese counterparts told me they were still ready to fight for their freedom. I still feel bad about leaving them. As far as I'm concerned, the only "dicking around" we did there was in not finishing the job.

"If Darwin ain't Happy,
Ain't Nobody Happy"

CHRISISALL

Sunday, June 11, 2006 10:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
my Vietnamese counterparts told me they were still ready to fight for their freedom. I still feel bad about leaving them. As far as I'm concerned, the only "dicking around" we did there was in not finishing the job.

There'a a POV we rarely see. Thanks, G.

Chrisisall

GEEZER

Sunday, June 11, 2006 11:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Good luck to you in your life.

Thanks. I consider I've had pretty good luck in the past 56 years. Hope you have good luck in your life too.

Unfortunately, our philosophies seem to be at odds on several points important to both of us. I really think that we've developed such an antipathy that we can't communicate civilly. I suggest a moritorium period to allow us to cool off. Maybe until July 1?

"If Darwin ain't Happy,
Ain't Nobody Happy"

GEEZER

Sunday, June 11, 2006 11:14 PM

Darn. Double Post. Curse you, Technology. This wouldn't have happened with a reed pen and papyrus.

KANEMAN

Friday, June 30, 2006 5:32 AM

Bottom Line ...THE WAR IS LEGAL!!!

99 libs on the wall
99 libs on the wall
take one down........
that such a ball...

SIGNYM

Friday, June 30, 2006 6:05 AM

Quote:
You also have to wonder how many Communist insurgencies didn't get off the ground because the Soviet Union and China were spending all their trouble-making budgets in Vietnam. If we'd just decided in 1960 not to fight there maybe the dominoes would have fallen. Maybe that 15 year delay - that show of resolve - kept the chain reaction from starting.

There'a lot of supposition in there. You might also think that the US involvement in Vietnam and Iraq showed the rest of the world that we are not as committed to freedom as we claim, and that it bred a deep cynicism not only in a whole generation of Americans who learned that their government would lie (Gulf of Tonkin, WMD) to get them into a war, it also bred a deep mistrust in a whole generation of people around the world. That we paid and are still paying for our adventurism around the world with a backlash that is still reverberating today in the form of Evo, Hugo, Obrador, the entire Chinese population (many of whom cheered when the Trade Towers fell), and Putin.

---------------------------------
Don't piss in my face and tell me it's raining.

PREV PAGE 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT PAGE