Time for some good news.

Rhysis

Rhysis

Well-Known Member
Staff member
I don't care if you agree or disagree with the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. It makes no difference for the purposes of this post. But, those are our countrymen over there, and we need to support them. As such, I'm pretty frickin pissed off that all you see in the news is 'this many people died today' 'a roadside bomb went off here today' 'this this many troops got delayed from coming home'

There's plenty of good news to be shared, but good news doesn't make George Bush and Tony Blair look bad, so we can't report that.

Well I'm reporting some of it. The text is hard to read on this image, so I've copied it over.

ShowLetter.jpg


"Air Force Chief Master Sgt. John Gebhardt, of the 332nd Expeditionary Medical Group at Balad, Iraq, cradles a young girl as they both sleep in the hospital. The girl’s entire family was executed by insurgents; the killers shot her in the head as well. The girl received treatment in the U.S. military hospital in Balad, but cries and moans often. According to nurses at the facility, Gebhardt is the only one who can calm down the girl, so he has spent the last several nights holding her while they both sleep in a chair."
 
(Take Two)

Its a shame.

If someone just had better aim, that little girl would be dead, and we wouldn't have to put up with crap like this.
 
Sure enough you get these good news stories out of the desolation and death that war brings....good to hear but there are those who use that to gloss over the disaster that is Iraq.

However, despite my leanings, I do support my countrymen (Australian troops) that are over there...they are professional soldiers who know their job and do it well...as well as our SAS troops, who were first in Iraq.
 
I don't follow the politics. I honestly don't care about them. Yes, that seems very ignorant, but, in politics it ultimately comes down to choosing the lesser of two evils. Therefore, I don't vote. However, I agree with Raharanor who stated that he supports the troops. I don't think they're really the bad guys. It's the president who ultimately decided that this war should go forward and therefore, the president who should be held responsible for the casualties of war. -shrugs- Again, that's just MY opinion.
 
My opinion, when did a war require us to take care of people other than our soldiers ? I mean sure we can garner support from some people if we help them out but realistically its a minority that will actually support us over there. We are the Invading army, we are not their ultimate saviours because we remain there. I support the Troops that are involved no matter the country unless its Slovenia or Iceland, who combined only sent 6 troops.
 
...when did a war require us to take care of people other than our soldiers ?
Click to expand...

Honestly, Mith, war isn't what it used to be. These days we shoot, stab and maim the enemy and then turn around and patch them back up so that we can shoot, maim and stab them again or release them so they can go get help and come back and kill our troops. It's a rather odd process. Why go to war if you're just going to save the lives of your enemies? In addition to that, there was the whole stupid thing where they arrested those soldiers for "torturing the enemy." Since when, in war, are we supposed to give the enemy caviar for dinner and then tuck them into bed at night with a bedtime story?
 
illogical_reality said:
Since when, in war, are we supposed to give the enemy caviar for dinner and then tuck them into bed at night with a bedtime story?
Click to expand...

Welcome to overexaggeration time.

I think the point you want to make is that you think war makes it ok to torture people.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Click to expand...

I think that somewhere along the line, someone decided that its a good idea to practice what you preach, and actually treat other human beings with some kind of respect, even if you are at war with them. All men are created equal, and they all have certain unalienable rights. Keep that in mind next time you think you want to violate those rights through torture.


For mith...

...when did a war require us to take care of people other than our soldiers ?
Click to expand...

I think there is also another document thats kind of famous called the Geneva Convention. Basically, it says that if you have a prisoner of war, you have to treat them in a certain way.

The entire purpose of that document, from my limited understanding, is to let everyone know that war is not an excuse to leave behind your humanity. Just because you are at war doesn't mean you get to treat your enemy like some sub-human piece of garbage. They are real people, just like you, and they deserve the same kind of respect as any living breathing human deserves. Caviar and a bed-time story? No. But that doesn't mean you get to treat them like dogs either.
 
I don't mean torture. I don't mean innocent children or even those who are not fighting. But, I do believe in the old "Do unto others..." If one of our soldiers were to be captured, they wouldn't worry about humanity, mercy, or anything like it. Why is America supposed to be the "bigger man" so to speak, and offer them what they refuse us? Why is it fair that our soldiers are tortured and killed and with theirs we cater to their every need? It's not. I guess that's why I'm not in the Armed Forces. I'd be one of the ones going to jail.
 
illogical_reality said:
Why is America supposed to be the "bigger man" so to speak, and offer them what they refuse us? Why is it fair that our soldiers are tortured and killed and with theirs we cater to their every need?
Click to expand...

With great power comes great responsibility.

You guys want to be world super-powers, then you have to take everything that comes with it, including following the rules, even when others don't. If you, as a country, ever stop taking the moral high road, you would find yourself on the blacklist of ever other country in the world, your economy would collapse, and you'd be so fucked, you wouldn't know what to do with yourselves. You are already on such thin ice its not even funny. I'd just be grateful that bush's term as president is almost over, and he won't be able to do any further damage.

god damn, i hate politics.
 
I rarely pay attention to politics. And, as a country, perhaps there are those in the United States who are interested in being the most powerful country in the world, but not so for me on a personal level. I feel like we're playing Big Brother and butting in where we're not wanted and shouldn't be. Every time there is some little bullshit happening in a third world country, the damn republicans want to run over there and "take care of it." I completely disagree with that mindset. Each country has their own set of customs and rules and who are we to force them to change their ways?

Oh, sure, Bush hides behind 9/11 as a reason to invade another country. In reality, I'm sure 9/11 was just an excuse to finish a personal campaign and take Saddam down where his daddy failed. Hell, the last time I checked, I don't think Saddam claimed he was responsible for 9/11.

I swear....if I could afford it I'd take my happy ass back to Ireland where I belong and to Hell with the US. And I know that sounds unpatriotic and I'm sure I would disagree with the politics over there, but I'm so sick of Bush and his warped view of right and wrong.
 
I love the priniciples that America was founded on, and the ideals we still for the most part cling too, but the policing the world thats the UN's job not our countries. Historically the world hates America unless we are stomping the Germans,(Who Loved us :WWI, Russia,Italy,England, France/WW2 England, France, Poland, Hungry, ) the Russians, (The Allies from WW2 minus Russian and the rest of the Nato Nations) or the English(The French), otherwise we used to take the whole Isolationist stance of screw the world we have out land of milk and honey an thats good enough. Then came the communist fear and Trumans Doctrin, and suddenly we are out there to spread and force Democracy into places that don't want it.

Still though, I stick with Kim on this one. To write rules to war indicates one can controle what will happen in war. While I may be all for Ethical treatment of Prisoners, I don't believe in taking multiple prisoners.
 
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" to paraphrase. That means don't treat prisoners of war like shit, just because their side do it to yours.

Also I seem to recall that Iraq was invaded "for the good of the Iraqi peopl" or at least that was one of the reasons they trotted out after the WMDs proved to be non-existant. If you're invading a country to help the people, wrongly or rightly, you should probably help them rebuild after you've blown their homes, schools, hospitals etc to shit with your "guided" missiles and "smart" bombs.
 
*Ahem*

This is why we went to war with Iraq.

You'll notice Bush is actually pretty eloquent in that address. That's because he's been faking the idiot thing this entire time.

In any event, it's pretty clear the main reason for going to war was Weapons of Mass destruction. Weapons which appear to have never been there in the first place, a fact blamed on poor intelligence and then brushed under the covers.

And...
take Saddam down where his daddy failed.

Daddy Bush won that battle. He stopped at the borders of Kuwait, and led the UN to putting Iraq under sanctions so oppressive it's a wonder the country didn't collapse on itself before we invaded. I'm never going to believe the personal vendetta story, and wonder why it's still being thrown around.

Our world leaders are pretty petty, but even I'm not cynical enough to believe they're THAT petty.
 
SJ_the_Bartender said:
You can control what happens in war. Maybe not you in particular, but the leaders of the warring powers can control it.
Click to expand...

Not really, for instance:

WWI, the Germans, begin using Chemical Weapons, the British, French, Americans, and the Russians could not stop that.

Japans attack on Nanking, and subsequent rape of the female citizenry with out regard to age.

WWII, The Japanese tried desperately three days before the US dropped the Nukes on Hiroshima, and Nagasaki to surrender.

The Vietnam (War) Conflict, We had some level of control over our enemy because we had better technology and fire power, but even so the US command didn't have full control over everything the Soldiers did.

Iraq Conflict/War (Not sure if we have a real declaration or not), Recently we have had five US soldiers who raped a thirteen year old girl after executing her family and then shot her in the head and lit her body on fire.

No such thing as true Control in a war. The Leaders of a Waring Faction can attempt to get peace or can start a war, but neither is guaranteed to work.
 
Meh. I don't know how I got caught up in a discussion of politics and war anyway. Like I said, if I had my way, I wouldn't live in the US anyway. There is just too much bullshit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom