Our Brave Boys? Or Murdering Thugs?
Short Blunt Shock
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is the soldiers that give us our freedoms...not the publishers or news presenters.....some in our midst have forgotten that.
- couldn't have put that better myself. Sir, I salute you.16B
Soldiers have won us some of our freedoms, trades unionists and politicians others. No sensible person would deny or diminish that. Soldiers have sometimes safeguarded our freedoms, but have also sometimes been used to help suppress or repress them. King George's redcoats helped repress freedoms in the Colonies, and closer to home (remember Peterloo?).
A free press can, and sometimes does, help to guarantee some of our freedoms, and sometimes helps warn us when they are under threat, or when our freedoms or values are being undermined. No sensible person would deny or diminish that.
As they are being undermined when undisciplined troops, off the leash, kill or beat up innocent civilians or prisoners alike. No sensible person would deny that.
A free press can, and sometimes does, help to guarantee some of our freedoms, and sometimes helps warn us when they are under threat, or when our freedoms or values are being undermined. No sensible person would deny or diminish that.
As they are being undermined when undisciplined troops, off the leash, kill or beat up innocent civilians or prisoners alike. No sensible person would deny that.
SASless/16blades,
Oh come on, please! “…soldiers that give us our freedoms…..?
To most of the population of this planet soldiers bring repression, enslavement, deprivation, exploitation, bereavement, horror, fear, pain, injury, torture and death.
This has been the case down the ages, nowadays soldiers do their political masters bidding, most of which is defending well entrenched self interest and has precious little to do with “giving” freedom to anyone. In bye gone days it was the same only it was the bidding of families who reckoned they had some divine right to rule over the rest of the population rather than politicians that was the soldiers aim.
When soldiers have “given” us our freedoms it usually involved taking away someone else’s or was a Civil War involving a divided population. WW2 was a citizens war like no other and we shall never see its like again.
Oh come on, please! “…soldiers that give us our freedoms…..?
To most of the population of this planet soldiers bring repression, enslavement, deprivation, exploitation, bereavement, horror, fear, pain, injury, torture and death.
This has been the case down the ages, nowadays soldiers do their political masters bidding, most of which is defending well entrenched self interest and has precious little to do with “giving” freedom to anyone. In bye gone days it was the same only it was the bidding of families who reckoned they had some divine right to rule over the rest of the population rather than politicians that was the soldiers aim.
When soldiers have “given” us our freedoms it usually involved taking away someone else’s or was a Civil War involving a divided population. WW2 was a citizens war like no other and we shall never see its like again.
Proone....
I guess it depends upon which side you are cheering for.
If my feeble memory does not fail me....seems I recall recently seeing Iraqi's dancing in the streets after they voted. Granted some of them had to clean up the remains of their friends and neighbors killed by suicide bombers outside the polling places.
You think the women of Afghanistan might suggest they have new freedom under the democratic government they now enjoy as compared to the Taliban?
What is it Proone....about 50,000,000 people that have a chance to live in freedom now as compared to living under Saddam and the Taliban? That does not count the Lebanese since the Syrians have pulled out....or the Egyptians now that elections are beginning there....or even in Saudi where local elections are beginning....or even Kuwait where the Iraqi's got the boot.
(Snotty closing comment deleted)
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature, and has no chance of being free unless made or kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
--John Stuart Mill
I guess it depends upon which side you are cheering for.
If my feeble memory does not fail me....seems I recall recently seeing Iraqi's dancing in the streets after they voted. Granted some of them had to clean up the remains of their friends and neighbors killed by suicide bombers outside the polling places.
You think the women of Afghanistan might suggest they have new freedom under the democratic government they now enjoy as compared to the Taliban?
What is it Proone....about 50,000,000 people that have a chance to live in freedom now as compared to living under Saddam and the Taliban? That does not count the Lebanese since the Syrians have pulled out....or the Egyptians now that elections are beginning there....or even in Saudi where local elections are beginning....or even Kuwait where the Iraqi's got the boot.
(Snotty closing comment deleted)
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature, and has no chance of being free unless made or kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
--John Stuart Mill
Last edited by SASless; 27th May 2005 at 20:05.
SASless…………..
Those Iraqis are so grateful for the freedom we brought them that they are killing us on a daily basis and we have to maintain huge standing forces in country to ensure that they stay free and don’t revert to anything we may not like.
Afghanistan? you went in there to free the oppressed Afghan women did you? How come you only did that after 9 11? Didn’t the CIA actually fund and assist the Taliban in ejecting the Russians from Afghanistan? which means that those Afghan women were living in those conditions because of a regime you funded and assisted into power and did nothing to control or criticise until Bin Laden attacked the US.
Try going back to Afghanistan and seeing exactly what has changed and how many women are “free” in “democratic Afghanistan.”
If you are so keen on freedom and democracy why aren’t you going into Syria, North Korea, Burma, Zimbabwe, Cuba etc etc etc.
Because freedom had nothing to do with attacking the Taliban in Afghanistan or invading Iraq, they were acts of political self interest, not “soldiers giving anyone freedom.”
Those Iraqis are so grateful for the freedom we brought them that they are killing us on a daily basis and we have to maintain huge standing forces in country to ensure that they stay free and don’t revert to anything we may not like.
Afghanistan? you went in there to free the oppressed Afghan women did you? How come you only did that after 9 11? Didn’t the CIA actually fund and assist the Taliban in ejecting the Russians from Afghanistan? which means that those Afghan women were living in those conditions because of a regime you funded and assisted into power and did nothing to control or criticise until Bin Laden attacked the US.
Try going back to Afghanistan and seeing exactly what has changed and how many women are “free” in “democratic Afghanistan.”
If you are so keen on freedom and democracy why aren’t you going into Syria, North Korea, Burma, Zimbabwe, Cuba etc etc etc.
Because freedom had nothing to do with attacking the Taliban in Afghanistan or invading Iraq, they were acts of political self interest, not “soldiers giving anyone freedom.”
"Its the soldiers who gave us our freedoms"
Oh please! Both world wars were fought by conscripts and we didn't have to make special pleadings about soldiers not obeying the Geneva Convention on our side!
Anyway....Have a good weekend.
Oh please! Both world wars were fought by conscripts and we didn't have to make special pleadings about soldiers not obeying the Geneva Convention on our side!
Anyway....Have a good weekend.
Proone ....
In the words of a US Marine....when asked by a typical liberal news reporter "Why are you fighting in Iraq?" That fine young man merely smiled and said "implementing my government's policies.....we don't make the policy...we just carry it out!"
Do you think for one second the world is devoid of politics? If you cannot accept the fact that politics is and always will be the vehicle by which the world's nations conduct their affairs....then you fail to see reality. This is a time of great conflict in the world....and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future. Accept it. For sure,you and I cannot change it. I will without reservation tell you that things are not run the way I would like to see them done....but I am only one person as are you.
A very small number of Iraqi's are fighting us....just as did some Germans at the end of WWII....in time they will be defeated.
I did not say we went in to free the women...I said as a result of that action, women are better off today than under the Taliban. Undeniably so....no more football stadium executions for going about uncovered.
Why are we not going into all those other places....rephrase the question....why are you not there? You are the government that opposed the Rhodesian independence. My country turned our backs upon them too....
Simply put, we have our hands full with Iraq currently. Defense cuts during the Clinton years left our military so short-handed that we do not have the necessary force structure to devote more troops to Syria. One might note it is shorter to road march to the Med than load up for an Arabian Gulf departure however.
Any way you figure it....it is the squaddie out there on the ground with the rifle and bayonet, the aircrew, and the sailors that exert the force needed to effect national policy. Politicians talk about it...news people decry it....but the war fighters do it.
Take a wander through some military cemetaries and take note of the price they pay for having the courage to stand up for what they believe in.
We owe them our undying gratitude and solid support. You have a bone to pick...do it with the politicians that put them there....not the guys that do it.
We in the United States are coming to our Memorial Day this weekend....a time when we honour all those that have served and those that were lost. It is right we do so.
Sunfish
Both wars were fought by Conscripts....which two wars are you referring to? Please do enlighten us as to where you came up with that gem.
Significant volunteers in all Western armies during the two World Wars....also there were ample evidence of prisoners being shot out of hand by our side. Ever read the accounts of how the German POW's suffered in PW enclosures at the end of the war. You plainly do not know your history.
Ever hear of the Eagle Squadron....all American pilots conscripted from the USA by the RAF. Yeah, right!
In the words of a US Marine....when asked by a typical liberal news reporter "Why are you fighting in Iraq?" That fine young man merely smiled and said "implementing my government's policies.....we don't make the policy...we just carry it out!"
Do you think for one second the world is devoid of politics? If you cannot accept the fact that politics is and always will be the vehicle by which the world's nations conduct their affairs....then you fail to see reality. This is a time of great conflict in the world....and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future. Accept it. For sure,you and I cannot change it. I will without reservation tell you that things are not run the way I would like to see them done....but I am only one person as are you.
A very small number of Iraqi's are fighting us....just as did some Germans at the end of WWII....in time they will be defeated.
I did not say we went in to free the women...I said as a result of that action, women are better off today than under the Taliban. Undeniably so....no more football stadium executions for going about uncovered.
Why are we not going into all those other places....rephrase the question....why are you not there? You are the government that opposed the Rhodesian independence. My country turned our backs upon them too....
Simply put, we have our hands full with Iraq currently. Defense cuts during the Clinton years left our military so short-handed that we do not have the necessary force structure to devote more troops to Syria. One might note it is shorter to road march to the Med than load up for an Arabian Gulf departure however.
Any way you figure it....it is the squaddie out there on the ground with the rifle and bayonet, the aircrew, and the sailors that exert the force needed to effect national policy. Politicians talk about it...news people decry it....but the war fighters do it.
Take a wander through some military cemetaries and take note of the price they pay for having the courage to stand up for what they believe in.
We owe them our undying gratitude and solid support. You have a bone to pick...do it with the politicians that put them there....not the guys that do it.
We in the United States are coming to our Memorial Day this weekend....a time when we honour all those that have served and those that were lost. It is right we do so.
Sunfish
Both wars were fought by Conscripts....which two wars are you referring to? Please do enlighten us as to where you came up with that gem.
Significant volunteers in all Western armies during the two World Wars....also there were ample evidence of prisoners being shot out of hand by our side. Ever read the accounts of how the German POW's suffered in PW enclosures at the end of the war. You plainly do not know your history.
Ever hear of the Eagle Squadron....all American pilots conscripted from the USA by the RAF. Yeah, right!
SASless.............
Whatever.....
We are dragging this thread off track, I just wanted to remind you that more people fear soldiers than have grateful regard for them.
As to conscripts, in Europe WW1 and WW2 WERE conscript wars fought by nations who mobilised their entire national resources.
How on earth can you claim any different?
Whatever.....
We are dragging this thread off track, I just wanted to remind you that more people fear soldiers than have grateful regard for them.
As to conscripts, in Europe WW1 and WW2 WERE conscript wars fought by nations who mobilised their entire national resources.
How on earth can you claim any different?
Proone
Had to ignore Hundreds of thousands of volunteers....understood the great majority of the troops were in fact conscripts....we had 18 million under arms at one time thus most were not volunteers....but to declare with finality that they were conscript fought wars overstates the facts.
We should also remember we had press censorship in those two wars as well.....and excesses for the home team were not allowed to be aired. Quite a different situation to current practice.
To paint our current crop of troops as less noble...less disciplined...or in any way sub-standard is not a fair statement. As in any war....the vast majority of troops perform excellent service and do not deserve to be tarnished by the few whose conduct falls short of the standard. There have always been excesses in any war....this war is no different but I do not think hanging the few as an example is the right approach to solving the problem either.
I take my hat off to the current serving troops who are caught in some very difficult circumstances. Those who wish to point fingers ought to take a moment to consider what it must be like to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan today. The troops are under incredible stress and face a very determined and capable enemy who are fighting in an urban setting. There is no more difficult fight than that.
We have readers who are serving there....who have served there...and who have sons and daughters who also are involved. I also have some feelings for them when they are exposed to the kinds of comments some of the posters have made.
I have said it before....and I will continue to say it....those that try to take the High Moral Ground here....are wrong when they attempt to paint the troops with a big broad brush.
When you have experienced a barrage of RPG's and seen the damage they cause.....or see the results of an IED or car bomb....your perspective of what is kind and gentle will be coloured a bit.
It may not make it right....but I can begin to understand why some of the excesses have occured. That is the point I am trying to make....our troops are human and will as humans are want to do...make mistakes. It just seems they should be the recipients of the same kind of mercy that is being demanded for their enemies.
Had to ignore Hundreds of thousands of volunteers....understood the great majority of the troops were in fact conscripts....we had 18 million under arms at one time thus most were not volunteers....but to declare with finality that they were conscript fought wars overstates the facts.
We should also remember we had press censorship in those two wars as well.....and excesses for the home team were not allowed to be aired. Quite a different situation to current practice.
To paint our current crop of troops as less noble...less disciplined...or in any way sub-standard is not a fair statement. As in any war....the vast majority of troops perform excellent service and do not deserve to be tarnished by the few whose conduct falls short of the standard. There have always been excesses in any war....this war is no different but I do not think hanging the few as an example is the right approach to solving the problem either.
I take my hat off to the current serving troops who are caught in some very difficult circumstances. Those who wish to point fingers ought to take a moment to consider what it must be like to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan today. The troops are under incredible stress and face a very determined and capable enemy who are fighting in an urban setting. There is no more difficult fight than that.
We have readers who are serving there....who have served there...and who have sons and daughters who also are involved. I also have some feelings for them when they are exposed to the kinds of comments some of the posters have made.
I have said it before....and I will continue to say it....those that try to take the High Moral Ground here....are wrong when they attempt to paint the troops with a big broad brush.
When you have experienced a barrage of RPG's and seen the damage they cause.....or see the results of an IED or car bomb....your perspective of what is kind and gentle will be coloured a bit.
It may not make it right....but I can begin to understand why some of the excesses have occured. That is the point I am trying to make....our troops are human and will as humans are want to do...make mistakes. It just seems they should be the recipients of the same kind of mercy that is being demanded for their enemies.
Short Blunt Shock
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh dear Pr00ne - I knew it was only a matter of time before you stuck your left oar in here.
Been to Afghanistan recently, have you? Thought not......
...or Iraq? Of course you haven't. But don't let that stop you 'telling it like it is' now.
I think you'll find that the majority of strife in Iraq is being caused or stirred up by foreign Islamists, helped along by some of the 'vested interests' you so decry, of the former regime.
Sunfish,
er....I'm sure you are aware of when the Geneva Conventions regarding PWs (GCIII and IV) were enacted. Discussions about 'war crimes' committed in WWI and WWII are pointless, since few actual 'war crimes' were committed in either confilct in respect of PW handling - the Hague Convention 1907 contained many get-out clauses which basically allowed a party to a conflict to use almost any means necessary to maintain discipline or extract information, if it was 'militarily necessary'. This was not superceded until GCIII and IV came into force in 1950.
Even under GCIV (mainly concerned with 'protected persons), individuals can forfeit their protected status - Article 5 States that if a person is suspected of being an 'illegal combatant' (basically not wearing a uniform or readily identifyable markings, or not conducting themselves in accordance with the laws and customs of war - GCIII Article 5), they forfeit their rights to protected status. Article 42 provides for their internment for as long as they remain a threat to the security of the state or occupying power. The only 'right' that they retain is to be treated humanely, althought 'humanely' does not appear to be defined.
It follows therefore, that an 'illegal combatant' can be interrogated using ANY means, so long as those means are not 'inhumane' - again, this remains undefined, which IMHO only adds weight to my assertion that these Conventions need to be reviewed. This will ultimately be to the benefit of BOTH parties, as captured terrorists will have a legally defined status, rather than the currently ill-defined no-man's land, and there will be a framework defining exactly what we can and cannot do, as in the case of legal combatant PWs. (NOTE: They only have to be SUSPECTED of being an illegal combatant for the above to apply, as stated in GCIV Article 5, not PROVEN to be terrorists).
GCIII Article 42 provides for the use of force and weapons against PWs. It defines such use of weapons as an 'extreme measure', particularly against PWs escaping or attempting to escape. IT DOES NOT PROHIBIT THE USE OF SUCH FORCE - but does require that it 'shall be preceded by such warnings as are appropriate in the circumstances' - in other words, if a PW is resisting arrest, rebelling or attacking his captors, force CAN be used against them. There also does not appear to be a bar on lethal force, if deemed necessary. Again, none of these protections apply to 'illegal combatants'.
In summary:
1. If a person is not wearing a uniform or readily identifyable marks, OR is not acting within the constraints of the various conventions governing war, they ARE NOT ENTITLED TO PW STATUS OR PROTECTED PERSON STATUS, and are an ILLEGAL COMBATANT. Suspicion of the above, and not unequivocable proof, is all that is required.
2. An illegal combatant can be interned indefinitely by the occupying power as long as they are considered a security risk.
3. The only right an illegal combatant has is to be treated 'humanely' - this term is not explicitly defined.
One more thing to consider, Pr00ne -
Exactly what freedoms do you think we would enjoy today were it NOT for these soldiers whom you so readily berate?
16B
Try going back to Afghanistan and seeing exactly what has changed and how many women are “free” in “democratic Afghanistan.”
Those Iraqis are so grateful for the freedom we brought them that they are killing us on a daily basis
I think you'll find that the majority of strife in Iraq is being caused or stirred up by foreign Islamists, helped along by some of the 'vested interests' you so decry, of the former regime.
Sunfish,
Oh please! Both world wars were fought by conscripts and we didn't have to make special pleadings about soldiers not obeying the Geneva Convention on our side!
Even under GCIV (mainly concerned with 'protected persons), individuals can forfeit their protected status - Article 5 States that if a person is suspected of being an 'illegal combatant' (basically not wearing a uniform or readily identifyable markings, or not conducting themselves in accordance with the laws and customs of war - GCIII Article 5), they forfeit their rights to protected status. Article 42 provides for their internment for as long as they remain a threat to the security of the state or occupying power. The only 'right' that they retain is to be treated humanely, althought 'humanely' does not appear to be defined.
It follows therefore, that an 'illegal combatant' can be interrogated using ANY means, so long as those means are not 'inhumane' - again, this remains undefined, which IMHO only adds weight to my assertion that these Conventions need to be reviewed. This will ultimately be to the benefit of BOTH parties, as captured terrorists will have a legally defined status, rather than the currently ill-defined no-man's land, and there will be a framework defining exactly what we can and cannot do, as in the case of legal combatant PWs. (NOTE: They only have to be SUSPECTED of being an illegal combatant for the above to apply, as stated in GCIV Article 5, not PROVEN to be terrorists).
GCIII Article 42 provides for the use of force and weapons against PWs. It defines such use of weapons as an 'extreme measure', particularly against PWs escaping or attempting to escape. IT DOES NOT PROHIBIT THE USE OF SUCH FORCE - but does require that it 'shall be preceded by such warnings as are appropriate in the circumstances' - in other words, if a PW is resisting arrest, rebelling or attacking his captors, force CAN be used against them. There also does not appear to be a bar on lethal force, if deemed necessary. Again, none of these protections apply to 'illegal combatants'.
In summary:
1. If a person is not wearing a uniform or readily identifyable marks, OR is not acting within the constraints of the various conventions governing war, they ARE NOT ENTITLED TO PW STATUS OR PROTECTED PERSON STATUS, and are an ILLEGAL COMBATANT. Suspicion of the above, and not unequivocable proof, is all that is required.
2. An illegal combatant can be interned indefinitely by the occupying power as long as they are considered a security risk.
3. The only right an illegal combatant has is to be treated 'humanely' - this term is not explicitly defined.
One more thing to consider, Pr00ne -
To most of the population of this planet soldiers bring repression, enslavement, deprivation, exploitation, bereavement, horror, fear, pain, injury, torture and death.
16B
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: lincolnshire
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm loathe to come in at this point because there's too much to say, but I'll blah on anyway.
Dave Martin
Agree wholeheartedly. Those of you who state that FOX presents 'the other side' (was it 'hold their feet to the fire'?) ought to bear in mind that that is the only channel that is normally tuned in for US forces in Iraq and the wider ME region. No problem with one channel being a Rumsfeld fan club site, but when it's all the guys see, then that's a problem.
I am nervous about commenting more widely - I am sp pleased the women of Afghanistan voted but it's not perfect by any means (neither are most democracies - though that's not my argument). Most Iraqis and, incidentally most ME countries, are glad to see the back of Hussein's regime but that does not excuse the mistakes that we have made since the end of Phase 3 (reasons various - needs new thread).
None of this is simple but I believe in treating others as I would want to be treated and, I know it sound trite, but two wrongs don't make a right. Unless we maintain the moral high ground (I hate that phrase - any suggested alternatives?) we are no better than those whose methods we stoop to.
I think I'd better stop now.
Dave Martin
Agree wholeheartedly. Those of you who state that FOX presents 'the other side' (was it 'hold their feet to the fire'?) ought to bear in mind that that is the only channel that is normally tuned in for US forces in Iraq and the wider ME region. No problem with one channel being a Rumsfeld fan club site, but when it's all the guys see, then that's a problem.
I am nervous about commenting more widely - I am sp pleased the women of Afghanistan voted but it's not perfect by any means (neither are most democracies - though that's not my argument). Most Iraqis and, incidentally most ME countries, are glad to see the back of Hussein's regime but that does not excuse the mistakes that we have made since the end of Phase 3 (reasons various - needs new thread).
None of this is simple but I believe in treating others as I would want to be treated and, I know it sound trite, but two wrongs don't make a right. Unless we maintain the moral high ground (I hate that phrase - any suggested alternatives?) we are no better than those whose methods we stoop to.
I think I'd better stop now.
16 blades,
Actually I HAVE been to Afghanistan, twice in the last eight months, and not in some safe military camp but actually out amongst the locals, for professional reasons, so shove it!
No I haven't been to Iraq but are you REALLY claiming that you have the support of the locals, nearly 700 dead since the elections?
Lastly, I am NOT berating soldiery, just countering the ridiculous statement that soldiers "give" us freedom, they don't!
I am a white male closer to 60 than 50, I think I owe most of my freedoms to those mentioned by Jackonicko in a post further up the page.
Actually I HAVE been to Afghanistan, twice in the last eight months, and not in some safe military camp but actually out amongst the locals, for professional reasons, so shove it!
No I haven't been to Iraq but are you REALLY claiming that you have the support of the locals, nearly 700 dead since the elections?
Lastly, I am NOT berating soldiery, just countering the ridiculous statement that soldiers "give" us freedom, they don't!
I am a white male closer to 60 than 50, I think I owe most of my freedoms to those mentioned by Jackonicko in a post further up the page.
Suspicion breeds confidence
To most of the population of this planet soldiers bring repression, enslavement, deprivation, exploitation, bereavement, horror, fear, pain, injury, torture and death.
I am a white male closer to 60 than 50, I think I owe most of my freedoms to those mentioned by Jackonicko in a post further up the page.
"I am an Iraqi person closer to 60 than 50, I think I owe most of my freedoms to those mentioned by 16Blades and SASless in a post further up the page."
The post 'up the page' said:
"Soldiers have won us some of our freedoms, trades unionists and politicians others."
And:
"A free press can, and sometimes does, help to guarantee some of our freedoms, and sometimes helps warn us when they are under threat, or when our freedoms or values are being undermined."
Is it really so hard to give credit where credit is due? Why the compulsion to credit the military with winning us everything we value?
And why is it so hard to criticise rogue members of the military who mistreat captives and/or civilians, in just the same way that we'd harangue incompetent politicians or irresponsible or unprincipalled members of the press, condemning them robustly while recognising that they are not broadly representative?
Does it really have to be quite so black and white?
"Soldiers have won us some of our freedoms, trades unionists and politicians others."
And:
"A free press can, and sometimes does, help to guarantee some of our freedoms, and sometimes helps warn us when they are under threat, or when our freedoms or values are being undermined."
Is it really so hard to give credit where credit is due? Why the compulsion to credit the military with winning us everything we value?
And why is it so hard to criticise rogue members of the military who mistreat captives and/or civilians, in just the same way that we'd harangue incompetent politicians or irresponsible or unprincipalled members of the press, condemning them robustly while recognising that they are not broadly representative?
Does it really have to be quite so black and white?
Jacko,
Why is it when politicians and press nimrods commit grievous offenses nothing happens to them? When squaddies make mistakes we carry out courtsmartials and send them to prison?
I suggest there is no justice in a system that does not demand equal punishment to those who knowingly commit acts of misconduct.
When our Liberal friends refuse to accept offensive conduct by their trusted colleagues and demand harsh punishment of those offenses....then I will cease my opposition to what is happening to our soldiers.
Equality, justice, and fair play is what I am seeking......empty words to a Liberal....but very real concepts to others.
An example....there was a suicide bombing at a mosque in Pakistan a few days ago.....lots of people killed. Show me anywhere in the Liberal Press/Media where there was any denouncment of that crime and its perpetrators. Where was the Muslim outcry.....but yet unfounded reports of mishandling of a Koran resulted in thousands marching in the streets and burning American flags. Did the Liberal Press/Media take issue with the protesters and state the truth about the situation? Not at all....no where did the press/media (except Fox News) suggest the protesters were wrong to ignore the bombing and raise hell over the unfounded press reports. Despite knowing the sensitivity of the situation...the LA Times and other outlets continue to run the story despite there being not one bit of evidence that the Koran was intentionally defamed.
I would suggest fairness and accrucacy only gets in the way of the Liberal media's quest to cause trouble for the Bush Administration.....no matter the cost to the national interest or that of the Muslims in this world.
That is why I think it is wrong to focus on the Troops and ignore the other transgressors.
Why is it when politicians and press nimrods commit grievous offenses nothing happens to them? When squaddies make mistakes we carry out courtsmartials and send them to prison?
I suggest there is no justice in a system that does not demand equal punishment to those who knowingly commit acts of misconduct.
When our Liberal friends refuse to accept offensive conduct by their trusted colleagues and demand harsh punishment of those offenses....then I will cease my opposition to what is happening to our soldiers.
Equality, justice, and fair play is what I am seeking......empty words to a Liberal....but very real concepts to others.
An example....there was a suicide bombing at a mosque in Pakistan a few days ago.....lots of people killed. Show me anywhere in the Liberal Press/Media where there was any denouncment of that crime and its perpetrators. Where was the Muslim outcry.....but yet unfounded reports of mishandling of a Koran resulted in thousands marching in the streets and burning American flags. Did the Liberal Press/Media take issue with the protesters and state the truth about the situation? Not at all....no where did the press/media (except Fox News) suggest the protesters were wrong to ignore the bombing and raise hell over the unfounded press reports. Despite knowing the sensitivity of the situation...the LA Times and other outlets continue to run the story despite there being not one bit of evidence that the Koran was intentionally defamed.
I would suggest fairness and accrucacy only gets in the way of the Liberal media's quest to cause trouble for the Bush Administration.....no matter the cost to the national interest or that of the Muslims in this world.
That is why I think it is wrong to focus on the Troops and ignore the other transgressors.
Navaleye,
That statement is NOT drivel, to the vast majority of humanity on this planet it is a daily fact, who mentioned western/european and well disciplined, weren't the SS european and well disciplined?
That statement is NOT drivel, to the vast majority of humanity on this planet it is a daily fact, who mentioned western/european and well disciplined, weren't the SS european and well disciplined?
TAC Int Bloke
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks pr00ne, I just won a fiver there, I wondered how long it would be before the SS came up, however, they were political rather than professional soldiers and I hope you're not comparing Aus/Can/UK/US/NZ forces with Nazi Germany
Mr Blair is on record as saying 'we are a force for world good' any guestions?
Mr Blair is on record as saying 'we are a force for world good' any guestions?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tamil Nadu
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that as a serviceman/woman you have to be accountable for yr every action.
How many of our boys & grils have been in the dock for courts martial or enquiries to account for their actions/decisions etc - isn't it time Blair and Bush were called to account for their actions and decisions!
How many of our boys & grils have been in the dock for courts martial or enquiries to account for their actions/decisions etc - isn't it time Blair and Bush were called to account for their actions and decisions!