• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Photos show U.S. GIs posing with dead Afghans[W:1146]

mac said:
The IRA get's a lot of it's funding from private Americans....does that make the United States of America a supporter of the IRA?
Click to expand...

About as much as it makes the Afghan people supporters of Al Qaeda.

But, the money from Pakistan came from a little more official agency other than the private citizen.


Significantly, Sheikh is also the man who, on the instructions of General Mahmoud Ahmed, the then head of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), wired $100,000 before the 9/11 attacks to Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker. It is extraordinary that neither Ahmed nor Sheikh have been charged and brought to trial on this count.

Michael Meacher: The Pakistan connection | World news | The Guardian

More than a month after the money transfer was discovered, the head of ISI, General Mahmud Ahmed resigned from his position. It was reported that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was investigating the possibility that Gen. Ahmed ordered Saeed Sheikh to send the $100,000 to Atta [14]

The Wall Street Journal was one of the only Western news organizations to follow up on the story, citing the Times of India: "US authorities sought General Mahmud Ahmed's removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 was wired to WTC hijacker Mohamed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh at the instance of General Mahmud."[17]

Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We play lose with terms like connections and help, but of our problems, the Taliban were and are the least of them.
 
mac said:
But then we'd have to deal with him. This administration prefers you just kill them.
Click to expand...

Everyone prefers it. They just won't say it. Bush's attempt to shut down GITMO was blocked because he struggled with what to do with the prisoners that nobody wants. GIMO remains open under Obama for the same reason. There is a great difference between our intel system knowing a person is guilty and a court room proving it.
 
Boo Radley said:
Protected? They were doing a decent job of that in Pakistan. Seems I recall money for 9/11 came from Pakistan as well. But hey, let's nto quibble. The fact si getting him would be one thing. Nation building another.
Click to expand...

You are preaching to the choir. How do you think a guy like me feels about these matters? Afghanistan was always the "Vietnam." It was never Iraq. Pakistan has revealed itself to be a true enemy to us on many levels, yet we continue to cut annual allowance to them and call them an ally. Almost half of the men killed in Afghanistan this year have been from cops who have turned on their handlers, yet we ctaer to Karzai's accusations and demands for annual money. Saudi Arabia is the source of hatred for most Arab radicals and serve to remind the faithful why they are supposed to hate everything except the House of Saud, yet we keep them in business and call them friends. I'm not confused.


I am one of those who see our enemy throughout the region between Cairo and Islamabad. I also believe that like 9/11, Osama Bin Laden is merely a symptom of a larger disease. My enemy is that radical parent who teaches his children that Israel and the West is the culprit for all their problems. My enemy is the complete lack of general education throughout a region. My enemy is also a piece of Islam that is set so deeply in brittle concrete that it strangles the life blood out of families and society as their leaders use oil money for personal subsistance. But identifying the sysmptoms is more manageable isn't it? Putting a terrorist face to the event is far easier on the politics than accusing a failed civilization of it's inability to contribute to the modern world. We ignore the countless religious organizations throughout the region with members that hail from all over the region declaring grievances about everything from the existance of Islrael, to the West's intrusion on their cultures, to Japan's Pokemon as a character that leades children away from God. And make no mistake, the Middle East is getting worse. This "Arab Spring" may be the last effort of a people to reverse the path they are on. Of course, if they fail and prove to the world that a civilization of Arabs are unable to function in the modern world while keeping their brand of Islam unchanged, then they will lose the little bit of sympathy that too much of the world offers them today.

As far as "nation building," I also believe in the British's tactic of old called "punitive strikes." Nation building works only if the population gets behind it for its own good. Obvious examples were Germany and Japan. But we aren't dealing with such civilized societies these days are we? The Middle East offers us societies that are struggling greatly with terms such as Nationalism, Democracy, Religion vs. State, Dictator, Caliphate, etc. You can't nation build a nation that is absolutely conflicted about what it wants. But we can simply punish and move on.




Boo Radley said:
And no, prisoners have gone to some pretty damn poor places, and some were innocent. Dead, but innocent.
Click to expand...

Well, many innocent people die in war.
 
cpwill said:
Ah yes. :doh we should have hit the Easy Button!!!


images




why didn't we think of this sooner!?!
Click to expand...

Politicians did. The military is the easy button. They talk about the last resort, but the truth is that it's easier than actually doing their jobs. If diplomats were better at their jobs, then the last resort would actually be a last resort. Instead, our suit wearing leaders call upon the military and rely on that played out maxim. It gets them off the hook and places all blame on the military for not achieving impractical demands. Of course, then future politicians get handshakes and applause for withdrawing.

Another "Easy Button" is sanctions. Instead of sending in the military to do the murder they'll starve out the population and act like they are punishing the elite.
 
mac said:
The IRA gets a lot of it's funding from private Americans....does that make the United States of America a supporter of the IRA?
Click to expand...



Nah, screw that. Pakistan, among too many, is an enemy bleeding us of our money. A big reason why the United States of America maintains a sense of control throughout the world is that we force the world to accept an illusion. The illusion is the web of "friends" throughout the world's regions who behave and exchange hellos from behind microphones. The truth is that many see our annual payments as rewards for their proper conduct and when called on it, it is easer for us to pretend that we can separate or enemies within their borders.

Germany does not equal the Nazi Party.
Afghanistan does not equal the Taliban.
Pakistan does not equal the countless hundreds of thousands of Pakistani citizens who sympathize and protect religious extremists.

We make things more difficult because we want them to be easy. History is clear. The longest lasting peace from one era to the next only came after an enemy was obliterated and the populations knew that they were defeated. We've been screwing this truth up ever since World War II. Never since has any population felt defeated, which is why our wars are quagmires and last until our own citizens demand political solutions in order to compromise coexistence.
 
mac said:
The IRA gets a lot of it's funding from private Americans....does that make the United States of America a supporter of the IRA?
Click to expand...

Now that the government has to power to detain suspected terrorists without trial, maybe people will be afraid to contribute to the IRA.
 
MSgt said:
You are preaching to the choir. How do you think a guy like me feels about these matters? Afghanistan was always the "Vietnam." It was never Iraq. Pakistan has revealed itself to be a true enemy to us on many levels, yet we continue to cut annual allowance to them and call them an ally. Almost half of the men killed in Afghanistan this year have been from cops who have turned on their handlers, yet we ctaer to Karzai's accusations and demands for annual money. Saudi Arabia is the source of hatred for most Arab radicals and serve to remind the faithful why they are supposed to hate everything except the House of Saud, yet we keep them in business and call them friends. I'm not confused.


I am one of those who see our enemy throughout the region between Cairo and Islamabad. I also believe that like 9/11, Osama Bin Laden is merely a symptom of a larger disease. My enemy is that radical parent who teaches his children that Israel and the West is the culprit for all their problems. My enemy is the complete lack of general education throughout a region. My enemy is also a piece of Islam that is set so deeply in brittle concrete that it strangles the life blood out of families and society as their leaders use oil money for personal subsistance. But identifying the sysmptoms is more manageable isn't it? Putting a terrorist face to the event is far easier on the politics than accusing a failed civilization of it's inability to contribute to the modern world. We ignore the countless religious organizations throughout the region with members that hail from all over the region declaring grievances about everything from the existance of Islrael, to the West's intrusion on their cultures, to Japan's Pokemon as a character that leades children away from God. And make no mistake, the Middle East is getting worse. This "Arab Spring" may be the last effort of a people to reverse the path they are on. Of course, if they fail and prove to the world that a civilization of Arabs are unable to function in the modern world while keeping their brand of Islam unchanged, then they will lose the little bit of sympathy that too much of the world offers them today.

As far as "nation building," I also believe in the British's tactic of old called "punitive strikes." Nation building works only if the population gets behind it for its own good. Obvious examples were Germany and Japan. But we aren't dealing with such civilized societies these days are we? The Middle East offers us societies that are struggling greatly with terms such as Nationalism, Democracy, Religion vs. State, Dictator, Caliphate, etc. You can't nation build a nation that is absolutely conflicted about what it wants. But we can simply punish and move on.






Well, many innocent people die in war.
Click to expand...

The only thing I take real exception to is innocent people die in war. Yes, in a war, a fight, one nation against another, in the heat of the battle. Beyond that, war doesn't excuse killing innocent people be it prison or drinking coffee at a cafe.
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
The only thing I take real exception to is innocent people die in war. Yes, in a war, a fight, one nation against another, in the heat of the battle. Beyond that, war doesn't excuse killing innocent people be it prison or drinking coffee at a cafe.
Click to expand...

And war doesn't excuse killing. But civilized people create organizations and laws in order to unleash humanity legally. But, who is killing who in prison?
 
MSgt said:
And war doesn't excuse killing. But civilized people create organizations and laws in order to unleash humanity legally. But, who is killing who in prison?
Click to expand...

We, US military, are responsible for at least two deaths. Those are easy to look up. The worse was a poor cab drive in the wrong place at the wrong time.

However, turning people over to others for them to be tortured or killed, later to find they were innocent isn't much better. It's really not moral even if they were guilty, but innocent is worse yet.

It is that moral core I speak of that is important. The laws, the standards, that govern us is to help to prevent us from committing this type of evil as much as possible.
 
Boo Radley said:
The only thing I take real exception to is innocent people die in war. Yes, in a war, a fight, one nation against another, in the heat of the battle. Beyond that, war doesn't excuse killing innocent people be it prison or drinking coffee at a cafe.
Click to expand...




Let me clue you in. War is hell and we take great risk and spend billions on how to avoid civillian casualties. Wheres this enemy relishes in killing not only our civillians, but even thier own if it fowards thier agenda.

I think your faux-outrage is misplaced on your brothers and sisters who at great mortal risk, do whatever it takes to minimize civillian casualties.

I hope this post gives you insight to the nature of battle.
 
Boo Radley said:
We, US military, are responsible for at least two deaths. Those are easy to look up. The worse was a poor cab drive in the wrong place at the wrong time.

However, turning people over to others for them to be tortured or killed, later to find they were innocent isn't much better. It's really not moral even if they were guilty, but innocent is worse yet.

It is that moral core I speak of that is important. The laws, the standards, that govern us is to help to prevent us from committing this type of evil as much as possible.
Click to expand...

I get it. We can't lose sight of the trees for the forest. You are right. But it's our moral core that has produced only "two" amongst thousands and thousands of prisoners. This makes the two the severe exception and nobody should be defined by their exceptions. But you are raising points to non-arguments. Despite the mainstream media's lust for drama and a few politician's quest to behave badly persuade polls, GITMO was never a gulag. Nor was Bush ever a Hitler. With the exception of a few waterboard cases, "torture" as demonstrated by monsters throughout history was never a real issue outside of the politics. Nobody believes in harming innocent people and nobody agrees that we should. It's our core values that prevent us from becoming what so many of even our European friends have perfected. So what is your argument here?

But let's not also forget that despite any military man's action abroad, nothing can compare to what civilians do everyday in our country. We have politicians that actually voted to make pizza a vegetable just to oppose others. We have innocent people convicted of crimes everyday throughout our country, for which DNA has later proven a mistake. In the men time, they are raped and beaten in their assigned environments even under the protection of guards. Can that ever be made right? Or what about racial lynching in our South? And haven't there been gays in our society who have been tortured to death?

I mean let's be real. When it comes to core values, it's the military that exemplifies this for our countrymen because civilians fail miserably all the time. We should be thankful that individuals don't get to define our core values. It's our historical record and preach that does. It's our idealism, which is something that the entire world has been getting behind since before World War I. My grievance is that we sometimes don't live up to it (even when we are able to) and the people of the world are allowed to drag us through the mud. Does it matter that our mistakes or errors don't compare to their historical depravities? No because everybody likes to see a winner fall, especially when that winner is responsible for ruining their parties. But why give into their shallow interpretation of us by pretending that they get to criticize us for imperfection?
 
Last edited:
MSgt said:
It's our moral core that has produced only "two" amongst thousands and thousands of prisoners. This makes the two the severe exception and nobody should be defined by their exceptions. But you are raising points to non-arguments. Despite the mainstream media's lust for drama and a few politician's quest to behave badly persuade polls, GITMO was never a gulag. Nor was Bush ever a Hitler. With the exception of a few waterboard cases, "torture" as demonstrated by monsters throughout history was never a real issue outside of the politics. Nobody believes in harming innocent people and nobody agrees that we should. It's our core values that prevent us from becoming what so many of even our European friends have perfected. So what is your argument here?

But let's not also forget that despite any military man's action abroad, nothing can compare to what civilians do everyday in our country. We have politicians that actually voted to make pizza a vegetable just to oppose others. We have innocent people convicted of crimes everyday throughout our country, for which DNA has later proven a mistake. In the men time, they are raped and beaten in their assigned environments even under the protection of guards. Can that ever be made right? Or what about racial lynching in our South? And haven't there been gays in our society who have been tortured to death?

I mean let's be real. When it comes to core values, it's the military that exemplifies this for our countrymen because civilians fail miserably all the time. We should be thankful that individuals don't get to define our core values. It's our historical record and preach that does. It's our idealism, which is something that the entire world has been getting behind since before World War I.
Click to expand...




Hear! Hear!
 
Boo Radley said:
The only thing I take real exception to is innocent people die in war. Yes, in a war, a fight, one nation against another, in the heat of the battle. Beyond that, war doesn't excuse killing innocent people be it prison or drinking coffee at a cafe.
Click to expand...

If you do not have the grammar of war, you cannot begin to discuss war.
 
MSgt said:
I get it. We can't lose sight of the trees for the forest. You are right. But it's our moral core that has produced only "two" amongst thousands and thousands of prisoners. This makes the two the severe exception and nobody should be defined by their exceptions. But you are raising points to non-arguments. Despite the mainstream media's lust for drama and a few politician's quest to behave badly persuade polls, GITMO was never a gulag. Nor was Bush ever a Hitler. With the exception of a few waterboard cases, "torture" as demonstrated by monsters throughout history was never a real issue outside of the politics. Nobody believes in harming innocent people and nobody agrees that we should. It's our core values that prevent us from becoming what so many of even our European friends have perfected. So what is your argument here?

But let's not also forget that despite any military man's action abroad, nothing can compare to what civilians do everyday in our country. We have politicians that actually voted to make pizza a vegetable just to oppose others. We have innocent people convicted of crimes everyday throughout our country, for which DNA has later proven a mistake. In the men time, they are raped and beaten in their assigned environments even under the protection of guards. Can that ever be made right? Or what about racial lynching in our South? And haven't there been gays in our society who have been tortured to death?

I mean let's be real. When it comes to core values, it's the military that exemplifies this for our countrymen because civilians fail miserably all the time. We should be thankful that individuals don't get to define our core values. It's our historical record and preach that does. It's our idealism, which is something that the entire world has been getting behind since before World War I. My grievance is that we sometimes don't live up to it (even when we are able to) and the people of the world are allowed to drag us through the mud. Does it matter that our mistakes or errors don't compare to their historical depravities? No because everybody likes to see a winner fall, especially when that winner is responsible for ruining their parties. But why give into their shallow interpretation of us by pretending that they get to criticize us for imperfection?
Click to expand...


OUTSTANDING! This brought a tear to the eye....You are dead on! And from one to another...Thanks for your service Master Sergeant.


j-mac
 
MSgt said:
I get it. We can't lose sight of the trees for the forest. You are right. But it's our moral core that has produced only "two" amongst thousands and thousands of prisoners. This makes the two the severe exception and nobody should be defined by their exceptions. But you are raising points to non-arguments. Despite the mainstream media's lust for drama and a few politician's quest to behave badly persuade polls, GITMO was never a gulag. Nor was Bush ever a Hitler. With the exception of a few waterboard cases, "torture" as demonstrated by monsters throughout history was never a real issue outside of the politics. Nobody believes in harming innocent people and nobody agrees that we should. It's our core values that prevent us from becoming what so many of even our European friends have perfected. So what is your argument here?

But let's not also forget that despite any military man's action abroad, nothing can compare to what civilians do everyday in our country. We have politicians that actually voted to make pizza a vegetable just to oppose others. We have innocent people convicted of crimes everyday throughout our country, for which DNA has later proven a mistake. In the men time, they are raped and beaten in their assigned environments even under the protection of guards. Can that ever be made right? Or what about racial lynching in our South? And haven't there been gays in our society who have been tortured to death?

I mean let's be real. When it comes to core values, it's the military that exemplifies this for our countrymen because civilians fail miserably all the time. We should be thankful that individuals don't get to define our core values. It's our historical record and preach that does. It's our idealism, which is something that the entire world has been getting behind since before World War I. My grievance is that we sometimes don't live up to it (even when we are able to) and the people of the world are allowed to drag us through the mud. Does it matter that our mistakes or errors don't compare to their historical depravities? No because everybody likes to see a winner fall, especially when that winner is responsible for ruining their parties. But why give into their shallow interpretation of us by pretending that they get to criticize us for imperfection?
Click to expand...

I've never claimed either the gulag or hitler. Just a place were we lost sight of our moral core, and reckless decider who made poor decisions.

Nor do I see as the military versus everyday citizens, because both have really good people and real assholes. That's a given.

However, I think some are too sensitive to any criticism and only want to hear praise. I think on these boards we see that all the time. And while I have never argued the military, or the country, be judged by their exceptions, I do argue that we should openly acknowledge these mistakes and stand accountable, and at the decision making level. No excuses. No pointing to others. Just taking accountability.

Here we debate these things, so we discuss. I don't consider being cavalier about human life as being a mere imperfection. It's to the core of a people. So my complaint is not only the action, but even more to those who seek to excuse it, rationalize it, and only want that tear in their eye. I get that tear periodically myself, but I like to think I do when it is earned and not just because I want to have it.

You've been more reasonable than most on these boards, and I do respect that. A lot quite frankly. But my experience tells me that if we abandon a code, excuse the breaking of those codes, everyone loses, including those we excuse.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Let me clue you in. War is hell and we take great risk and spend billions on how to avoid civillian casualties. Wheres this enemy relishes in killing not only our civillians, but even thier own if it fowards thier agenda.

I think your faux-outrage is misplaced on your brothers and sisters who at great mortal risk, do whatever it takes to minimize civillian casualties.

I hope this post gives you insight to the nature of battle.
Click to expand...

I wish you had a clue. :coffeepap
 
Boo Radley said:
I've never claimed either the gulag or hitler. Just a place were we lost sight of our moral core, and reckless decider who made poor decisions.
Click to expand...

Didn't mean to suggest that.


Boo Radley said:
However, I think some are too sensitive to any criticism and only want to hear praise. I think on these boards we see that all the time. And while I have never argued the military, or the country, be judged by their exceptions, I do argue that we should openly acknowledge these mistakes and stand accountable, and at the decision making level. No excuses. No pointing to others. Just taking accountability.
Click to expand...

True. But it is in the military where people are held most accountable. Long after the sentence of a Court Martial is carried out, a civilian will still be sitting in court trials and holding interviews with reporters. The sensitivity comes into play when civilians seek to hold the military at a standard they flee from. Or being dragged about in the media, until found not guilty and forgotten. The Haditha Marines were found not guilty by courts in California. Most Americans have no idea of this other than what happened at Haditha. The media made sure of that. We don't like the media because ever since Vietnam it seeks an angle that neither supports the troop nor the mission. Today's PC world has people stating "Support the Troop, but not the mission." This is the media and politician's way of being able to continue unfairly and unjustly criticizing and judging. It's unccountable civilans that protest at the funerals of our troops. It unaccountable civilians that burn Qu'rans in Florida.

And look at Hollywood. Where are the Audy Murphy's or Jimmy Stewarts? Where are the war movies that show the hard work of a war effort without the tone of sympathy and politics? Without making us all look like victims of corporation and corrupt government? From Vietnam on, our society has been fractured between military and civilian. Oliver Stone themed his Vietnam movies around unproffessional behavior and murder in villages. And what would Rambo be if he wasn't shooting up an American town over his PTSD? And who could forget John Travolta investigating the rape of a fellow soldier in The General's Daughter during a training exercise by unproffessional monsters in uniform? Could you see John Wayne, Henry Fonda or Gary Cooper in these films portraying our troops and their themes? You would be hard pressed to find a veteran anywhere in Hollywood anymore. The same can be stated about our politicians, who send off to commit legal murder and then dare to demand perfection and credit for "resorting to the last option" or deciding against military advice on what to do.

So, military members may be too sensitive at times, but there is also a lot of misunderstanding going on from the civilian world that jump to judge and criticize what they simply don't know. Killing a civilian is an absolute no-no. It's black and white to a civilian as he listens to his favorite reporter give his opinions on the matter. But to many members of the military (not all), we understand the grey in these situations as we watch civilians around the world, to include our own Americans, assign guilt. Even a mass murderer in the civilian world is afforded the term "alleged" by reporters. But a soldier or Marine? Never. I would state that most of the military don't want praise. We just want to be left alone to do our jobs without a civilian somewhere flipping to the wrong channel and making a judgment about an act of combat he will never understand and then demanding justice. And it can't be taught. I've tried.

But there are things some of my kind don't understand and will not until experienced. I grew up a Marine's son. I've been in the maerine Corps for 20 years and retiring this summer. I have absolutely no idea what it is going to be like to be a civilian. Though my wife out in Colorado (kelzie) assures me, I am worried about it. I just don't see normal things in life the same way as others. But I'm supposed to be productive in this world? You couldn't explain what it is like to me because I have no base in which to fall to in order to appreciate your value perspectives.


Boo Radley said:
.....my experience tells me that if we abandon a code, excuse the breaking of those codes, everyone loses, including those we excuse.
Click to expand...

Of course. But you won't find a deeper held core of values than in the military where Non-Judicial Punishments and Page 11s and Counseling Sheets are handed out for discipline problems by the Chain of Command. Court Martials are quick and speedy. Justice is very swift in the military in order to uphold those codes of conduct. You will not find swift justice in the civilian sector, even though you have the right to a "speedy trial" once lawyers and reporters get involved. Of course, after military investigations we know what all went down and we don't have a lot of loop holes and outs for the guilty once the Court Martial begins. What would pass as "not really his fault" doesn't fly in the military where accountability actually matters.
 
Last edited:
MSgt said:
Didn't mean to suggest that.




True. But it is in the military where people are held most accountable. Long after the sentence of a Court Martial is carried out, a civilian will still be sitting in court trials and holding interviews with reporters. The sensitivity comes into play when civilians seek to hold the military at a standard they flee from. Or being dragged about in the media, until found not guilty and forgotten. The Haditha Marines were found not guilty by courts in California. Most Americans have no idea of this other than what happened at Haditha. The media made sure of that. We don't like the media because ever since Vietnam it seeks an angle that neither supports the troop nor the mission. Today's PC world has people stating "Support the Troop, but not the mission." This is the media and politician's way of being able to continue unfairly and unjustly criticizing and judging. It's unccountable civilans that protest at the funerals of our troops. It unaccountable civilians that burn Qu'rans in Florida.

And look at Hollywood. Where are the Audy Murphy's or Jimmy Stewarts? Where are the war movies that show the hard work of a war effort without the tone of sympathy and politics? Without making us all look like victims of corporation and corrupt government? From Vietnam on, our society has been fractured between military and civilian. Oliver Stone themed his Vietnam movies around unproffessional behavior and murder in villages. And what would Rambo be if he wasn't shooting up an American town over his PTSD? And who could forget John Travolta investigating the rape of a fellow soldier in The General's Daughter during a training exercise by unproffessional monsters in uniform? Could you see John Wayne, Henry Fonda or Gary Cooper in these films portraying our troops and their themes? You would be hard pressed to find a veteran anywhere in Hollywood anymore. The same can be stated about our politicians, who send off to commit legal murder and then dare to demand perfection and credit for "resorting to the last option" or deciding against military advice on what to do.

So, military members may be too sensitive at times, but there is also a lot of misunderstanding going on from the civilian world that jump to judge and criticize what they simply don't know. Killing a civilian is an absolute no-no. It's black and white to a civilian as he listens to his favorite reporter give his opinions on the matter. But to many members of the military (not all), we understand the grey in these situations as we watch civilians around the world, to include our own Americans, assign guilt. Even a mass murderer in the civilian world is afforded the term "alleged" by reporters. But a soldier or Marine? Never. I would state that most of the military don't want praise. We just want to be left alone to do our jobs without a civilian somewhere flipping to the wrong channel and making a judgment about an act of combat he will never understand and then demanding justice. And it can't be taught. I've tried.

But there are things some of my kind don't understand and will not until experienced. I grew up a Marine's son. I've been in the maerine Corps for 20 years and retiring this summer. I have absolutely no idea what it is going to be like to be a civilian. Though my wife out in Colorado (kelzie) assures me, I am worried about it. I just don't see normal things in life the same way as others. But I'm supposed to be productive in this world? You couldn't explain what it is like to me because I have no base in which to fall to in order to appreciate your value perspectives.




Of course. But you won't find a deeper held core of values than in the military where Non-Judicial Punishments and Page 11s and Counseling Sheets are handed out for discipline problems by the Chain of Command. Court Martials are quick and speedy. Justice is very swift in the military in order to uphold those codes of conduct. You will not find swift justice in the civilian sector, even though you have the right to a "speedy trial" once lawyers and reporters get involved. Of course, after military investigations we know what all went down and we don't have a lot of loop holes and outs for the guilty once the Court Martial begins. What would pass as "not really his fault" doesn't fly in the military where accountability actually matters.
Click to expand...

I think what you say is mostly true. And most my problem is with civilian leadership and those who seek to excuse wrong behavior. But I would agree that most of those in the military are as you describe. But I also think that is why they should be most dedicated to seeing the standard up held, as those who break it poorly reflect on all the others. This isn't fair, but largely true of all groups. I also have a problem with the soldier paying the price for the error of the leadership. That has happened far too often IMHO.
 
Boo Radley said:
I think what you say is mostly true. And most my problem is with civilian leadership and those who seek to excuse wrong behavior. But I would agree that most of those in the military are as you describe. But I also think that is why they should be most dedicated to seeing the standard up held, as those who break it poorly reflect on all the others. This isn't fair, but largely true of all groups. I also have a problem with the soldier paying the price for the error of the leadership. That has happened far too often IMHO.
Click to expand...



Yeah, there's the rub. Complain as we do about it, it is true that the military is supposed to be held to a higher standard. If we expect our diplomats to heed to customs and courtesies because they represent our nation (not the trailer bum) then we should expect our military to do the same as ambassadors. In other word, our civilians are supposed to criticize us.

And don't get me started on the failures of today's Generals. I'm not retired yet.
 
Last edited:
mac said:
Right. You're wrong. Hell, Venezuela and Canada alone account for 33% percent of the proven oil reserve.
Click to expand...

Most of the world's easily recoverable oil reserves are in the Middle East.

Of course, once the price gets high enough, then the tar sands, oil shale, etc will be profitable.

Meanwhile, we can generate no end of hot air ranting about how we just need to exploit our own resources and how the left wing is just keeping us from a certain prosperity and energy independence. Maybe we can tap some of that hot air, sort of like geothermal energy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom