Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 201
  1. tirk's Avatar
    Posts
    810 Posts
    Global Posts
    918 Global Posts
       #141  
    Quote Originally Posted by lifes2short View Post
    Those who served and believe they are judgmentally owed something don't understand what service means.
    What does "service" mean, and is it always a positive thing? What about the patriotic Germans and Japanese who "served their country" in WW2? Should they be respected for their duty, or condemned for fighting an unjust and illegal war?
    PalmPilot Professional...Palm Vx...Treo 600...Treo 680...HTC Touch HD...iPhone 4S...
  2. #142  
    Quote Originally Posted by tirk View Post
    What does "service" mean, and is it always a positive thing? What about the patriotic Germans and Japanese who "served their country" in WW2? Should they be respected for their duty, or condemned for fighting an unjust and illegal war?
    if I somehow learned that my german father participated in massacres of civilians, and the murder of Jews, I would feel compelled to probably shun him.

    Were he an ordinary soldier, following normal commands, doing what he had then believed to be honorable labor, I would respect HIM -- even though the cause on whose behalf he fought, was shown to be dishonorable
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  3. tirk's Avatar
    Posts
    810 Posts
    Global Posts
    918 Global Posts
       #143  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    if I somehow learned that my german father participated in massacres of civilians, and the murder of Jews, I would feel compelled to probably shun him.
    Richard Nixon apparently thought otherwise. As a result of his intervention William Calley served less than 4 years under house arrest, rather than the 20 year sentence he was originally given for his part in My Lai.

    Were he an ordinary soldier, following normal commands, doing what he had then believed to be honorable labor, I would respect HIM -- even though the cause on whose behalf he fought, was shown to be dishonorable
    I disagree. If you use or threaten to use deadly force you have to be sure that it is both legally and morally justifiable. "Just following orders" is not enough.
    PalmPilot Professional...Palm Vx...Treo 600...Treo 680...HTC Touch HD...iPhone 4S...
  4. #144  
    Quote Originally Posted by tirk View Post
    What does "service" mean, and is it always a positive thing? What about the patriotic Germans and Japanese who "served their country" in WW2? Should they be respected for their duty, or condemned for fighting an unjust and illegal war?
    It should be obvious that my clarification of the use of the term 'service' is serving the general population's physical security needs, which goes beyond implications of 'just following orders' within the context of an extraordinary Millosovich-type ruler. The same distinction is used in respecting the troops, themselves, and despising the policies which placed them into harm's way.

    I've said once previously that I would welcome our military finding its spine and telling this administration 'No More!' for the abusive mistreatment it has received. However, I also acknowledge that this will not happen in our world. Those films which have depicted moral outrage, indignation, and the willingness to take morally correct actions by military leadership in the field, despite the direction given it by Pentagon or White House are unfortunately unrealistic.
    Last edited by lifes2short; 09/25/2007 at 04:13 PM.
  5. #145  
    Well here is where the "fog of war" has applicability. Nobody should tolerate and advocate more My Lai villages or war crimes of any sort. You're taught as a soldier to adhere to the Geneva convention and given examples of what are lawful orders vs. unlawful orders. But when you're in combat you're also in an ecosphere unlike any other. You're trying to survive, help your buddies survive, and compete your mission. Within the realms of this reality you have to make decisions and they are not always black and white. Let me give you an example:

    A sniper is sent to the top of a hill to disrupt enemy supply channels into a valley below. Your fellow combatants are down in that valley as well so you know that if you fail to disrupt the supply lines that more of your buddies will die since the enemy will have a fresh supply of ammunitions. Suddenly a bicycle pops up on the horizon on the hill across from you and it is loaded with supplies for the enemy below. Your heart races as you realizes you have only a minute or two to take out this bicyclist or more of your friends may die. You set your sights on the bicycle and just as the target comes into focus in your scope you realize something awful - the bicycle rider is a 12 year old boy! What do you do? Do you take him out knowing your friends will die if you don't? Do you kill a young man you has made an awful decision to help the enemy, but is a boy nonetheless? I won't tell you how the story ends. I'll only tell you that I understand what "the fog of war" is.

    The bottom line is that the soldier in the field cannot always be blamed for the situation and mission that has been thrust upon them. I suppose in an all volunteer army you could ask why anyone would volunteer to put themselves in that position - albeit if they were drafted they may not have had that choice - but supposedly those days are gone. Now if a soldier murders civilians, rapes them, tortures them, etc. then they should be held accountable IMO. But I have trouble blaming our troops for participating in this war that was started by their Commander and Chief.
  6. #146  
    Quote Originally Posted by lifes2short View Post
    As many as passed over land in FL during my first 25+ years of adult life, ending with a small Cat-1 storm which kissed the FL west coast back in '97, including every tropical depression and tropical storm which flooded the state. In other words, I lost count a long, long time ago.
    Well, at least we may have some common ground to build from. How many of those smaller than a Category 3 received national coverage?
    I'm no expert on canals, but is there any major difference, where storm surge management is concerned, in those built in New Orleans and those built on the FL west coast?
    Quite huge. How much coast land has Florida lost over the last 30 years?
    Disagree though they may, they are not in the same league as New Orleans on economic scales.
    From what perspective?
    No, but you certainly inferred that their motivation was purely opportunism. ["The only reason that Katrina got the national coverage it did was that the media saw it as a ratings opportunity"]
    That's because I think their motivation was purely opportunism. There has never traditionally been much concern about the issues of the coast before. If the interest was in actually doing something about the problem, there have been opportunities for a long time. Fixing problems before they occur doesn't make the news, though. Human suffering sells much better.
    Fair enough, but I would say that by the very definition of opportunism, one party's plate was just a bit more full than the other where the price of dignity was concerned.
    I <3 false dichotomies.
    I said nothing of you supporting Bush, but did point out the overuse of a phrase which is used by his supporters/defenders.
    Oh come now. You clearly implied it.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  7. #147  
    [QUOTE=mikec;1349230]Not oversimplifying, just cutting throught the bullshyte.[QUOTE/]
    Or perpetuating it.
    They had the info, but decided to posture (or cry like a baby) instead of be a real leader.
    Oh come now. Like Bush was a real leader through this thing. He's cut from the same cloth. He could have risked something and deployed before the governor requested it, but he just played the game and let her twist in the wind.
    They lucked out, because Brown was a political lieghtweight who didn't realize shytestorms flow uphill to the biggest media target.
    The hiring of that political lightweight is one thing that Bush cannot avoid being villified for.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  8. #148  
    Quote Originally Posted by lifes2short View Post
    Those who served and believe they are judgmentally owed something don't understand what service means.



    So much for holding out hope that you could find the high road to take. Try using GPS next time since your moral compass is on the fritz.
    "owed" somthing? Not sure where you get that idea. Maybe someone on your side is bitter?

    My moral compass is fine; you focus on yourself and your issues.
  9. #149  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    if I somehow learned that my german father participated in massacres of civilians, and the murder of Jews, I would feel compelled to probably shun him.

    Were he an ordinary soldier, following normal commands, doing what he had then believed to be honorable labor, I would respect HIM -- even though the cause on whose behalf he fought, was shown to be dishonorable
    This reminds me of the old joke you tell at parties.

    "My grandfather was killed in WWII at a concentration camp."

    (Audience sympathetically goes "Awwww, that's a shame.)

    "Yea, he fell out of a guard tower."

    Await the stunned response...if you can tell if with a straight face.
  10. #150  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    Well here is where the "fog of war" has applicability. Nobody should tolerate and advocate more My Lai villages or war crimes of any sort. You're taught as a soldier to adhere to the Geneva convention and given examples of what are lawful orders vs. unlawful orders. But when you're in combat you're also in an ecosphere unlike any other. You're trying to survive, help your buddies survive, and compete your mission. Within the realms of this reality you have to make decisions and they are not always black and white. Let me give you an example:

    A sniper is sent to the top of a hill to disrupt enemy supply channels into a valley below. Your fellow combatants are down in that valley as well so you know that if you fail to disrupt the supply lines that more of your buddies will die since the enemy will have a fresh supply of ammunitions. Suddenly a bicycle pops up on the horizon on the hill across from you and it is loaded with supplies for the enemy below. Your heart races as you realizes you have only a minute or two to take out this bicyclist or more of your friends may die. You set your sights on the bicycle and just as the target comes into focus in your scope you realize something awful - the bicycle rider is a 12 year old boy! What do you do? Do you take him out knowing your friends will die if you don't? Do you kill a young man you has made an awful decision to help the enemy, but is a boy nonetheless? I won't tell you how the story ends. I'll only tell you that I understand what "the fog of war" is.

    The bottom line is that the soldier in the field cannot always be blamed for the situation and mission that has been thrust upon them. I suppose in an all volunteer army you could ask why anyone would volunteer to put themselves in that position - albeit if they were drafted they may not have had that choice - but supposedly those days are gone. Now if a soldier murders civilians, rapes them, tortures them, etc. then they should be held accountable IMO. But I have trouble blaming our troops for participating in this war that was started by their Commander and Chief.
    This is a non-decision. You do your duty and pull the trigger. It's too bad that 12 year boy is carrying munitions. If you can look your friend's loved one in the eye and tell them you could have saved them but chose not to, well, I suppose the read answer if for you to eat a bullet and take yourself out fo the (unfair) game of life.


    Note - this is not the same as spray firing civilians or raping and pilaging.
  11. #151  
    [QUOTE=Toby;1350763]
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec View Post
    Not oversimplifying, just cutting throught the bullshyte.[QUOTE/]
    Or perpetuating it.

    Oh come now. Like Bush was a real leader through this thing. He's cut from the same cloth. He could have risked something and deployed before the governor requested it, but he just played the game and let her twist in the wind.

    The hiring of that political lightweight is one thing that Bush cannot avoid being villified for.
    So this is all "Bush's fault". GMAFB.

    Ray Naggin crying like a baby on the radio, instead of being a leader.

    That worthless govenor waiting before allowing Federal help.

    The New Orleans cops looting the city and abondoning citizens.

    Didn't see that in Missisippi or other states.

    You see what people are made of when the shyte hits the fan. Now we all know what that area is made of.
  12. #152  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec View Post
    So this is all "Bush's fault". GMAFB.
    *sigh* No. Try reading for comprehension.
    Ray Naggin crying like a baby on the radio, instead of being a leader.
    Ray wasn't crying much on the radio. He cussed up a storm once, though. Maybe you're confusing him with Aaron Broussard crying on MSNBC.
    That worthless govenor waiting before allowing Federal help.
    You see, the problem with criticizing Mee-maw for incompetence is that you must then acknowledge cold indifference on the part of federal authorities.
    The New Orleans cops looting the city and abondoning citizens.
    Where you there? What do you know of it other than what you saw on the evening news?
    Didn't see that in Missisippi or other states.
    Because it didn't happen, or because it wasn't considered a story?
    You see what people are made of when the shyte hits the fan. Now we all know what that area is made of.
    It's made of people, like everywhere else.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  13. #153  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Well, at least we may have some common ground to build from. How many of those smaller than a Category 3 received national coverage?
    Since Andrew, just about any storm at tropical depression or higher which is aimed for FL gets national attention. Just a token mention totaling a 15-second blurb, but it gets mentioned at the national level during hurricane season. This is not my field of professional expertise, so I can't supply you with hard numbers.

    Quite huge. How much coast land has Florida lost over the last 30 years?
    Can't tell you and it wouldn't matter if I could since the causes of land loss are multiple, unassociated with storms.

    From what perspective?
    On a national level. As a percentage of their own economies, I'm certain Biloxi and Gulfport suffered greatly due to Katrina.

    That's because I think their motivation was purely opportunism. There has never traditionally been much concern about the issues of the coast before. If the interest was in actually doing something about the problem, there have been opportunities for a long time. Fixing problems before they occur doesn't make the news, though. Human suffering sells much better.
    Was Katrina (including the aftermath) a catastrophe, in your opinion? Why would national media want to cover what amounts to engineering reports and building efforts if not part of follow-up to catastrophe? Local/Regional media has a vested interest in coverage because its viewers have a vested interest.

    I<3 false dichotomies.
    No false dichotomy. Values are matters of shades of grey in most areas which reflects what was 'piled' onto each party's respective plate. A judgment call.

    Oh come now. You clearly implied it.
    I'm pretty much a literalist. If I had wanted to imply any support for Bush on your part, I would've said so explicitely. My focus was solely on your words used and nothing more.
  14. #154  
    Quote Originally Posted by mikec View Post
    "owed" somthing? Not sure where you get that idea. Maybe someone on your side is bitter?
    Are you really expecting to be taken seriously when you give your familiar example of "As my uncle used to say when he saw/met a moron, "I took 3 bullets for that turd?" And it cracked us all up every time" ?

    My moral compass is fine; you focus on yourself and your issues.
    See above.
  15. #155  
    Quote Originally Posted by lifes2short View Post
    Are you really expecting to be taken seriously when you give your familiar example of "As my uncle used to say when he saw/met a moron, "I took 3 bullets for that turd?" And it cracked us all up every time" ?



    See above.
    Your sense of humor appears ot be lost. (or maybe Bush stole it?)

    Your righteous indignation is amusing.
  16. #156  
    Hey Mike, you seem to know a lot about the military. It makes me wonder what was your personal experience with it and if you had any what was your MOS?
  17. #157  
    Quote Originally Posted by lifes2short View Post
    Since Andrew, just about any storm at tropical depression or higher which is aimed for FL gets national attention. Just a token mention totaling a 15-second blurb, but it gets mentioned at the national level during hurricane season.
    For a literalist, you seem to pick and choose what you interpret literally. Getting mentioned at the national level is clearly not what's being discussed.
    This is not my field of professional expertise, so I can't supply you with hard numbers.
    That's OK. I think I understand.
    Can't tell you and it wouldn't matter if I could since the causes of land loss are multiple, unassociated with storms.
    Therein lies the rub. The land loss in Louisiana has _everything_ to do with storms and their effects.
    On a national level. As a percentage of their own economies, I'm certain Biloxi and Gulfport suffered greatly due to Katrina.
    Are you suggesting the areas affected by Katrina have had a greater impact on the national economy? Or are you just saying that theoretically they could have?
    Was Katrina (including the aftermath) a catastrophe, in your opinion?
    The true catastrophe of Katrina was not the storm.
    Why would national media want to cover what amounts to engineering reports and building efforts if not part of follow-up to catastrophe?
    Indeed.
    Local/Regional media has a vested interest in coverage because its viewers have a vested interest.
    Sure. That was pretty much the point.
    No false dichotomy.
    You can't have your cake and eat it too.
    Values are matters of shades of grey in most areas which reflects what was 'piled' onto each party's respective plate. A judgment call.
    So, I can't have an opinion or perspective which does not toe one of the two largest national US political party's lines?
    I'm pretty much a literalist. If I had wanted to imply any support for Bush on your part, I would've said so explicitely. My focus was solely on your words used and nothing more.
    Then what brought up the freedom fries comment?
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  18. #158  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    For a literalist, you seem to pick and choose what you interpret literally. Getting mentioned at the national level is clearly not what's being discussed.
    My response was in reply to your question: "How many of those smaller than a Category 3 received national coverage"? My own words can be taken as coming from a literalist, as I have no need to pick and chose how literal my own words are.

    Therein lies the rub. The land loss in Louisiana has _everything_ to do with storms and their effects.
    Solely? Development has never contributed to land loss? Natural erosion?

    Are you suggesting the areas affected by Katrina have had a greater impact on the national economy? Or are you just saying that theoretically they could have?
    Neither. I drew a contrast between the geographic areas in discussion.

    The true catastrophe of Katrina was not the storm.
    Not an answer.

    Sure. That was pretty much the point.
    Your point was to state clearly that National media was purely exploiting the circumstances of human suffering in New Orleans.

    You can't have your cake and eat it too.
    I'm not trying to, though your attempts haven't been half-bad.

    So, I can't have an opinion or perspective which does not toe one of the two largest national US political party's lines?
    No one is attempting to disuade you.

    Then what brought up the freedom fries comment?
    Go back to the original statement and hindsight may become 20/20.
  19. #159  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    ...
    Therein lies the rub. The land loss in Louisiana has _everything_ to do with storms and their effects.
    ...
    has the dredging of navigation channels for barges and oil exploitation had no effect on the delta ??

    What about the destruction of wetlands that had historically provided a bumper to hurricanes ?? Has that made the coast vulnerable to storm damage ??
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  20. #160  
    Quote Originally Posted by lifes2short View Post
    My response was in reply to your question: "How many of those smaller than a Category 3 received national coverage"? My own words can be taken as coming from a literalist, as I have no need to pick and chose how literal my own words are.
    So, you're saying that you cannot read for context.
    Solely?
    This question doesn't make any sense to me.
    Development has never contributed to land loss? Natural erosion?
    You're getting it exactly backwards it seems.
    Neither. I drew a contrast between the geographic areas in discussion.
    But your contrast means little in the vacuum of a single sentence.
    Not an answer.
    And yet so much more than an answer.
    Your point was to state clearly that National media was purely exploiting the circumstances of human suffering in New Orleans.
    OK.
    I'm not trying to, though your attempts haven't been half-bad.
    You're obviously too smart for me.
    No one is attempting to disuade you.
    So did you switch your context with the word 'party'?
    Go back to the original statement and hindsight may become 20/20.
    The only hindsight I'm having at the moment is that you're a very difficult person to have a conversation with.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions