Remember when Gulf War II started and it was a big deal when one or two of our guys died? *
Notice now that 16 guys died over the weekend, or maybe it was just during yesterday alone, and no big deal's being made of it?
I wonder if they're trying to treat it as a casual thing so when we've got 20 and 30 and 100 guys dying a day, since the announcers on radio and TV aren't getting excited about it, no one else will. **
------------------
* Our Guys means Americans of course
** "no one else will" = no other Americans will
PeakOil is You
Soldiers less valuable now
Soldiers less valuable now
by I_Like_Plants » Wed 03 Aug 2005, 19:04:43
- I_Like_Plants
- Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 3839
- Joined: Sun 12 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
- Location: 1st territorial capitol of AZ
by eastbay » Wed 03 Aug 2005, 19:17:36
Interesting also is occupation forces are killed at about the same rate as were Soviet soldiers during the Afghanistan occupation. Certainly the American press is reporting these deaths, but the reporting is more subdued lately.
Remember how the Western press had a field day gleefully reporting every Soviet KIA and every military success by The Taliban and others.
My how things change. But remain the same. It's all to defend the money.
Remember how the Western press had a field day gleefully reporting every Soviet KIA and every military success by The Taliban and others.
My how things change. But remain the same. It's all to defend the money.
-
eastbay - Expert
- Posts: 7186
- Joined: Sat 18 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
- Location: One Mile From the Columbia River
by cube » Wed 03 Aug 2005, 21:38:22
Americans don't like to be reminded that they're still in Iraq. In fact if Americans had their way, they'd wish they never heard of that country.
I remember some news agency (can't remember specific name) a couple years ago thought it would be a really bright idea to dispatch a news crew in Iraq permanently, so that way they can get the news right there on the spot. I guess that's suppose to lend them a little more credibility or whatever. Anyways it was a dismal failure. Nobody wanted to tune and listen.
I remember some news agency (can't remember specific name) a couple years ago thought it would be a really bright idea to dispatch a news crew in Iraq permanently, so that way they can get the news right there on the spot. I guess that's suppose to lend them a little more credibility or whatever. Anyways it was a dismal failure. Nobody wanted to tune and listen.
- cube
- Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 3909
- Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
by MicroHydro » Wed 03 Aug 2005, 22:00:10
Members of congress with kids in Iraq = zero
Network anchors or pundits with kids in Iraq = zero
Fortune 500 ceos with kids in Iraq = zero
What do you expect?
Network anchors or pundits with kids in Iraq = zero
Fortune 500 ceos with kids in Iraq = zero
What do you expect?
"The world is changed... I feel it in the water... I feel it in the earth... I smell it in the air... Much that once was, is lost..." - Galadriel
-
MicroHydro - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1242
- Joined: Sun 10 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
by EnemyCombatant » Wed 03 Aug 2005, 23:03:54
People should stop and think for a moment that these young men gave all they had. If they had families, their families will be changed forever. There is some kid out there who won't be able to go to a baseball game with his dad -- ever.
People should stop and think -- if it was worth it. I know the answer is horrifying, but the sooner we deal with it the better.
People should stop and think -- if it was worth it. I know the answer is horrifying, but the sooner we deal with it the better.
Now why didn't I take the blue pill.
-
EnemyCombatant - Tar Sands
- Posts: 854
- Joined: Wed 16 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
by FoxV » Wed 03 Aug 2005, 23:13:22
I love how Bush said in a confrence that the recent deaths "are a reminder that America is still at war"; As if those marines were killed while defending Bunker Hill.
I'm afraid that if you have to remind your citizens that you're still at war, then you're not really at war are you.
I think the people of the US don't want to hear about Iraq because its just too stupid to listen to.
I'm afraid that if you have to remind your citizens that you're still at war, then you're not really at war are you.
I think the people of the US don't want to hear about Iraq because its just too stupid to listen to.
Angry yet?
- FoxV
- Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1321
- Joined: Wed 02 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: Canada
by HonestPessimist » Wed 03 Aug 2005, 23:56:40
Over 3,000 Russian soldiers were killed in the Chechen Wars in 1994-1996 and 1999. (the Chechens disputed the Russian government, saying it was as high as 5,000 or 5,500 in both wars). The Russian war in Chechyna is never ending, as we speak.
Approximately 52,000 British & Commonwealth troops were killed during the British invasion and occupation of Iraq during and after World War I. Great Britain didn't leave Iraq until early 1930s.
The only reason you all are too concerned about the recent deaths of US troops is because the media is trying to sensationalizing you, making you more and more worried about what's going on over there. It's unfortunate that such soldiers died in combats, that's the price everyone in the military is expected to pay while serving in the military anywhere.
You all are just going to have to swallow the losses and accept the consequences of the way any military institution anywhere in the world have to accept and deal with. I personally do not know any of those soldiers and neither do you all but we can only express our condolences to the families of the soldiers and honor them nevertheless.
Screw the media and its sensationalizing attempts to screw up your perception of any risky military operation. Every soldier knew and accepted the consequences when they signed up in the first place.
Approximately 52,000 British & Commonwealth troops were killed during the British invasion and occupation of Iraq during and after World War I. Great Britain didn't leave Iraq until early 1930s.
The only reason you all are too concerned about the recent deaths of US troops is because the media is trying to sensationalizing you, making you more and more worried about what's going on over there. It's unfortunate that such soldiers died in combats, that's the price everyone in the military is expected to pay while serving in the military anywhere.
You all are just going to have to swallow the losses and accept the consequences of the way any military institution anywhere in the world have to accept and deal with. I personally do not know any of those soldiers and neither do you all but we can only express our condolences to the families of the soldiers and honor them nevertheless.
Screw the media and its sensationalizing attempts to screw up your perception of any risky military operation. Every soldier knew and accepted the consequences when they signed up in the first place.
-
HonestPessimist - Coal
- Posts: 404
- Joined: Fri 25 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
by EnemyCombatant » Thu 04 Aug 2005, 00:10:28
We should never send them in harm's way unless
ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.
This is the travesty.
When these boys signed up, they signed up to protect our country. Not to be hired guns for Halliburton.
This is why we need to meditate on this. Are their lives worth it?
ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.
This is the travesty.
When these boys signed up, they signed up to protect our country. Not to be hired guns for Halliburton.
This is why we need to meditate on this. Are their lives worth it?
Now why didn't I take the blue pill.
-
EnemyCombatant - Tar Sands
- Posts: 854
- Joined: Wed 16 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
by seahorse » Thu 04 Aug 2005, 01:32:41
Honestpessimist?
Can death ever be oversensationalized? How can the press oversensationalize the death of anyone, especially in war? War is death, and the value of pursuing any war has to be measured by its ultimate cost, which is the amount of death it takes to pursue it, to justify it,to attain the victory. How is it we look back at other wars, or battles, like the Battle of the Somme, and think how ridiculous is was to waste all those lives. How is it okay to measure the past by weighing the human cost and yet that same measure not be allowed here?
How, though, can death in any context be oversensationalized? Isn't "death" the ultimate question anyway? Do church's oversensationlize death by preaching hell?
But, I disagree with your position that the cost of the Iraqi war, as measured in death to either side, is being oversensationlized. In fact, the evidence is just the opposite - by not showing the photos of death, the war is being desationalized. Americans have no idea what the ramnifications of the war are, for they are not allowed to know. for example, its illegal to publish photos of the coffins coming home and Nightline gets crucified for listing the names of the dead. Our government is keeping the cost of the war from the people by desationalizing the aspect of death and human cost.
How could I ever agree with you that the war deaths are being over sensationlized if you don't tell me what it is we are pursuing? In the end, all things are measured by the goal. Every day, police make the decision to conduct or not conduct a high speed pursuit based on the risk to human life, how is war any different? All things are measured by the goal and the human costs to achieve that goal. So, tell me what the goal is in Iraq, so that I may then measure the cost of the war, and then, based on that cost, form an opinion as to whether that cost is justified.
After you tell me what the goal is, then tell me how many deaths on either side are acceptable. And, what degree of force is justified? Nukes?
If you believe that any amount of American deaths in pursuit of the goal is justified, then tell me why aren't we drafting? For surely, if a nation is justified in pursuing war, all people are called upon to make the sacrifice. A nation's pursuit of war can never be justified on the basis it has a volunteer army. The pursuit of war can never be justified that the goal of killing is justified bc we can pay people enough money to do it. People kill for lots of reasons unrelated to the cause of the war. People kill for money, anger, bc they like it, so don't attempt to justify a nation's pursuit of war based on the fact there are people signing up to fight and die. This is what the mafia does, pays hitmen. Is our country to be no better than a mafia hitman? If having enough money to pay people to kill for you is all the justification needed, then America, being the richest country in the world, needs no justification to wage war. War simply cannot be justified based a countries economic ability to wage the war, this does morality a great injustice. To justify the pursuit of war, the nation, as a whole, has to be comitted to fight and die for that cause, and this means willing to draft. War is nation's sacrifice, not a "mercenary" pursuit.
Its by desationalizing this war that we keep getting volunteers for it. By not allowing our people to see the true cost of the war, to both sides, we perpetuate the myth that this war is advancing the cause of freedom and justice. Its funny how people like Cheney, Bush, Wolfowitz, Rove, none of them fought when their generation had the chance in Vietnam. Funny how none of their kids are over there in Iraq right now. Funny how easy it is to justify a war when there is no personal risk involved.
But, those volunteers are over there right now, eating shitty MREs, sweating in level four flak jackets, and pulling guard tonight trying to survive, are doing so bc they believe that what they have volunteered to do somehow advances America's cause. Yet, if one of these brave young men or women dies, you accuse the press of oversensationalizing the death by talking about it. Where does your desensitizing stop? Should we quit putting flags on the coffins? Does playing taps oversensationalize the death? Maybe, we shouldn't even have funerals, maybe, in the picture perfect world, the bodies would just be left to dry in the desert, no funeral, no hype, no sensationalization of the death. No no no. We can't quit playing taps and putting flags on the coffins, because that's not sensationalizing, that's instilling and perpetuating patriotism - those things perpetuate the myth of the cause, so we have to keep them, to keep people volunteering. In the end, we get our "warriors" to fight and die, just like the jihadest, we desationalize the death and human cost and emphasize the honor in death part.
Your fallacy is that no one volunteers to die, death comes to all of us. Your fallacy lies in the fact you want to honor death to perpetuate the myth of the cause, yet never measure the cause against its costs.
The truth is, death in Iraq is not being sensationalized, bc those pictures of the six dead marines that you can only find on the internet after hard searching don't lie, but not showing the pictures of their dead bodies, and not showing their returning coffins, and only waiving the flag is the perpetuation of a myth, that this war is about "continuing the cause of freedom and justice." How though, do we advance the cause of freedom by killing the people we are trying to free? How do we free people that don't want to be free? How do we justify the bodies of the dead and maimed by anything that we have gained or hope to attain?
So, we continue to get volunteers for this war by desationalizing the death and human cost, we offer big bonues, and perpetuate a myth, that they are dying for their country, the great American jihad. In the end, they are volunteering to die for men like Cheney and Rove that never fought for anything except personal gain, and that's not worth dying for.
Can death ever be oversensationalized? How can the press oversensationalize the death of anyone, especially in war? War is death, and the value of pursuing any war has to be measured by its ultimate cost, which is the amount of death it takes to pursue it, to justify it,to attain the victory. How is it we look back at other wars, or battles, like the Battle of the Somme, and think how ridiculous is was to waste all those lives. How is it okay to measure the past by weighing the human cost and yet that same measure not be allowed here?
How, though, can death in any context be oversensationalized? Isn't "death" the ultimate question anyway? Do church's oversensationlize death by preaching hell?
But, I disagree with your position that the cost of the Iraqi war, as measured in death to either side, is being oversensationlized. In fact, the evidence is just the opposite - by not showing the photos of death, the war is being desationalized. Americans have no idea what the ramnifications of the war are, for they are not allowed to know. for example, its illegal to publish photos of the coffins coming home and Nightline gets crucified for listing the names of the dead. Our government is keeping the cost of the war from the people by desationalizing the aspect of death and human cost.
How could I ever agree with you that the war deaths are being over sensationlized if you don't tell me what it is we are pursuing? In the end, all things are measured by the goal. Every day, police make the decision to conduct or not conduct a high speed pursuit based on the risk to human life, how is war any different? All things are measured by the goal and the human costs to achieve that goal. So, tell me what the goal is in Iraq, so that I may then measure the cost of the war, and then, based on that cost, form an opinion as to whether that cost is justified.
After you tell me what the goal is, then tell me how many deaths on either side are acceptable. And, what degree of force is justified? Nukes?
If you believe that any amount of American deaths in pursuit of the goal is justified, then tell me why aren't we drafting? For surely, if a nation is justified in pursuing war, all people are called upon to make the sacrifice. A nation's pursuit of war can never be justified on the basis it has a volunteer army. The pursuit of war can never be justified that the goal of killing is justified bc we can pay people enough money to do it. People kill for lots of reasons unrelated to the cause of the war. People kill for money, anger, bc they like it, so don't attempt to justify a nation's pursuit of war based on the fact there are people signing up to fight and die. This is what the mafia does, pays hitmen. Is our country to be no better than a mafia hitman? If having enough money to pay people to kill for you is all the justification needed, then America, being the richest country in the world, needs no justification to wage war. War simply cannot be justified based a countries economic ability to wage the war, this does morality a great injustice. To justify the pursuit of war, the nation, as a whole, has to be comitted to fight and die for that cause, and this means willing to draft. War is nation's sacrifice, not a "mercenary" pursuit.
Its by desationalizing this war that we keep getting volunteers for it. By not allowing our people to see the true cost of the war, to both sides, we perpetuate the myth that this war is advancing the cause of freedom and justice. Its funny how people like Cheney, Bush, Wolfowitz, Rove, none of them fought when their generation had the chance in Vietnam. Funny how none of their kids are over there in Iraq right now. Funny how easy it is to justify a war when there is no personal risk involved.
But, those volunteers are over there right now, eating shitty MREs, sweating in level four flak jackets, and pulling guard tonight trying to survive, are doing so bc they believe that what they have volunteered to do somehow advances America's cause. Yet, if one of these brave young men or women dies, you accuse the press of oversensationalizing the death by talking about it. Where does your desensitizing stop? Should we quit putting flags on the coffins? Does playing taps oversensationalize the death? Maybe, we shouldn't even have funerals, maybe, in the picture perfect world, the bodies would just be left to dry in the desert, no funeral, no hype, no sensationalization of the death. No no no. We can't quit playing taps and putting flags on the coffins, because that's not sensationalizing, that's instilling and perpetuating patriotism - those things perpetuate the myth of the cause, so we have to keep them, to keep people volunteering. In the end, we get our "warriors" to fight and die, just like the jihadest, we desationalize the death and human cost and emphasize the honor in death part.
Your fallacy is that no one volunteers to die, death comes to all of us. Your fallacy lies in the fact you want to honor death to perpetuate the myth of the cause, yet never measure the cause against its costs.
The truth is, death in Iraq is not being sensationalized, bc those pictures of the six dead marines that you can only find on the internet after hard searching don't lie, but not showing the pictures of their dead bodies, and not showing their returning coffins, and only waiving the flag is the perpetuation of a myth, that this war is about "continuing the cause of freedom and justice." How though, do we advance the cause of freedom by killing the people we are trying to free? How do we free people that don't want to be free? How do we justify the bodies of the dead and maimed by anything that we have gained or hope to attain?
So, we continue to get volunteers for this war by desationalizing the death and human cost, we offer big bonues, and perpetuate a myth, that they are dying for their country, the great American jihad. In the end, they are volunteering to die for men like Cheney and Rove that never fought for anything except personal gain, and that's not worth dying for.
-
seahorse - Expert
- Posts: 2275
- Joined: Fri 15 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Arkansas
by No-Oil » Thu 04 Aug 2005, 07:20:32
Seahorse wrote "Can death ever be oversensationalized?"
YES, usually always when it involves an American. But remember that during Vietnam, more American's were shot dead at home than were killed in the "war". It's the same now, more American's are dying at home than in Iraq, thus if people see shooting deaths every evening on the news, what's a few more in some far off place no-one gives a sh!t about ?
They are soldiers right ! soldiers are supposed to die. But what effect does it have on me here in (insert your local in the USA) when I don't know them & don't really care. If the bombs were going off in your home town & killing your friends, then you'd have more compassion & much anger & rightly so.
The issue is that if you are a citizen of the USA, you should care. Your tax dollars permit this carnage. Your fuel costs drive this carnage. Your government was elected by YOUR VOTE. Thus you pay for it to happen, you were complicent in it & if it was a company or group of individuals at home, you would all be in court charged with murder &/or as accessories to murder. And that is just for your own soldiers, never mind the Iraqi's.
The deaths of US (& British) soldieers are "over sensationalised", every one is named & everyone given a proper burial etc. Why is it that every Iraqi is not named & we don't even know if they are given a proper burial !
Because YOU don't care, about them, even whilst claiming to liberate them. That's why the US forces have looted the Iraqi treasury, revoked Iraqi oil deals (all created legally) & failed to deliver practically any of the funding that you agreed to send to rebuild the country.
Mean while the US are building up a huge debt while their government cuts taxes to the most well off companies. The US citizen will pay for it later & I mean PAY cash, when they lose their jobs, their homes & their life at the hands of a vicious government. But hey they created the bed, just hope they are prepared to lie in it !!!!!!
YES, usually always when it involves an American. But remember that during Vietnam, more American's were shot dead at home than were killed in the "war". It's the same now, more American's are dying at home than in Iraq, thus if people see shooting deaths every evening on the news, what's a few more in some far off place no-one gives a sh!t about ?
They are soldiers right ! soldiers are supposed to die. But what effect does it have on me here in (insert your local in the USA) when I don't know them & don't really care. If the bombs were going off in your home town & killing your friends, then you'd have more compassion & much anger & rightly so.
The issue is that if you are a citizen of the USA, you should care. Your tax dollars permit this carnage. Your fuel costs drive this carnage. Your government was elected by YOUR VOTE. Thus you pay for it to happen, you were complicent in it & if it was a company or group of individuals at home, you would all be in court charged with murder &/or as accessories to murder. And that is just for your own soldiers, never mind the Iraqi's.
The deaths of US (& British) soldieers are "over sensationalised", every one is named & everyone given a proper burial etc. Why is it that every Iraqi is not named & we don't even know if they are given a proper burial !
Because YOU don't care, about them, even whilst claiming to liberate them. That's why the US forces have looted the Iraqi treasury, revoked Iraqi oil deals (all created legally) & failed to deliver practically any of the funding that you agreed to send to rebuild the country.
Mean while the US are building up a huge debt while their government cuts taxes to the most well off companies. The US citizen will pay for it later & I mean PAY cash, when they lose their jobs, their homes & their life at the hands of a vicious government. But hey they created the bed, just hope they are prepared to lie in it !!!!!!
The roller coaster is still climbing, but it's near the top now !
Where there's a WAR there's a WAY
Where there's a WAR there's a WAY
-
No-Oil - Lignite
- Posts: 241
- Joined: Fri 31 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
- Location: UK
by killJOY » Thu 04 Aug 2005, 07:39:50
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')onestpessimist?
Can death ever be oversensationalized?
Can death ever be oversensationalized?
Notice how those advocating belligerance are not over there themselves fighting.
First off, watch how our "president"--a coke-addict and chickenhawk in the 60s and 70s Vietnam era--actually gives the finger to the press in this video:
http://www.nobeliefs.com/politics/BushFlip.mov
This is the son of a bitch who yelled 'Bring em on'! Same fucker who claims to follow the religion of jesus. He is a child.
Then there's the issue of "sensationalizing" war dead. How many are really dead AS A RESULT OF the war in Iraq? The media reports numbers of those "killed in Iraq." How many died en route to hospitals? How many died later at home? Could it be, as reported here, over 7,000? I don't know, but the "media" certainly isn't on this story:
http://www.tbrnews.org/Archives/a1741.htm
Peak oil = comet Kohoutek.
-
killJOY - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2220
- Joined: Mon 21 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: ^NNE^
by BabyPeanut » Thu 04 Aug 2005, 09:36:09
Soldiers? How Passe.
http://www.foster-miller.com/lemming.htm
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')img]http://www.foster-miller.com/images/pages/pic_products_talon_lg.jpg[/img]
http://www.foster-miller.com/lemming.htm
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')img]http://www.foster-miller.com/images/pages/pic_products_talon_lg.jpg[/img]
- BabyPeanut
- Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 3275
- Joined: Tue 17 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: 39° 39' N 77° 77' W or thereabouts
by seahorse » Thu 04 Aug 2005, 10:42:39
No-oil,
I think we are saying the same thing. In America, we don't see the death that the war is bringing. We don't see pictures of the dead from either side. Therefore, to say that soldier deaths are being "oversensationalized" is not correct. Its my belief that America learned from Vietnam that if the public sees the death and carnage that war brings, the war can quickly lose public support. In this war, like the first Gulf War, there are strict controls on the press. Therefore, the average American does not see the war carnage on the t.v. at night. Keeping the public ignorant is by design, similar to what happened in WWII. They don't want to lose public support, and they want people to volunteer to fight. Allowing the press to report what's going on, on nightly t.v., would quickly lose support for the war and bring recruiting to a halt, at least this is the fear, and problably a legitimate fear. Therefore, our Administration and its supporters argue against talking of the dead by saying, to do so, is only "oversensationalizing the death."
Do soldiers know they will die? Absolutely, I was one at one time. However, soldiers, volunteer or not, can and should fight and die for moral purposes, for just causes. Only an informed public can make that decision, and by continuing this argument that the war carnage is somehow being "oversensationalized" only keeps this war going.
Now, if you want to bring this war to a quick halt, focus on the dead American soldiers/marines- show the pictures of their broken limbs, mangled and burned bodies. Because, as you know, America fights with a volunteer military. If you stop the recruitment, you effectively stop the war.
I think we are saying the same thing. In America, we don't see the death that the war is bringing. We don't see pictures of the dead from either side. Therefore, to say that soldier deaths are being "oversensationalized" is not correct. Its my belief that America learned from Vietnam that if the public sees the death and carnage that war brings, the war can quickly lose public support. In this war, like the first Gulf War, there are strict controls on the press. Therefore, the average American does not see the war carnage on the t.v. at night. Keeping the public ignorant is by design, similar to what happened in WWII. They don't want to lose public support, and they want people to volunteer to fight. Allowing the press to report what's going on, on nightly t.v., would quickly lose support for the war and bring recruiting to a halt, at least this is the fear, and problably a legitimate fear. Therefore, our Administration and its supporters argue against talking of the dead by saying, to do so, is only "oversensationalizing the death."
Do soldiers know they will die? Absolutely, I was one at one time. However, soldiers, volunteer or not, can and should fight and die for moral purposes, for just causes. Only an informed public can make that decision, and by continuing this argument that the war carnage is somehow being "oversensationalized" only keeps this war going.
Now, if you want to bring this war to a quick halt, focus on the dead American soldiers/marines- show the pictures of their broken limbs, mangled and burned bodies. Because, as you know, America fights with a volunteer military. If you stop the recruitment, you effectively stop the war.
-
seahorse - Expert
- Posts: 2275
- Joined: Fri 15 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Arkansas
by sdcoyote » Thu 04 Aug 2005, 11:11:30
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MicroHydro', 'M')embers of congress with kids in Iraq = zero
Network anchors or pundits with kids in Iraq = zero
Fortune 500 ceos with kids in Iraq = zero
What do you expect?
Network anchors or pundits with kids in Iraq = zero
Fortune 500 ceos with kids in Iraq = zero
What do you expect?
While I agree with the sentiment, it is not altogether true. Sen. Tim Johnson (D. South Dakota) has or had a son in Iraq.
-
sdcoyote - Peat
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Tue 24 May 2005, 03:00:00
soldiers are children somebody gave a gun to
by doufus » Thu 04 Aug 2005, 11:17:00
I've worked with men damaged by the asian experience and more recent conflicts. It's interesting to see them at 50-60 and also at 19 or 20.
The latter are mostly children expecting a game of adventure.
Exciting, until as one said to me "...and then it got real".
No-one told them a 3 yr old would play with a mortar fuse. Karump
and the squad is trying to push the kid's intestines back in while the rest
are on the ground wondering if they're under attack. Children screaming,
women screaming, men crying, dust and guts. Tthe safetys are off and one move and somebody else dies.
I know men who see a tunnel every day of their lives. They don't
know what happened in that tunnel with their pistol and torch.
Every ounce of energy is spent keeping that knowledge from themselves.
But it leaks. Mostly at night, but often in the day.
I see those 19 yr olds and know they'll be those 50 yr olds one day.
So I feel sorry for the young men dying in Iraq for their adventure
and their notions of duty and patriotism. But let's face it, we rely on
the innocence of boys and the stupidity of old men to perpetuate
wars. And i feel sorry for the people of iraq as well.
America will have another generation of boys scouts who come
home with hypervigilance, sleep disorders, rage, flashbacks,
PTSD and depression. As they punch the living f**k out of their
wives and kids or retreat into alcohol and drugs, unemployment
and suicide you can be assured that the casualty list will grow long,
long after the last shot is fired in Iraq.
And all for Disneyland.
The latter are mostly children expecting a game of adventure.
Exciting, until as one said to me "...and then it got real".
No-one told them a 3 yr old would play with a mortar fuse. Karump
and the squad is trying to push the kid's intestines back in while the rest
are on the ground wondering if they're under attack. Children screaming,
women screaming, men crying, dust and guts. Tthe safetys are off and one move and somebody else dies.
I know men who see a tunnel every day of their lives. They don't
know what happened in that tunnel with their pistol and torch.
Every ounce of energy is spent keeping that knowledge from themselves.
But it leaks. Mostly at night, but often in the day.
I see those 19 yr olds and know they'll be those 50 yr olds one day.
So I feel sorry for the young men dying in Iraq for their adventure
and their notions of duty and patriotism. But let's face it, we rely on
the innocence of boys and the stupidity of old men to perpetuate
wars. And i feel sorry for the people of iraq as well.
America will have another generation of boys scouts who come
home with hypervigilance, sleep disorders, rage, flashbacks,
PTSD and depression. As they punch the living f**k out of their
wives and kids or retreat into alcohol and drugs, unemployment
and suicide you can be assured that the casualty list will grow long,
long after the last shot is fired in Iraq.
And all for Disneyland.
-
doufus - Lignite
- Posts: 202
- Joined: Tue 02 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
by Dukat_Reloaded » Thu 04 Aug 2005, 13:05:47
HAHA, thats a funny one KillJOY
Here's a video of your president about to say the truth but then changed his mind
Bush Video
Here's a video of your president about to say the truth but then changed his mind
Bush Video
-
Dukat_Reloaded - Tar Sands
- Posts: 953
- Joined: Sun 31 Jul 2005, 03:00:00
by EnemyCombatant » Thu 04 Aug 2005, 13:15:25
Just shut the fuck up and put a support the troops bumper sticker on your car.
Now why didn't I take the blue pill.
-
EnemyCombatant - Tar Sands
- Posts: 854
- Joined: Wed 16 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
by EnemyCombatant » Thu 04 Aug 2005, 13:21:37
Correct me if I am wrong.
But it is FACT that you have to die INSIDE of Iraq in order to be counted in the casualties reported by the pentagon.
So much for oversensationalism.
But it is FACT that you have to die INSIDE of Iraq in order to be counted in the casualties reported by the pentagon.
So much for oversensationalism.
Now why didn't I take the blue pill.
-
EnemyCombatant - Tar Sands
- Posts: 854
- Joined: Wed 16 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
by Waterthrush » Thu 04 Aug 2005, 14:59:49
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BabyPeanut', 'S')oldiers? How Passe.
http://www.foster-miller.com/lemming.htm
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')img]http://www.foster-miller.com/images/pages/pic_products_talon_lg.jpg[/img]
http://www.foster-miller.com/lemming.htm
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')img]http://www.foster-miller.com/images/pages/pic_products_talon_lg.jpg[/img]
What a world. But, what got me, is the phrase that these robots are "man-portable." I thought the robots were supposed to be carrying US! Although the lemming part of the address makes me suspect the website is a hoax.
Regarding the "oversensationalization." Perhaps the deaths are oversensationalized, but that may be because the glaring failure of the Bush administration to achieve anything in Iraq isn't getting much traction. The money is lost to us forever, Iraq is in pieces, and Bush is signalling he will withdraw under pretty much any circumstances. The US is seriously weakened economically and militarily. And this is what the soldiers have died for? It is scandalous, it is infuriating. But the US has basically been fought to a standstill in Iraq, and with the ensuing withdrawal, which is going to take place under almost any circumstances, means that all the lives, all the money, all the damage to Iraq, all the damage to the US - well, if Bush can portray this as some kind of victory, I'll give up on my fellow citizens. They really will have entered the world of 1984.
- Waterthrush
- Lignite
- Posts: 236
- Joined: Fri 03 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
- Location: New Jersey