August 19, 2022, 11:10:27 am

New
Site design:

A lot of new content added.

Check the home page.


New!
Thanatopsis "Requiem" Available now.


Studio Videos

Live in studio performances

Viet Nam all over again??

Started by gkg, July 21, 2006, 11:11:36 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

gkg

Peace.

image = <i>"Blue Velvet"</i> (front of 2-sided piece) (c) georgia k griffin - all rights reserved

buswolley

"they were under orders to "kill all military age males," according to sworn statements obtained by The Associated Press." - This concerns me more than anything else in the article.  Who knows what really happened, for the sake of all the lives involved, soldier and citizen, I hope they come to the truth.  But to think that our soldiers are encouraged to "kill all military age males" is sickening.  

gkg

yup - that\'s exactly the part that gave me the sickening deja vu.
Peace.

image = <i>"Blue Velvet"</i> (front of 2-sided piece) (c) georgia k griffin - all rights reserved

sedagive

Quote"they were under orders to "kill all military age males," according to sworn statements obtained by The Associated Press." - This concerns me more than anything else in the article.  Who knows what really happened, for the sake of all the lives involved, soldier and citizen, I hope they come to the truth.  But to think that our soldiers are encouraged to "kill all military age males" is sickening.  

The commanding officer that was accused of giving this order flatly denies it. I am very skeptical of initial reports from any news organization. We will find out the truth of what happened, and if it turns out to be criminal those responsible will be held to account. No doubt the military has its bad apples, what bothers me though, is that for every accusation of a crime commited by someone in the U.S. military there are undoubtedly thousands of acts of heroism. I\'ve yet to hear even one, reported by the "objective media." Rape and murder are the worst of all crimes, and any rational person knows it is not the norm, for the U.S. military.
  
Having said all of that, it is unimaginable to me, what it would be like to be living in hell under the rule of saddam, only to be raped and murdered by someone that was sent there to save you. What could be worse?



gkg

the only thing i can think of to rival it would be losing your child to a war that was brought about by egotism, hubris and greed.

i have seen several \'feel good\' stories done about good soldiers working hard to make a difference, and i don\'t envy them their task at all.

that said, if someone gave that order they would be sure to deny it, no?  its going to take a full investigation i am sure, before we have a clue what happened in this and other incidents, but since they at first denied all the atrocities of Viet Nam and more recently things like Abu Ghraib, denials mean nothing.
Peace.

image = <i>"Blue Velvet"</i> (front of 2-sided piece) (c) georgia k griffin - all rights reserved

buswolley

I read an article recently I believe it was in Time Magazine that stated, and I am paraphrasing here, that the psychology of war has proven time and time again (war after war) that most crimes that are committed during war times are a direct result of a leader encouraging, directly or indirectly, the inappropriate behavior essentially creating a mob like atmosphere.  

I agree it would be nice to hear some more positive stories and not just handing out candy bars.

I watched a television program several years ago that claimed Iraq may have been better off under Saddam's rule.  Woman were not as objectified, children were getting a western school education, and they did not have as much religious turmoil as they do now, but all this was a direct result of the fact that if you didn't do it Saddam's way he killed you, besides that one little problem...

While all our heads have been turned to Israel, Iraq is currently on the brink of complete melt down.  When will we ever learn?  It makes me wonder if we had gone after Bin Lauden and won on that battle front wouldn't that have sent a stronger message to terrorist?  And in hind sight perhaps Israel, Iran, Iraq, Hizballah, Hamas, etc., etc. may all now be playing a little nicer.

sedagive

August 10, 2006, 05:23:42 am #6 Last Edit: August 10, 2006, 05:24:55 am by sedagive
QuoteI read an article recently I believe it was in Time Magazine that stated, and I am paraphrasing here, that the psychology of war has proven time and time again (war after war) that most crimes that are committed during war times are a direct result of a leader encouraging, directly or indirectly, the inappropriate behavior essentially creating a mob like atmosphere.  

I agree it would be nice to hear some more positive stories and not just handing out candy bars.

I watched a television program several years ago that claimed Iraq may have been better off under Saddam's rule.  Woman were not as objectified, children were getting a western school education, and they did not have as much religious turmoil as they do now, but all this was a direct result of the fact that if you didn't do it Saddam's way he killed you, besides that one little problem...

While all our heads have been turned to Israel, Iraq is currently on the brink of complete melt down.  When will we ever learn?  It makes me wonder if we had gone after Bin Lauden and won on that battle front wouldn't that have sent a stronger message to terrorist?  And in hind sight perhaps Israel, Iran, Iraq, Hizballah, Hamas, etc., etc. may all now be playing a little nicer.


Ok several things. It is not going well in Iraq right now, but sadam and his sons were responsible for state sponsered rape, torture and murder. Mass graves were uncovered recently, and I have heard different #s but between 100,000 to 300,000 bodies. sadam made desert out of the wetlands in the south forcing 10s of 1000s to become refugees in Iran. Here women are objectified, there they are livestock (have you ever heard of female genital mutilation?). I could go on and on. I hope there isn\'t a total meltdown, but what you don\'t see is that most of that country is getting on with life, there are thousands fighting and killing in a few cities but there are millions nowhere near the violence. I don\'t want to paint a rosey picture but sometimes you need perspective. I have these arguements with friends of mine and it makes me feel bad that some of them always believe the worst case scenario to be true.

Not getting Bin Laden is a shame but the terrorists won\'t stop until they are dead. Hezballah and Hamas are terrorist organizations that unfortunately have been given legitimacy by becoming members of government. This is what appeasement gets you. Iran supports terrorism financially more so than sadam did. They will never play nice. their goal is to kill you and me and the Jews and......could you imagine if everyone on your block was planning to kill you and making it known thats their plan. How would you react? blah blah am I still typing?

gkg

that\'s a long stream of over simplicification and rationalization that i cannot subscribe to.  war is not the solution to any of the issues you\'ve skimmed over.  it is doing nothing to resolve any of the issues and it is simply serving to keep the public in those places beholden to one faction or another; and making a small group of people very wealthy.
Peace.

image = <i>"Blue Velvet"</i> (front of 2-sided piece) (c) georgia k griffin - all rights reserved

sedagive

August 11, 2006, 04:18:38 am #8 Last Edit: August 11, 2006, 04:19:44 am by sedagive
Quotethat\'s a long stream of over simplicification and rationalization that i cannot subscribe to.  war is not the solution to any of the issues you\'ve skimmed over.  it is doing nothing to resolve any of the issues and it is simply serving to keep the public in those places beholden to one faction or another; and making a small group of people very wealthy.
I\'m not asking you to subscribe to anything, over simplification is saying that war isn\'t the answer to any of the problems. What are the solutions you would seek to solve the problems? What did I say that was over simplified? I gave some very relevant pespective to the entire picture. Who is getting wealthy?

gkg

you need to do some serious reading...

how on earth anyone can think that war is a solution is beyond me.  the solutions are actual dialogues and learning to compromise.  the solutions are geniune diplomacy efforts rather than the nonsense that has been going on.  i\'m sorry but you seem to want me to concede something or come over to your way of thinking or else \'prove\' my way is right - self examination of your own line of thought and what solutions lie within your suggestions would be more fruitful for you.
Peace.

image = <i>"Blue Velvet"</i> (front of 2-sided piece) (c) georgia k griffin - all rights reserved

sedagive

Quoteyou need to do some serious reading...

how on earth anyone can think that war is a solution is beyond me.  the solutions are actual dialogues and learning to compromise.  the solutions are geniune diplomacy efforts rather than the nonsense that has been going on.  i\'m sorry but you seem to want me to concede something or come over to your way of thinking or else \'prove\' my way is right - self examination of your own line of thought and what solutions lie within your suggestions would be more fruitful for you.

Hmmm. Lets see.  Diplomacy with Hitler led to the slaughter of millions of Jews.  WWII was necessary to defeat him and free Europe.  We were attacked by the Japanese at pearl harbor, WWII was necessary to defeat them now they are very close allies.  War sucks, but it has always been and always will be a part of human behavior.

A dialogue with terrorists is absurd. The Islamic terrorists want nothing short of our complete demise, they state that frequently. Dialogues and diplomacy aren\'t getting us very far with Iran, its just buying time for them to keep moving toward the building of nuclear weapons. All the talk is a joke to them, their president openly advocates the destruction of Israel. If there is anything that was learned from appeasing Hitler, its that dictators like him don\'t compromise or play by the rules or get along. You are obviously a pacifist and thats fine, but would you be willing to lay your head on the chopping block if the U.S. adopted pacifism as a national policy.

I do lots of serious reading, from many sources of varying points of view. My position on war is one of simple logic and human nature. If someone is going to kill me or my friend I will try to kill him first. I don\'t want to get too personal here but I\'m sure you would kill someone given the chance if it was the only way to save someone you love.  You are right. I do want you to prove your way is right, but since I tried to get you to answer a couple of questions regarding your assertions and instead, you just made a "take the moral high ground and examine yourself" type of statement, I can only conclude that you are unable to logically defend your position. Typical, happens everytime.

gkg

QuoteI can only conclude that you are unable to logically defend your position. Typical, happens everytime.

while i agree that there may be times when war has sadly served a purpose, it has not been a solution.  you confuse the two.  there would never have been a resolution to any of the wars you cite without dialogue and diplomacy in conjunction and aftermath.

sometimes war is seemingly unavoidable, but that does not make it a solution.  as for your WWII analogy - do more reading - we did not take the situation seriously and again had our own ends in mind before we realized exactly where the entire situation was headed.  it was our stance that we didn\'t want to get involved.

in this particular case, war is steadfastly not the answer because there was no legitimate threat to anyone, it was a manufactured threat.  you want to believe what you want to believe, that\'s fine.

as for the rest - no, you don\'t really care to register what has been said so of course you\'re going to dismissively ignore what others are saying as not logically supporting their argument.
Peace.

image = <i>"Blue Velvet"</i> (front of 2-sided piece) (c) georgia k griffin - all rights reserved

sedagive

Quote

while i agree that there may be times when war has sadly served a purpose, it has not been a solution.  you confuse the two.  there would never have been a resolution to any of the wars you cite without dialogue and diplomacy in conjunction and aftermath.

sometimes war is seemingly unavoidable, but that does not make it a solution.  as for your WWII analogy - do more reading - we did not take the situation seriously and again had our own ends in mind before we realized exactly where the entire situation was headed.  it was our stance that we didn\'t want to get involved.

in this particular case, war is steadfastly not the answer because there was no legitimate threat to anyone, it was a manufactured threat.  you want to believe what you want to believe, that\'s fine.

as for the rest - no, you don\'t really care to register what has been said so of course you\'re going to dismissively ignore what others are saying as not logically supporting their argument.

Wrong. The Japanese surrendered after we dropped two large bombs on them. I guess you can say diplomacy, were the two bombs and the Japanese saying "we surrender" as dialogue. Honestly it is hard to understand what you say it makes no sense. You do not have an understanding of logic. Can I get you to answer a question? What purpose did WWII serve with regard to either Europe or Japan?

I have registered what has been said but you won\'t answer questions to support your claims. You might want to look up the definition of solution. I asked you what solution would you propose to the current problems? No answer. I asked who is getting rich? No answer.  War is certainly a solution, to many problems.

gkg

if you think surrender is the end of the story then you really don\'t grasp the depths of what happens in war.

war puts an end to somethings, only by opening up another can of worms, and at a horrific cost of human lives and suffering.  if that is your definition of a lasting solution then i suggest you reconsider.

why should i answer a silly question like \'who\'s getting rich\' when it\'s perfectly obvious?  the military, their suppliers - the contractors bilking the military, various major corporations are making a tidy bundle off this war and will do so for sometime, including the reconstruction if we can ever end the destruction.

really though, you don\'t seem to want to discuss things, you simply want to hurl insults and that\'s not constructive debate so i close my final communication with you by wishing you peace.
Peace.

image = <i>"Blue Velvet"</i> (front of 2-sided piece) (c) georgia k griffin - all rights reserved

D.O.D

  gkg- Do not debate a stone.   B