yugi Posted June 11, 2005 Report Share Posted June 11, 2005 http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/001.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/002.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/003.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/004.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/005.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/006.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/007.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/01.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/0202.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/03.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/0404.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/05.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/008.JPG http://www.tumaer.org/uploading/009.JPG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PocketRocket Posted June 11, 2005 Report Share Posted June 11, 2005 Well, I don't normally agree with feeding the trolls, but how about ridiculing them??? Cardinal rule of advertising is this, before printing or posting your piece, check your spelling YUGI-OH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technocrat Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 Beleive me im no fan of the US administration or the war... but usuing those images with that sort of caption cheapens the lives of all. Don't use death and destruction for political gain... that is tasteless. War is tasteless i agree... i have seen those images before without the captions and they show the true brutality of war... but with the captions they create a disconnect. IMHO the captioned pictures are a terrible way to acheive the goals clearly set by their creator. Propaganda by either side is still propaganda... a true evil upon itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 Technocrat: You hit the nail on the head... well said.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 Beleive me im no fan of the US administration or the war... but usuing those images with that sort of caption cheapens the lives of all. Don't use death and destruction for political gain... that is tasteless. War is tasteless i agree... i have seen those images before without the captions and they show the true brutality of war... but with the captions they create a disconnect. IMHO the captioned pictures are a terrible way to acheive the goals clearly set by their creator. Propaganda by either side is still propaganda... a true evil upon itself Well, I don't know where the poster or the photos came from (or why there were so many spelling mistakes), but on ething I found interesting was my own reaction. I've seen plenty of horrible images from Iraq since 2003: dead Iraqi soldiers, dead Iraqi civilians, dead insurgents, maimed kids and agonized survivors. But this was one of the only times I've seen depictions of U.S. casualties. And, while I'm prety desensitized to graphic images (thanks, Hollywod), the fact that these images or ones like them probably have not been seen by Americans is, to me, teling. Let's not forget: suppression of information is as much a propaganda tool as broadcasting information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Black dog; The Web site is an Arab web site being used by the Iraqi insurgents to promote thier cause. the fact that these images or ones like them probably have not been seen by Americans is, to me, teling. Let's not forget: suppression of information is as much a propaganda tool as broadcasting information It is telling, It's telling me that the US goverment does not want the families of these servicemen and women to see thier husbands or wifes actual shape of thier remains....It's called censorship and yes we have it here in north america....for a good reason.. What reason could we possiable want to see these pictures? and what reason would we want to allow the families of the dead access to them , or for that matter to the famlies of those still alive or going overseas. Is it not enough just knowing that their dead... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 I'd have to agree with BlackDog here. I don't see any harm whatsoever in letting the public see that its not a clean, faceless war... The US GOP is hiding an awful lot from their public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 It is telling, It's telling me that the US goverment does not want the families of these servicemen and women to see thier husbands or wifes actual shape of thier remains....It's called censorship and yes we have it here in north america....for a good reason..What reason could we possiable want to see these pictures? and what reason would we want to allow the families of the dead access to them , or for that matter to the famlies of those still alive or going overseas. Is it not enough just knowing that their dead... Nevermind graphic images like some of the one's above. Since 1991, the DoD has prohibited the media in 1991 from photographing caskets while the military is transporting them home from combat. It tok a Freedom of Information request just to get the one's we have seen shown. My point is that war has become utterly sanitized. The 1991 Guf War was portrayed as a video game and the real and devestating human costs hidden from view. It's part of our society's general denial of death, but also a propaganda device. Perhaps if people knew the true costs of war, perhaps they'd be less wiling to support it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 (edited) X Edited June 14, 2005 by Army Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Black dog: Nevermind graphic images like some of the one's above. Since 1991, the DoD has prohibited the media in 1991 from photographing caskets while the military is transporting them home from combat. It tok a Freedom of Information request just to get the one's we have seen shown. Tell me what possiable good would the release of pictures of airplanes full of caskets do. Show the people that war has a price...how slow do you think we all are ...everyone can read a history book, the numbers are all in there what good would a picture of 20 caskets on a plane do...when the history books mention numbers in the millions .... As for the other photos...would it be great for that guys wife or for that matter his kids to find that on the intra net ...good idea .... There is a time and place for censorship and those pictures are an excellant time ... My point is that war has become utterly sanitized. The 1991 Guf War was portrayed as a video game and the real and devestating human costs hidden from view. It's part of our society's general denial of death, but also a propaganda device. Perhaps if people knew the true costs of war, perhaps they'd be less wiling to support it. BS, both Gulf wars had inbedded journalists right with the front line combat units.reporting live feeds, so many that there was times where they put the lives around them in danger or got in the way of combat operations "all for getting the story"sure they had restictions as they could not tell where they were exactly because they were live....but other than that censorship was laughable ...compared to other conflicts..Korea, WWII everything had to be censored by the military first....NO live feeds, Â It's part of our society's general denial of death, but also a propaganda device. Perhaps if people knew the true costs of war, perhaps they'd be less wiling to support it. Again BS, you can pick up everything you want to know about death with out showing graphic pictures above...In our history books they show plenty of pictures dipicting death, without being to graphic...If they can't learn it from them there is a problem.. Graphic pictures are used in the military to desensitise troops to much of it has the opposite effect....want to know the true cost ask a veteran he will tell you.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Tell me what possiable good would the release of pictures of airplanes full of caskets do. Show the people that war has a price...how slow do you think we all are ...everyone can read a history book, the numbers are all in there what good would a picture of 20 caskets on a plane do...when the history books mention numbers in the millions .... As for the other photos...would it be great for that guys wife or for that matter his kids to find that on the intra net ...good idea .... There is a time and place for censorship and those pictures are an excellant time ... "A picture is worth a thousand words." Numbers on a page (1,600 dead, 12,000 wounded) simply lacks the visceral impact of an image like row upon row of flag draped coffins. If they didn't think these images would have an impact, they wouldn't censor them, would they? BS, both Gulf wars had inbedded journalists right with the front line combat units.reporting live feeds, so many that there was times where they put the lives around them in danger or got in the way of combat operations "all for getting the story"sure they had restictions as they could not tell where they were exactly because they were live....but other than that censorship was laughable ...compared to other conflicts..Korea, WWII everything had to be censored by the military first....NO live feeds, Puh lease. Sure we got fancy computer graphics, grainy night-vision footage from the front lines and breathless: but we only got one side of the story and one version of that side. The Iraq invasion and its predecessor set the standard for media-managment in a war zone. Live or not, its still propaganda. Again BS, you can pick up everything you want to know about death with out showing graphic pictures above...In our history books they show plenty of pictures dipicting death, without being to graphic...If they can't learn it from them there is a problem.. Graphic pictures are used in the military to desensitise troops to much of it has the opposite effect....want to know the true cost ask a veteran he will tell you.... So you're saying sanitized depictions of death in war don't match the reality? Do you think a population weaned on violent images on TV, in movies, in video games is not already desensitized to a degree? Do you think the general public is aware of what really happends to a human body when its struck by a bullet from a high-calibre assault rifle? Do you think that if they did, that might make them hesitate about supporting a war that is turning humans into so much dead meat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimera Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 BD, Most of these pictures should not be shown to the general public for one reason: Respect. Be it respect for the dead or their families, take your pick. At least those men and women had the b@lls to fight and die for a cause they believed in. That alone makes them better human beings than most. Wether or not you believe in the cause is irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 BD, Most of these pictures should not be shown to the general public for one reason:Â Respect. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Without the picture, some just cannot understand the true cost of the war. What should really be shown in the media, is the devestation that is in Iraq due to the war. How many cities are just a total mess because of the invasion. These are the pictures that should be shown to the Amercian public and the rest of the world. The media is a total wuss now when it comes to reporting news. They are not journalists anymore and have nothing in the ways of investigative reporting. They are all military and government PR scams. over 1700 troops dead. over 10,000 wounded. Iraqi civilian casualties? From reports of 20,000 to 100,000. <------------- Were are those pictures in the news media? The American population loves simulated violence, but cannot seem to handle REAL violence. Show those coffins, parade them around the square, in the name of Democracy and Freedom for the homeland. And tell them we are winning this war. Tell them we are doing all we can to help Iraq. Rummy saying the situation is just as bad as it was 2 years ago. I am in total shock on this one !! Show the pictures. Let the American people, and the world know EXACTLY what their government is up to in other places. Find the pictures and send the links in to your local member of congress/parliment/media ect. Let them know what is up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 Black dog: "A picture is worth a thousand words." Numbers on a page (1,600 dead, 12,000 wounded) simply lacks the visceral impact of an image like row upon row of flag draped coffins. If they didn't think these images would have an impact, they wouldn't censor them, would they? They are worth a thousand words, and they do have an impact on the moral of a entire nation, but out of respect for the dead they should be censored ,these men and women have served thier country and have paid the ultimate price, They did so voluntarily as chimera pionted out because they believed in that cause...What right do we as the living by using thier deaths thier sacrifice to step on thier believes... to further another cause that these soldiers don't support...The coffin issue is not as large as the other issue of showing American soldiers mangled bodies ....where is the pay out for doing that, where is the respect for that soldiers ultimate sacrifice for his country, the respect for his grieving family.... Â Puh lease. Sure we got fancy computer graphics, grainy night-vision footage from the front lines and breathless: but we only got one side of the story and one version of that side. The Iraq invasion and its predecessor set the standard for media-managment in a war zone. Live or not, its still propaganda. Was it there was footage from the Iraqi side, during the first Gulf war...the Iraqi's decided that they did not want thier people to witness thier defeat...during the 2 and Iraqi war they had a problem with finding journalists that were willing to risk everything and traval with the insurgents something about they like excuting them...that being said there was some reporting going on by the Arab side ...you actually have to change the channel or have sat TV... So you're saying sanitized depictions of death in war don't match the reality? Do you think a population weaned on violent images on TV, in movies, in video games is not already desensitized to a degree? Thats exactly what I'm saying, Have you been in a war zone...To a small degree they have but war is a thousand times more graphic....and if you think by watching some TV and playing some video games will prepare you for war your seriously mistaken....Can you honestly say that you would be prepared to see that guy in those images die, render first aid, haul him back to the aid station....then get back in combat soaked in his blood... Do you think the general public is aware of what really happends to a human body when its struck by a bullet from a high-calibre assault rifle? No, i don't ...do you think there is a need for the general public to be aware? and where do we draw the line...The battle field is full of wpns far more deadly than the assault rifle...do we show them the results of getting hit with a 25 mm cannon shell, 40 mm HE round , or perhaps a anti personal tank round. we could take vidio on what happens to the human body as a 70 ton tank runs over it... All to what... show the public what it is like on the battle field so that man will stand up and proclaim the end to violence against each other to end war... Have you read a history book, has there been a time without it...mid evil warfare was alot more gruesume than it is today, with the families cleaning up the battlefields in which thousands died did that make a difference....NO we just got better at killing .... Do you think that if they did, that might make them hesitate about supporting a war that is turning humans into so much dead meat? NO, it does not in any form make a difference,as a soldier seeing to much death and violence turns off those feelings it makes you cold, unfeeling, it makes those involved better killers as they don't want to end up like those they've seen...and it takes along time to re generate those normal emotions expected by every day society.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 Gosthacked: Without the picture, some just cannot understand the true cost of the war. History books are full of pictures of the dead and dying, (they are not as graphic as the ones shown on this insurgent site).... and they do have a shock value, they do show the price of war. What should really be shown in the media, is the devestation that is in Iraq due to the war. How many cities are just a total mess because of the invasion. These are the pictures that should be shown to the Amercian public and the rest of the world. You need to change the chanel, the media does cover all that you mentioned, Those pictures are much to graphic to be shown period.... and if its shock value you want why do we not show pictures of horrific traffic accidents put them on prime time so the families can really get a good image on what there spouse, father, mother, kids, looked like when they died...maybe we will all stop driving saving our resouces, and all those that die in traffic accidents.. over 1700 troops dead.over 10,000 wounded. Iraqi civilian casualties? From reports of 20,000 to 100,000. <------------- Were are those pictures in the news media? They to are available on the on the intra net,and those that are to graphic should also be banned...and censored for the same reason... The American population loves simulated violence, but cannot seem to handle REAL violence. Show those coffins, parade them around the square, in the name of Democracy and Freedom for the homeland. And tell them we are winning this war. Tell them we are doing all we can to help Iraq. And you can...handle real violence....those soldiers will be honored given a military funeral, and buried by thier families....that is all that should happen they have paid the ultimate price and should not be asked to be used to further your cause.... Are you American or Canadian? reason i ask is you use "Tell them (we) are doing all (we) can to help Iraq." We as Canadians have a past time of throwing rocks at glass houses (what are Canadains doing to help the people of Iraq) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 Bollocks and regardless.. if the populous of the US saw these types of images, there would be hell to pay and it would be like Viet Nam all over again with the protests against the Gov't. If the American people saw these they wouldn't be quite so gung ho and wouldn't that be a problem for George. There is a cost and boy is it steep. Hiding these type pictures are as bad as lying to the face of the American people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 Shakeyhands: The American public are very aware that they are losing soldiers in this conflict, Those cas figures are published every night in most if not all media stations across North America....How is it that not showing a graphic picture is lying ....they've told the public of the deaths...they informed the family... What good does it do anyone to see those grapic pictures... If the American people saw these they wouldn't be quite so gung ho and wouldn't that be a problem for George. The American people are not stupid, they don't need pictures to form an educated opinion on this conflict....These pictures do nothing but cause undo harm to the family and relatives of this soldier...and diminish moral of those serving now... Perhaps you would feel different if that was your wife,husband, brother,sister, or child...and someone sent those pictures to you...thier is a reason censorship works in this country and this is one reason why we have censorship...it is why we have a rating system in this country....and yes there are things that go beyond what anyone should have access to those graphic pictures of a soldier with half his head blown off are a case and piont.... Hiding these type pictures are as bad as lying to the face of the American people. Ya right again how is this lying....have you seen those photos ...can you honestly say that the public needs to see those graphic images to really let them know what can happen on a battle field .... would you show them to your kids...your wife...And why is the reason we don't do that with vehicle accidents to promote safe driving ,or drinking and driving ...Or airplane crashes to promote flight safety...to let the people know this is what happens to a human body when it falls from 40,000 ft...You need a reality check on this one ...and think of the harm or pain that could be cause by those pictures why do you think the insurgents put them on the net..... Did they release any pictures of those killed in Afgan by that american pilot with a 500 LB bomb...NO....was it not enough to know that we lost 4 good soldiers in a tragic mistake ...Now you say you want pictures.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest eureka Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 Pictures are sorely needed. It is graphic "pictures" that hold the best promise for avoiding war. For many centuries elites in government have got away with sacrificing their citizens in war and hidden the atrocities visited on opponents. It is pictures that have, as much as nuclear stalemates, brought us an era of relative peacefulness. It is pictures that have brought a realization of the horrors of the past two World Wars and ofKorea and Vietnam. It is the sanitization of the visual aspacts of Iraq that make its continuance a possibility. Americans who are exposed to those aspects do not join the Army or support the aggression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimera Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 Pictures are sorely needed. It is graphic "pictures" that hold the best promise for avoiding war. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So you are saying that Ms. Dyer needs to see a picture of what happened to her son to make her believe that war is a bad thing? Americans who are exposed to those aspects do not join the Army or support the aggression. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Really? How many American soldiers have you spoken to recently that makes you so sure of this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest eureka Posted June 15, 2005 Report Share Posted June 15, 2005 No! But the American people do. Have you read any of the many articles that both magazines and newspapers are printing these days. America is in crisis with respect to its military recruitment The Defense Department has even substantially reduced the monthly quotas to relieve the presssure pn recruiters and to avoid embarrassinf publicity over the failure of recruitmrnt efforts. The failures come from the new understanding of what war is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 eureka: Pictures are sorely needed. It is graphic "pictures" that hold the best promise for avoiding war. I will agree with you that pictures are a more powerful media than script...a tasteful picture can also tell a powerful story...IE when the allieds liberated the concentration camps there were thousands of pictures taken, pictures of the dead piled high, pictures showing the conditions of those that survived.those told a very powerful story all without showing graphic pictures of bodies that were mutalated by guards, half eaten by prisoners, bodies that were 1/2 decomposed from waiting to be burned or buried.... They told a story, that needed to be told, all with showing as much respect to those that were photoed. These photos are in most history books and can be viewed by ANYONE at any age.... If you think that you have found the Holy grail that will stop wars by showing it's effects...your sadly mistaken....The only thing that is going to stop wars is by changing the way man settles disagreements....war has been around since man learned to use a club, and is here to stay long after we are gone....you really want to make a difference then send your politions to fight.... For many centuries elites in government have got away with sacrificing their citizens in war and hidden the atrocities visited on opponents. And these pictures are going to change that ? the people will stand up and revolt.... how much civil unrest did Vietnam cause the US goverment and how long did that war go on for....These pictures will not stop our goverment from sending soldiers to war, niether will it's citizens .... It is pictures that have, as much as nuclear stalemates, brought us an era of relative peacefulness. It is pictures that have brought a realization of the horrors of the past two World Wars and ofKorea and Vietnam. lets not forget one thing Pictures did not bring you peace, Soldiers and thier sacrafice brought you peace...Soldiers made up of ordinary people from all walks of life, citizens that answer a call from thier country and served ,risking thier lives and spilling thier blood thats what brought you peace....Pictures told thier story but that is all they did.... As for relative peacefulness you are talking about Canada and the sense that Canada is not involved in a major conflict. Because at this time in the world there are 36 conflict zones of every size people are dying every second from war and conflict....but hey maybe those people never got to see those pictures... They get to see it every day It is the sanitization of the visual aspacts of Iraq that make its continuance a possibility. Americans who are exposed to those aspects do not join the Army or support the aggression How is it that Iraq and the war is being sanitized, I've seen plenty of news footage of the war, and the dead from both sides have been shown, the conditions of war have been shown, the effects of war have been shown....they have shown american soldiers dead laying in a pool of blood, however you can not make out who the soldier is, or who the person is....out of respect for the dead....they show American soldiers who have been wounded and being worked on by medics... How much more does the public need. This Soldier in the picture has volenteered to answer the call of his country,He is made aware of the risks and consquences of the job he is being asked to do...and yet he still serves, he pays the ultimate price while carrying out his duty...all they ask in return is his country's respect, and to be properly buried....Not to become someone else's cause.... We don't do this for any other job, such as policemen or fire fighters, who are asked to risk thier lives carrying out thier duties...we don't show medical pictures of shot policemen or badly burned fire fighters because we want them to continue doing their jobs. it's not the same thing BS, every country needs an army, and it needs soldiers....it is a fact of our times....so why is it exceptable to show medical photos of a badly mangled soldier... Soldiers don't start Wars, they have no control over anything in war...Our goverments start wars, and decide when to end wars....lets show some respect to those that have died in the service of thier country whether or not you agree with the cause or not ...You want to use your freedom of rights to end the war by reasonable means give'er....But remember those that have paid the ultimate price have paid enough.... If you can't drive your piont home with out these type of photos then your case is pretty weak... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 Respect. Be it respect for the dead or their families, take your pick. At least those men and women had the b@lls to fight and die for a cause they believed in. That alone makes them better human beings than most. Wether or not you believe in the cause is irrelevant. I question how many believe in the cause and how many joined th service for reasons other than killing Arabs. As for them being better people: give me a break consider others who've died in teh service of a cause they believe in (Mohammad Atta?)and ask if they are better people than most. They are worth a thousand words, and they do have an impact on the moral of a entire nation, but out of respect for the dead they should be censored ,these men and women have served thier country and have paid the ultimate price, They did so voluntarily as chimera pionted out because they believed in that cause...What right do we as the living by using thier deaths thier sacrifice to step on thier believes... to further another cause that these soldiers don't support...The coffin issue is not as large as the other issue of showing American soldiers mangled bodies ....where is the pay out for doing that, where is the respect for that soldiers ultimate sacrifice for his country, the respect for his grieving family.... How about asking if their sacrifice was necessary? How about asking why these people are dying? Was it there was footage from the Iraqi side, during the first Gulf war...the Iraqi's decided that they did not want thier people to witness thier defeat...during the 2 and Iraqi war they had a problem with finding journalists that were willing to risk everything and traval with the insurgents something about they like excuting them...that being said there was some reporting going on by the Arab side ...you actually have to change the channel or have sat TV... Lots of journalists have worked with insurgents and have been threatened accordingly. Al jazeera's Baghdad centre was bombed by U.S. forces on the eve of the invasion. But my point stands: the other side is not being represented by the western media. Thats exactly what I'm saying, Have you been in a war zone...To a small degree they have but war is a thousand times more graphic....and if you think by watching some TV and playing some video games will prepare you for war your seriously mistaken....Can you honestly say that you would be prepared to see that guy in those images die, render first aid, haul him back to the aid station....then get back in combat soaked in his blood... I'm not talking about the people in combat, but those whose only view of war is through their TV screen. No, i don't ...do you think there is a need for the general public to be aware? and where do we draw the line...The battle field is full of wpns far more deadly than the assault rifle...do we show them the results of getting hit with a 25 mm cannon shell, 40 mm HE round , or perhaps a anti personal tank round. we could take vidio on what happens to the human body as a 70 ton tank runs over it...All to what... show the public what it is like on the battle field so that man will stand up and proclaim the end to violence against each other to end war... Have you read a history book, has there been a time without it...mid evil warfare was alot more gruesume than it is today, with the families cleaning up the battlefields in which thousands died did that make a difference....NO we just got better at killing .... All I am saying is that if our leaders are prepared to send people to die, they should be prepared to show the rest of us the results and let us decide if the death and destruction is worth it. Censorship is rarely an answer. And you can...handle real violence....those soldiers will be honored given a military funeral, and buried by thier families....that is all that should happen they have paid the ultimate price and should not be asked to be used to further your cause.... They didn't ask to die. they didn't ask to be used as props to further the cause of war (for what are slogans like "support our troops!" used for but to silence dissent ). If their deaths can stop further slaughter, then their sacrifice would be truely worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimera Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 Spoken like someone who never has, and never will, put his life on the line and fight for his country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 Spoken like someone who never has, and never will, put his life on the line and fight for his country. No and I never would. If my life, my family and my home were being threatened, I would fight. But never for country. You know why? Because the idea is bullshit. The Americans getting killed and maimed in Iraq aren't losing life and limb for the good of their country. Patriotism and nationalism are the tools the rich and powerful use to convince those with nothing to gain from war to give up their lives in order to protect the interests of those they serve. Ever has it been thus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimera Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 I am very glad that your ignorant and selfish views were not prevalent in '39 through '45. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.