Jump to content

British Navy Sailors


jdobbin

Recommended Posts

In History, the Mennonites and Doukhoubors (sp) were freely able to express their pacifist views, were exempt from conscription, and weren't locked up. And this is in World War 1 mind you without the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In Canada we have in our culture to not persecute people concerning this and to make sure that people have the ability to express themselves in this way. Even if groups happened to be persecuted, the government apologizes and compensates.

Persecution in Canada = Politcal Suicide

I wasn't referencing Canada, I was referencing the United States. My main point of contention with ScottSA is his firm belief that those who don't support war somehow hate our society. If that attitude is prevalent persecution will surely follow, it's nothing more than hate monering.

I don't think dissension about the war is a sign of hate of our society. I do have a problem with people who say things like "I don't support the war, but i support the troops" I believe thats Hippocratic. There are some people who post here that i truly do feel hate the USA from top to bottom. But I don't think thats everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 429
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In History, the Mennonites and Doukhoubors (sp) were freely able to express their pacifist views, were exempt from conscription, and weren't locked up. And this is in World War 1 mind you without the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In Canada we have in our culture to not persecute people concerning this and to make sure that people have the ability to express themselves in this way. Even if groups happened to be persecuted, the government apologizes and compensates.

Persecution in Canada = Politcal Suicide

I wasn't referencing Canada, I was referencing the United States. My main point of contention with ScottSA is his firm belief that those who don't support war somehow hate our society. If that attitude is prevalent persecution will surely follow, it's nothing more than hate monering.

There's also a line that one must realize that there's not supporting a war which is all fine and good, and flat out condemning our society and everything it stands for. There's also a line for saying that those who don't agree with the war are this, that, and the other thing, and acting on it. Both sides are equally guilty of hate mongering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In History, the Mennonites and Doukhoubors (sp) were freely able to express their pacifist views, were exempt from conscription, and weren't locked up. And this is in World War 1 mind you without the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In Canada we have in our culture to not persecute people concerning this and to make sure that people have the ability to express themselves in this way. Even if groups happened to be persecuted, the government apologizes and compensates.

Persecution in Canada = Politcal Suicide

I wasn't referencing Canada, I was referencing the United States. My main point of contention with ScottSA is his firm belief that those who don't support war somehow hate our society. If that attitude is prevalent persecution will surely follow, it's nothing more than hate monering.

I don't think dissension about the war is a sign of hate of our society. I do have a problem with people who say things like "I don't support the war, but i support the troops" I believe thats Hippocratic. There are some people who post here that i truly do feel hate the USA from top to bottom. But I don't think thats everyone.

So saying "I don't agree with this war, but since the troops are there let them do their job and hope they're all right" doesn't fly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can only say what I feel... I no longer think this war is winnable and I think it was fought on the cheap and based on unfound bases (whether deliberate or mistaken is a separate debate). But I admire the men and women who don the uniform and do what they're asked to do. I don't support the war, but I honor the troops. I think the aim of the cause is no longer attainable, but I can't blame the rank and file guys in the service. They did their best under almost criminally substandard leadership. If anything, their service was a bright spot in an otherwise shameful period of US history. Yes, I support the troops. But I do not support the war. It is possible to say both and sincerely mean both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can only say what I feel... I no longer think this war is winnable and I think it was fought on the cheap and based on unfound bases (whether deliberate or mistaken is a separate debate). But I admire the men and women who don the uniform and do what they're asked to do. I don't support the war, but I honor the troops. I think the aim of the cause is no longer attainable, but I can't blame the rank and file guys in the service. They did their best under almost criminally substandard leadership. If anything, their service was a bright spot in an otherwise shameful period of US history. Yes, I support the troops. But I do not support the war. It is possible to say both and sincerely mean both.

Sure it is. But you seem a bit confused. The war was won in a little over two weeks, with the ousting of the Baathist regime. The occupation, on the other hand has been underfought from the beginning, althouth the cacophany from the press has made it seem far worse than it really is. Somehow a constant repetition of the casualty count of US soldiers turned into a gleeful mantra on the news, and constant repetition of "mounting toll" and other neat catchphrases have been guarenteed to leave the impression amongst armchair warriors than Iraq is nothing but an unmitigated disaster. It's not at all...it will just take time...Bush tried telling everyone that from the beginning, but no one was listening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure it is. But you seem a bit confused. The war was won in a little over two weeks, with the ousting of the Baathist regime. The occupation, on the other hand has been underfought from the beginning, althouth the cacophany from the press has made it seem far worse than it really is. Somehow a constant repetition of the casualty count of US soldiers turned into a gleeful mantra on the news, and constant repetition of "mounting toll" and other neat catchphrases have been guarenteed to leave the impression amongst armchair warriors than Iraq is nothing but an unmitigated disaster. It's not at all...it will just take time...Bush tried telling everyone that from the beginning, but no one was listening.

Fine, if you want to define the initial two week campaign to Baghdad as "the war" and all else "the occupation", fine with me. We won the war. We are losing the occupation. The occupation has been so severely botched by the Bush administration that it probably can't be set right without sending hundreds of thousands of US troops into Iraq. In my opinion, there's no point in claiming to have won the war when the occupation after the war is what matters more.

I don't understand where this claim of "gleeful mantra on the news" comes from. It is entirely a figment of your imagination. No one is happy about reports of casualties -- not the public and certainly not the media which, for the first time in a long time, is experiencing an extremely high mortality and casualty rate in the theatre of war. If anything, the media has been extremely sympathetic to the soldiers and quite honorable when doing things like listing those who died during the week, portraying the fallen, interviewing their families. If you've got enough backbone to test the veracity of your claim, I'd suggest picking up the latest issue of Newsweek. It does a beautiful job of showing the true costs of this war. I suspect you won't because it will force you to admit (even if only to yourself) that one of your "truths" is anything but. I don't know where you're getting your news, but if you want to see demonically gleeful mantras of death, keep reading right wingers like Ann Coulter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think dissension about the war is a sign of hate of our society. I do have a problem with people who say things like "I don't support the war, but i support the troops" I believe thats Hippocratic. There are some people who post here that i truly do feel hate the USA from top to bottom. But I don't think thats everyone.

I can support the troops and not the war. What really is hypocritical of that. What if there was no war? Would there even be a reason to discuss hypocriticalness? I support the troops, I have several friends for the Cadian military who has done two tours there. My uncle was on a civilian contractor in Kabul. He never left the green zone. One of my military friends did encounter some action.

The mission I do not support. But I want to suport the troops and say, we are trying to bring you home. We do not want you to die for a cause that was not right to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

see my sig

Support the troops. Bring them home. Let the bankers fight their own wars.

Its irresponsible toward the troops when you do not protest what you think is an unjust war. They have no say in it because they are part of professional armies.

Its up to us to stop unjust wars. We take responsibility for the orders they are given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know the frigate was tied up in port.

Well thank you for admiting you know absolutely nothing about this matter.

And your take on it has been right up there with Rosie O'Donnell.

It's the evil capitalist running dog west!

You old centrist you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time.

Not really, their is a history of "patriots" attacking and persecuting people because they didn't agree with a war, or to serve in a war. Mennonites and the Amish were often attacked because of their views on non-violence.

Can you tell us how many Amish and Mennonites were imprisoned and tortured for their views on the war?

When the "patriots" talk of fighting for liberty, they are more than willing to persecute those who don't agree with war. I've even seen on here people calling those who disagree with war as supporters of dictator's, and enemies of western society.

Much of the far Left, as evidenced by this site, is an enemy of western society. They hate the west, they hate capitalism, and they absolutely loathe and fear freedom of speech and expression. They sympathise far more with brutal dictators and religious fanatics and are always ready to believe whatever excuses they offer up, while instantly dismissing with mockery, suspicion and ridicule anything which comes from a western political figure.

Most of the Left put their minds in straight jackets long ago and are appallingly ignorant of the realities of life. Combined with a self-righteous indignation towards those who disagree with them, and a belief such people ought to be punished, I don't see how we can not believe they are a danger to the freedoms we enjoy in the West.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure it is. But you seem a bit confused. The war was won in a little over two weeks, with the ousting of the Baathist regime.

Perhaps a phone call to the President to remind him there is no war is in order .

Council on Foreign Relations speech, Dec 7th/05

"Like earlier struggles for freedom, this war will take many turns, and the enemy must be defeated on every"

And then .....

December 20th/06 in an Oval office interview....

President Bush acknowledged for the first time yesterday that the United States is not winning the war in Iraq and said he plans to expand the overall size of the "stressed" U.S. armed forces to meet the challenges of a long-term global struggle against terrorists

And then From the August 21 Post article:

Asked if he wasn't frustrated by the seeming lack of progress there, Bush replied, "Sometimes I'm frustrated, rarely surprised. War is not a time of joy. These are challenging times."

August 21st/06

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much of the far Left, as evidenced by this site, is an enemy of western society. They hate the west, they hate capitalism, and they absolutely loathe and fear freedom of speech and expression. They sympathise far more with brutal dictators and religious fanatics and are always ready to believe whatever excuses they offer up, while instantly dismissing with mockery, suspicion and ridicule anything which comes from a western political figure.

Hyperbole.

Most of the RIGHT put their minds in straight jackets long ago and are appallingly ignorant of the realities of life. Combined with a self-righteous indignation towards those who disagree with them, and a belief such people ought to be punished, I don't see how we can not believe how the RIGHT are a danger to the freedoms we enjoy in the West.

Would that be a fair statement?

Naw...I didn't think so either. It also wasnt true in the original form.

No less than Louis J. Freel , Director of the FBI will clear this up for you.

http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress01/freeh051001.htm

Edit to add...I re-read your post and see that you did reference the "far left" , but they are just as nuts, but less violent, than the "far right".

Either way, we are talking about few and far between in numbers .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I'm late in this discussion - and only wanted to add a brief comment after seeing another video of captured sailors. Of course this parading of helpless people with overpowering force is appalling - and achieves nothing at all. But let's remember what's started the whole thing. Why they were there.

It's bizzare and chilling to see the circle of death taking hold. As if some bug of maddness and violence spreading over and catching more and more victims - until it's allowed to run it's course with unknown count of life loss. We've seen it so many times, yet it never fails to repeat itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's bizzare and chilling to see the circle of death taking hold.

"Circle of death"? Is that some variation on "cycle of violence"? Y'know, the world is not a big self-help group where if we all hold hands and smoke a doob, we'll all get in touch with our inner child. You DO realize that, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you tell us how many Amish and Mennonites were imprisoned and tortured for their views on the war?

Sure, I can give account's of anabaptists being persecuted.

http://www.anabaptists.org/history/rev-war.html

http://www.hutterites.org/HutteriteHistory/am-worldwar1.htm

"Circle of death"? Is that some variation on "cycle of violence"? Y'know, the world is not a big self-help group where if we all hold hands and smoke a doob, we'll all get in touch with our inner child. You DO realize that, right?

You know, the world isn't just some place where if you nuke somebody or bomb them all your problems will be resolved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, the world isn't just some place where if you nuke somebody or bomb them all your problems will be resolved.

Not anymore...but it worked like a charm in 1945. One big problem was definitely resolved.

The original statement is incorrect. If you bomb or nuke someone, your short term (and sometimes even longterm problems as in the case with nuclear weaponry) are solved.

In fact, if you bomb everyone out of existence except for your own kind, your problems will go away for a long time.

Better yet, if you kill anyone who disagrees with you, you wont ever have any problems.

I'm happy to see so many of my former fellow countrymen agree with me. I am even happier to see Bush in the office, since he seems hell-bent on propagating that line of thinking!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact, if you bomb everyone out of existence except for your own kind, your problems will go away for a long time.

Like America's friends, Japan and Germany?

-----------------------------------------------------------------

In the first six to twelve months of a war with the United States and Great Britain I will run wild and win victory upon victory. But then, if the war continues after that, I have no expectation of success. I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.

---Isoroku Yamamoto

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...althouth the cacophany from the press has made it seem far worse than it really is. Somehow a constant repetition of the casualty count of US soldiers turned into a gleeful mantra on the news, and constant repetition of "mounting toll" and other neat catchphrases have been guarenteed to leave the impression amongst armchair warriors than Iraq is nothing but an unmitigated disaster...

Yet another hate-filled media piece, a veritable hit job on our men and women in uniform:

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=8894...656525&f=00&fg=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you tell us how many Amish and Mennonites were imprisoned and tortured for their views on the war?

Sure, I can give account's of anabaptists being persecuted.

http://www.anabaptists.org/history/rev-war.html

http://www.hutterites.org/HutteriteHistory/am-worldwar1.htm

And you don't feel just a little embarrassed having to go back to the Revolutionary war for that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm happy to see so many of my former fellow countrymen agree with me. I am even happier to see Bush in the office, since he seems hell-bent on propagating that line of thinking!

Hardly a Bush phenom....many presidents and PMs have resorted to such measures. NATO bombed Serbia for 79 days in 1999 to solve a "problem".

If you left the US for such reasons, it wasn't just Bush....you left America itself, regardless of who sits in the oval office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really, it's the same logic that is driving the patriot's of today. If you don't like war, you're an enemy of society.

Not true at all....there are many "patriots" who oppose or support war, for many different reasons. However, those who oppose war yet benefit from the same society that wages war have some other issues to deal with. Leaving forever is one solution, but most just stay and live with the cognitive dissonance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,745
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    historyradio.org
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • User went up a rank
      Experienced
    • exPS went up a rank
      Contributor
    • DUI_Offender earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • exPS went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Rising Star
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...