The act was pretty despicable. But worse has happened unfortunately.
Cruelty to animals is the least of the Army's worries as of now. It seems that the military's psychological screening is not effective. But then again, psychology was always hard to pin down
Sure poeple get shot in war. People can think and react on it and trying to devend themselfs. Puppy`s not.
This rant against americans isnt the way the go. Sure those guys were americans but for sure others will do something similar aswell. Keep in mind the are in war and it does propably weird thing sto the mind. But that isnt a freenote to go ahead with animal cruelty
Remind me again how conflicts in places such as Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan (or, to make me sound less "US Bashing") or the Falklands are "fighting for my right to wear a shirt".
... Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghan can be compaired, but the Falklands? That is something totally different.
The first three they were/are trying to keep the countries democratic so people have the same rights we do so they can wear anti govt t-shirts and not get killed for it.
The Falklands was us not wanting to give up a little bit of land.
What i mean is that part of that document was saying that those soldiers are "fighting for our rights to wear a shirt" (which is bs, but anyway...).
If we (or the US) hadn't fought in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan or the Falklands do you think we'd be under some crazy society where we had no right to wear shirts? No. Perhaps small things might be different but frankly theres bugger all Argentina could do the UK, besides try and take a tiny Island that never meant that much in the first place.
EDIT - My point is that while Soldiers are fighting for people's rights (and other motivations), most modern combat situations between rich western countries won't be for the direct benefit of the rights of the people in their own country.
No you're right, it doesn't directly affect us as such, but it is the general overview that if we let them get away with terrorism and the like they will do bigger and bigger events, though there is the other side of the coin which says they are only blowing up our buildings, buses, trains because we are over there.
But the fact is, we only have the rights to slam the govt, military, and whatever else we like because of our armed forces. Agreed, the current guys haven't really had any real evil foes to deal with, but if we didn't have a military we'd have been over thrown by now.
It is like these hippies who are campaigning for us to drop the nuke subs, but the best offence is the best defence. No one will really attack us because we have the ability to drop a nuke on them. Which is something no country wants. So it keeps us safe.
extending that same logic with some logic from the gun thread we had a while ago
why dont you walk down the street with a gun to keep yourself safe every day?
Ha ha ha... What a load of mewling, sentimental tripe. *He* is a professional, paid to do a job *he* chose as a career. That *his* office happens to be subsidised by the honest work of others is a privilege that *he* should be grateful for.
We don't owe *him* anything.
And by the way, there are women in the armed forces too, or perhaps Susan Faludi is right to suggest that a certain sector of American society has revelled in the so-called 'terror', creating "an exaltation of American masculinity".
I agree with you. My post was just to make people think a little about the war (not saying the pdf is necessarly true) before they go and say "oooo aah the soldiers are psychos, torture those bastards!!!" etc. Maybe they are really doing something good too? But of course normal people never realize this and instead go bashing the military. And what if there were really WMD's? Not as many people would then go say the war was such a bad thing. We will never know... Also think about the innocent people living in Iraq when Saddam was in power. They were killed and tortured each day, remember how happy they were when US military took over Baghdad and they ruined his monument. But of course soldiers are psychopaths and kill all innocent people!!!
We have the armed forces to protect the country, and the police to protect the people. Agree the latter could be better at their jobs on occasions, but they are there so we don't need to walk around packing heat all the time.
from the top of my head saddams genocide killed ~200.000 people and the most conservative estimate of the wars civilian death toll is at around 250.000 with numbers going up to 1.000.000 depending on who you choose to believe
Dont get me wrong, I'm not saying that it's good that the US Army is in Iraq. But when you have the other side hiding behind civilians and using them as shields, it's no wonder so many civilian deaths are tallied up. I personally like to think we've improved since the Vietnam.
@ Anyone raising his voice in anger about those poor dogs: Fine. Great. Have you asked yourself how the meat in this evening's meal was treated when it was a live animal?
(And yes, I think it's sick what they did in the videos. I'm sure those soldiers were nice, decent guys back at home. That's what a war does to people. It's sick, but not half as sick as Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, or My Lai, to name a few.)
It's not so much the politicians I have problems with. It's the mindless civilians who vote for them and go on bleating "support our troops". If they really care about those boys they should get them out of the war asap.
how can you do that?
Thanks for the correction Wolf