OT: Free speech? [Archive] - .com.unity Forums

gregebowman

May 17th, 2004, 06:52 PM

WEll, I'm sorry I even took the time to check it out. Yeah, accidents happen in military life as well as civilian life. Could they be called "dumb mistakes"? I've seen some of these Gomer Pyle types when I was in the Air Force. It could also be from lack of training, or understanding on the solder's part. But to make a website that's implying it's the soldier's fault, I won't stand for it. People die. Let it rest. If you have an agenda, go for the leaders. If you're anti-war or anti-military, that's your opinion; just don't bring down the military when we're in a war. This is the kind of stuff that makes me angry. I could kind of understand the rebellion in the 60's and 70's over Viet Nam, since it was mostly a political war. But we're in a real war fighting for our way of life, and you get these people who don't understand that. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Cyclop

May 17th, 2004, 07:09 PM

Not sure why this person would be on the dumbest list: "Killed in Balad, Iraq, on May 18, 2003 when Sahib and another soldier were cleaning their weapons and the other soldier's weapon discharged"

I guess my name should be on the list as well as I lost my left eye when a booby trap I was setting exploded in my face.

Most of the reasons/people listed are not from being "stupid".

Raging Deadstar

May 17th, 2004, 07:16 PM

I agree that this site is in bad taste in some areas. Of course, i'd rather put up with sites like this than lose the right of "Freedom of Speech"

Intimidator

May 17th, 2004, 07:26 PM

I'm against this war from day 1, but this site is horrible.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are those f*ckers trying to make fun of people who died while doing their duty !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

AAAAAAAARRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH

Please send the people who made this site to Iraq for a couple of weeks..........

[ May 17, 2004, 18:26: Message edited by: Intimidator ]

sachmo

May 17th, 2004, 07:28 PM

They have British soldiers on there, too. Apparently, the "America" is subjective.

BTW, the site is registered in Mexico.

narf poit chez BOOM

May 17th, 2004, 08:02 PM

And every one of you exercising your right to free speech.

Atrocities

May 17th, 2004, 08:25 PM

There should be a law protecting somepeople from their right to free speech. In this persons case, violation of that law should be punishable by death.

[ May 17, 2004, 19:26: Message edited by: Atrocities ]

Arkcon

May 17th, 2004, 08:58 PM

If you remove the ?id=528 portion of the url, you'll get a true random page each time. The top 20 listed on the side are "Gomer"-type accidents. That much is true. But the site thinks in some cases getting your transport shot at by a rocket propelled grenade makes a person "stupid" as well.

This guy is a troll. Not you sachmo, the guy who wrote the site.

There was another site, obviously deliberately written to piss people off with false info. It tried to show how the American flag was no longer flying at the D-Day memorial in Caen, France, shortly after France expressed opposition to the US before the Iraq war. I never found out if it was a case of photoshopping, caught them while they were in the process of raising the flag, wind-blown behind the pole or what. And now I've lost track of the site.

What was interesting to me was what happened when the guy with the D-day site was cornered and asked to explain himself. He got all philosophical on the definition of knowledge and information. I never could find out conclusively if he was pro-US and faked the photos to make France look bad, anti-US and faked the photos, so people would get riled up, be proven wrong and look like fools. Or just a prankster, trying to see what the Internet would do with random bits of information.

Anyhow, a troll. Plain and simple.

[ May 17, 2004, 20:31: Message edited by: Arkcon ]

primitive

May 17th, 2004, 11:58 PM

Bad taste definitively http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

I can't locate Lynndie England there so it's incorrect to boot. (Or GWB for that matter, but then again he can hardly be labeled a soldier http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

Don't let the annoyance of this moron (the site maker) make you forget the real criminals.

Baron Munchausen

May 18th, 2004, 01:23 AM

I must agree that this site is in extremely poor taste. There is no sign from the information given that any of the soldiers listed died due to 'stupidity' on their part. Many very smart people die in traffic accidents, or while working with heavy machinery, or even in an ordinary swimming pool. Now, if you want to make a case for stupid foreign policy that's another matter... but the soldiers are not the ones responsible for that.

Renegade 13

May 18th, 2004, 03:10 AM

Originally posted by gregebowman:
...just don't bring down the military when we're in a war... I mean no offense by this, merely a correction. Please take it as such.

You are not officially involved in a war. The war was declared to be over a year ago. I would say that it is essentially a warzone over there, but it is not "officially" a war.

Atrocities

May 18th, 2004, 04:01 AM

Freedom of speach isn't free. Its paid for by the blood of those very military men and women who have and are dying in the line of duty.

narf poit chez BOOM

May 18th, 2004, 04:19 AM

And freedom has been suppressed by military men. The military must not be supported unconditionally.

Yes, I think the guy's an *** too.

I'm just saying that the military cannot be supported unconditionally.

dogscoff

May 18th, 2004, 04:51 PM

Well said Narf- you summed up my own feelings eloquently.

Atrocities

May 18th, 2004, 04:52 PM

I think that falls under the Duhhhhhhhhh file guys. So it goes without saying.

gregebowman

May 18th, 2004, 05:02 PM

I remember back in 1990 before Desert Storm happened that there were over 100 deaths of military people from various sorts of accidents. Then the war started, and you didn't hear too much of that because of the war casualties. But there was really stupid accidents that happened that I heard from my unit when they were over there. One guy was showing off some rocket propelled grenade when it went off and struck someone in their tent. Fortunately, that person survived, although he was messed up. So yeah, there can be some boneheaded accidents. But we need to support the troops over there now, and not make them feel like their idiots for being over there. And yes, we still are at war. It may not be an officially declared war, but they took the first shot by destroying the twin towers. It won't be over until we can wipe out this extreme form of religion.

primitive

May 18th, 2004, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by gregebowman:
.
.
. But we need to support the troops over there now, and not make them feel like their idiots for being over there. And yes, we still are at war. It may not be an officially declared war, but they took the first shot by destroying the twin towers. It won't be over until we can wipe out this extreme form of religion. Greg:
Huh, for your information: Your in the f**ing wrong country.

Is there really still people who believe Iraq was behind 9/11 ?

rextorres

May 18th, 2004, 05:34 PM

The irony is that we've enabled the very forces that are most anti-american by invading Iraq.

[ May 18, 2004, 16:38: Message edited by: rextorres ]

Intimidator

May 18th, 2004, 11:08 PM

Originally posted by gregebowman:
I remember back in 1990 before Desert Storm happened that there were over 100 deaths of military people from various sorts of accidents. Then the war started, and you didn't hear too much of that because of the war casualties. But there was really stupid accidents that happened that I heard from my unit when they were over there. One guy was showing off some rocket propelled grenade when it went off and struck someone in their tent. Fortunately, that person survived, although he was messed up. So yeah, there can be some boneheaded accidents. But we need to support the troops over there now, and not make them feel like their idiots for being over there. And yes, we still are at war. It may not be an officially declared war, but they took the first shot by destroying the twin towers. It won't be over until we can wipe out this extreme form of religion. I thought that this war was against weapons off mass destruction (never found), and had nothing to do with 9-11 and Islam. But correct me if I'm wrong.

Atrocities

May 19th, 2004, 12:31 AM

Is there really still people who believe Iraq was behind 9/11 ? I believe it was Nova or some show on the History channel that connected the dots to Iraq. During the gulf war many Kuaties dissappeared only to return as new people. These people then moved to Afganastan and joined the Taliban and Aliquida. The new people were not the same people who dissappeared, but were in fact Iraqie secret police or intel operatives. Or so the show indicated. I found it to be very professional the way they discussed this and if it is accurate then yes, Iraq did have something to do with 9/11. Remember it was Iraq who planned to assinate G. Bush Sr. and had put a bounty on the heads of every American in the middle east. But that is old news.

In retrospect, I think it is plausable that Iraq did have something to do with 9/11 based upon the evidence provided, but how much they were in volved, well that we may never really know.

(Please for give my spelling.)

[ May 18, 2004, 23:35: Message edited by: Atrocities ]

Renegade 13

May 19th, 2004, 01:12 AM

Originally posted by gregebowman:
...It won't be over until we can wipe out this extreme form of religion. God, I can't believe I just read this! That attitude is the exact same attitude that makes the "terrorists" think they have the right to wipe out all the "infidels". No one can say which religion has a right to exist, and which religions do not! Such an attitude of intolerance is simply wrong, and definitely contrary to the constitution of your own country! Does not your constitution guarantee a freedom of religion? Sure, if the religion is espousing violence, then that's wrong, but that's not what their religion promotes. (as far as I know....I could be wrong) A few fanatics are the ones who twist their beliefs to make them say what they want them to say.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not defending the terrorist's actions, I'm simply saying that freedom of religion is as important a right as freedom of speech. If we don't believe that, then we end up with a situation like WWII and the Jews. And none of us wants that.

I'm sorry for criticizing your opinion, but I have to say I do not at all agree with it, and I could not sit by and not voice my opinion.

[ May 19, 2004, 00:15: Message edited by: Renegade 13 ]

Fyron

May 19th, 2004, 01:29 AM

Its always about the Jews... what about the dozens of other instances of genocide in the 20th century? For example, millions of Armenians were slaughtered sometime around 1920 or so... the Jews are nothing special or unique. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Aiken

May 19th, 2004, 01:40 AM

Renegade 13

May 19th, 2004, 02:05 AM

I simply mentioned the Jews because it is the most well known example of genocide. Of course there are lots more! Lets see how many I can come up with:

- Hutu's and the Tutsi's (Rwanda I think)(spelling)
- The former Zaire had something like that a few years back
- The Kurds in Iraq

And the list just goes on and on and ....

Mephisto

May 19th, 2004, 06:50 AM

Atrocities, the Iraq didn't support Al Quiada as far as it is known. It did not sent military police to Kuwait and then to Afghanistan. Most of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia and they were born there, no secret behind that one. It did pay money to the relatives of Palestinian suicide bombers, that is the only thing true behind the report.

JayBdey

May 19th, 2004, 07:45 AM

America committed atrocities too.

America dropped incendiary bombs on the German town of Dresden. Dresden was a town of mostly old wooden buildings and the fire created a surge of air that sucked people into it. The death toll of the Dresden bombing exceeded the atomic bLasts on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These people were burned to death by the firestorm that sucked them into the core of the fire. It would have been a slow, horribly painful death for many of them.

Yet no kids in America learn about this in school, and you won�t see it on the history channel.

Randallw

May 19th, 2004, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Its always about the Jews... what about the dozens of other instances of genocide in the 20th century? For example, millions of Armenians were slaughtered sometime around 1920 or so... the Jews are nothing special or unique. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif At risk of being criticised, I have always assumed its because there are so many powerful jewish people in the developed world. They make sure no one forgets. I don't think there are many famous Armenians (apart from Cher http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif ) reminding people.

dogscoff

May 19th, 2004, 10:15 AM

I don't think there are many famous Armenians (apart from Cher ) reminding people.
Well I never knew that. I always assumed she was Jewish...

Something else about the holocaust that many people don't realise is that Hitler also sent disabled people, the mentally ill and a whole bunch of ethnic Groups to the gas chambers. Although the jewish population suffered most in terms of sheer numbers of people killed, the romany gypsies were damn near exterminated altogether. (there were less of them to start with.)

Grauzone

May 19th, 2004, 10:23 AM

Originally posted by JayBdey:
America committed atrocities too.

America dropped incendiary bombs on the German ...

Yet no kids in America learn about this in school, and you won�t see it on the history channel. I agree you. I have an impression most Americans see the world a little bit different as e.g. most of the "Old-Europeans". But what is the cause of this interesting point of view?

My opinion is: the cause is the history of a country and its representation in the historical education in the scools. I know it from Germany: Here is the main focus of history in scool WWII and the Genocide on Jews. As a result an german kid has often an impression to be guilty in things happen over 60 yeas ago. I don't beleave in "Erbschuld" (is an concept that faults of parents are also the faults of their children). As result of this scool indoctrination most germans have an abcence of patriotism. To say "I'm proud to be a german" can stamp you as an radical nationalist.

I think USA have an inverted problem. It's a kind of fragmented Identity. A nation that defends "human rights", "freedom of speech" and "democracy" all over the world MUST NOT break this rules so open and so often (also in own country) because of nobody can punish this country for such delicts.

But problems of this kind are solvable over few years. Many germans owe a new kind of "patriotism" to Rumsfeld. He gives them an alternative identification. Not as "forever guilty german" but as "peace loving old-european" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif .

Sorry for my bad English http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Grauzone

May 19th, 2004, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by dogscoff:

Something else about the holocaust that many people don't realise is that Hitler also sent disabled people, ... [/QB]Hitler was not only one. Stalin has killed in the same time many more people. But russian archives are not so exact as german archives are.

Randallw

May 19th, 2004, 12:50 PM

Stalin murdered many more of his own people* than Hitler yet Hitler is considered worse. Perhaps it was because under Stalin people were shipped off to Siberia where they just happened to die, or people just happened to die because of the communists caring more about their plan than the starving Ukrainian peasants. The soviets were just less exact in what they did. The Nazi efforts were planned to specifically kill people. There is a joke that in Nazi Germany at least the trains ran on time, but what is important is what the trains were doing. The Germans get criticised more, either rightly or wrongly, because they were more specific and planned things to the Last detail. It may not be so much that people were killed but that the one regime had a Mission statement and list of goals etc (almost like modern business) Truely History is written by the victor.

*strangely enough neither Stalin or Hitler was actually from the country he ran.

[ May 19, 2004, 11:53: Message edited by: Randallw ]

Atrocities

May 19th, 2004, 02:48 PM

I wonder if Mel Gibson is going to make a movie about the holocaust? The Pation of The War?

I have no desire to his current movie, from what I have heard it is all about hate and blame. We have enough of that in the world now and we don't need any more.

sachmo

May 19th, 2004, 02:55 PM

Originally posted by JayBdey:
America committed atrocities too.

America dropped incendiary bombs on the German town of Dresden. Dresden was a town of mostly old wooden buildings and the fire created a surge of air that sucked people into it. The death toll of the Dresden bombing exceeded the atomic bLasts on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These people were burned to death by the firestorm that sucked them into the core of the fire. It would have been a slow, horribly painful death for many of them.

Yet no kids in America learn about this in school, and you won�t see it on the history channel. Many of the casualties from the firebombing attacks in Germany and Japan were from asphyxiation and smoke inhalation. It was indeed a horrible, horrible way to die. The problem is in what position you take on the subject. If you believe that it was necessary to save more lives, then it becomes acceptable. I have a feeling that if there were chemical bombs and/or nuclear weapons going off in America, there would have been far less outcry about the prisoner abuse.

And I learned about the firebombing of Germany and Japan in high school in the late 80's. I have also seen it documented on the History Channel. Maybe they don't talk about this in school anymore, because it might offend someone. I'll ask my kids when they get there.

Grauzone

May 19th, 2004, 03:10 PM

Originally posted by sachmo:
The problem is in what position you take on the subject. If you believe that it was necessary to save more lives, then it becomes acceptable. I have a feeling that if there were chemical bombs and/or nuclear weapons going off in America, there would have been far less outcry about the prisoner abuse.
It is never acceptable to fall back to such kind of barbarism. Not for people who say they defend "freedom", "peace" and "human rights". Acceptance for such practics for enemies leads in most cases to use same practics on own population few years later.

CNCRaymond

May 19th, 2004, 03:27 PM

DELURKING

*I had considered toning this down a bit, but I really wanted to convey my anger over this ageless argument about WWII. So bare in mind that I mean no one here any disrespect at all. This is not a personal attack against any one and if you find it offensive or insulting, remember you chose to read it after I warned you.*

Read at own risk, stongly worded comment to follow. If you offend easily, do not read. If you do read and are offended, remember you chose to read it.

I always love to read how people of today judge what happened in WWII by today�s standards. I almost laugh at their logic.

Any argument based on the beliefs of today, judging that era, is flawed to the point of being useless.

So you can use your examples about what occurred in that era and try and say they were atrocities by today�s standards all you want. Unless you were alive then and lived through that time you have no right to pass judgment.

Germany firebombed England too you know.

Japan treated its POW's so horribly that many who are alive today STILL hate the Japanese people and are grateful that we dropped the H-bomb on the island not once but twice. Given the alternative, them or us, we chose them. That is the nature of war.

It how you treat your enemies AFTER you have beaten that shows the world if you�re a monster or not. The US was very generous with its enemies following the war and that record has never been questioned.

War is hell and if another world war were to come, we would all find this out first hand, and I promise you, the gloves will come off and no matter how many liberal, save you from your rights, left wing lets just surrender, flag burning, protesting, anti American Americans there are, we will do what we must to survive.

You can fire off your counter points, I won't be reading them.

RE-LURKING

sachmo

May 19th, 2004, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by orm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by sachmo:
The problem is in what position you take on the subject. If you believe that it was necessary to save more lives, then it becomes acceptable. I have a feeling that if there were chemical bombs and/or nuclear weapons going off in America, there would have been far less outcry about the prisoner abuse.
It is never acceptable to fall back to such kind of barbarism. Not for people who say they defend "freedom", "peace" and "human rights". Acceptance for such practics for enemies leads in most cases to use same practics on own population few years later. <hr /></blockquote>You and I may believe that, but if you had lived through those time, or you were a soldier waiting to invade Japan, you might have a different story. I guess when you come down to it, what is the price you are willing to make others PAY for your rights? Would you firebomb a city to kill your greatest enemy, or would you avoid it because it is not in your character? When I think about losing my family, lots of moral questions get answered pretty quickly.

Clarification: I am not attempting to justify any of the current issues in Iraq nor draw a comparision between the Iraqi threat and the Nazi threat. My purpose is to try and spark conversation on how "atrocities" can be viewed in a different light by some.

[ May 19, 2004, 14:55: Message edited by: sachmo ]

Grauzone

May 19th, 2004, 04:05 PM

I agree your opinion about human nature. To survive should be always the highest priority. But in the actual politics USA fights not for survival.

Atrocities done in the past are good lessons to learn better ways to live together. They shows us many possibilities to solve actual problems, and ways wouldn't work. My point is that i see too much decisions done by potitians today, they could do better if they take a little time to see in our past.

Germany was one of few coutries where "bombing to democracy" ever functions. The couse wos not the total destruction of this country, it was the "Marchall Plan" helps the germans to build up their state.

Reduction of poverty reduces terror, not bombs. I now no "smart-anti-terrorist-bomb". Bombs hit almost the false peole in such asymetric combat.

All that money wasted in Iraq could be effectively used on other spots.

dogscoff

May 19th, 2004, 04:19 PM

To the german guy who says that many germans are loaded with guilt over the actions of their predecessors:

You are right, the current generation should not feel guilty of the "sins of the father", and very few people in the world now judge modern germany by it's actions 60 years ago. Most people recognise modern Germany as a peace-loving nation.
The younger generation shouldn't feel guity. Each individual should be judged on their own actions.

However it's interesting that while nobody dreams of judging modern Germany by their actions in the war, many people want us to judge modern USA by *their" actions in the war. How many times have I heard "If it wasn't for us you'd all be speaking german by now"?

To whoever pointed out that neither Hitler nor Stalin came from their own countires: Keep your eye on Schwarzenegger.

And to all those people trying to justify the lowering of human rights: You can't. As soon as you put anything at all- even your own survival (and I we can argue later about just how threatened the survival of the USA is/ was) then you can no longer proclaim yourself to be any better than hitler/ stalin/ saddam hussein/ Darth Vadrer/ insert your bad guy of choice here. Remember that Al-Qaeda also think that they are fighting to protect the survival of their way of life. Hitler used similar propaganda to justify the kind of atrocities we have all been condemning here.

Grauzone

May 19th, 2004, 04:33 PM

Originally posted by dogscoff:
However it's interesting that while nobody dreams of judging modern Germany by their actions in the war, many people want us to judge modern USA by *their" actions in the war. How many times have I heard "If it wasn't for us you'd all be speaking german by now"?
If you mean me: I do not try to judge USA for their wars of the past. I'm not agree with the actual politic of USA goverment. They make avoidable failures now.

sachmo

May 19th, 2004, 04:37 PM

Originally posted by dogscoff:

And to all those people trying to justify the lowering of human rights: You can't. As soon as you put anything at all- even your own survival (and I we can argue later about just how threatened the survival of the USA is/ was) then you can no longer proclaim yourself to be any better than hitler/ stalin/ saddam hussein/ Darth Vadrer/ insert your bad guy of choice here. Remember that Al-Qaeda also think that they are fighting to protect the survival of their way of life. Hitler used similar propaganda to justify the kind of atrocities we have all been condemning here. So it would be better to be dead with a clear conscience than to be alive having done horrible things to defend yourself?

I think that each situation must be looked at independently.

Grauzone

May 19th, 2004, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by sachmo:
So it would be better to be dead with a clear conscience than to be alive having done horrible things to defend yourself?

I think that each situation must be looked at independently.I think as you do.

Atrocities

May 19th, 2004, 05:03 PM

For me, all I want is to know that my family is safe, that the world is at peace, terrorism is no longer the tool of trade for those who want to get their own way, and food and gas aplenty.

I want enough money to live comfortably, and feel safe when I travel abroad and live without the fear that the FBI or other will come crashing into my home because of some computer glitch that identified me as a threat.

To walk through an airport and get on a plane without sweating the security checks, or being blown up in flight or flown into a building by crazy mad men.

I would love to live in a world where we all just focused upon making each others lives better, expanding our understanding of the planet and the universe while working toward the common goal of exploring the unknown abyss of space.

A planet where religion and people respected each other enought to never fight again over petty doctrains of idology and fear.

A planet where I am free to express my opinion, own a gun, drive a car, eat pizza, poop in the woods, fish, hunt, watch tv, play video games, take picutes, and travel from state to state without the fear of someone attempting to take those things away from me.

Image what a world like that would be like. No wars, no famons, no violence, just one big happy planet working toward the common goal of bettering each others lives while expanding our own.

But we don't live in that world, ours is filled with power hungry mad men, corprate jugernoughts out to deforest the planet and enslave the population, religious zeolots who think that God want them to kill inocent children by blowing up school busses and train stations. That the road to salvation lays through atrocities against humanity and that toppling a building full of people is how to earn your passage into heaven.

I hate the violence that is so rampant throught the world where one must kill in order to survive or to feed ones family. Have we not out grown this manality of beat they neighbor into oblivion over petty crap?

If Jesus walked the earth today he would most likely not be a yuppie driving a Hummer while talking on his cell phone to his theorpist, he would be, I think, a poor man working his life away trying to make thing better for those around him. Hey wait a minute; isn't that what most of us are doing? I am a firm believer that all of the planets hardships are caused by only a small percent of the people who live on it. The rest of us just want to live and let live.

War is bad, very bad, and I pray that the one we are in now ends soon.

dogscoff

May 19th, 2004, 05:26 PM

So it would be better to be dead with a clear conscience than to be alive having done horrible things to defend yourself?
Within limits, yes. However it is perfectly possible for a nation to defend itself against an attack without resorting to the kind of methods outlawed by the geneva convention.

If you mean me:
I didn't mean you.

primitive

May 19th, 2004, 07:31 PM

Originally posted by dogscoff:
.
.
To whoever pointed out that neither Hitler nor Stalin came from their own countires: Keep your eye on Schwarzenegger.
.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

mottlee

May 19th, 2004, 07:50 PM

Originally posted by orm:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Randallw:
Stalin murdered many more of his own people* than Hitler yet Hitler is considered worse... Truely History is written by the victor.

*strangely enough neither Stalin or Hitler was actually from the country he ran. I think you are right. It is the precicion and efficiency that makes germans to the worst criminals in this time (and the fact that they loose the conflict). But i don't understand why and how my generation of german adults is responsible for this crime. To criticise Israelian politics brings you automaticaly near to the position of Antisemitism, even though many of israelian doings are not so far from what Stalin has do with ethnical minorities in russia. And why do the USA protect this behaviour? <hr /></blockquote>I for one do not "Blame" Germany or the German people for what a few did, the German army was like ours, protecting their home (in the end) would we all not do that? for a people to take the "Blame" for someone else is wrong,look what we Americans have done to the native Americans here!

sachmo

May 19th, 2004, 08:00 PM

Originally posted by dogscoff:

Within limits, yes. However it is perfectly possible for a nation to defend itself against an attack without resorting to the kind of methods outlawed by the geneva convention.

I have not read the articles of the Geneva convention, so I cannot comment on each of them in particualar. However, with just my passing knowledge of them, I think I'd have to disagree with your statement.

Just taking as an example a war where one country has a tremendous military advantage over the other. The conventional war will be over in days, but the guerilla conflict could Last for a long time. The weaker force would have to break the will of the larger force, as they cannot hope to win a military victory. To break their will, they would almost assuredly have to commit atrocities against the soldiers of the invading army before the invading army can break the will of the people.

Gandalf Parker

May 19th, 2004, 08:01 PM

Interesting notes about Germany: Nazism was voted into power with less than 50% of the votes. The stance was rebuilding the economy and protection from things outside of the country. Early changes were in defense of national security. It was only later when they discovered that "temporary actions" werent being removed that many started getting nervous.

dogscoff

May 19th, 2004, 08:08 PM

To break their will, they would almost assuredly have to commit atrocities against the soldiers of the invading army before the invading army can break the will of the people.
Then it's better to die or just give up the fight. If my country were invaded and I were fighting a guerilla resistance, I would kill enemy soldiers at every opportunity and using whatever sneaky methods were available to me, but to commit human rights abuses beyond that..?

Well, if I were to win by such methods then I would no longer be the same person at the end of it and the country would no longer be the same country I had tried to defend. It would not be a worthwhile victory.

Maybe I would feel differently if I were in that situation, but that wouldn't make it right.

narf poit chez BOOM

May 19th, 2004, 09:11 PM

Originally posted by CNCRaymond:
DELURKING

You can fire off your counter points, I won't be reading them.

RE-LURKING That's hypocritical. 'You listen to me, but I won't listen to you.'

[ May 19, 2004, 20:15: Message edited by: narf poit chez BOOM ]

dogscoff

May 19th, 2004, 09:25 PM

good point narf. unfortunately, he's not listening...

sachmo

May 19th, 2004, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by dogscoff:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />
To break their will, they would almost assuredly have to commit atrocities against the soldiers of the invading army before the invading army can break the will of the people.
Then it's better to die or just give up the fight. If my country were invaded and I were fighting a guerilla resistance, I would kill enemy soldiers at every opportunity and using whatever sneaky methods were available to me, but to commit human rights abuses beyond that..?

Well, if I were to win by such methods then I would no longer be the same person at the end of it and the country would no longer be the same country I had tried to defend. It would not be a worthwhile victory.

Maybe I would feel differently if I were in that situation, but that wouldn't make it right. <hr /></blockquote>I hear you, Dogscoff. I certainly wouldn't want to find out.
Maybe that's why they say war changes people. I'll have to ponder that.

Grauzone

May 20th, 2004, 01:17 AM

Originally posted by Randallw:
Stalin murdered many more of his own people* than Hitler yet Hitler is considered worse... Truely History is written by the victor.

*strangely enough neither Stalin or Hitler was actually from the country he ran. I think you are right. It is the precicion and efficiency that makes germans to the worst criminals in this time (and the fact that they loose the conflict). But i don't understand why and how my generation of german adults is responsible for this crime. To criticise Israelian politics brings you automaticaly near to the position of Antisemitism, even though many of israelian doings are not so far from what Stalin has do with ethnical minorities in russia. And why do the USA protect this behaviour?

Randallw

May 20th, 2004, 01:24 AM

Blaming Germans today for what past generations did is as stupid as antisemitism blaming jews for what their ancient ancestors might have once done.

Renegade 13

May 20th, 2004, 02:10 AM

I have to say that I've thought about this subject quite a bit. And I've come to the conclusion that if my home country was invaded, I would kill enemy soldiers at any opportunity, while remaining hidden, if possible. However, I would not force them to suffer before they died. Their death would be clean and (relatively) painless. A quick shot.

Now that might sound a little scary to some of you, but I would do whatever it took to protect my friends and family....within limits. It is not worth degrading and dehumanizing yourself to expel an enemy from your homeland. In the end, you would end up being a worse person than if you had died.

Personally, I would rather die than commit atrocities against any other human being.

PvK

May 20th, 2004, 03:16 AM

Like many such "moral" questions, the reason for doing the right thing is often not just "to be good" or even "to be able to live with oneself".

In this example, commiting attrocities as the occupied underdog resistance fighter may be very likely to result in terrible retribution upon one's own people (a typical historical result) - likely worse than non-attrocious resistance would. When the enemy has your people at their mercy, it's not the best time to play "who can inflict the worst attrocities". Even if somehow the enemy would not reciprocate, the tactical value of attrocity is often minimal, or even negative. In fact, a common and ancient propaganda technique (though also, not a wise one in the end) is to lie about the attrocities of the enemy, to promote fearlessness and determination in one's own people.

PvK

Baron Munchausen

May 20th, 2004, 03:18 AM

Originally posted by primitive:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by dogscoff:
.
.
To whoever pointed out that neither Hitler nor Stalin came from their own countries: Keep your eye on Schwarzenegger.
.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif <hr /></blockquote>It may sound 'cute' now, but if they start the process to amend the Constitution so foreign-born people can be President it'll be paranoia time.

Renegade 13

May 20th, 2004, 05:46 AM

Hmm....A Canadian president....I can see possibilities here.... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

THAT COULD BE ME!! BE AFRAID, BE VERY VERY VERY AFRAID!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Randallw

May 20th, 2004, 06:27 AM

Originally posted by dogscoff:

To whoever pointed out that neither Hitler nor Stalin came from their own countires: Keep your eye on Schwarzenegger. Ok, but since I am neither American let alone californian and I would have voted for him anyway I am not particularly worried.

narf poit chez BOOM

May 20th, 2004, 09:13 AM

Originally posted by Renegade 13:
Hmm....A Canadian president....I can see possibilities here.... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

THAT COULD BE ME!! BE AFRAID, BE VERY VERY VERY AFRAID!!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif 'And so in closing, on this, the Last day of my term, I'm surrendering the United States of America to Canada...'

Nah. I would never do that. You can let me be president. Really.

Randallw

May 20th, 2004, 02:26 PM

If I, a Tasmanian, became President I would round up all the native inhabitants (ie. Americans) and send them to live in Hawaii (which even then is too hospitable). Then move all the Tasmanians to America where we could use the reources and Land without having to worry about any indigenous people, just like here http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif .

sachmo

May 20th, 2004, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by Randallw:
If I, a Tasmanian, became President I would round up all the native inhabitants (ie. Americans) and send them to live in Hawaii (which even then is too hospitable). Then move all the Tasmanians to America where we could use the reources and Land without having to worry about any indigenous people, just like here http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif . The island would sink.

Fyron

May 20th, 2004, 11:04 PM

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
'And so in closing, on this, the Last day of my term, I'm surrendering the United States of America to Canada...'

Nah. I would never do that. You can let me be president. Really. Too bad all treaties have to be ratified by the Senate. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

narf poit chez BOOM

May 21st, 2004, 02:35 AM

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
'And so in closing, on this, the Last day of my term, I'm surrendering the United States of America to Canada...'

Nah. I would never do that. You can let me be president. Really. Too bad all treaties have to be ratified by the Senate. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif <hr /></blockquote>Well, I would disolve the senate the day before.

Did I say that out load?

Oops.

dogscoff

May 21st, 2004, 09:58 AM

{quote]
Well, I would disolve the senate the day before.
[/quote]

Of course to do that you'd need to be granted "special emergency powers" in a carefully-engineered national crisis.

I can't decide whether to draw a parallel to Attack of the Clones, Babylon 5 or modern-day USA...

Grauzone

May 21st, 2004, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by dogscoff:

Of course to do that you'd need to be granted "special emergency powers" in a carefully-engineered national crisis.

I can't decide whether to draw a parallel to Attack of the Clones, Babylon 5 or modern-day USA... [/QB]Hear ye http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

geoschmo

June 3rd, 2004, 04:24 PM

Why should I love my country?

It is nothing but a place.

It's the place I am from.

This chair is where I am sitting, but I do not love it.

I am not free because of my country.

I am free because of the people who lived in my country before me.

They gave up their lives to gain their freedom.

Someone after them gave up their life to keep that freedom.

Now I give up my freedom to save my life.

Someday someone will give up their life to get that freedom back.

Because they are from my country.