Subject:
|
Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 17 Mar 2003 17:50:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
464 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> Orion:
>
> It's a vexed issue. If you read some of the other articles you know that
> the legality of this possible war with Iraq is very much in question. If you
> are a catholic I think the Pope just gave you the basis for objecting to war
> on religious grounds. Onwards...
>
> Please note Terry Jones' (yes, of Monty Python fame -- but I believe he has
> a degree in history also) comments here:
>
> http://www.observer.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,910024,00.html
> "I appreciate Mr. Bush's argument that because Saddam Hussein has refused to
> take any notice of the UN, Mr. Bush should teach him a lesson by dropping a
> lot of bombs on him. But now he's telling us that if the UN won't give him
> permission to do it, he's jolly well going to drop a lot of bombs on Saddam
> anyway. In which case won't Mr. Bush be guilty of the same thing he's
> accusing Saddam Hussein of?"
>
> And just in case you think the Bush Cartel is not lying to every man, woman,
> child, and military man in the U.S., it is critical that it be understood
> that the case made before the U.N. by "Colon" Powell was based on false
> information (this was all over the foreign press for weeks before now, BTW
> -- but here is a U.S. trusted source):
>
> http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/14/sprj.irq.documents/index.html
> [In a nutshell:] "Intelligence documents that U.S. and British governments
> said were strong evidence that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons have been
> dismissed as forgeries by U.N. weapons inspectors."
>
> I am personally hard-pressed to believe anything but that this information
> was well-known to be false by the intelligence community, people at the
> Pentagon, and the frat-boys in the White House. I mean, cmon...!
>
> I want to honor our men in uniform for the service they provide in defending
> the homeland. If they are doing something else -- like fighting an illegal
> war far, far away from home -- then I am in a bind. I hope you can
> distinguish between the love I might bear a military man for doing the
> "right thing" as well as my disdain for such a person for doing the
> absolutely "wrong thing."
>
> An illustration in a slightly different arena:
> Should I thank a policeman for nearly clubbing a man to death in the streets
> of Los Angeles? But sure, I would thank the same policeman for rescuing a
> cat out of a tree or stopping a robbery in progress.
>
> Perhaps you might be interested in answering the following questions:
> 1. Why are you in the military?
> 2. Do you oppose this war?
> 3. Are you in a command position, or a strictly "follow orders" position?
> 4. What types of orders do you feel prepared to refuse, if any?
> 5. What is your stand on "just following orders" knowing that it may not be
> a defense in a future war crimes tribunal?
>
> I wish you and your family well, Orion -- beyond these mind-boggling
> questions and moral dilemmas. Please understand that I do not find you
> personally objectionable in any way. I am questioning a system and behavior
> that may be doing great injustice in the world at large. Please also note
> that I am not trying to persuade you of anything. I am trying to get your
> take on the issues from inside the crucible. I respect a person in your
> circumstances too much to claim feeling pity for you, but allow me to
> express sympathy with the difficulties with which you are faced.
>
> -- Hop-Frog
The bottom line is this:
When I joined the Navy six and a half years ago I took an oath. Basically,
among other things, it said I would obey the President and other officers
appointed above me. Do you renig on an oath simply becuse someone else
doesn't agree with that oath?
I am not willing to throw my life and my possible future career when I get
out of the service away simply becuse some people have a differing view on
world security.
I read somewhere that 25% of the people in my country (the US) don't support
a war even with imminent nuclear threat. The threat of chemical or
biological weapons is just as bad, if not worse.
I support the military members not because they are fighting a war. I
support them because they are mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, sons,
daughters, husbamds, wives, and coworkers away from their friends and
families and away from home.
Sorry if I rambled around but these are just a few of my thoughts
-Orion
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This...
|
| (...) It may seem strange, but there are Iraqis with mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, sons, daughters, husbands, wives, and co-workers too. I expect the vast majority of them mean you no harm; most of the rest are just following orders like (...) (22 years ago, 17-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
164 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
