Author Topic: Desecration of enemy bodies.  (Read 2211 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Poseidon

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 399
  • Darwins +24/-0
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #58 on: January 21, 2012, 10:47:56 PM »
I hasten to agree with Jay that it is in poor taste to whiz on dead enemies. But there is another side to the scenario. It is fair to suppose that the dead enemy was doing his damnest to kill you just a few minutes or maybe an hour ago. The soldiers were still juiced. The dumb mistake that they made is letting their adrenelin go to the extreme of allowing the video to be made.

Those of you who have never been subjected to armed and deadly combat are not quite qualified to pass judgement on these guys or the engaged military in general. I can tell you, first hand, that some of the least intellectual soldiers are, in combat, just as loyal and protective of  their fellow soldiers, marines, or sailors as anyone could be. After just a few hours of real combat it is not billy bad ass anymore.  Those guys get humble real fast when they know damned well that they may never see another sunrise.

Want to read a very good book about this stuff....? Perhaps not, but if you do, try this one: Shade It Black. It is too much detail about a woman marine who was stationed in Iraq. She was assigned to the MA unit. MA in military speak, means mortuary affairs. She was responsible along with several others, for putting body parts in bags and trying to identify which part went with what body and then trying to assign some kind of identity to the remains. She and her group sometimes had to pick up parts with buckets and sponges.  Females were not supposed to be at the front lines but she was.  Would it surprise anyone to learn that she suffered PTSD in spades after her discharge. Another book about a female in Iraq is; Hesitation Kills. This one is about a female marine who was in charge of a group of reconnaissance drones (not the same as Predator drones). Those cute little planes have the megapixel technology that can see the color and weave  of an enemies socks at 8000 feet. They also show our people and theirs getting blown all to hell.  Read those books if you want some real information about war and soldiering.

So pissing on corpses is not a good idea. But how about we cut those guys, and the thousands of others like them a little slack.  No, make that a lot of slack.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12573
  • Darwins +703/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #59 on: January 22, 2012, 09:34:27 AM »
I'm sorry but you are just displaying your ignorance of the facts so it would be pointless to get into any further discussion. 

I take that as a snarky way for you to exit the conversation and think you are saving face.  So, thank you for the concession. 

I'm not a history expert, Frank.  I'm not even a history buff.  So I maintain my position with the understanding that I could be wrong.  If I am wrong, I would prefer to know what is right.  If you do not even have enough respect for me to understand that and to explain how & why I am wrong, then having a discussion with you is not worth my effort. 


I agree with frank, other then violating freedoms, it is not isn't equal.  Forced soldiers fight crappy look at all the negative effects that it had on the Vietnam forced soldiers, killing whole towns.

You are just as wrong as Frank[1].  You are looking at an unjust and unpopular war that people did not want to fight.  In Vietnam the draft was not the problem.  The war itself was the problem.  It was perceived as unjust and not really our business being there.  It lacked specific, attainable goals and politically we were too constrained to really win. That seemed to be obvious to most of the public.  But a president never wants to withdraw from a war without a clear victory. Politically, it looks bad.

In a democratic republic, if we the people do not want to fight in a war, the president has no business starting one.  If the prez knows something we dont' - that the war is a just and necessary war to fight, and that in not executing the war the existence of the nation is at risk - then he needs to make that case and we all need to participate.   

I gave the the example of ww2 where almost 2/3 of the soldiers were drafted.  Why did they not have problems to the extent they had in vietnam[2]?

Besides the draft if you were to implement the draft it would encourage the failing leadership to fight more wars more carelessly.

You are going to have to put more effort into it.  This statement has no rationale behind it.  Please explain to me how having a draft will encourage more wars.  I think a draft gives the public at large reason to be more engaged in the war related decisions of our leaders and it would makes wars less frequent.  The possibility that any one of us could have to fight in some far-flung adventure would make us pay more attention to what the potus is saying.
 1. that is, really, really wrong
 2. they still had atrocities, murders, and shooting unpopular offices.  All wars do.
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7289
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #60 on: January 22, 2012, 10:05:38 AM »
I hasten to agree with Jay that it is in poor taste to whiz on dead enemies. But there is another side to the scenario. It is fair to suppose that the dead enemy was doing his damnest to kill you just a few minutes or maybe an hour ago. The soldiers were still juiced. The dumb mistake that they made is letting their adrenelin go to the extreme of allowing the video to be made.

[snip]

So pissing on corpses is not a good idea. But how about we cut those guys, and the thousands of others like them a little slack.  No, make that a lot of slack.

I think I can understand this view - but I have never been a soldier.  And I don't pretend to know what it might be like to finish up a real fight for my life, and "come down" from that level of adrenaline, fear, anger, etc.  I'm reminded of the cops who have that high rush of adrenaline after a dangerous chase, and they proceed to over-power and literally beat up the suspect unnecessarily, in some cases.

So - the question I have is, who took the video of this, and why?  And then why did that video get published?  Was it a bystander?  Was it an innocent civilian who wanted to expose our troops behavior?  Or was it a soldier?  This process of decision-making needs an overhaul if it was the army who created and ultimately distributed this video.  If it was done outside of protocol by a soldier, he should be disciplined.

So two issues:  how to get our soldiers better prepared mentally to walk away from firefights without resorting to this type of behavior, and to modify and better control the way this video evidence is collected, managed, and ultimately distributed.

Offline JeffPT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2096
  • Darwins +238/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a lead farmer mutha fucka
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #61 on: January 22, 2012, 11:54:37 AM »
So pissing on corpses is not a good idea. But how about we cut those guys, and the thousands of others like them a little slack.  No, make that a lot of slack.

Poseidon, do you believe we should cut the same level of slack to the Iraqi soldier who desecrates an American in the same manner? If we are shown videos of mutilated Americans being dragged through the streets naked, should we just say, "that's not a good idea" and move on?  If you were the parent of said American soldier, would that still be your position, or would you rather climb through the TV screen and rip their eyes out with your bare hands?   That's the sort of thing that gets lost in cutting people slack for this type of stuff... the fact that the dead guy they're pissing on has a family somewhere that loves him. 

If you are (and I don't know you at all, and would not presume to judge you either way) saying that soldiers from both sides should be cut some slack, then I might agree somewhat with your stance.  If not, then it is massively hypocritical to cut our troops slack, and condemn our enemies for similar activities. The problem is that the vast majority of people on both sides of the fight are NOT going to see things your way.  And that fact should be taken into account I think.   

Personally, I think what they did is fucking terrible any way you look at it.  I don't agree with it, and I think they should be punished for it.  Desecrating that body is only going to fuel people's hatred of our country more.  While they may have killed one, the video will probably be used by propagandists to create dozens more just like him, which will probably contribute to the deaths of more Americans and more enemy soldiers.  The exact opposite of what we want.

I'm sorry that combat is hell, and that it makes people do strange things that they wouldn't normally do. But that flag they wear represents OUR country, so in essence, their actions represent all of us.  The enemy doesn't distinguish between the actions of the few and the will of the entire country any more than we do.  We see those towel heads dancing in the street in the middle of the day, burning our flag, and we think their whole country is full of nut jobs, when the vast majority of us have no clue what their lives are like.  Most of them probably don't want war any more than we do, but when they see stuff like this, that attitude might star to change. 

War is fucking stupid anyway.  Shit like this just makes things worse. 
Whenever events that are purported to occur in our best interest are as numerous as the events that will just as soon kill us, then intent is hard, if not impossible to assert. NDT

Offline MadBunny

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3617
  • Darwins +119/-0
  • Fallen Illuminatus
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #62 on: January 22, 2012, 02:34:46 PM »
So pissing on corpses is not a good idea. But how about we cut those guys, and the thousands of others like them a little slack.  No, make that a lot of slack.

No.  No slack at all.

Saying we need to give slack to soldiers on this stuff because what they do is hard is like saying we should tolerate police brutality because policing is hard.  Sorry but no.
Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a night.  Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #63 on: January 22, 2012, 02:39:55 PM »
 author=screwtape link=topic=21200.msg472838#msg472838 date=1327242867]

Quote
I take that as a snarky way for you to exit the conversation and think you are saving face.  So, thank you for the concession. 

I'm not a history expert, Frank.  I'm not even a history buff.  So I maintain my position with the understanding that I could be wrong.  If I am wrong, I would prefer to know what is right.  If you do not even have enough respect for me to understand that and to explain how & why I am wrong, then having a discussion with you is not worth my effort. 


It would take too long and it has nothing to do with this thread. Just Google it up. Almost all the major major battles took place on the eastern front. The majority of casulaties were inflicted there. The largest armies fought there. It had by far the longest front. This is from a site by your own countries forces.

Quote
Unfortunately, history shows these views concerning American and British supremacy and the importance of Normandy and the Western Front In Europe to be inaccurate. Operation OVERLORD and the massive cross-channel Invasion of Europe were not necessary to the military defeat if Germany. Furthermore, had the invasion merely been delayed for a few months, the political objectives which resulted from OVERLORD could have been attained with only a fraction of the British/American casualties.
These conclusions may seem startling or even ridiculous to those accustomed to popularly held views of allied victory in Europe. However, they are based on readily documented historical information. The historical record shows that by the end of 1943 the German Army had been beaten decisively on the eastern front and that it could not resist the increasing power and tempo of the Soviet advance to Berlin. It also shows that by early 1944 the American and British strategic bombing campaign was systematically devastating the German industrial base and that defeat or total incapacitation of the German war machine was inevitable -- sooner, not later. Most remarkable of all, however, history shows that American and British planners believed that the massive Normandy invasion was not necessary to achieve military victory, and that it could easily result in a catastrophic defeat for the allied forces. Such a result would, as a minimum, have lengthened rather than shortened the war and could well have caused incalculable damage to the allied cause.



http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/NoOverlord/index.html

There is any number of books, sites, documentary evidence that clearly states the war was won in the east. America did not save us Russia did.

"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline violatedsmurf80

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 392
  • Darwins +2/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #64 on: January 22, 2012, 04:47:15 PM »
You are just as wrong as Frank[1].  You are looking at an unjust and unpopular war that people did not want to fight.  In Vietnam the draft was not the problem.  The war itself was the problem.  It was perceived as unjust and not really our business being there.  It lacked specific, attainable goals and politically we were too constrained to really win. That seemed to be obvious to most of the public.  But a president never wants to withdraw from a war without a clear victory. Politically, it looks bad.

I agree to a point, the fact that the unmotivated were motivated because they had to or face jail time. In my opinion that makes the draft a bad idea. Yes it does look bad, look at the Iraq war everything was a lie that Bush told the public did it matter to him, nahh I don’t think that it did. 

In a democratic republic, if we the people do not want to fight in a war, the president has no business starting one.  If the prez knows something we dont' - that the war is a just and necessary war to fight, and that in not executing the war the existence of the nation is at risk - then he needs to make that case and we all need to participate


Your right but the problem I see is the fact that we as a democratic republic do not have all that much say in what goes on in this country. Not to take it off topic look at the executive orders that the presidents push though with out the peoples approval, or even the recent wars we are involved in with out the American approval and still going on.

 
You are going to have to put more effort into it.  This statement has no rationale behind it.  Please explain to me how having a draft will encourage more wars.  I think a draft gives the public at large reason to be more engaged in the war related decisions of our leaders and it would makes wars less frequent.  The possibility that any one of us could have to fight in some far-flung adventure would make us pay more attention to what the potus is saying.

How many conflicts have we been in sense Vietnam with the idea that if necessary we can use the draft I can think of three right off of the bat that encouraged the president not to worry if he had a strong enough army.

 look at Bay of Pigs Invasion, Grenada,  Panama, after the movement that america did to "stop the Marxist movement" it had nothing else to do, then comes the Iraq war. If you feed the people the right words they will support it, till they get bored of it.
When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.”--- Sinclair Lewis

I believe there is something out there watching over us. Unfortunately, it's the government.

Offline MadBunny

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3617
  • Darwins +119/-0
  • Fallen Illuminatus
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #65 on: January 22, 2012, 08:16:08 PM »
There is any number of books, sites, documentary evidence that clearly states the war was won in the east. America did not save us Russia did.

Sorry to disappoint you Frank, but the biggest factor in Hitlers defeat comes down to Hitler himself.

At almost every level the generals in the German army were very, very good.  The problem is that the commander, in this case Hitler, made poor choices.

Take the Atlantic campaign for example;  In the beginning of the war, when U-boats were basically kings of the ocean and sinking so many ships they had to restock torpedoes, Hitler had a hard on for so called 'super destroyers' and scaled back on U-boat production.  Later in the war when the Allies were sinking so many U-boats that an assignment to one was tantamount to a death sentence, production was ramped up on them.

While the Russian front did have a huge impact on the war itself, to pretend that the American/Allied involvement was inconsequential is revisionist.


Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a night.  Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Offline Poseidon

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 399
  • Darwins +24/-0
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #66 on: January 23, 2012, 02:35:55 AM »
Madbunny I am disappointed in your attempt to compare police work to military personel in a combat zone. Your writing and thought processes have heretofore been much better than that one.

I have the utmost respect for my local cops. In December we had one of our city policemen shot and killed by some screwball kid.  My community took that pretty personally. Cops have a dangerous job to be sure.

That police face the possibility of danger every day is not in the same league with dogfaces in a combat zone.

Try to imagine that you are part of a patrol party. You have not been able to bathe for three weeks, you are getting only three or four hours of sleep in a day, you have eaten MREs exclusively for weeks and often only one MRE meal a day.  You dare not let your guard down because the enemy is quite good at what he does. He will ambush your unit and start a firefight that may last for hours on end, frequently throughout the night. You are afraid to ride a Hummer a few clicks down some dusty road because of the ever present IEDs, sometimes there can be as many as 15 or 20 of them within one kilometer. You have absolutely no way of determining which of the civilians are friendlies and which one will blow you up.  You are tired very tired, you have to sleep on the ground if at all, you just want to get this miserable job done and get the hell out of this god forsaken place .....but not in a body bag.  All the while you are seriously worried about your wife and children back home. You are within a hairs breadth of losing it all. Is it any surprise that people in these circumstances sometimes do stupid things? 

And as for Frank...........well he has some information that sounds too much like one of the conspiracy tales of a disgruntled and seriously tilted pseudo historian.

Offline plethora

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3457
  • Darwins +60/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Metalhead, Family Man, IT Admin & Anti-Theist \m/
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #67 on: January 23, 2012, 06:48:15 AM »
You are tired very tired, you have to sleep on the ground if at all, you just want to get this miserable job done and get the hell out of this god forsaken place .....but not in a body bag.  All the while you are seriously worried about your wife and children back home. You are within a hairs breadth of losing it all. Is it any surprise that people in these circumstances sometimes do stupid things? 

First off ... I'm very interested in your response to JeffPT's question of whether we should give enemy soldiers the same kind of slack for desecrating fallen American soldiers' bodies. Go on ...

Second ... they signed up for this shit... and while some of them may regret it when they get into the shit the first time ... many of them go back voluntarily for additional tours knowing full well they'll see combat again. So I have no sympathy for someone who voluntarily puts themselves into this situation and then expects me to cut them some slack when they do something stupid.

Third ... I have a wife and kid. I support them and they need me. They need me to be present and here with them in our daily lives ...they need me to keep myself healthy and safe for their sake. If someone with a wife and kids signs up to be sent to war... I'm sorry but they must take full responsibility for putting themselves and their families in that situation. I would never do that to myself, my wife and or my kid. They need to get their fucking priorities straight.
The truth doesn't give a shit about our feelings.

Offline Brakeman

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1243
  • Darwins +47/-3
  • Gender: Male
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #68 on: January 23, 2012, 07:01:36 AM »
Madbunny I am disappointed in your attempt to compare police work to military personel in a combat zone. Your writing and thought processes have heretofore been much better than that one.

You must be 12 years old and still reading comic books. You do know that the vast majority of american soldiers in Combat that you describe (Afghanistan/ Iraq) work in huge groups, have vastly superior Armour, Firepower, Training, and Field intelligence.  They have the easiest military job in the world. Mexican police on the other hand have a very short life expectancy, fight with poor training and basic, sometimes worn out weaponry and have the worst field intel in the business because of corruption.

I have lived in a war zone for a short while, and I have been in more than one fire fight in my life, and I have been shot before out in the field and wondered if I was going to die.  So don't think I don't have a pretty fair idea of the emotional stress they feel.

People, Soldier too, don't suddenly change personality in a war zone or a stressful situation. These soldier are loose canons and the "celebration in the endzone" shit should have been beaten out of them in boot camp. You can't sugar coat it, if they do something to hurt the goal or cause, they are bad for the military and actions like this are precursors to war criminals like the Mai Lai massacre soldiers.

The Soldier's job is a hard one, but what makes it hard is the discipline required. If a soldier doesn't have discipline he/she definately has chosen the wrong vocation.
Help find the cure for FUNDAMENTIA !

Offline Brakeman

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1243
  • Darwins +47/-3
  • Gender: Male
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #69 on: January 23, 2012, 07:05:53 AM »
As a small addendum, I know who I'm talking about too. My brother was a US army ranger not so long ago and he was (and still is to an extent) a loose canon who never should have been trusted with even a pointy stick in combat, in my opinion.
Help find the cure for FUNDAMENTIA !

Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12447
  • Darwins +293/-32
  • Gender: Male
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #70 on: January 23, 2012, 08:22:08 AM »
I suppose that if they decided to go on to rape and murder the wife and kids of their victims, instead of pissing on their victims, then they should similarly be "cut some slack".  After all, we just don't understand the psychological pressures they're being put under.  They can't be held fully responsible for their actions.

Right, Poseidon?
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.

Offline violatedsmurf80

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 392
  • Darwins +2/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #71 on: January 23, 2012, 09:00:41 AM »
I suppose that if they decided to go on to rape and murder the wife and kids of their victims, instead of pissing on their victims, then they should similarly be "cut some slack".  After all, we just don't understand the psychological pressures they're being put under.  They can't be held fully responsible for their actions.

Right, Poseidon?

We are past that rape and murder crap. thye did so in veitnam, there are two vary famous ones quang ngai province is the only one i can think of at the moment.



First off ... I'm very interested in your response to JeffPT's question of whether we should give enemy soldiers the same kind of slack for desecrating fallen American soldiers' bodies. Go on ...

America has look at somalia for example.
When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.”--- Sinclair Lewis

I believe there is something out there watching over us. Unfortunately, it's the government.

Online Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12447
  • Darwins +293/-32
  • Gender: Male
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #72 on: January 23, 2012, 09:02:08 AM »
We are past that rape and murder crap. thye did so in veitnam, there are two vary famous ones quang ngai province is the only one i can think of at the moment.

Who's past it?  I was asking a relevant question about Poseidon's position.
I have not encountered any mechanical malfunctioning in my spirit.  It works every single time I need it to.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #73 on: January 23, 2012, 09:25:08 AM »
Madbunny I am disappointed in your attempt to compare police work to military personel in a combat zone. Your writing and thought processes have heretofore been much better than that one.

I wouldn't say that. The rules of engagement are so...restrictive...in Iraq and Afghanistan as to effectively limit our actions basically to that of a police action. Imagine a gang fight breaking out in the streets of California or New York. It's practically the same scenario[1]. There is no front. There is no easily identifiable enemy force with uniforms and movements we can track. It's a bunch of locals with rifles and a couple of RPG's. The biggest threat over there is the roadside bombs.

We were instructed that the only time we were authorized to engage a target is if we could actually SEE them pointing a weapon at us and firing at us. Then again, I was in a maintenance unit and never left the base so I can't speak for the units who went out on patrols or door to door in the villages. We were called Fobbits but the same RoE applied to us if the base was over run. We were actually instructed to "hide" inside a building if the base was over run. Imagine being told THAT shit as a soldier serving in a combat zone.

"Here's your weapon, ammunition and combat gear. Now, if we are attacked by enemy forces you be sure and hide in a safe place."

Kinda fucked up if you ask me.
 1. Just happening everyday and in more places
I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #74 on: January 23, 2012, 01:27:28 PM »


And as for Frank...........well he has some information that sounds too much like one of the conspiracy tales of a disgruntled and seriously tilted pseudo historian.

And from Madbunny
Quote
Sorry to disappoint you Frank, but the biggest factor in Hitlers defeat comes down to Hitler himself.

This is fascinating. I'm contradicting a deeply held belief and you're reacting exactly like someone having their religion attacked. You won't even believe a Lieutenant Colonel in your own airforce who provides you with a long list of references. It's all a conspiracy eh? Amazing.

Now you know why it's so hard to make a dent in religious belief.
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline MadBunny

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3617
  • Darwins +119/-0
  • Fallen Illuminatus
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #75 on: January 23, 2012, 02:29:05 PM »
Madbunny I am disappointed in your attempt to compare police work to military personel in a combat zone. Your writing and thought processes have heretofore been much better than that one.

I have the utmost respect for my local cops. In December we had one of our city policemen shot and killed by some screwball kid.  My community took that pretty personally. Cops have a dangerous job to be sure.

That police face the possibility of danger every day is not in the same league with dogfaces in a combat zone.
So your argument is then that they should be able to do whatever they feel like at any particular moment? Where do you draw the line?
No, it's a slippery slope to head down that line of thinking and you know it.

The analogy holds. 
Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a night.  Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Offline MadBunny

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3617
  • Darwins +119/-0
  • Fallen Illuminatus
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #76 on: January 23, 2012, 02:38:59 PM »
This is fascinating. I'm contradicting a deeply held belief and you're reacting exactly like someone having their religion attacked. You won't even believe a Lieutenant Colonel in your own airforce who provides you with a long list of references. It's all a conspiracy eh? Amazing.

Now you know why it's so hard to make a dent in religious belief.

You reposted:
Quote
Furthermore, had the invasion merely been delayed for a few months, the political objectives which resulted from OVERLORD could have been attained with only a fraction of the British/American casualties.

If the political objectives were to divide Germany's forces and push them out of occupied territories then that would still have required an on the ground operation, which would have required some kind of beachhead.  However, you will note that the quote you posted in no way counters my stipulation that Hitler had himself mismanaged his war efforts.

I suppose that if you want to argue that perhaps a Russian occupation of all those lands to the West of Germany would have resulted in a better outcome that's debatable.[1] As it was, we were left with East and West Germany after the surrender.
 1.  Though looking at what they did with East Germany, I think probably it wouldn't have.
Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a night.  Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12573
  • Darwins +703/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #77 on: January 23, 2012, 04:13:26 PM »
Those of you who have never been subjected to armed and deadly combat are not quite qualified to pass judgement on these guys or the engaged military in general.

I don't accept this kind of argument that puts the military on a pedestal, as if citizens who have not served are somehow of lesser stature.  It is kind of like saying unless someone close to you has been murdered, you have no right to offer an opinion on the death penalty.  Well, yeah we do.  In fact, we are probably in a position to make a better decision.  You need people making decisions who are not emotionally involved with the situation.

I also reject this argument because the military itself has rules against pissing on dead enemy soldiers.  So, it's not just civilians who are saying this is unacceptable, it is the army itself. 

I can tell you, first hand,

Totally irrelevant to the topic at hand.  You are making an emotional plea.  Look, this is not an attack on everyone in the military.  It is criticism of a couple of boneheads who did something wrong and were stupid enough to make a video of it and then even stupider to put it on the internet. 

So pissing on corpses is not a good idea. But how about we cut those guys, and the thousands of others like them a little slack.  No, make that a lot of slack.

No.  They represent my country, which means by extension they represent me.  And I do not want to be represented in that manner.  They behaved in an unprincipled and illegal way.  If we are going to think we are a principled nation that follows the rule of law, then there is no slack for what they did.

Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12573
  • Darwins +703/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #78 on: January 23, 2012, 04:23:30 PM »
Quote
...The historical record shows that by the end of 1943 the German Army had been beaten decisively on the eastern front and that it could not resist the increasing power and tempo of the Soviet advance to Berlin. It also shows that by early 1944 the American and British strategic bombing campaign was systematically devastating the German industrial base and that defeat or total incapacitation of the German war machine was inevitable -- sooner, not later.

Bold mine.  Collective we. 

And the point I was trying to make in the first place was if the draft produces an incompetent defense, then how does one explain ww2? Which army - the ruskies or the Yanks - really won the war has little or nothing to do with that point. 

Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12573
  • Darwins +703/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #79 on: January 23, 2012, 04:33:26 PM »
I agree to a point, the fact that the unmotivated were motivated because they had to or face jail time. In my opinion that makes the draft a bad idea. Yes it does look bad, look at the Iraq war everything was a lie that Bush told the public did it matter to him, nahh I don’t think that it did. 

I'm not sure what you are saying here.  I am saying that in a war that is widely supported by the public, the draft works.  The draft also makes the public pay attention. 

So if we take Iraq 2 as the example, initially, it was very popular, and the draft would have been fine.  Maybe we would have had enough troops to prevent the looting (which really changed the tone of the occupation).  But, it was popular because as you pointed out, Bush (et al.) lied about WMDs.  By around 2004 that was fairly obvious.  If the public at large had more invested in the war - ie the possibility of being drafted or of having someone they cared about being drafted - perhaps Bush would not have had a second term. Maybe we would have left much sooner.

Your right but the problem I see is the fact that we as a democratic republic do not have all that much say in what goes on in this country.

We have all the say, but we say nothing because we have disengaged from the process.  We were told the war would not even be an inconvenience.  We were told to go shopping.  Go fucking shopping!  And we did, because it was an ugly thing to look at.  So we looked at it as little as possible.  The draft gives us reason to re-engage.


How many conflicts have we been in sense Vietnam with the idea that if necessary we can use the draft I can think of three right off of the bat that encouraged the president not to worry if he had a strong enough army.

?  Huh? 
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Online Gnu Ordure

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3832
  • Darwins +109/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #80 on: January 23, 2012, 08:35:45 PM »
Screwtape to Frank:
Quote
I know it kills you to give the US any credit for anything, but the facts is facts.  Without the US involvement, you would not exist. Or you would be wearing a little square moustache under your nose.
Those aren't facts, Screw. We destoyed the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain without any military assistance from you guys; Hitler couldn't invade after that. So our continued existence was assured.

Quote
We saved Euprope's britches in WW2
And of course, after the Battle of Britain, Hitler would have been happy to make peace with us, if we agreed that he could do what he wanted with Europe.

In other words, in August 1940 the fate of the good people of Europe actually lay in the hands of a single person; Churchill could have walked away from the conflict, abandoning Europe to a horrific fate - a significant proportion of the Government wanted to do that, but Churchill persuaded them otherwise, and then told Hitler to get stuffed.

Who knows how things would have turned out if the Japanese hadn't attacked the US? But describing what actually happened as the US saving our 'European britches' is somewhat simplistic.

Offline Poseidon

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 399
  • Darwins +24/-0
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #81 on: January 23, 2012, 11:54:37 PM »
We have two arguments going here. It is clear that I am hopelessly outnumbered and my position has been adequately shot down.  So be it, I concede the debate if not the concept.

And now for Gnu. If the Brits destroyed the Luftwaftee by themselves, then what the hell were all those P51s and P47s, and B24s and B17s doing at your airfields and in the skies over Germany?  And why did the yanks go ashore at Anzio?  It was not just to get some Authentic Italian pizza.  Sir Winston pressed very hard to set up an offensive to capture Rome and give some grief to the German field marshall and his army.   But the brits did not have the needed troops or equipment. That fell to the Yanks under the command of Major General Lucas, at the direction of Brigadier Mark Clark.  The Brits were, and are, a tough and determined lot, no doubt about that. However they needed more than a little help to defeat the Germans.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2700
  • Darwins +78/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #82 on: January 24, 2012, 01:30:21 AM »
Please stand by for this musical interlude and brief rant.





Fuck war Fuck war Fuck war Fuck war and fuck you if you want to divide and conquer or subdue the innocent and free

Long live the West Memphis 3



And now back to our regular programming.

I show affection for my pets by holding them against me and whispering, "I love you" repeatedly as they struggle to break free.

Offline plethora

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3457
  • Darwins +60/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Metalhead, Family Man, IT Admin & Anti-Theist \m/
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #83 on: January 24, 2012, 06:33:20 AM »
"... Army green was no safe bet":

The truth doesn't give a shit about our feelings.

Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12573
  • Darwins +703/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #84 on: January 24, 2012, 11:27:44 AM »
Those aren't facts, Screw. We destoyed the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain without any military assistance from you guys; Hitler couldn't invade after that. So our continued existence was assured.

I find that extremely difficult to believe.  Not the Battle of Britain part.  The second part.  It was only a matter of time before you would have been overrun.  Eventually you would have run out of supplies or people.  In fact, you were:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease#Historical_background
Quote
Following the fall of France, Great Britain became the only European nation actively engaged in war against Nazi Germany. Britain had been paying for its materiel in gold under "cash and carry", as required by the Neutrality Acts of the 1930s, but by 1941 it had liquidated so many assets that it was running short of cash.

During this same period, the U.S. government began to mobilize for a possible war, instituting the first-ever peacetime draft and a fivefold increase in the defense budget (from $2 billion to $10 billion). In the meantime, as the British began running short of money, arms, and other supplies, Prime Minister Winston Churchill pressured President Franklin D. Roosevelt for American help. Sympathetic to the British plight but hampered by the Neutrality Acts, which forbade arms sales on credit or the loaning of money to belligerent nations, Roosevelt eventually came up with the idea of "Lend-Lease".

Bold mine. 

Collective we.  Had any one of the Allies not participated, with the possible exception of the French[1], the Germans and Japanese would probably have won.

Why is it so hard to admit that without US involvement you would have lost? 


 1. and come on, can they really be considered to have participated?
Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline MadBunny

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3617
  • Darwins +119/-0
  • Fallen Illuminatus
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #85 on: January 24, 2012, 04:24:06 PM »
and come on, can they really be considered to have participated?

Well I do believe they ran some reasonably effective guerrilla operations.
Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a night.  Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Online Gnu Ordure

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3832
  • Darwins +109/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: Desecration of enemy bodies.
« Reply #86 on: January 24, 2012, 08:48:42 PM »
Screw:
Quote
I find that extremely difficult to believe.  Not the Battle of Britain part.  The second part.  It was only a matter of time before you would have been overrun..
As I said, we could have made peace. We could have abandoned Europe to their fate and retained our Empire. Who knows what might have happened after that?

But whatever, you were just trading with us. If you had stopped trading with us, we would have sought supplies elsewhere. You don't get to claim that you saved our lives just because you were trading with us.





Listen, the way I see it is, every Allied nation that fought against the Axis is simultaneously owed by their colleagues, but also indebted to them. We all contributed to a common cause. We needed each other. So one country claiming that they were the essential one, the necessary one... that's just crass. We were all in it together.

Quote
Why is it so hard to admit that without US involvement you would have lost?

But without British involvement you might have lost. Imagine this:

1. Britain makes peace with Hitler in 1940.
2. Hitler then makes peace with the USSR.
3. Hitler develops nuclear weapons (which the US haven't bothered to do, as there's peace in Europe).
4. Hitler nukes New York and Washington.

That could easily have happened - and you'd have lost.

And one reason it didn't happen is because Churchill refused to take step one, and so thousands of Americans in New York and Washington were not subsequently vaporized.

See the May 1940 War Cabinet CrisisWiki article. It says:
Quote
At that meeting on 28 May 1940, British Prime Minister Winston S. Churchill had saved Britain and perhaps Western Civilization from threat of Nazi domination.
That is not hyperbole. He set the course, and Britain followed. And Churchill set his course regardless of America, who didn't join in until late '41.