Devil's Advocate:
You base your case on the fact that people need information in order to make wise decisions and know how to act. But your assumption is that people get good information from the internet, and that they are encouraged to act in a wise manner. If they are being fed bad information (perhaps even purposefully crafted bad information...) then wont their subsequent behavior be counter to the best interest of the nation and of themselves?
I almost entirely agree with your basic premise, but it is worthwhile to consider the details.
You're forgetting another quite important reason for cyber attack:
Data Theft or Data Compromise
Shutting down access to NASDAQ for a few hours would be pretty catastrophic, no doubt. Imagine for a moment, however, if an attack were able to manipulate the data, corrupt it, trace sources for transactions, gain access to corporate bank accounts, file transactions through NASDAQ credentials...
You have spent your time here telling us all how evil the US Military is. Not that there are some bad people. Not that there are some who have stepped over the line. Not that there are those we should pursue for crimes. Your every statement has been that the US Military is evil, is engaged where they should not be, and that they commit crimes against civilians. You further suggest that there are no other nation's armies occupying foreign lands or have soldiers among them that have commited crimes against civilians (with the exception of central Africa). I can provide quotes if you like.
I don't for a second suggest we give a pass to those who actually commit crimes, and that sentiment is reflected in the quotes listed above. But unlike you I do not equate the actions of those criminals to the nature of the US military. I don't assume that if the military is deployed and anyone is injured or killed that it was an act of criminal barbarism on the part of the US military. I actually make a distinction between the criminals and the honorable veterans. What stains the honor of the ENTIRE Army (and Navy, and Air Force, and Marines, and National Guard, and Coast Guard...) is omitting the honorable acts and harping constantly on only the issolated crimes.
You cannot hold a million people to a higher standard, or show them honor in any way, when your every remark paints them as a whole as evil and criminal. You cannot instill a soldier with a sense of pride, or honor, or duty, or sacrafice, when you make him believe that all he does is criminal and that he shares company with no one but criminals.
In not a single statement have I suggested that we forgive criminals because there are other criminals. I've stated repeatedly that we should condemn them all. I have said, however, that it's dishonest as hell to berate our military as openly evil, while saying NOTHING of the crimes of others. You cannot be honest and paint the US military with a sweeping stroke as evil, and allow by omission a belief that anyone we fight is an innocent lamb. Just like the terrorists in Afghanistan, just like rioters and murders in LA, use of force against these people does not inherently constitute a crime no matter how much you'd like to portray it as such.
You actually suggest that those who volunteer and swear to put their own life down for you do not deserve your willingness to seperate their honor and sacrafice from the criminals who find their way into service. You state plainly that they should just be that way, and that you should never have to acknowledge what they do. And you suggest you were in an Army. How would your fellow soldiers react to seeing you talk about all the crimes the military commits, and then stating that you shouldn't have to point out that they aren't all criminals?
That's a rather nebulous argument. The distinction is of course that stun guns have legitimate, legal uses. In fact, they allow for a method of detainment of resistant suspects that minimizes risk to both suspect and officer. It also allows for a non-lethal self defense tool.
What use is there for a mechanism that shuts down all internet use (as well as can be done, realisticaly), that is not inherently oppressive and issolationist?
The point being that designing a tool that has no other use than violating civil rights is a far cry from creating a technology that inadvertantly allows for negative impact on civil rights.
How would you react to every news publication being required to have a US State Dept Political Officer on duty at all times? Just in case, you know, we had to shut down all newspapers on short notice to 'protect' our citizens?
US Army did all that - to native americans, to Nicaragua, Bolivia, Honduras, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chile, black US citizens during LA riots etc.
Which thing, exactly, did the US Military do to black US citizens during the LA riots? Please provide your evidence. What exactly is out of context? How, exactly, does the cause of the riots relate to the US military in any way, shape or fashion?
And I can't be reasoned with? I'll say anything to justify abuses by the US army? Here are some quotes just under this subject:
I will concede that the US has made some really poor policy decisions in the past, some of which have involved the military and have caused serious harm.
- (#32654836)
I agree with you completely. We are, largely speaking, alligned with really bad people out of self-interest. China and the Saudi's being the tip of the iceburg.
- (#32654318)
As I said, I dont forgive soldiers who (might) have commited cold-blooded murder.
- (#32654170)
And you're precisely right about the rest of the world too! There are barbaric tyrants worldwide! But it's convenient for us to by clothes made in china, and toys from here, and oil from there, and blah blah blah. We don't report how brutal they are to their citizens because if we keep our mouths shut and foster a "world economy" we can get their shit cheap.
I don't mind condemning soldiers who step across the line. But I have a real problem with the hypocricy of forgiving everyone else in the world for their sins and being the first to step up onto the soap box to condemn our own.
- (#32654170)
We are on foreign soil today, for better or for worse, rightly or wrongly. We cant realistically just pull out and come home and everyone will forgive and forget our 'intrusions' or 'crimes' or whatever else.
The point of what I posted was to point out that if you want to condemn the US Military for its brutal activities, be consistent and be fair.
(#32654026)
The point is that you're so quick to condemn the military on this situation. And if they were actually knowingly murdering innocent people then they should be condemned.
(#32653494)
==============
By contrast, you have not said word one that there are good and honorable people in the US military. You've not suggested for a second that there are good and honorable officers, soldiers, servicemen and women all over the world, not just in our military but others. You've not acknowledged that our military has done some wonderful things for people too.
You wont go there because you're dishonest, and you have an agenda you wont allow to be inconvenienced by a balanced and fair discussion.
Ok, here's the key point for everyone to recognize: You will say anything and distort any truth, and manipulate any scenario in order to portray US troops and the US as a whole as evil. This is readily apparent when you claim that the US Army 'did all that' to black US citizens during the LA riots.
There was $1billion dollars worth of damage, and much more importantly 1000's of injuries and 53 deaths because of the RIOTERS.
There was ONE death after the US military was deployed there, and it was a motorist whom the troops shot because they said he was trying to run them over. You don't have a damn thing to say about the 1000's of nutjobs who looted THEIR OWN NEIGHBORS and THEIR OWN COMMUNITIES. No, you condemn the military for 1 act of self-defense. You dont mention the completely innocent man who was drug from his truck and beaten nearly to death, and who still has serious disability. You don't say anything about the Hispanic man drug from his vehicle and beaten, had is ear nearly severed from his head, and had his face caved in with a car stereo. The police could not even attempt to help in either case because they were ordered to retreat the area for their own safety.
But your reaction is to condemn the US military...
You've proven outright that you're dishonest and willing to go to any length to condemn anyone in uniform purely because they wear the uniform. Your credibility is zero.
- You're ok with someone's else's military fighting terrorists, just not our military.
- You're ok with military crimes against civilians so long as the military and the civilians are in the same country. (We'll disregard that Tibet is part of China... because China refuses to acknowledge Tibet's 90 years of claims to independence, and occupies it with military and issolates it from the world to prevent it becoming autonomous. There are consistent claims of military murdering residents of the Tibet region who speak out against China. This situation paralells that of Singapore in many regards. Including some pretty amazing claims of brutality against residents of Singapore in those occasions in which the Chinese mlitary finds themselves in a position to take them into custody.)
- You're ok with military force against civilians, so long as the military only fire over the border, or kill any civilian that approaches it, rather than actually moving into the other country and staying there.
- You're ok with military beating or killing unarmed civilians if there is a declared war.
- You believe that the American military is equivilent to central African militaries that actively engage in genocide and slavery.
- You believe that the US military is engaged in live operations on foreign soil, without the concent of the local government, and not as a part of a multi-nation initiative (the UN).
Yeah, I think our conversation is pretty much over.
Agreed. Like many of the policies put forth by our current administration, you might trust them to use those new powers and regulations for the betterment of all. (This is, of course, quite debatable.) But do you have confidence that the -next- President, and his administration, will be so caring?
One of the reasons for the Constitution specifically limiting the reach of the Federal Govt (that no one really seems to give a shit about anymore... we'll just "pass a law so you can see what's in it"...) is so that the Feds cannot build an empire over which they have absolute control. Putting in mechanisms to 'turn it off' does precisely that.
How many other nations have their soldiers occupying a foreign contry?
Seriously?
First of all, the US isnt "occupying" any nation by strict definition. We do have troops deployed on foreign soil, but only at the discretion of that nation's government.
Second, You don't "know" that the US troops are commiting any crimes against anyone. You might suspect it. You might even have a reasonable suspicion. But you don't "know" a damn thing unless you'd like to claim you've personaly witnessed something. That being said, how about Russia attacking Chechens? Some people would consider the army of Israel intercepting the Gaza Blocade runners being a crime against civilians. How about the attacks by the Chinese military against Tibet? How about the consistent combat between the Pakistani military, the Indian military, and civilians along their borders? How about the consistent crimes between North and South Korean military and civilians. How about between China and Singapore? How about between any number of central African nations and neighboring civilians?
But just to play your game, let's talk about Afghanistan alone. In order of troop concentation the following nations have troops in Afghanistan :
United States
United Kingdom
Germany
Francy
Italy
Canada
Poland
Netherlands
Turkey
Australia
Spain
Romania
Georgia
Denmark
Belgium
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Norway
Sweden
Hungary
Slovakia
Croatia
Portugal
Albania
Lithuania
Macedonia
Latvia
Estonia
New Zeland
Finland
Azarbaijan
Slovenia
Armenia
Greece
Mongolia
Singapore
Montenegro
United Arab Emerates
Ukraine
Luxembourg
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Ireland
Jordan
Iceland
Austria
I will concede that the US has made some really poor policy decisions in the past, some of which have involved the military and have caused serious harm. But to suggest that the US military has been a direct cause of a fair share of the barbarism in the world is dishonest and disgusting.
You suggest that 'the public' would not likely stand 'idly by'... That suggests that if they saw how bad war was they would not allow the war to continue. Particularly because we're spending 'billions on killing people'.
The flip side of that argument is, that if 'the public' could see in color on television nightly children strapped with explosives blowing up funerals, the 'the public' might well get pissed off enough at how evil an act like that is that they would be supportive of getting even more involved.
You suggest that the Truth would prevent our presence there. It might well have the opposite effect, but you've made your judgement apparent in your argument. You've already defined your version of the "Truth".
Please enlighten me: How did the US Military bring about Sharia Law?
How did it bring about Communist North Korea that is attempting to gain nukes? How did it bring about the 1 child law due to overpopulation in China that allows for murdering daughters because they are less valued? Again... this list can go on indefinately.
I didn't meant to suggest that military occupation would solve them. Only that I'm sick of hearing about how our military is so evil, and giving a complete pass to barbarism of anyone not in our military.
I agree with you completely. We are, largely speaking, alligned with really bad people out of self-interest. China and the Saudi's being the tip of the iceburg. Again, why is it we'll condemn our soldiers so quickly, and never discuss the crimes against humanity of those two regimes? Because we're fostering a "global market"...
That's exactly what you proposed? That's why you specifically pointed out how the truth would make our people not stand idly by while our government spent billions killing people overseas? Yeah, you're right. That's sounded completely unbiased...
Really? Ask Kim Jung Il 'pretty please' and he'll stop trying to get a nuke? Ask Ahmadinejad to 'pretty please' not threaten to drive the jews burning bodies into the ocean and he'll somehow find compassion? How about we ask the blood diamond miners to 'pretty please' stop? This list could go on indefinately.
Actually I completely agree with you. If you want the truth to be told, tell the whole truth! How can you not know that these soldiers snapped because they saw nearly a decade of absolute brutality in the way the 'innocent' people of the region treat women and children? You sure as hell arent hearing stories of that brutality on the news beyond an occasional snipit. As I said, I dont forgive soldiers who (might) have commited cold-blooded murder. But I dont forgive barbarism either. And neither should you. You should be exactly as pissed and exactly as interested in all US citizens knowing about all the barbarism as you are in all the US citizens know about these alledged murdering US soldiers.
But you dont appear to be. You arent calling for the heads of people who will murder a 7 year old boy, or rape a woman so that she can be beheaded. The left will instead find every reason why we just don't understand their culture, and they sure as hell dont advertise that kind of behavior to our public.
And you're precisely right about the rest of the world too! There are barbaric tyrants worldwide! But it's convenient for us to by clothes made in china, and toys from here, and oil from there, and blah blah blah. We don't report how brutal they are to their citizens because if we keep our mouths shut and foster a "world economy" we can get their shit cheap.
I don't mind condemning soldiers who step across the line. But I have a real problem with the hypocricy of forgiving everyone else in the world for their sins and being the first to step up onto the soap box to condemn our own.
Actually that's not my position. I'd rather we not have to have this conversation because we can snuggle up here at home all warm and cozy. But the reality is that that's not an option. We are on foreign soil today, for better or for worse, rightly or wrongly. We cant realistically just pull out and come home and everyone will forgive and forget our 'intrusions' or 'crimes' or whatever else.
The point of what I posted was to point out that if you want to condemn the US Military for its brutal activities, be consistent and be fair. If you want to display the evil of our soldiers, display the evil of all soldiers. If you want to prove how bad we are by display all information, then display all information about how bad those we fight are too. Give all the info, and let people actually make some self-judgements rather than expecting us to just swallow the spoon fed self-loathing of the far left.
For the same reason why I think uncensored war footage should be shown on the nightly news, maybe if the average civilian actually saw what goes on in war, the public would be less likely to stand by idly while our government spends billions on killing people on the other side of the planet.
Just my $.02
Hey, I'm good with that. Lets bring all the troops home, stop spending money "killing people on the other side of the planet", and only show the footage of the what other people do. How's that grab ya?
Just think, we can have hours of news footage daily of the plight of Muslim women alone. Being arrested for having a suntan? Being beaten, caned and stoned to death. Marital rape being legal? How about footage of rapes before their beheadings? How about child marriages? How about female castrations as punishment?
Would you like to talk about kids being strapped with explosives? That'll be juicy footage. How about bombs set off in weddings and funerals? How about 7 year old kids being murdered because their grandfather spoke out against the violence of the Taliban?
The point is that you're so quick to condemn the military on this situation. And if they were actually knowingly murdering innocent people then they should be condemned. But the fact is that you dont have all the facts, and yet you want desperately to see them all hanged along with the entire US military establishments. You casually ignore the attrocities commited around the world, many of which we have military might in place to help prevent. But the world media is so complicit that they don't report on those things, except for a by-line here and there quickly denouncing the act and distancing themselves, governments, and religions from them. It's glossed over as if to say "Yeah, that's a real shame... So anyway lets get those US Soldiers and hang 'em high!".
You think that we should show the world how brutal we are? Fine. As soon as we show the world how brutal the WORLD is I'll be right there with you. As soon as we start showing people WHY we are in many of the places we are, instead of shielding everyone here from the horrible acts that people outside our rubber-bumber nation commit then we can start showing them how all people compare. You don't want to show both sides. You don't want to give context. You don't want people here to see how bad some of these dictators and regimes are because you know it will do nothing if not ensure the resolve our nation has for kicking the crap out of some of the nutjobs out there.
War sucks. It's horrible. It's ugly. It changes people forever. But quite frankly, better that than live in a world where everyone's too afraid to stand up and fight the tyrants because it's not politically correct. You can hope for flowers and bunnies all you want. But there will always be people who really don't care what you hope for and are willing to crush any dream you ever had for your kids. And I'll always be supportive of us not standing there watching and doing nothing, while shielding our citizens because it might damage their delicate psyche's.
So you're suggesting that it's wiser to error on the side of disclosure?
Sorry, but if a piece of information is borderline on it's sensitivity it would be stupid to release it. Better to classify it and correct the error later. You can't correct an inappropriate disclosure.
You believe that anyone speeding through a particular intersection is stupid and doesnt care about their impact on others, or the danger they put others in. And you think that these stupid, insensitive people will modify their behavior to the benefit of others because you piss them off with a ticket? Will they care about others more? No. Will they be more sensitive to other people's safety? No. They might slow down, but it doesn't mean they are going to stop texting, eating, drinking coffee, putting on makeup, etc. It just means they'll be going slower when they slam into someone.
How about instead we hire people who drive around and punish people who are actually hazards to society? There are plenty of people that are actively dangerous, many of which arent even speeding, to keep cops busy for a long long time, and generate revenue through fines. It's also worthwhile to point out that most (if not all?) radar cameras don't issue tickets that reduce the points on a person's license, and they can't due to legal implications. A real live cop issuing a ticket does. You REALLY want to serve public safety? Instead of issuing a fine (like to rich people who couldn't care less), have a real cop issue a real ticket, and the idiot behind the wheel will soon be driving without a license. That happens and this insensitive clod will eventually land in prison instead of just paying off a string of meaningless fines.
I dont suggest for a moment that people breaking the law shouldnt be held accountable. But I do suggest that maybe a real person could make a real contact with me, and discuss the situation. I have a right to face my accuser, and I'm not interested in handing my fate over to a machine.
Your complaints can be summed up as; others having a lack of respect for you and your fellow citizens. When we're talking about a PUBLIC ROAD (that my taxes pay for), patrolled by a PUBLIC SERVANT (that my taxes pay for), and protected by PUBLIC CIVIL CODE (that my taxes pay for and are formulated by people I and my neighbors have voted into office), I believe I earned at lest the RESPECT of a face to face contact rather than an automated window-dressing ticket that doesn't actually solve a damn thing or help protect anyone. It just gives self-righteous nannies something to gossip about on the phone while driving through the 'burbs.
Precisely my point. Anyone is capable of rationalizing how their stance is the most logical and most beneficial to the majority. That's why we have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights. Those documents were written by amazingly intelligent people specifically to avoid rationalizations by well-intentioned buffoons.
I just hope that our Justice Dept starts leaning more toward the "Protect and Uphold the Constition" camp, and and at least attempts to distance themselves from the "Buffoons" camp.
Slashdot Mirror
Those have nothing to do with the Patriot Act. But you're right, they are pretty scary.
Devil's Advocate:
You base your case on the fact that people need information in order to make wise decisions and know how to act. But your assumption is that people get good information from the internet, and that they are encouraged to act in a wise manner. If they are being fed bad information (perhaps even purposefully crafted bad information...) then wont their subsequent behavior be counter to the best interest of the nation and of themselves?
I almost entirely agree with your basic premise, but it is worthwhile to consider the details.
You're forgetting another quite important reason for cyber attack:
...
Data Theft or Data Compromise
Shutting down access to NASDAQ for a few hours would be pretty catastrophic, no doubt. Imagine for a moment, however, if an attack were able to manipulate the data, corrupt it, trace sources for transactions, gain access to corporate bank accounts, file transactions through NASDAQ credentials
Absolutely false. Please point to the provision that allows the suspension of the Constitution.
Unless of course you're being facetious and suggesting that the Patriot Act is an unconstitutional act, which I can't really argue.
You have spent your time here telling us all how evil the US Military is. Not that there are some bad people. Not that there are some who have stepped over the line. Not that there are those we should pursue for crimes. Your every statement has been that the US Military is evil, is engaged where they should not be, and that they commit crimes against civilians. You further suggest that there are no other nation's armies occupying foreign lands or have soldiers among them that have commited crimes against civilians (with the exception of central Africa). I can provide quotes if you like.
I don't for a second suggest we give a pass to those who actually commit crimes, and that sentiment is reflected in the quotes listed above. But unlike you I do not equate the actions of those criminals to the nature of the US military. I don't assume that if the military is deployed and anyone is injured or killed that it was an act of criminal barbarism on the part of the US military. I actually make a distinction between the criminals and the honorable veterans. What stains the honor of the ENTIRE Army (and Navy, and Air Force, and Marines, and National Guard, and Coast Guard...) is omitting the honorable acts and harping constantly on only the issolated crimes.
You cannot hold a million people to a higher standard, or show them honor in any way, when your every remark paints them as a whole as evil and criminal. You cannot instill a soldier with a sense of pride, or honor, or duty, or sacrafice, when you make him believe that all he does is criminal and that he shares company with no one but criminals.
In not a single statement have I suggested that we forgive criminals because there are other criminals. I've stated repeatedly that we should condemn them all. I have said, however, that it's dishonest as hell to berate our military as openly evil, while saying NOTHING of the crimes of others. You cannot be honest and paint the US military with a sweeping stroke as evil, and allow by omission a belief that anyone we fight is an innocent lamb. Just like the terrorists in Afghanistan, just like rioters and murders in LA, use of force against these people does not inherently constitute a crime no matter how much you'd like to portray it as such.
You actually suggest that those who volunteer and swear to put their own life down for you do not deserve your willingness to seperate their honor and sacrafice from the criminals who find their way into service. You state plainly that they should just be that way, and that you should never have to acknowledge what they do. And you suggest you were in an Army. How would your fellow soldiers react to seeing you talk about all the crimes the military commits, and then stating that you shouldn't have to point out that they aren't all criminals?
That's a rather nebulous argument. The distinction is of course that stun guns have legitimate, legal uses. In fact, they allow for a method of detainment of resistant suspects that minimizes risk to both suspect and officer. It also allows for a non-lethal self defense tool.
What use is there for a mechanism that shuts down all internet use (as well as can be done, realisticaly), that is not inherently oppressive and issolationist?
The point being that designing a tool that has no other use than violating civil rights is a far cry from creating a technology that inadvertantly allows for negative impact on civil rights.
How would you react to every news publication being required to have a US State Dept Political Officer on duty at all times? Just in case, you know, we had to shut down all newspapers on short notice to 'protect' our citizens?
US Army did all that - to native americans, to Nicaragua, Bolivia, Honduras, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chile, black US citizens during LA riots etc.
Which thing, exactly, did the US Military do to black US citizens during the LA riots? Please provide your evidence. What exactly is out of context? How, exactly, does the cause of the riots relate to the US military in any way, shape or fashion?
And I can't be reasoned with? I'll say anything to justify abuses by the US army? Here are some quotes just under this subject:
I will concede that the US has made some really poor policy decisions in the past, some of which have involved the military and have caused serious harm.
- (#32654836)
I agree with you completely. We are, largely speaking, alligned with really bad people out of self-interest. China and the Saudi's being the tip of the iceburg.
- (#32654318)
As I said, I dont forgive soldiers who (might) have commited cold-blooded murder.
- (#32654170)
And you're precisely right about the rest of the world too! There are barbaric tyrants worldwide! But it's convenient for us to by clothes made in china, and toys from here, and oil from there, and blah blah blah. We don't report how brutal they are to their citizens because if we keep our mouths shut and foster a "world economy" we can get their shit cheap.
I don't mind condemning soldiers who step across the line. But I have a real problem with the hypocricy of forgiving everyone else in the world for their sins and being the first to step up onto the soap box to condemn our own.
- (#32654170)
We are on foreign soil today, for better or for worse, rightly or wrongly. We cant realistically just pull out and come home and everyone will forgive and forget our 'intrusions' or 'crimes' or whatever else.
The point of what I posted was to point out that if you want to condemn the US Military for its brutal activities, be consistent and be fair.
(#32654026)
The point is that you're so quick to condemn the military on this situation. And if they were actually knowingly murdering innocent people then they should be condemned.
(#32653494)
============== By contrast, you have not said word one that there are good and honorable people in the US military. You've not suggested for a second that there are good and honorable officers, soldiers, servicemen and women all over the world, not just in our military but others. You've not acknowledged that our military has done some wonderful things for people too.
You wont go there because you're dishonest, and you have an agenda you wont allow to be inconvenienced by a balanced and fair discussion.
Ok, here's the key point for everyone to recognize: You will say anything and distort any truth, and manipulate any scenario in order to portray US troops and the US as a whole as evil. This is readily apparent when you claim that the US Army 'did all that' to black US citizens during the LA riots.
...
There was $1billion dollars worth of damage, and much more importantly 1000's of injuries and 53 deaths because of the RIOTERS.
There was ONE death after the US military was deployed there, and it was a motorist whom the troops shot because they said he was trying to run them over. You don't have a damn thing to say about the 1000's of nutjobs who looted THEIR OWN NEIGHBORS and THEIR OWN COMMUNITIES. No, you condemn the military for 1 act of self-defense. You dont mention the completely innocent man who was drug from his truck and beaten nearly to death, and who still has serious disability. You don't say anything about the Hispanic man drug from his vehicle and beaten, had is ear nearly severed from his head, and had his face caved in with a car stereo. The police could not even attempt to help in either case because they were ordered to retreat the area for their own safety.
But your reaction is to condemn the US military
You've proven outright that you're dishonest and willing to go to any length to condemn anyone in uniform purely because they wear the uniform. Your credibility is zero.
Ok, to sum up:
... because China refuses to acknowledge Tibet's 90 years of claims to independence, and occupies it with military and issolates it from the world to prevent it becoming autonomous. There are consistent claims of military murdering residents of the Tibet region who speak out against China. This situation paralells that of Singapore in many regards. Including some pretty amazing claims of brutality against residents of Singapore in those occasions in which the Chinese mlitary finds themselves in a position to take them into custody.)
- You're ok with someone's else's military fighting terrorists, just not our military.
- You're ok with military crimes against civilians so long as the military and the civilians are in the same country. (We'll disregard that Tibet is part of China
- You're ok with military force against civilians, so long as the military only fire over the border, or kill any civilian that approaches it, rather than actually moving into the other country and staying there.
- You're ok with military beating or killing unarmed civilians if there is a declared war.
- You believe that the American military is equivilent to central African militaries that actively engage in genocide and slavery.
- You believe that the US military is engaged in live operations on foreign soil, without the concent of the local government, and not as a part of a multi-nation initiative (the UN).
Yeah, I think our conversation is pretty much over.
Agreed. Like many of the policies put forth by our current administration, you might trust them to use those new powers and regulations for the betterment of all. (This is, of course, quite debatable.) But do you have confidence that the -next- President, and his administration, will be so caring?
One of the reasons for the Constitution specifically limiting the reach of the Federal Govt (that no one really seems to give a shit about anymore... we'll just "pass a law so you can see what's in it"...) is so that the Feds cannot build an empire over which they have absolute control. Putting in mechanisms to 'turn it off' does precisely that.
How many other nations have their soldiers occupying a foreign contry?
Seriously?
....
First of all, the US isnt "occupying" any nation by strict definition. We do have troops deployed on foreign soil, but only at the discretion of that nation's government.
Second, You don't "know" that the US troops are commiting any crimes against anyone. You might suspect it. You might even have a reasonable suspicion. But you don't "know" a damn thing unless you'd like to claim you've personaly witnessed something. That being said, how about Russia attacking Chechens? Some people would consider the army of Israel intercepting the Gaza Blocade runners being a crime against civilians. How about the attacks by the Chinese military against Tibet? How about the consistent combat between the Pakistani military, the Indian military, and civilians along their borders? How about the consistent crimes between North and South Korean military and civilians. How about between China and Singapore? How about between any number of central African nations and neighboring civilians?
But just to play your game, let's talk about Afghanistan alone. In order of troop concentation the following nations have troops in Afghanistan :
United States
United Kingdom
Germany
Francy
Italy
Canada
Poland
Netherlands
Turkey
Australia
Spain
Romania
Georgia
Denmark
Belgium
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Norway
Sweden
Hungary
Slovakia
Croatia
Portugal
Albania
Lithuania
Macedonia
Latvia
Estonia
New Zeland
Finland
Azarbaijan
Slovenia
Armenia
Greece
Mongolia
Singapore
Montenegro
United Arab Emerates
Ukraine
Luxembourg
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Ireland
Jordan
Iceland
Austria
What was your point again?
I will concede that the US has made some really poor policy decisions in the past, some of which have involved the military and have caused serious harm. But to suggest that the US military has been a direct cause of a fair share of the barbarism in the world is dishonest and disgusting.
You're backpeddling, and you know it.
... That suggests that if they saw how bad war was they would not allow the war to continue. Particularly because we're spending 'billions on killing people'.
You suggest that 'the public' would not likely stand 'idly by'
The flip side of that argument is, that if 'the public' could see in color on television nightly children strapped with explosives blowing up funerals, the 'the public' might well get pissed off enough at how evil an act like that is that they would be supportive of getting even more involved.
You suggest that the Truth would prevent our presence there. It might well have the opposite effect, but you've made your judgement apparent in your argument. You've already defined your version of the "Truth".
Please enlighten me: How did the US Military bring about Sharia Law? How did it bring about Communist North Korea that is attempting to gain nukes? How did it bring about the 1 child law due to overpopulation in China that allows for murdering daughters because they are less valued? Again... this list can go on indefinately.
I didn't meant to suggest that military occupation would solve them. Only that I'm sick of hearing about how our military is so evil, and giving a complete pass to barbarism of anyone not in our military.
I agree with you completely. We are, largely speaking, alligned with really bad people out of self-interest. China and the Saudi's being the tip of the iceburg. Again, why is it we'll condemn our soldiers so quickly, and never discuss the crimes against humanity of those two regimes? Because we're fostering a "global market"...
That's exactly what you proposed? That's why you specifically pointed out how the truth would make our people not stand idly by while our government spent billions killing people overseas? Yeah, you're right. That's sounded completely unbiased...
Really? Ask Kim Jung Il 'pretty please' and he'll stop trying to get a nuke? Ask Ahmadinejad to 'pretty please' not threaten to drive the jews burning bodies into the ocean and he'll somehow find compassion? How about we ask the blood diamond miners to 'pretty please' stop? This list could go on indefinately.
Actually I completely agree with you. If you want the truth to be told, tell the whole truth! How can you not know that these soldiers snapped because they saw nearly a decade of absolute brutality in the way the 'innocent' people of the region treat women and children? You sure as hell arent hearing stories of that brutality on the news beyond an occasional snipit. As I said, I dont forgive soldiers who (might) have commited cold-blooded murder. But I dont forgive barbarism either. And neither should you. You should be exactly as pissed and exactly as interested in all US citizens knowing about all the barbarism as you are in all the US citizens know about these alledged murdering US soldiers.
But you dont appear to be. You arent calling for the heads of people who will murder a 7 year old boy, or rape a woman so that she can be beheaded. The left will instead find every reason why we just don't understand their culture, and they sure as hell dont advertise that kind of behavior to our public.
And you're precisely right about the rest of the world too! There are barbaric tyrants worldwide! But it's convenient for us to by clothes made in china, and toys from here, and oil from there, and blah blah blah. We don't report how brutal they are to their citizens because if we keep our mouths shut and foster a "world economy" we can get their shit cheap.
I don't mind condemning soldiers who step across the line. But I have a real problem with the hypocricy of forgiving everyone else in the world for their sins and being the first to step up onto the soap box to condemn our own.
Actually that's not my position. I'd rather we not have to have this conversation because we can snuggle up here at home all warm and cozy. But the reality is that that's not an option. We are on foreign soil today, for better or for worse, rightly or wrongly. We cant realistically just pull out and come home and everyone will forgive and forget our 'intrusions' or 'crimes' or whatever else.
The point of what I posted was to point out that if you want to condemn the US Military for its brutal activities, be consistent and be fair. If you want to display the evil of our soldiers, display the evil of all soldiers. If you want to prove how bad we are by display all information, then display all information about how bad those we fight are too. Give all the info, and let people actually make some self-judgements rather than expecting us to just swallow the spoon fed self-loathing of the far left.
For the same reason why I think uncensored war footage should be shown on the nightly news, maybe if the average civilian actually saw what goes on in war, the public would be less likely to stand by idly while our government spends billions on killing people on the other side of the planet.
Just my $.02
Hey, I'm good with that. Lets bring all the troops home, stop spending money "killing people on the other side of the planet", and only show the footage of the what other people do. How's that grab ya?
Just think, we can have hours of news footage daily of the plight of Muslim women alone. Being arrested for having a suntan? Being beaten, caned and stoned to death. Marital rape being legal? How about footage of rapes before their beheadings? How about child marriages? How about female castrations as punishment?
Would you like to talk about kids being strapped with explosives? That'll be juicy footage. How about bombs set off in weddings and funerals? How about 7 year old kids being murdered because their grandfather spoke out against the violence of the Taliban?
The point is that you're so quick to condemn the military on this situation. And if they were actually knowingly murdering innocent people then they should be condemned. But the fact is that you dont have all the facts, and yet you want desperately to see them all hanged along with the entire US military establishments. You casually ignore the attrocities commited around the world, many of which we have military might in place to help prevent. But the world media is so complicit that they don't report on those things, except for a by-line here and there quickly denouncing the act and distancing themselves, governments, and religions from them. It's glossed over as if to say "Yeah, that's a real shame... So anyway lets get those US Soldiers and hang 'em high!".
You think that we should show the world how brutal we are? Fine. As soon as we show the world how brutal the WORLD is I'll be right there with you. As soon as we start showing people WHY we are in many of the places we are, instead of shielding everyone here from the horrible acts that people outside our rubber-bumber nation commit then we can start showing them how all people compare. You don't want to show both sides. You don't want to give context. You don't want people here to see how bad some of these dictators and regimes are because you know it will do nothing if not ensure the resolve our nation has for kicking the crap out of some of the nutjobs out there.
War sucks. It's horrible. It's ugly. It changes people forever. But quite frankly, better that than live in a world where everyone's too afraid to stand up and fight the tyrants because it's not politically correct. You can hope for flowers and bunnies all you want. But there will always be people who really don't care what you hope for and are willing to crush any dream you ever had for your kids. And I'll always be supportive of us not standing there watching and doing nothing, while shielding our citizens because it might damage their delicate psyche's.
So you're suggesting that it's wiser to error on the side of disclosure?
Sorry, but if a piece of information is borderline on it's sensitivity it would be stupid to release it. Better to classify it and correct the error later. You can't correct an inappropriate disclosure.
Ahh This is how 99.99999% of our population feels these days. Spoken like someone who would never "nut up".
Posted by ---Anonymous Coward---
Absolutely ****ing classic.
Ok, lets examine your logic for a moment.
You believe that anyone speeding through a particular intersection is stupid and doesnt care about their impact on others, or the danger they put others in. And you think that these stupid, insensitive people will modify their behavior to the benefit of others because you piss them off with a ticket? Will they care about others more? No. Will they be more sensitive to other people's safety? No. They might slow down, but it doesn't mean they are going to stop texting, eating, drinking coffee, putting on makeup, etc. It just means they'll be going slower when they slam into someone.
How about instead we hire people who drive around and punish people who are actually hazards to society? There are plenty of people that are actively dangerous, many of which arent even speeding, to keep cops busy for a long long time, and generate revenue through fines. It's also worthwhile to point out that most (if not all?) radar cameras don't issue tickets that reduce the points on a person's license, and they can't due to legal implications. A real live cop issuing a ticket does. You REALLY want to serve public safety? Instead of issuing a fine (like to rich people who couldn't care less), have a real cop issue a real ticket, and the idiot behind the wheel will soon be driving without a license. That happens and this insensitive clod will eventually land in prison instead of just paying off a string of meaningless fines.
I dont suggest for a moment that people breaking the law shouldnt be held accountable. But I do suggest that maybe a real person could make a real contact with me, and discuss the situation. I have a right to face my accuser, and I'm not interested in handing my fate over to a machine.
Your complaints can be summed up as; others having a lack of respect for you and your fellow citizens. When we're talking about a PUBLIC ROAD (that my taxes pay for), patrolled by a PUBLIC SERVANT (that my taxes pay for), and protected by PUBLIC CIVIL CODE (that my taxes pay for and are formulated by people I and my neighbors have voted into office), I believe I earned at lest the RESPECT of a face to face contact rather than an automated window-dressing ticket that doesn't actually solve a damn thing or help protect anyone. It just gives self-righteous nannies something to gossip about on the phone while driving through the 'burbs.
Precisely my point. Anyone is capable of rationalizing how their stance is the most logical and most beneficial to the majority. That's why we have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights. Those documents were written by amazingly intelligent people specifically to avoid rationalizations by well-intentioned buffoons.
I just hope that our Justice Dept starts leaning more toward the "Protect and Uphold the Constition" camp, and and at least attempts to distance themselves from the "Buffoons" camp.