It's a shame your suicidal cry to be modded down has been ignored, eh?
*shrug*, I have lots of karma and no intention of kissing the mods asses because it happens to be politically correct to do so. I contribute more then enough good stuff to/. to get away with voicing my real opinions, moderators be damned.
Besides, the only reason my original post is still at 2 is because MORE people have modded it up then those that have modded it down (after I lost the +2 karma bonus on it). So I guess I'm not the only one that has that view of Ms. Fonda;) And the people who modded it up actually have more balls then the people who modded it down, because they will actually have to face meta-moderation, as opposed to all the chicken shits that modded it "overrated".
Seriously though, thanks for injecting some sanity into this discussion. As I stated in my reply to him, I'm opposed to the death penalty. But not because I have some moral issue with it. I'm opposed to it because our system has produced way too many convictions that were later overturned the idea of an innocent person being convicted is utterly horrifying to me.
But the likes of ruthless genocidal mass murdering war criminals along the lines of those that you mentioned? No problem. What would the GP have us do with them? Lock them away for the rest of their lives? That's not enough, IMHO.
Actually, it serves two purposes. One is deterrence. The other is justice. Justice for the victims, justice for the survivors. Three purposes if you consider prevention.
Now, for the record, I am personally opposed to the death penalty. I happen to oppose it because I'm horrified of the idea of an innocent person being executed and our system has produced far too many convictions that were later overturned. I don't oppose it because I have a moral issue with the state taking your life after due process of law.
And I agree with the GP. There are some actions so heinous towards humanity that pretty much any punishment is justifiable. Genocide comes to mind. Are you really going to tell me that this person, this person, or this person didn't deserve what they got?
Hmm, there isn't any meaning behind my sig other then homage to one of my favorite movies and maybe a little bit of irony directed at my Government.
he US is a great whipping boy because it's so large, but why not try looking to places where there are serious problems before painting the United States as the only bogeyman in the world, or even the most serious one?
I really hope you don't think I'm painting my country (yes, I'm an American) as the bogeyman. Hell, I've been slammed many times in this very story for taking people to task for blaming the US for all the woes of the world.
I'd find it really ironic and amusing if you took my signature literally after I've spent all afternoon engaged in a flame war over another movie quote (from Office Space) that I used being taken too literally;)
You seem to believe that somehow all of the dialogue of Office Space is "/. culture"
All of the dialogue? Hardly. That one specific line? Yeah, I would expect anyone that spends any amount of time reading comments on/. to recognize that as a joke, even if they don't know where it came from. Just as I would expect anyone to peg "In Soviet Russia...", "I for one welcome our [whatever] overlords", blah, blah, blah.
because you can't admit that you made a dumb statement that could easily be interpreted the wrong way
"easily be interpreted the wrong way by uptight people overly concerned about political correctness". There, fixed that for you.
A halfway rational person in this discussion? Wow! Pleased to meet you.
I can also tell you that it will affect is more if we choose to leave.
What's the solution then? Do we stay in the middle of a civil war pouring our blood and treasure into it forever? I'm all for a solution to the mess in Iraq that doesn't involve us pulling out and leaving the country to implode on itself. I just don't see one.
Bush's "stay the course" mentality is not a plan for victory. I also can't understand the outright refusal to consider a partition of the country as a workable solution. If you look at the history of Iraq it's an artificially created country that was thrown together after WW1 with no consideration to ethic/tribal or religious history. There was one of those in Europe too -- it was called Yugoslavia. Should we have forced that country to remain together when it's citizens started killing each other?
I'm not an anti-war flower child. I was opposed to the war before it started, because I didn't see any connection between Iraq and 9/11, nor did I see Saddam as a creditable threat to the United States. Once it started I was rooting a quick victory that would bring our troops home ASAP. You show me a real solution to this problem and I'll listen. Mainstream Democrats will listen. We aren't all traitors that want to "cut and run", ya know?:)
It was years before I happened to watch that movie and found out where the line came from
Ditto. The first time I saw Office Space was less then seven months ago.
p to that point, I'd thought it just a nasty little meme in extremely poor taste, circulated by juvenile geeks who liked to gloat over the idea of someone else getting forcibly sodomised in prison
Even if it was just a nasty little meme in poor taste, it's still a part of/. culture, for better or worse, and I think I have the right to become somewhat annoyed when people assume that I'm "pro-rape" because I happened to use it.
It's that type of political correctness that I find offensive. Perhaps I'm the rarity in that I don't offend -- tell me a racist joke and you have a halfway decent chance of making me laugh. Does that make me a racist? Ever hear about Black comedy (aka: dark humor)?
Hell, I'm surprised that nobody even latched onto the fact that I called her a "cunt" to try and call me a sexist. Hell, at least that would be remotely justified. Instead I've gotten a fair amount of grief for using a comment that appears quite often on/.
Certainly I can imagine how seeing frequent nasty little references to prison rape throughout Slashdot would anger anyone with a sense of justice and a less than encyclopaedic knowledge of geek movie culture.
I don't think it takes "encyclopedic knowledge of geek movie culture" to realize that I was using a standard issue/. joke. If you accept the fact that it's a standard joke around here (even if it's one that you find offensive) then you should also be willing to accept the fact that I wasn't condoning prison rape.
Does prison rape or racism bother me? Hell yes they do. Does that mean I can't laugh at a good joke using either one of those subjects? Nope. People need to grow a thick skin and stop allowing themselves to be offended by such trivial nonsense.
Alright, AC, I'll make one more attempt at rationally explaining myself. Why I'm wasting my time is anyone's guess.
I make an off-handed remark using a joke that is well known on/. The GP posts a reply saying "I'm sorry, but *no one* deserves to be raped".
I make a reply pointing out the reference and agreeing with the GP by saying I don't condone prison rape. No where in that reply was I remotely insulting to the GP.
Then the GP posts another reply saying "How can the content of that movie possibly justify the idea of rape as punishment", thus completely missing the point and continuing with his off-topic whining (off-topic as far as the thread goes) about prison rape.
I don't think I owe anybody an apology for using a well known piece of Slashdot culture to illustrate my original point. I also don't think I owe anybody an apology for being somewhat annoyed with people that ignore the explanation of that culture and attempt to paint me as being pro-rape. And if either one of you finds the concept of prison rape so horrific that you allow yourself to be bothered by a completely unrelated joke from a movie then perhaps you should start doing something more productive towards solving the problem then engaging in a stupid flamewar about it on/.
It's this type of political correctness that prevents real debate. "OMG, a joke about prison rape, that's not funny!"
That's not entirely true. The last poll done that I've seen that actually asked Iraqis this very question (available from the Brookings Institute) was carried out in March 2007, and showed that a majority (53%) believed the security situation would improve if US troops left. 26% said it would get worse, the rest said they didn't know.
And I fail to see how that disproves my point that "many Iraqis are afraid to see us leave". I didn't say "a majority of Iraqis" and regardless of what they think, I personally think we should leave.
I only pointed that out because I suspect that the majority of the people around here blaming the United States for the civilian deaths in Iraq are missing the point. Most of the violence is Iraqi on Iraqi. It's probably going to get worse when we leave.
You're going to need at least 500 words to back that shit up.
Actually, I don't. All I need to do is explain my perception of him, because that explains why I feel the way I do about him. If that was your perception of someone (right or wrong) then I wouldn't blame you for not respecting them either.
If it bothers you that much, post 500 words to dispute what I've said. I'm not going to waste my time going that far off topic.
Yes, because the thousands of POWs that claimed to be tortured by the North Vietnamese were all lying. Jane Fonda was brave enough to stand up to them and tell the truth.
I'll get modded down again, but I'll say it again: She's a fucking treasonous cunt that deserves nothing but contempt and scorn.
You don't have a problem with people attempting to undermine the morale of our troops while boosting the morale of the enemy during wartime?
i don't know the details of her case
Well, it's not just about that one photograph. She also made radio broadcasts on behalf of the Communist regime. Broadcasts that were specifically directed at our forces and designed to undermine their morale. She also called our returning POWs "hypocrites and liars" when they discussed how they were treated (tortured) by the enemy.
You can try to pursuade the general public/gvt but not soldiers?
You can try to persuade the soldiers that the war is unjust if you want, that is your right under the 1st Amendment. Hell, you can stand outside a military base and shout it at the top of your lungs, and I'd support your right to do that. The word for that is 'free speech'.
Saying it while posing with enemy troops is a line that I don't think should be crossed. Nor is saying it in enemy propaganda broadcasts. The right word for that is treason.
I was going to write a detailed reply to your tirade, but the Anonymous Coward said it way better then I ever could have.
For the people who don't see AC posts: If you engage in a conversation and don't get the local culture's idioms then you're the one responsible. You should be embarrassed. I wouldn't go in to a group that I am not familiar with, misunderstand a joke that anybody in the group should get, point out they're horrible people for that joke, then have the joke explained to find out that it is not as bad as I thought it was and then continue to ridicule them
your failure to see the other side's point of view is what perpetuates mankind's mediocrity
How about your failure of people on your side of the fence to see our point of view?
All of my posts in this little flamewar^Wdiscussion have shown my opposition to the Iraq war, yet I'm still being modded down, presumably because my realist views aren't very PC.
I'll readily acknowledge the mistakes we've made in the Middle East and other places, the budding Democracies that we've overthrown in favor of installing puppets, etc, etc. But for fuck's sake (to use your words) what the hell should do about the current problem? I want us out of Iraq, but you and I both know that it will be a wholesale slaughter once we leave. We are damned if we do and damned if we don't.
try and see the other point of view
I see legitimate grievances, particularly on the Palestinian issue. I also see Islamic Fundamentalists trying to twist those legitimate grievances into an excuse for an all out war against the West. I also see leaders that don't particularly care about their people trying to use those grievances to remain in power -- it's the classic formula of using an external threat (real or perceived) to quash dissent. Hell, it's even been tried here in the States.
Do you see our point of view? Forget Iraq -- can you at least admit that the Western World has legitimate cause to be concerned with an nuclear-armed Iran?
But in the US there is a GIANT hole in New York where 3000 of my countrymen lay dead. To me, stay alive is real.
Yes, and Iraq had absoletely nothing to do with the creation of that hole or the murder of 3,000 Americans.
And your analogy is retarded. We know exactly which one of those five kids killed our brother. We just chose to focus our efforts on beating the snot out a different kid whose only crime was picking a fight with us ten years ago.
Hey, I agree with you, but probably for different reasons. Mine are practical -- how long are we going to waste our blood and treasure on a hopeless cause?
Here's something for all the people worried about civilian deaths to ponder: When we leave, the Iraqi civilian population is going to suffer ten times more then they are now.
I wish there was some sort of way to stabilize this mess, but given that the country itself was an artificial construct that lumped people together with no regard for ethic/tribal or religious background..... I fail to see how you can save it.
The point of that leak was that the US has chemical weapons in Iraq. Maybe they even used them... say it ain't so!
Yes, white phosphorous and tear gas. Because those are so comparable to real chemical weapons, like VX or mustard gas.
You realize the chemical weapons conventions don't consider WP to be a chemical weapon, right? And the next time we need to control a crowd, would you rather have us use Geneva complaint full-metal-jacket rounds on them instead of tear gas?
I'm opposed to the war for practical reasons. Maybe the people opposed to it for moral reasons should start offering real-world suggestions for how to end the war instead of latching onto conspiracy theories about the United States purposefully harming civilians. What do you suggest? Should we leave? Should we stay and make it a UN mission and try end the violence? Should we split Iraq into three smaller countries?
She was one of the great American heroes that helped convince the youth of the world that Americans wasn't all genocidal maniacs bend on bombing children with napalm, it was just their government that was crazy.
None of which required her to make propaganda useful to the enemy of her country.
People like Jane Fonda give the American left a bad name.
As it was, the young people of the world could protest the US war
"the US war"? That war was going on for decades. In hindsight, our involvement was stupid, but don't pretend like there wouldn't have been a war without our involvement. Lest we forget, that it was the Japanese who destabilized the country by brutally occupying it during WW2 and the French that attempted to hold onto a colonial possession against the popular will of the people.
It was one of the big misfortunes of the Cold War (largely caused by paranoia of anything remotely resembling communism) that we happened to find ourselves fighting a movement that quoted our own declaration of independence. I've always wondered what would have happened if we had engaged them and supported their efforts to free their country from the French. Perhaps we could have kept them from falling into the Communist camp and the division of Vietnam and the subsequent war never happens.
and still wear US cloth and listen to US music, without being hypocrites.
It never ceases to amaze me how popular it is to hate the United States, yet how popular our culture remains in spite of this.
Sorry, but he *was* reacting to what *was* there...all you've done is come back and say that you really didn't *mean* that
That I didn't really mean that was obvious to anybody that has been around/. for more then two weeks. Will you next call me a communist if I make a "In Soviet Russia...." joke?
but don't belittle others for your inability to clearly communicate
How about his inability to clearly read all the replies to his post (not just mine) pointing out where the line came from?
Not assuming everyone on/. has internalized the entire dialogue of Office Space might be a good place to start on improving those communication skills.
Give me a fucking break. Assuming that somebody reading Slashdot is familiar with a well known Slashdot pun does not imply a lack of communication skills on my part. He made the leap of faith to assume that I was condoning prison rape, based on my use of a well known part of/. culture. When I corrected that leap of faith, he responded with yet more whining about how "prison rape is never justified", even though I specifically said that I don't condone it.
When there are two groups of dead people that I have had no personal connection with and their deaths don't affect me personally
Umm, American troops do have a "personal connection" to the American people and the media's coverage preferences reflect this reality.
There are other signs of the same thing, not treating citizens of other countries as equal human beings is common practice in the USA
I'm sorry, but those types of statements are offensive. You are trying to equate a lack of media coverage of Iraqi civilian suffering to "not treating citizens of other countries as equal human beings".
Do we care more about American deaths then we do those of anybody else? Sure. But you are still way off base trying to play the racism card here. Would you be playing that card if we were fighting the UK or Canada and ignoring their civilian deaths?
Other than being the target of an assassination by request of a major player in the current US administration
Ya know, I've heard that a lot, and I haven't seen any real proof. Have some, by any chance?
what's so bad about Hugo Chavez.
I'm not going to get into a debate about him or his ideas. Suffice it to say, he has taken every single opportunity that he can to attack and insult the United States on the World stage and I lose respect for any American citizen that does anything to help him.
I'll try to explain it another way: To my way of thinking, if you disagree with your countries policy, the proper course of action is to voice your opposition with your elected leaders, to your fellow citizens and at the ballotbox. You don't help other world leaders make a case against your country or undermine it. You don't stand on foreign soil and bad mouth your country and/or Government.
And Hugo Chavez? Give me a break. I still wouldn't condone it, but I would have had less contempt for her standing with somebody like Nelson Mandella (he also disagrees with American foreign policy, as I understand it) and voicing opposition to the Iraq war. There was no reason to do it with the likes of Hugo Chavez other then to offend people.
I had the same opinion with the whole flap a few years ago about the Dixie Chicks. Had they said what they said in the United States, to an American audience I wouldn't have had a problem with it. But you don't take cheap shots at your own country or leaders to get a rise out of a foreign crowd.
but if you start to disregard arguments from people based solely on the people they are photographed with, then you are sinking to the level of tabloid debate.
Who said that was the sole reason I stopped listening to her? She could have been photographed next to Adolf Hitler and I wouldn't have let that make up my mind. It was the things that she said and the context of the situation that earned my contempt and lost her my ear.
A lot of the times the question is "why did so many of our troops lost their lives in Iraq?" instead of "why did so many civilians lost their lives in Iraq and how could we let that happen?".
*shrug*, civilians die during war. It sucks, but that's the reality. How would you suggest fighting insurgents that blend into the population without having civilian injuries or deaths?
See, this is the problem. The media does pay attention to what's going on in Iraq. But in the order of importance the american troops in Iraq get ranked above pretty much everything else
Because that's what Americans care about.
It seems like a tautology, but the reason you talk about the death and well-being of american troops much more than the death and well-being of iraqi civilians is because you consider americans more important
From my standpoint, they are more important. And I'm not trolling here (though I'll get modded down anyway). You are talking about American media. What do you think they are going to focus on? Do I have legitimate gripe that the Arab media is focusing too much on the civilian deaths and not enough on the deaths of our troops?
Why is the debate about whether "the troops should be brought home
From an American perspective, what the hell should the debate be about? If you want the American media to attach more value to the suffering of the Iraqi civilian population, then you have to ask yourself why we should leave? Because I'll go out on a limb and say that the population is going to suffer a lot more when we leave, if for no other reason then the various sects will fall upon themselves without us being around to stop them.
This is why I consider the current state of discussion about Iraq deeply offensive
What do you want to talk about? Civilian deaths? What is your solution to the problem? If we stay the low-intensity warfare is going to go on for years (decades?) and the civilian population suffers. If we leave, then open warfare erupts and the civilian population suffers. In fact, they probably suffer more, because whatever you can say about American actions in Iraq, we don't have death squads roaming neighborhoods and engaging in random killings.
What the heck should the discussion be about? How we got here? That's for the history books to talk about. The more important question is "Where do we go from here?". If you have a better solution then America pulling our forces out I'm all ears. If you have a better topic of discussion for American media then "Should we pull our boys out?" I'm all ears.
From the muslim point of view, wouldn't the things that are happening now in Iraq be ample justification for outright aggression towards the western world?
What's going on in Iraq now is not a Muslim vs. the West showdown. The violence in Iraq right now is primarily Muslim on Muslim. Shia death squads, Sunni insurgents, etc, etc. In fact, the very nation of Iraq was an artificial construct of the British Empire. Why allowing it to split along ethic and/or religious lines is off the table is beyond me. Should we have invaded Yugoslavia and forced that country to remain united?
Slashdot Mirror
*shrug*, I have lots of karma and no intention of kissing the mods asses because it happens to be politically correct to do so. I contribute more then enough good stuff to /. to get away with voicing my real opinions, moderators be damned.
Besides, the only reason my original post is still at 2 is because MORE people have modded it up then those that have modded it down (after I lost the +2 karma bonus on it). So I guess I'm not the only one that has that view of Ms. Fonda ;) And the people who modded it up actually have more balls then the people who modded it down, because they will actually have to face meta-moderation, as opposed to all the chicken shits that modded it "overrated".
Are you talking about this guy or this guy? *duck*
Seriously though, thanks for injecting some sanity into this discussion. As I stated in my reply to him, I'm opposed to the death penalty. But not because I have some moral issue with it. I'm opposed to it because our system has produced way too many convictions that were later overturned the idea of an innocent person being convicted is utterly horrifying to me.
But the likes of ruthless genocidal mass murdering war criminals along the lines of those that you mentioned? No problem. What would the GP have us do with them? Lock them away for the rest of their lives? That's not enough, IMHO.
Actually, it serves two purposes. One is deterrence. The other is justice. Justice for the victims, justice for the survivors. Three purposes if you consider prevention.
Now, for the record, I am personally opposed to the death penalty. I happen to oppose it because I'm horrified of the idea of an innocent person being executed and our system has produced far too many convictions that were later overturned. I don't oppose it because I have a moral issue with the state taking your life after due process of law.
And I agree with the GP. There are some actions so heinous towards humanity that pretty much any punishment is justifiable. Genocide comes to mind. Are you really going to tell me that this person, this person, or this person didn't deserve what they got?
Hmm, there isn't any meaning behind my sig other then homage to one of my favorite movies and maybe a little bit of irony directed at my Government.
he US is a great whipping boy because it's so large, but why not try looking to places where there are serious problems before painting the United States as the only bogeyman in the world, or even the most serious one?I really hope you don't think I'm painting my country (yes, I'm an American) as the bogeyman. Hell, I've been slammed many times in this very story for taking people to task for blaming the US for all the woes of the world.
I'd find it really ironic and amusing if you took my signature literally after I've spent all afternoon engaged in a flame war over another movie quote (from Office Space) that I used being taken too literally ;)
If by "intent of the quote" you mean to bluntly explain in one sentence why prison sucks and you don't wanna go there, then yeah.
If by "intent of the quote" you mean to condone prison rape, then I'd have to disagree :)
All of the dialogue? Hardly. That one specific line? Yeah, I would expect anyone that spends any amount of time reading comments on /. to recognize that as a joke, even if they don't know where it came from. Just as I would expect anyone to peg "In Soviet Russia...", "I for one welcome our [whatever] overlords", blah, blah, blah.
because you can't admit that you made a dumb statement that could easily be interpreted the wrong way"easily be interpreted the wrong way by uptight people overly concerned about political correctness". There, fixed that for you.
(Whoops, used another reference to /. culture ;)
A halfway rational person in this discussion? Wow! Pleased to meet you.
I can also tell you that it will affect is more if we choose to leave.What's the solution then? Do we stay in the middle of a civil war pouring our blood and treasure into it forever? I'm all for a solution to the mess in Iraq that doesn't involve us pulling out and leaving the country to implode on itself. I just don't see one.
Bush's "stay the course" mentality is not a plan for victory. I also can't understand the outright refusal to consider a partition of the country as a workable solution. If you look at the history of Iraq it's an artificially created country that was thrown together after WW1 with no consideration to ethic/tribal or religious history. There was one of those in Europe too -- it was called Yugoslavia. Should we have forced that country to remain together when it's citizens started killing each other?
I'm not an anti-war flower child. I was opposed to the war before it started, because I didn't see any connection between Iraq and 9/11, nor did I see Saddam as a creditable threat to the United States. Once it started I was rooting a quick victory that would bring our troops home ASAP. You show me a real solution to this problem and I'll listen. Mainstream Democrats will listen. We aren't all traitors that want to "cut and run", ya know? :)
Ditto. The first time I saw Office Space was less then seven months ago.
p to that point, I'd thought it just a nasty little meme in extremely poor taste, circulated by juvenile geeks who liked to gloat over the idea of someone else getting forcibly sodomised in prisonEven if it was just a nasty little meme in poor taste, it's still a part of /. culture, for better or worse, and I think I have the right to become somewhat annoyed when people assume that I'm "pro-rape" because I happened to use it.
It's that type of political correctness that I find offensive. Perhaps I'm the rarity in that I don't offend -- tell me a racist joke and you have a halfway decent chance of making me laugh. Does that make me a racist? Ever hear about Black comedy (aka: dark humor)?
Hell, I'm surprised that nobody even latched onto the fact that I called her a "cunt" to try and call me a sexist. Hell, at least that would be remotely justified. Instead I've gotten a fair amount of grief for using a comment that appears quite often on /.
Certainly I can imagine how seeing frequent nasty little references to prison rape throughout Slashdot would anger anyone with a sense of justice and a less than encyclopaedic knowledge of geek movie culture.I don't think it takes "encyclopedic knowledge of geek movie culture" to realize that I was using a standard issue /. joke. If you accept the fact that it's a standard joke around here (even if it's one that you find offensive) then you should also be willing to accept the fact that I wasn't condoning prison rape.
Does prison rape or racism bother me? Hell yes they do. Does that mean I can't laugh at a good joke using either one of those subjects? Nope. People need to grow a thick skin and stop allowing themselves to be offended by such trivial nonsense.
Alright, AC, I'll make one more attempt at rationally explaining myself. Why I'm wasting my time is anyone's guess.
I make an off-handed remark using a joke that is well known on /. The GP posts a reply saying "I'm sorry, but *no one* deserves to be raped".
I make a reply pointing out the reference and agreeing with the GP by saying I don't condone prison rape. No where in that reply was I remotely insulting to the GP.
Then the GP posts another reply saying "How can the content of that movie possibly justify the idea of rape as punishment", thus completely missing the point and continuing with his off-topic whining (off-topic as far as the thread goes) about prison rape.
I don't think I owe anybody an apology for using a well known piece of Slashdot culture to illustrate my original point. I also don't think I owe anybody an apology for being somewhat annoyed with people that ignore the explanation of that culture and attempt to paint me as being pro-rape. And if either one of you finds the concept of prison rape so horrific that you allow yourself to be bothered by a completely unrelated joke from a movie then perhaps you should start doing something more productive towards solving the problem then engaging in a stupid flamewar about it on /.
It's this type of political correctness that prevents real debate. "OMG, a joke about prison rape, that's not funny!"
And I fail to see how that disproves my point that "many Iraqis are afraid to see us leave". I didn't say "a majority of Iraqis" and regardless of what they think, I personally think we should leave.
I only pointed that out because I suspect that the majority of the people around here blaming the United States for the civilian deaths in Iraq are missing the point. Most of the violence is Iraqi on Iraqi. It's probably going to get worse when we leave.
Actually, I don't. All I need to do is explain my perception of him, because that explains why I feel the way I do about him. If that was your perception of someone (right or wrong) then I wouldn't blame you for not respecting them either.
If it bothers you that much, post 500 words to dispute what I've said. I'm not going to waste my time going that far off topic.
Yes, because the thousands of POWs that claimed to be tortured by the North Vietnamese were all lying. Jane Fonda was brave enough to stand up to them and tell the truth.
I'll get modded down again, but I'll say it again: She's a fucking treasonous cunt that deserves nothing but contempt and scorn.
You don't have a problem with people attempting to undermine the morale of our troops while boosting the morale of the enemy during wartime?
i don't know the details of her caseWell, it's not just about that one photograph. She also made radio broadcasts on behalf of the Communist regime. Broadcasts that were specifically directed at our forces and designed to undermine their morale. She also called our returning POWs "hypocrites and liars" when they discussed how they were treated (tortured) by the enemy.
You can try to pursuade the general public/gvt but not soldiers?You can try to persuade the soldiers that the war is unjust if you want, that is your right under the 1st Amendment. Hell, you can stand outside a military base and shout it at the top of your lungs, and I'd support your right to do that. The word for that is 'free speech'.
Saying it while posing with enemy troops is a line that I don't think should be crossed. Nor is saying it in enemy propaganda broadcasts. The right word for that is treason.
I was going to write a detailed reply to your tirade, but the Anonymous Coward said it way better then I ever could have.
For the people who don't see AC posts: If you engage in a conversation and don't get the local culture's idioms then you're the one responsible. You should be embarrassed. I wouldn't go in to a group that I am not familiar with, misunderstand a joke that anybody in the group should get, point out they're horrible people for that joke, then have the joke explained to find out that it is not as bad as I thought it was and then continue to ridicule them
How about your failure of people on your side of the fence to see our point of view?
All of my posts in this little flamewar^Wdiscussion have shown my opposition to the Iraq war, yet I'm still being modded down, presumably because my realist views aren't very PC.
I'll readily acknowledge the mistakes we've made in the Middle East and other places, the budding Democracies that we've overthrown in favor of installing puppets, etc, etc. But for fuck's sake (to use your words) what the hell should do about the current problem? I want us out of Iraq, but you and I both know that it will be a wholesale slaughter once we leave. We are damned if we do and damned if we don't.
try and see the other point of viewI see legitimate grievances, particularly on the Palestinian issue. I also see Islamic Fundamentalists trying to twist those legitimate grievances into an excuse for an all out war against the West. I also see leaders that don't particularly care about their people trying to use those grievances to remain in power -- it's the classic formula of using an external threat (real or perceived) to quash dissent. Hell, it's even been tried here in the States.
Do you see our point of view? Forget Iraq -- can you at least admit that the Western World has legitimate cause to be concerned with an nuclear-armed Iran?
Yes, and Iraq had absoletely nothing to do with the creation of that hole or the murder of 3,000 Americans.
And your analogy is retarded. We know exactly which one of those five kids killed our brother. We just chose to focus our efforts on beating the snot out a different kid whose only crime was picking a fight with us ten years ago.
I'm supposed to like and respect somebody doing everything in his power to undermine my country and destroy democracy in his?
*Gasp*, the horrible assumption I made, assuming that somebody reading /. (with a UID much lower then mine, no less) would be familiar with /. culture.
I'm not an entirely self-centered fuckface.No, your just a pussy chicken shit hiding behind the AC functionality of /.
Hey, I agree with you, but probably for different reasons. Mine are practical -- how long are we going to waste our blood and treasure on a hopeless cause?
Here's something for all the people worried about civilian deaths to ponder: When we leave, the Iraqi civilian population is going to suffer ten times more then they are now.
I wish there was some sort of way to stabilize this mess, but given that the country itself was an artificial construct that lumped people together with no regard for ethic/tribal or religious background..... I fail to see how you can save it.
Yes, white phosphorous and tear gas. Because those are so comparable to real chemical weapons, like VX or mustard gas.
You realize the chemical weapons conventions don't consider WP to be a chemical weapon, right? And the next time we need to control a crowd, would you rather have us use Geneva complaint full-metal-jacket rounds on them instead of tear gas?
I'm opposed to the war for practical reasons. Maybe the people opposed to it for moral reasons should start offering real-world suggestions for how to end the war instead of latching onto conspiracy theories about the United States purposefully harming civilians. What do you suggest? Should we leave? Should we stay and make it a UN mission and try end the violence? Should we split Iraq into three smaller countries?
None of which required her to make propaganda useful to the enemy of her country.
People like Jane Fonda give the American left a bad name.
As it was, the young people of the world could protest the US war"the US war"? That war was going on for decades. In hindsight, our involvement was stupid, but don't pretend like there wouldn't have been a war without our involvement. Lest we forget, that it was the Japanese who destabilized the country by brutally occupying it during WW2 and the French that attempted to hold onto a colonial possession against the popular will of the people.
It was one of the big misfortunes of the Cold War (largely caused by paranoia of anything remotely resembling communism) that we happened to find ourselves fighting a movement that quoted our own declaration of independence. I've always wondered what would have happened if we had engaged them and supported their efforts to free their country from the French. Perhaps we could have kept them from falling into the Communist camp and the division of Vietnam and the subsequent war never happens.
and still wear US cloth and listen to US music, without being hypocrites.It never ceases to amaze me how popular it is to hate the United States, yet how popular our culture remains in spite of this.
That I didn't really mean that was obvious to anybody that has been around /. for more then two weeks. Will you next call me a communist if I make a "In Soviet Russia...." joke?
but don't belittle others for your inability to clearly communicateHow about his inability to clearly read all the replies to his post (not just mine) pointing out where the line came from?
Not assuming everyone onGive me a fucking break. Assuming that somebody reading Slashdot is familiar with a well known Slashdot pun does not imply a lack of communication skills on my part. He made the leap of faith to assume that I was condoning prison rape, based on my use of a well known part of /. culture. When I corrected that leap of faith, he responded with yet more whining about how "prison rape is never justified", even though I specifically said that I don't condone it.
Umm, American troops do have a "personal connection" to the American people and the media's coverage preferences reflect this reality.
There are other signs of the same thing, not treating citizens of other countries as equal human beings is common practice in the USAI'm sorry, but those types of statements are offensive. You are trying to equate a lack of media coverage of Iraqi civilian suffering to "not treating citizens of other countries as equal human beings".
Do we care more about American deaths then we do those of anybody else? Sure. But you are still way off base trying to play the racism card here. Would you be playing that card if we were fighting the UK or Canada and ignoring their civilian deaths?
Ya know, I've heard that a lot, and I haven't seen any real proof. Have some, by any chance?
what's so bad about Hugo Chavez.I'm not going to get into a debate about him or his ideas. Suffice it to say, he has taken every single opportunity that he can to attack and insult the United States on the World stage and I lose respect for any American citizen that does anything to help him.
I'll try to explain it another way: To my way of thinking, if you disagree with your countries policy, the proper course of action is to voice your opposition with your elected leaders, to your fellow citizens and at the ballotbox. You don't help other world leaders make a case against your country or undermine it. You don't stand on foreign soil and bad mouth your country and/or Government.
And Hugo Chavez? Give me a break. I still wouldn't condone it, but I would have had less contempt for her standing with somebody like Nelson Mandella (he also disagrees with American foreign policy, as I understand it) and voicing opposition to the Iraq war. There was no reason to do it with the likes of Hugo Chavez other then to offend people.
I had the same opinion with the whole flap a few years ago about the Dixie Chicks. Had they said what they said in the United States, to an American audience I wouldn't have had a problem with it. But you don't take cheap shots at your own country or leaders to get a rise out of a foreign crowd.
but if you start to disregard arguments from people based solely on the people they are photographed with, then you are sinking to the level of tabloid debate.Who said that was the sole reason I stopped listening to her? She could have been photographed next to Adolf Hitler and I wouldn't have let that make up my mind. It was the things that she said and the context of the situation that earned my contempt and lost her my ear.
*shrug*, civilians die during war. It sucks, but that's the reality. How would you suggest fighting insurgents that blend into the population without having civilian injuries or deaths?
See, this is the problem. The media does pay attention to what's going on in Iraq. But in the order of importance the american troops in Iraq get ranked above pretty much everything elseBecause that's what Americans care about.
It seems like a tautology, but the reason you talk about the death and well-being of american troops much more than the death and well-being of iraqi civilians is because you consider americans more importantFrom my standpoint, they are more important. And I'm not trolling here (though I'll get modded down anyway). You are talking about American media. What do you think they are going to focus on? Do I have legitimate gripe that the Arab media is focusing too much on the civilian deaths and not enough on the deaths of our troops?
Why is the debate about whether "the troops should be brought homeFrom an American perspective, what the hell should the debate be about? If you want the American media to attach more value to the suffering of the Iraqi civilian population, then you have to ask yourself why we should leave? Because I'll go out on a limb and say that the population is going to suffer a lot more when we leave, if for no other reason then the various sects will fall upon themselves without us being around to stop them.
This is why I consider the current state of discussion about Iraq deeply offensiveWhat do you want to talk about? Civilian deaths? What is your solution to the problem? If we stay the low-intensity warfare is going to go on for years (decades?) and the civilian population suffers. If we leave, then open warfare erupts and the civilian population suffers. In fact, they probably suffer more, because whatever you can say about American actions in Iraq, we don't have death squads roaming neighborhoods and engaging in random killings.
What the heck should the discussion be about? How we got here? That's for the history books to talk about. The more important question is "Where do we go from here?". If you have a better solution then America pulling our forces out I'm all ears. If you have a better topic of discussion for American media then "Should we pull our boys out?" I'm all ears.
From the muslim point of view, wouldn't the things that are happening now in Iraq be ample justification for outright aggression towards the western world?What's going on in Iraq now is not a Muslim vs. the West showdown. The violence in Iraq right now is primarily Muslim on Muslim. Shia death squads, Sunni insurgents, etc, etc. In fact, the very nation of Iraq was an artificial construct of the British Empire. Why allowing it to split along ethic and/or religious lines is off the table is beyond me. Should we have invaded Yugoslavia and forced that country to remain united?