legacycentral bbs

Of course it is! I've said it all along. Some of us were born to have kids and raise a family, some of us ... not so much. This guy is like my long lost dad and the pansies want to silence him? Screw them - this man speaks the truth! Paragraphs 2 & 3 are the my favorite.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/02/03/genera ... index.html

Steve

And they don't want him fighting in battles? WTF?

If you want the job done right, send someone who is willing to do the job. He's willing.

Does that mean he's going to come home after the war and go on a shooting rampage? NO!!

I agree, these people are a bunch of whiny pussies.

They are trained killers, what would you expect. If he has fun on the job who cares? People need to face up to reality, we pay these people to kill, not be squemish.

lol, that guy's hilarious

DZX is right.

I don't want some pussy motherfucker with his finger hovering over the trigger thinking about the enemys feelings instead of capping them and laying them out. Kill or be killed, and hesitation costs more lives than ones own.

Seriously, these people rape their own women, kill them because they violate some bullshit "women are inferior" code, terrorize our country, and cut the heads off of our troops while they are still alive, and here we are trying to remove a man from command because he think's it's fun to shoot these people?

Fuck that. Shoot first and ask questions later. I'd prefer it if no more American soldiers are decapitated. I'd like it that our own -K- can come home safely, along with all our other troops. Fun or not, it's a job, let them do it and don't be such a pussy that you potentially put other soldiers lives in jeopardy.

Fuck, it's 4:38am, Another sleep deprived night

Hmmm
I still blows my mind that we are so hung up on killing.
Killing is fun. It also has a lot of other emotions that go along with it and after it (PTSD). To a soldier it means you have done a good job, it means that the enemy you just killed won't be able to kill your buddies.
The United States of America (that means every one of you as well) asks soldiers to kill for them. Then they get all funny if you do a good job and are proud of it. None of the people that will judge him has to live with being a killer. They will feel disgusted for a few minutes, I get to feel it for the rest of my life. And none of them will feel any responsibilty for him being a killer even though he killed for his country (again, every one of you)

I'm not crazy. I'm not a psyco. Just a regular guy that does a job that you can't understand unless you have been in combat.

People need to realize that the General isn't talking about beating puppies, he’s talking about smoking a heavily armed and dedicated enemy who is doing their best to kill you first.

There was a cool video on the history channel this morning about snipers. Wow, some of them are extremely talented.

I'm so sick and fuckin' tired of all this PC touchy feely crap! You can't even say anything anymore without offending someone. where as I can see how this Generals comments could be taken wrong and offend some people I don't think it should reflect negativly on him at all. If they burn this guy then I might lose all hope in our system. He has a job to do and he does it well. I think it's great if he takes pride in and enjoys his job. I for one tip my hat to all the men and women of our armed forces and thank them from the bottom of my heart for the hard work and sacrafice they are laying down each and every day for the rest of us. Thank you!

It's really sad that anytime someone says something insensitve it creates a such a media shit storm in this country. I want real news. I don't need to hear about a General, and a Marine General at that, that likes war. I would sure as hell hope that he does. We don't need scared, submissive, depressed men leading our men and women into the fire. We need confident, hell raising, tough as nails, John Wayne, kick your ass if you look at him wrong, bas ass mudder fuckers. You know?

When I first thought about this story I was kind of thinking that the guy is not thinking by saying these things at a press conference. I mean that's either not giving a damn or just kind of dumb, knowing that there's A LOT of people who don't support the war. Anyway, he's a general, not a foot soldier, so he probably hasn't been doing any killing for quite a while now. From the looks of it he was being flippant when he made the comment and spoke without thinking who he was speaking to. Let me ask you this, do you want your neighborhood policeman feeling this way about killing criminals? A lot of soldiers become cops and nobody wants a cop that feels good about killing.

My opinion is that if you're on the battlefield and someone's shooting at you you're most likely going to feel pretty damn good about saving yours and your brother's hides by killing the enemy, there'e nothing wrong with being happy to live another day. On the other hand, if you enjoy killing people in a non combat situation then you're a pretty fucking disturbed individual. If someone killed my friend beside me in war it would be really hard to feel any sympathy for the enemy or those who support him but it's never been ok in a public setting to say that you enjoy killing your enemy people since you're talking to people who don't and probably never will kill another person.

Killing should make you feel bad when you're out of the heat of battle. There's nothing wrong with having a conscience and even general's should have them. I'm sorry if it offends anyone but I think killing is wrong, yes you may have to do it, but that doesn't mean you have to like doing it to be good at it. Take McArthur for example, he liked killing the enemy so much that he wanted to start nuking Vietnam and Cambodia, regardless of the non-combatants in the area. If a general (McArthur) values life that little maybe he should think about what he's doing....and retire.

However, I do think the media coverage of it is also way off base. I generally despise the media and the spin it puts on things. I don't think the general should be berated or disciplined in any way.

One more thing, as far as the culture of that area goes. It's not really all that accurate to say that they routinely beat and rape their women. It's pretty typical to try and demonize other cultures when you're at war with them. I'm not saying I'm all for them or that they're humanitarians but it's good to have a little perspective, especially since the Iraqis themelves never attacked us. At the same time the media is bashing the war they are also bashing the Arabs. Islamic terrorists have done a lot to harm and destroy Arab culture but we're not exactly innocent of all blame in that part of the world.

So I don't think it was that big a deal but at the same time it's not cool either.

EDIT: I just wanted to add that I'm not trying to be deliberately provocative in my post. I just feel strongly that people need to stop killing each other.

The Taliban institutionalized the brutallization of women. It was the majority there. As for killing - there's a lot justifiable reasons I won't get into (in fact I prefer it if about 2 or 3 billion people were selectively culled since we won't let disease do it indiscriminately), but there's a difference between a soldier and a serial killer. It's an utterly different mentality and would be akin to saying a hunter would run rampant shooting his neighbors pets. People want soldiers when they need them and then like to discard them when they don't fit into their false happy land. Of course I may be borderline sociopathic anyway.

Steve

Wow. Well, it appears VERY flippant. Almost like a 'down-home-good-ol'-boys' kinda saying. Which, when you get into the military, and as high up as that, even the most sophisticated man can adopt a less-sophisticated lifestyle and mannerisms to adapt/relate to his peers/clique.
But the part we have to understand is that we've upset a system. Think about Pleasantville..anyone remember that movie?
When David and Jennifer (Toby Maguire and Reese Witherspoon) enter the Pleasantville life, (As Bud and Mary-Sue) they enter into a system. People do things a certain way, (think about the soda fountain guy) and believe certain things for a reason. Some of these Iraqis are being forced to admit that there's a world outside of their Desert Pleasantville. Their 'system' is being disrupted by outsiders who, not only have not lived life like they have, but who also have different beliefs about human life, and the definition of the human condition.
Just like in Pleasantville, they're happy without sex; in Iraq/Middle East, they're quite happy with keeping their women in submissive, oppressed conditions. They're HAPPY like that. ...until someone comes along and says things could be different, and that things are different in other parts of the world, outside of the one they live in.
Sure, the grass is always greener, but you're dealing with loyalists and dreamers. Loyalists only dream of further loyalty and ways to improve the system to which they're loyal. --They don't like the feelings of change. Dreamers are convinced that things can be different, and that change is better, even if it doesn't appear to be, and even if things feel worse. In this situation, Americans, like always are the dreamers. We're fighting the loyalists, like the Mayor of Pleasantville. And until we show them that change is not only good, but that it can feel good, we won't win this battle. In fact, the only win may be in truce, for not all the loyalists will be convinced, and not all the loyalists should die. Our world is color, but keeping those who are happy in their black-and-white is crucial to a truly peaceful environment.

BAC5.2 wrote:I don't want some pussy motherfucker with his finger hovering over the trigger thinking about the enemy's feelings instead of capping them and laying them out.

This is definitely sig worthy

Yeah...it's ridiculous how PC this fucking world has gotten....and how many people can't take a joke, or take everything so personally. Chill out.....

Josh - I do my best

i find it ironic on one hand that so many of you say your tired of the PC bullshit (i am as well), but on the other hand seem to be in support of the president and the war, when bush is largely responsible for the climate in america right now.

whats going on with the FCC, the war, and civil rights is a fucking nightmare right now. its the peak of contradicition and "do what i say not what do".

I live in boulder, Boulder has an anti-bush policy.

and that was pretty damn funny phil

Well, like our eloquent and beloved leader says:

The economy is the strongest it's ever been
The war is going phenomenally well
America is spreading freedom like wildfire all over the globe
America is more free than ever
America is the greatest it's ever been
America is just better than everywhere else

I'm glad things are better than ever

I'm sick of political correctness too but that doesn't mean I want the exact opposite either...political blindness.

LedJetta - I Hate Bush, but I do agree with Afghanistan. I wanted Clinton to do something about it back in 1996, but whatareyougonnado? Now if the idiot would only finish what he started there ...

Afghanistan isn't the Middle East as a PAkistani Muslim friend of mine (yes, it's true) was always quick to point out.

Scott - hope I didn't seem to be attacking as I respect your opinion and the contribution to the conversation (as explained below).

I can't believe how far this post has gone and I think it's a riot all the concurring responses I got. I just posted it late at night half-joking as I'm sure the general's comments were. Though one of the questions of self-discovery the main character of my novels is trying to resolve is this very argument of societal expectations vs. the general's comments so this is an important thing for me just the same.

And Phil gets the line of the post award!

Steve

Playing the devils advocate for a moment, the general could have picked how he phrased this better. This is also why you don’t see Marine officers in the press too often, they are a different breed. I also want to see the whole discussion, I can only imagine how out of context this was taken and wonder who the direct audience was. . "It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up there with you. I like brawling,” sounds like he was talking to other Marines. For a ground pounder on the front line it is extremely motivating to know that the man calling the shots would have no problem taking some shots if he was in your position. I’m a big believer in the theory that a leader should not ask a subordinate to do anything they haven’t or would not be willing to do.

I think they should have held off on invading iraq until they had Osama Bin Laden. Invading Iraq divided the attention.

Nah, I didn't take it as an attack at all. I love a good debate...a good civil debate. It's easy to get heated about all this especially with rampant nationalism going on. G-reg's ideas are good too and from that point of view it makes a lot of sense. Giving props to the troops is always a good thing, especially since they have no choice but to button their lip and stick it out. I do support the troops as long as they're doing the right thing which they seem to be. I'm not one to just blindly wave a flag though because there's things that are more important to me than country.

Don't get me wrong, I love this country and the people in it (not the leaders) but it doesn't seem to love me back very often so I'm reluctant to stick my ass out for it unless there's foreign troops on our soil then I'll fight like a Wolverine.

All I'm trying to say is that you can throw all the what if's out there about world freedom you like but I don't see Iraqis ever coming to fight us on our soil so why are we REALLY there giving up our soldier's precious lives???? I don't know about anyone else but even though I want the Iraqis to be free I don't think it's worth one drop of American blood to fight a war (one that used to be about imminent danger to us and WMD) so a few million Iraqis can MAYBE form a government that will someday be friendly to us. Sacrificing lives for freedom shouldn't be a maybe type of thing in my eyes. We helped the French and how do they feel about us right now? Have they always been above board...? NOT

evolutionmovement wrote:LedJetta - I Hate Bush, but I do agree with Afghanistan.

unfortunately, we arent in afghanistan. i agree with us being there to get osama as well, but it was just a good cover to get over there and into iraq.

fav. part of that article:
retired Vice Adm. Edward H. Martin. "I don't think any of us who have ever fought in wars liked to kill anybody."

I don't think this Iraq war has anything to do with Iraqis being free. That is pure spin.
Ever seen the clip of 2000-election Bush saying he doesn't believe in "nation building"?
Remember when the reasons behind it were always WMDs? Powell's powerpoint to the UN on WMDs and mobile trucks and "this tiny amount will kill so many" and so on. W used to cite reasons like "Saddam tried to kill my dad, he's a bad guy."
We never heard anything about building a democracy to make us safer until after the WMDs weren't found.
And the contradictions? In that latest state of the union, we heard all about spreading democracy in the middle east. Then a couple sentences later, allies like Saudi Arabia were mentioned. If spreading democracy is so important, why not start by convincing countries we are friendly with? Why even be allies with non democratic nations if Bush is going to take on tyranny? (I'm all for allies, just extrapolating on his bs)

I think the poor planning and lack of reasoning in important decisions should lead to impeachment.

Bush should be impeached on multiple counts for all the lying and manipulating this admin's done (they all do, but this guy has a totalitarian view of it where he's above explaining or even trying to excuse himself for it. He doesn't know or care that it's wrong as long as it meets his end). The marine in the article was talking about Afghanistan in particular, not Iraq, which is why I agree. Hussein should've been taken out by Bush Sr. when it made sense, though hindsight is 20/20 and I can understand his reasons for not doing so at the time. Still we fucked the people in Iraq back then by leading them to believe we would help them defeat Hussein and then we walked away as they stood up to be slaughtered. But whatever the case for going there, we should've resolved Afghanistan first and then talked about Iraq. Empires have fallen by spreading forces too thin. Not that Bush reads so he wouldn't know.

But Scott, the French also helped us out (though that was Louis XVI and more to fuck the British) - not that I'm a Francophile (though French fries, toast, women, and some of their cars are great).

Steve