Iraqi Civilian Massacre: how it happened

Yuri

Tank
Joined
Jun 5, 2004
Messages
5,373
Reaction score
4
The US government should not be held responsible by every wrong specific members of the military commit on their own volition. It should be held accountable for the further prevention of such awful shit, though, and it should apologize and justly punish those who commit such atrocities.

I think people just need to realize more that the government and its people don't go hand and hand. You can't hate citizens for acts of the governement, and you can't hate the government for acts of specific military personnel.


Which leads me back into saying: Pointing out that the enemy also commits atrocities isn't unjust in a thread like this. Of course it would be if you said "They deserve it!" but that was never said. Its just a reminder that some people are crazy, and because of this, war is hell.
 

Sulkdodds

Companion Cube
Joined
Jul 3, 2003
Messages
18,851
Reaction score
25
Perhaps, but that raises the question: does saying 'people are crazy and war is hell' merely attempt to distract from the fact that, really, an army should be responsible for their own soldiers? Does it distract from the fact that this whole thing, when combined with certain other reported incidents and trends, is indicative of a very worrying prevailing attitude?

Erestheux said:
You can't hate citizens for acts of the governement, and you can't hate the government for acts of specific military personnel.
But you can hate the whole society for how it acts in general (don't get me wrong, I really dislike most countries).

Wait, why am I arguing this? I don't even 'hate' America that much.

My point is, it annoys me when people say 'your opinion is not valid because you hate such and such a country'. Sorry, but that only makes any sense if its their actual reasons for hatred you're questioning.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2003
Messages
3,230
Reaction score
0
Perhaps, but that raises the question: does saying 'people are crazy and war is hell' merely attempt to distract from the fact that, really, an army should be responsible for their own soldiers?
Perhaps, but an 'army' is not the one responsible for the actions at Haditha. It was 'men'. 'Humans'. You can't blame an entire part of something and everything in it, unless all of it actively follows the example of those few. And those few appear to only be 20 out of 120,000. It's not right to actively blame an entire organization when just a few slander its reputation through the digusting acts of massacre and atrocity.

My point is, it annoys me when people say 'your opinion is not valid because you hate such and such a country'. Sorry, but that only makes any sense if its their actual reasons for hatred you're questioning.
So basically I should'nt be disgusted with someone because they use Hatred, a rage motivated conscious act of self serving apathy, over logic and reason which promote actual solutions to the problems that trouble them instead of furthering the conflict beyond them reaching a resolution?

I disagree with Hatred in general, because its not a very logical or thought provoking way of thought. Surely thats agreeable. And, I don't think CptStern was 'hating' anyone thing. I read disgust from his post, not hatred.
 

Sulkdodds

Companion Cube
Joined
Jul 3, 2003
Messages
18,851
Reaction score
25
Kerberos said:
And those few appear to only be 20 out of 120,000. It's not right to actively blame an entire organization when just a few slander its reputation through the digusting acts of massacre and atrocity.
That's only if there's only twenty crazies. When the army spends so damn much on drilling things into people, and conditioning to act like they're supposed to act, it's unnaceptable. It may indicate a complete failure in the training which teaches people how not to flip out and kill civilians? I'm not saying they're totally fully responsible but I am saying they must share at least some of the blame. It's their JOB to keep their soldiers in control.

Kerberos said:
So basically I should'nt be disgusted with someone because they use Hatred, a rage motivated conscious act of self serving apathy, over logic and reason which promote actual solutions to the problems that trouble them instead of furthering the conflict beyond them reaching a resolution?
Not what I said, really.

Arguments are not invalidated by hatred if the hatred is the result of the argument.

eg. I argue that socialism is awful. Here is my reasoning.

"Yeah, well you just hate socialism!"

No shit, Sherlock.

It doesn't happen so much anymore here, but it used to.
 

Sulkdodds

Companion Cube
Joined
Jul 3, 2003
Messages
18,851
Reaction score
25
Nah, you didn't, don't worry about it. This forum's for arguments after all. :O
 
Top