Military Spending is great for the economy

[Sampson]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

So I think you're getting these reactions to the topic, Sampson, because by naming the topic like you did, it was interpreted that you were trying to use this video as an emotional argument for the second question. Which is maybe not what you were going for, but that's how it could have been taken.

The topic title was meant as a sort of ironic reference to a previous topic, not an extension of that argument. I feel I've laid out my thoughts on that subject fairly well, so shall I write of it no more unless someone wishes to bump that topic to dispute something I said.

[marcus]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

Let me pose a question: whenever an event like this occurs and someone tells you about it and makes a big deal about feeling bad for these people--do you believe them, or do you think their empathy is feigned?

Maybe I'm just a heartless asshole, but I'm not personally effected by this disaster at all and I really don't care. Yeah it sucks, and yeah I'm going to donate a few dollars, but I feel no emotional sorrow whatsoever. I'm not from Iraq, I've never been there, didn't know anyone from there, etc. If this shooting had happened here, I wouldn't expect anyone from Iraq to feel bad for me.

[marcus]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

Whoah, Marcus, where did that come from? Well, aside from three italicized words being changed, it's an exact quote from the instigator here.

Sampson, you're worse than the politicians you point fingers at. You're worse than all the media moguls, political big wigs, and celebrities who think just because they have money and an opinion it makes them knowledgeable on world events. You feign sympathy and spot light atrocities not out of genuine care but to draw attention and support for your own agenda.

Who cares about them Iraqi civilians, right? It's war. Just a couple more bodies to add to the pile and a couple more people angry and rallying in support of my cause. If you were kidnapped by the enemy, tortured, and beheaded then surely you don't expect anyone to shed a tear or support your family because human empathy is non-existent, right?

Yeah, I loved listening to that Wikileaks guy talking. "It seems to me that the pilots are like 'this is another day at the office. this is something we've been doing for weeks and weeks and weeks." Try years, pal. The rules of engagement are already retarded enough and while gunships have superior firepower the same can't be said for infantry on foot. Do you know what it's like standing inside a city surrounded by thousands of possibly hostile people and you can't do a damn thing unless A) you confirm they're armed and B) they're actually shooting at you which usually means C) you're already dead. Some bases are even shelled with mortar fire and there's nothing the soldiers can do about it because the rules forbid them from defending themselves until someone who's clearly armed is sighted.

Now, in no way am I condoning the decisions the pilots made and the biggest problem with military punishment is that it always comes down hard on the enlisted people (young men and women who are told to obey) rather than the commanding officers that actually issue the order. An officer in the hot seat is forced to retire with his fat pension. An enlisted soldier is given court martial and thrown in jail like that guy who was convicted of torture a few years ago despite being ordered by his commanders to do so. That's the true injustice there: the people who have power to start and stop this aren't.

Videos like this bring awareness but in completely the wrong light. The "atrocities" of war should have been evident since two nuclear bombs were dropped on Japan 70 years ago. Why is it, though, that everyone still demands the blood of the common man and not the leaders? If anything should change it's putting the men in power in the spot light. The last thing I want to see is this turning into Vietnam where the guys on the ground return home to hatred and abuse for doing what they were told to do with no choice of refusing. Some will argue that "Nobody is forced to sign on" to which my reply is "But the people who do are the exact reason America doesn't have a draft like most countries and National Call to Service lasts less than 2 years."

[Czechs Mex]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

Let me pose a question: whenever an event like this occurs and someone tells you about it and makes a big deal about feeling bad for these people--do you believe them, or do you think their empathy is feigned?

Maybe I'm just a heartless asshole, but I'm not personally effected by this disaster at all and I really don't care. Yeah it sucks, and yeah I'm going to donate a few dollars, but I feel no emotional sorrow whatsoever. I'm not from Iraq, I've never been there, didn't know anyone from there, etc. If this shooting had happened here, I wouldn't expect anyone from Iraq to feel bad for me.

When I first read this post, I was like, "Man, Marcus is a douche."

And then I saw the second post and LOL'd.

And then I thought I'd look up to see where Sampson actually said that. Turns out it was in the Port-Au-Prince earthquake topic, which is arguably a somewhat different scenario to make that comment, given that we had no direct involvement in causing the Port-Au-Prince earthquake, but we (the U.S.) were directly responsible for the deaths in the Iraq video above.

Not saying what Sampson's motivations are, I'm just saying that's not as fair of a comparison as it initially seemed.

JUST CALL ME THE FACT CZECHER.

[Stormy]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

I'm just watching the long video now, Biggie, I assume you have quite a few friends in the armed forces. Is it normal for people to be so... casual when they're killing other people? It just seems like they're joking, laughing a fair amount.

Like biggie said, they are desensitized to it. How could someone take the life of another human being and not be affected? That kind of person would be a monster, and I find it hard to believe that every single person in the military is a sociopath (according to the DSM-IV, 3% of males on the planet are sociopaths, and sociopaths don't handle authority very well, so...). Part of coping with this kind of thing is not thinking about those being killed as people, or making justifications. Think about it to hard and you will lose it.

[marcus]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

When I first read this post, I was like, "Man, Marcus is a douche."

And then I saw the second post and LOL'd.

And then I thought I'd look up to see where Sampson actually said that. Turns out it was in the Port-Au-Prince earthquake topic, which is arguably a somewhat different scenario to make that comment, given that we had no direct involvement in causing the Port-Au-Prince earthquake, but we (the U.S.) were directly responsible for the deaths in the Iraq video above.

Not saying what Sampson's motivations are, I'm just saying that's not as hilarious or as fair of a comparison as it initially seemed.

JUST CALL ME THE FACT CZECHER.

Regardless, I refuse to believe that if you basically flip the bird to half a million dead people but get up in arms over a possible accident involving a dozen, you really don't care either way. I just can't take Sampson seriously as a human being. Even so called "neutral parties" are terrible because they're uncaring instigators looking for support. I'm just imagining this wikileaks guy jumping into the middle of a heated argument, punching someone in the balls, then pointing to another person screaming "He did it!" while taking off.

"This is an atrocity of the highest level! Now take your Red Cross donations and give them to us because we're having financial troubles."

[Czechs Mex]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

if you basically flip the bird to half a million dead people but get up in arms over a possible accident involving a dozen, you really don't care either way.

Of the six people who responded to Sampson's post in the earthquake topic, half of them agreed with him to some extent. I'd be surprised if those same people felt no empathy for the people killed here.

Sadly, horrible things happen every day. About 40,000 people in the U.S. die in car accidents every year. Do you mourn for every one of them? If someone doesn't appear to be affected by that statistic, but mourns the death of someone they just figuratively pushed under a train, does that mean they're being insincere in the second case?

All I'm saying is that it's natural to have some moral burden for the deaths you actually feel in some way responsible for. There's a reason to feel responsible for these Iraq deaths, so the quote you posted shouldn't be evidence that Sampson is feigning empathy for political reasons.

[marcus]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

The only reason to feel responsible is through association by nationality. It's clear Sampson believes the military is a burden and has absolutely no worth or value in modern society. If that's the case his hands are washed clean. What's the intention for this topic? To raise awareness of the horrors of war, something history has reminded us of for the past 4,000 years?

You can't beat yourself up over something you have no part in but parading someone else's misfortunes to put you in the limelight is despicable. If it's a journalist's job to accuse and spew their own political agenda using a dead man as fuel, then they're worse than defense attorneys who make deals with known murderers just to keep their personal quota high.

[Magus]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

We must have peace!

[Czechs Mex]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

What's the intention for this topic?

I dunno, I'm just here because I don't want to do work.

[Adrian Foley]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

Of the six people who responded to Sampson's post in the earthquake topic, half of them agreed with him to some extent. I'd be surprised if those same people felt no empathy for the people killed here.

Sadly, horrible things happen every day. About 40,000 people in the U.S. die in car accidents every year. Do you mourn for every one of them? If someone doesn't appear to be affected by that statistic, but mourns the death of someone they just figuratively pushed under a train, does that mean they're being insincere in the second case?

This reminded me of the 35W bridge collapse. Like 12 people died. In comparison to how many people who died in car accidents that year, I didn't really see the big deal.

[Sampson]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

Thanks for the early birthday present, Marcus. I find your blindness amusing. Rather than actually attempt to address the presented topic, and perhaps refute it (other than some broad statements about COs not being punished), you simply go after my character. Bravo.

Whoah, Marcus, where did that come from? Well, aside from three italicized words being changed, it's an exact quote from the instigator here.

Instigator? Of what, discussion? I simply posted whats bound to be a tremendously popular internet video. I feel that such a video is relevant to the free forum.

As for my previous statement on regards to Haitians and whether or not that somehow makes me a hypocrite for posting this video--it doesn't. Not at all.

In the Haiti topic I said that I felt no emotional distress over the event. Which is true and something that I cannot control. I didn't advocate not helping them. I said that I myself would donate to the relief effort, which I did, because if I was in their shoes I'd want someone to do that for me. My point was that I wasn't going to cry in my bed for ten hours and have my day ruined because some people I never met a couple thousand miles away died.

Similarly, I personally feel no sorrow over the death of this journalist. I didn't cry earlier and light a candle after watching the video. That said, if I was in his shoes I wouldn't want such an event to happen to me, and like helping the Haitians, I think people should help Iraqis by preventing this event from occurring again, if possible.

Sampson, you're worse than the politicians you point fingers at. You're worse than all the media moguls, political big wigs, and celebrities who think just because they have money and an opinion it makes them knowledgeable on world events. You feign sympathy and spot light atrocities not out of genuine care but to draw attention and support for your own agenda.

Yes, I, a keyboard jockey, am worse than media moguls and political big whigs, etc. for doing what they do (attempt to promote their beliefs) by writing occasional posts on an internet forum aimed at nerds rather than influence the media they control or the laws which govern this country.

I'd like to think that. My ego would. But sadly it's not true.

[Sejon]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

What's weird is that when the Haitian quake happened, I was only slightly bummed, for a transient moment. But when the Chilean quake happened a short while later, I found myself being terribly depressed.

"Poor Chile! Why them?!" I kept thinking to myself. And I emailed friends and relatives about my reactions to it.

Yet the death toll and damage in Chile was but an infinitesimal fraction of what happened in Haiti. Not to mention Chile is far more organized and prepared to cope with such a disaster.

I don't even understand my reasoning! It's just how I observed my emotions playing out.

[Alex]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

It's because you hate black people.

[Sejon]

Re: Military Spending is great for the economy

Yet had it hit Jamaica or the Dominican Republic, I know I would have been devastated.

So that can't be it.

Maybe it's because they're French, hur hur.