NationStates Jolt Archive

To MUSLIMS ...USMC Lt Gen. Pitman's Apology ,

This Letter of Apology was written by Lieutenant General Chuck H. Pitman, US Marine Corps, Retired:

"For good and ill", the Iraqi prisoner abuse mess will remain an issue. On the one hand, right thinking Americans will abhor the stupidity of the actions while on the other hand, political glee will take control and fashion this minor event into some modern day massacre.

I humbly offer my opinion here:

I am sorry that the last seven times we Americans took up arms and sacrificed the blood of our youth, it was in the defense of Muslims (Bosnia, Kosovo, Gulf War 1, Kuwait, etc.).

I am sorry that no such call for an apology upon the extremists came after 9/11.

I am sorry that all of the murderers on 9/11 were Islamic Arabs.

I am sorry that most Arabs and Muslims have to live in squalor under savage dictatorships.

I am sorry that their leaders squander their wealth.

I am sorry that their governments breed hate for the US in their religious schools, mosques, and government-controlled media.

I am sorry that Yassar Arafat was kicked out of every Arab country and high-jacked the Palestinian "cause."

I am sorry that no other Arab country will take in or offer more than a token amount of financial help to those same Palestinians.

I am sorry that the USA has to step in and be the biggest financial supporter of poverty stricken Arabs while the insanely wealthy Arabs blame the USA for all their problems.

I am sorry that our own left wing, our media, and our own brainwashed asses do not understand any of this (from the misleading vocal elements of our society, like radical professors, CNN and the NY TIMES).

I am sorry the United Nations scammed the poor people of Iraq out of the "food for oil" money so they could get rich while the common folk suffered.

I am sorry that some Arab governments pay the families of homicide bombers upon their death.

I am sorry that those same bombers are brainwashed thinking they will receive 72 virgins in "paradise."

I am sorry that the homicide bombers think pregnant women, babies, children, the elderly and other noncombatant civilians are legitimate targets.

I am sorry that our troops die to free more Arabs from the gang rape rooms and the filling of mass graves of dissidents of their own making.

I am sorry that Muslim extremists have killed more Arabs than any other group.

I am sorry that foreign trained terrorists are trying to seize control of Iraq and return it to a terrorist state.

I am sorry we don't drop a few dozen Daisy cutters on Fallujah.

I am sorry every time terrorists hide they find a convenient "Holy Site."

I am sorry they didn't apologize for driving two jets into the World Trade Center that collapsed and severely damaged Saint Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church - one of our Holy Sites.

I am sorry they didn't apologize for flight 93 and 175, the USS Cole, the embassy bombings, the murders and beheadings of Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl, etc....etc!

I am sorry Michael Moore is American; he could feed a medium sized village
in Africa.

America will get past this latest absurdity. We will punish those responsible because that is what we do.

We hang out our dirty laundry for the entire world to see. We move on. That's one of the reasons we are hated so much. We don't hide this stuff like all those Arab countries that are now demanding an apology.

Deep down inside, when most Americans saw this reported in the news, we were like - so what? We lost hundreds and made fun of a few prisoners. Sure , it was wrong, sure, it dramatically hurts our cause, but until captured we were trying to kill these same prisoners. Now we're supposed to wring our hands because a few were humiliated?

Our compassion is tempered with the vivid memories of our own people killed, mutilated and burnt amongst a joyous crowd of celebrating Fallujahans.

If you want an apology from this American, you're going to have a long wait!

You have a better chance of finding those seventy-two virgins.

Chuck H. Pitman

Lieutenant General
US Marine Corps (Retired)

http://www.usmc.mil/genbios2.nsf/biographies/EA7025F431B3DF8C85256A40007188C6?opendocument

So... whats your point?

Apology is a bit of a misnomer, isn't it?


He has a few good points, though. Too bad it's lost in an 'if they do it so can we' kind of argument.

This has been posted before.

"I am sorry the US is 100% great and everything is the fault of Arabs and the liberal controlled media.
I am sorry my apology sounds suspiciously false."

If this is real, he should be sacked right now.
That's just insulting bullshit, a provocation to a billion or so people and certainly not befitting someone who wears a US-Military uniform, which you guys seem to value so highly.

He's retired.

Thanks for the post B0zzy. :D

That's just insulting bullshit, a provocation to a billion or so people and certainly not befitting someone who wears a US-Military uniform, which you guys seem to value so highly.

He is retired.

US General offers apology to Muslims;

Perhaps too little too late?

He's retired.
Hmmm...Well can't they give him some sort of dishnourable discharge or something? Take all his medals, his memorabilia and kick him out of any ex-military organisations as well as deleting all military records of him.

This has been posted before.
And I point you to how it ended (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9039998#post9039998).

Let's not go there again, please. First sign of that sort of behavior and this too shall be locked.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Forum Moderator
The One-Stop Rules Shop

Hmmm...Well can't they give him some sort of dishnourable discharge or something? Take all his medals, his memorabilia and kick him out of any ex-military organisations as well as deleting all military records of him.

Nope.

I agree with this guy 100%. I dont think america is a perfect nation but the whole world seems to think were the essence of evil when were not.

To MUSLIMS ...USMC Lt Gen. Pitman's Apology ,

This Letter of Apology was written by Lieutenant General Chuck H. Pitman, US Marine Corps, Retired:



I like that. I think he made a lot of good points.

I agree with this guy 100%. I dont think america is a perfect nation but the whole world seems to think were the essence of evil when were not.

Coming from someone who named themselves after that hideous evil vampire...
j/k, don't get mad, get glad!

America is not a perfect country, most people realize this. it is what makes it even more precious to us, that there are flaws we must fix. But, when a fellow Marine (albeit one much higher ranking than I ever hoped to achieve) makes a statement like this, he is doing a disservice to himself, to his country, and to the Corps. It is a statement that is condescending and uncalled for, serving no purpose but to further polarize two societies that have far more in common than they would ever care to realize.

But of course, he has every right to speak his mind, and although I do disagree with what he says, I do applaud him for excersizing his first amendment rights.

Hmmm...Well can't they give him some sort of dishnourable discharge or something? Take all his medals, his memorabilia and kick him out of any ex-military organisations as well as deleting all military records of him.
You guys have no idea how great a guy General Pitman is. He was the commanding officer of the Marine detachment at NAS Pensacola when I was in flight school. I had the dubious distinction of being chewed out by him after a couple of average flights. He told me that Marines had to do better than just average.

Afterwards, I was talking to the adjutant and he let me know just what kind of history Lt Colonel Pitman had made. Part of that history was his participation in subduing a sniper in New Orleans. He loaded up a helicopter with some Marines and police, then went after a sniper that had killed several officers. This was big news in the late '70s and you ought to look it up.

The man isn't a crackpot, he's a real hero. His frustration is shared by a good number of us that served.

-snip-
I don't give a shit if he stopped nuclear war with his farts, he still doesn't have the right to embarass his nation like that.

First of all, I fully support the war effort. That said, I'm a realist. We're not in Iraq right now because the Iraqi people were oppressed. They were oppressed for a long time before we decided to invade. Nor are we in Iraq because of the atrocities of Saddam Hussien's regime. The U.S. has sponsored several dictators in South America that did similar things, in the name of fighting Communism. I believe we're there for oil. But to all the people who say that's not a legitimate reason, why not? Obtaining further reserves of what's becoming a more and more valuable resource isn't in the best interests of this country? Obtaining a base in the Middle East for future operations against rogue states isn't in the best interests of this country? Bringing the focus of the U.S.'s enemies to a single focal point where they can come to us and we can fight them a lot easier than we could in the mountains isn't in the best interests of this country? Having the terrorists blow things up in Iraq as opposed to in New York City isn't in the best interests of this country? Let's face facts. As terrible as it is that so many U.S. servicemen have died in Iraq, most of the overall casualties have been Iraqis. Honestly, I sleep a lot better knowing that there aren't bombs going off in L.A., Chicago, or New York City. Don't you?
Also, as someone accurately pointed out, even though you might disagree with the man, you can't simply call him a bigot because his view is different from yours. If so, you're not really a left-leaning, freedom of speech believer. You're just hiding behind that to push your agenda of being politically correct. Personally, the one area where I don't want political correctness is amongst the men and women who are defending our country. I don't want them to be in touch with their inner feelings. I want them to be able to fight our enemies without being held-back by fear of someone coming down on them.
By the way: I'm new here. Hi. :)

I don't give a shit if he stopped nuclear war with his farts, he still doesn't have the right to embarass his nation like that.
I guess my point is that he didn't embarrass the nation, only the chronic apologists who think we were to blame in the first place.

I don't give a shit if he stopped nuclear war with his farts, he still doesn't have the right to embarass his nation like that.

What do you say of the Chinese overseas dissidents dissing their nation and spreading anti-Communist propaganda?

What do you say of the Chinese overseas dissidents dissing their nation and spreading anti-Communist propaganda?

Same thing I will say for this. If the administration of their home country really takes offense to it, said dissidents will get a nice long jail term or worst when they can get their hands on it.

Given the current US administrations stances though, I doubt anything will happen.

What do you say of the Chinese overseas dissidents dissing their nation and spreading anti-Communist propaganda?
Actually, I say he should be given back to China. They can decide what to do with him.
What would you think if the US-Ambassador in Beijing or something goes to the Chinese, and says he'll reveal the identities of CIA Agents there, and weird documents are starting to float about that seem to be actual CIA Files on people?

Same thing I will say for this. If the administration of their home country really takes offense to it, said dissidents will get a nice long jail term or worst when they can get their hands on it.

Given the current US administrations stances though, I doubt anything will happen.

What if you met a German dissident in America in the 1940s denouncing the Holocaust. Would you go up and bitchslap him and tell him off for betraying his nation?

-snip-
What, like Marlene Dietrich?
That treacherous slut, I'll never get over her. Grrr!
:mad:

What, like Marlene Dietrich?
That treacherous slut, I'll never get over her. Grrr!
:mad:

ok. suppose i din say anything

-_-'''

I don't give a shit if he stopped nuclear war with his farts, he still doesn't have the right to embarass his nation like that.

He didn't embarass his nation in the slightest.

Same thing I will say for this. If the administration of their home country really takes offense to it, said dissidents will get a nice long jail term or worst when they can get their hands on it.

Umm, ever heard of the unalienable right of Freedom of Speech?

Liverbreath']He didn't embarass his nation in the slightest.
If that is what you want to be known for in the world, then not.
I would suggest though that a less arrogant, more accomodating, or even compromising approach might be better to solve the problem of perceptions of the US.

I am sorry we don't drop a few dozen Daisy cutters on Fallujah.

Oh...pleasant. :rolleyes: I think this guy might have a "they're foreign, so it doesn't matter" complex.

Oh...pleasant. :rolleyes: I think this guy might have a "they're foreign, so it doesn't matter" complex.
I think it's more a case of "We're God's own country"... It goes around a lot is seems.

The embarrasing thing: The guy wrote that thing clearly stating he's a retired army boy. That means he's trying to speak for your country. Not just yourself. It also means he's speaking for your allies.

Now some of you may not give a damn about international law. I guess such things aren't very handy when you're the not the one with the worlds greatest military force bombing you to bits. If you were, you'd feel differently - and that's a promise.
I see the word "flamebaiting" used here often. I believe it's fitting of that apology. Now if you don't think your army personel flaimbaiting countless millions around the globe and dragging your allies into it by doing it is an insult, no amount of words will ever set you straight. I hope you realize what you're doing one day. And I hope (and will do my utmost to ensure) the next government in my country never gives you any more help again. Ever. You are simple too far over the edge.

- I humbly apologize to the 2-3 Americans who doesn't think annexing forign countries for their resources and rediculing & threatning vast parts of the worlds population is a great idea. The above wasn't meant at you.

This guy makes my eyes water, hold my hand over my heart, and just watch a US flag dance in the wind. Im so proud to be an American. Weve dont so much for this modern world, and the older generations saw that, and respected us for that. This new generation is clouded over with I dont know what, but Americans are used to going in and getting the job done, and not being thanked or patted on the back, but being spit at and called 'baby killer'. But what the hell, were used to it, it goes in one ear and out the other. Were not going to be belittled by a Frenchman sitting on the verande, sipping wines and grazing on cheeses while trimming his thin moustache. Maybe Ill consider what they have to say once they pay us our outstanding WWI-WWII debts for throwing ourselves in the grinder that was Europe to free the two-faced French. Said enough?

He shares an honest sentiment with many clear (though oddly overlooked by the world) observations. So far few have actually discussed any of his finer points - it is so much easier to hold fast to your beliefs than to face cognitive dissonance.

Well everything is correct, you can argue his opinions about left wing media, but other than that, its all pretty cut and dry.

One mistake though, Michael Moore could feed a large African village, but even famine striken areas have their limits.

....Said enough?
Are you being sarcastic?

Making a Michael Moore fat joke really helped his argument. I mean, without that, I might have thought he was just indulging in a rather idiotic, somewhat bigoted, and extremely condescending rant, but that fat joke really helped me take his points seriously! [/sarcasm]

I wish people like this would stop acting as representatives of America. After reading things like that "apology," it's hard to blame the Europeans and such who believe that all Americans are arrogant, jingoistic jerks... (We're not! I promise!) :(

Making a Michael Moore fat joke really helped his argument. I mean, without that, I might have thought he was just indulging in a rather idiotic, somewhat bigoted, and extremely condescending rant, but that fat joke really helped me take his points seriously! [/sarcasm]

I wish people like this would stop acting as representatives of America. After reading things like that "apology," it's hard to blame the Europeans and such who believe that all Americans are arrogant, jingoistic jerks... (We're not! I promise!) :(

No, trust me, were not all like that. (get ready for sarcasm for those who cant detect it). There are the quite left-liberals like above, who turn their backs to genocide and dont really have much to say to the victims of 9/11 that want closure other than 'I dont know how well do it, but well find a nice way to solve the problem, but lets check with the UN about it while the bad guys are still plotting, sending WOMD into Syria, and killing their own people in a vast array of torture chambers'. On the other side is the mean right-conservatives who want to shut down the UN who has done nothingC at all, well, maybe just a few scandals here and there and I swear, just a few thousand starvation deaths, but other than that its good. Were also mean when we set up the first working democracy in Iraq after 30 years, and the second in the middle east (the other which is US backed). Were also mean and took Saddam out of power, which he should have stayed in power because the liberals in the UN and the US wanted him there, maybe because he was a friendly guy to them (you would have to ask lib Dan Rathers, seeing that Ive never actually talked to the guy).

Ok, that was weird, but I had to get a point across. I want to hear a European say that their not all 'genocide lovin', oil smugglin', automatically-blame-America' people

You B0zzy, don't apologize. It is not your fault, It is the government. They should apologize for abusing the human rights of the muslims.

-snip-
:confused:
That was a confusing post...

Hmm, we're not all genocide loving, oil...whatever it is you wanted me to say.

There are the quite left-liberals like above, who turn their backs to genocide and dont really have much to say to the victims of 9/11 that want closure other than 'I dont know how well do it, but well find a nice way to solve the problem, but lets check with the UN about it while the bad guys are still plotting, sending WOMD into Syria, and killing their own people in a vast array of torture chambers'.

Um.

I'm assuming since you quoted me that I was meant to be an example of a "quite-left liberal who turn[s] [my] back to genocide" (etc.). I'm not entirely clear how you concluded this, since my post made exactly zero references to genocide, the UN, or 9/11, offered no opinion as to the justification or lack thereof for the Iraq war, and, in fact, was pretty much confined to saying that acting like a condescending jerk is not the best way to win the hearts and minds of the world. Perhaps that makes me an extremist. If so, that's a pretty sad statement on our society.

I'm not sure how much of your accusation was meant to be sarcastic - hopefully more of it than it sounded like.

Why do you think that the world thinks we're Jingognists Jerks and arrogant like you said (sp? on jingoadf word)

Why do you think that the world thinks we're Jingognists Jerks and arrogant like you said (sp? on jingoadf word)

First: jingoism (noun) - Extreme nationalism characterized especially by a belligerent foreign policy; chauvinistic patriotism; adj. jingoistic :)

As for why...well, some obvious reasons spring to mind. If we're talking globally, Bush and co.'s aggressively unilateralist policies with regard both to Iraq and various other issues are troubling to a lot of people. If we're talking on an individual basis, if you read over past threads on here, you'll find an awful lot of Americans claiming that, effectively, the U.S. can do no wrong, that anything we do is fine so long as others have done worse (which seems to parallel the attitude expressed in that "apology"), and that anyone who criticizes the U.S. is an evil cheese-eating surrender monkey who's just jealous of our studliness. :rolleyes: The attitude expressed in the "apology" is one of disdain at the very idea of Americans apologizing for anything, and that's a problem. Until we can admit that we're imperfect, how can we expect anyone to take us seriously and not just write all Americans off as arrogant jerks?

I'm glad the retired Lt. Gen said those things. Now granted I am in Iraq right now, so he is speaking from my view point. I will tell you my two bits though on this matter. The moment we let the UN lead every decision we make in this country, is the moment we stop being the leaders of democracy and start being its slaves. Quiet frankly, America needs to be the bully, the world police because we are the ones that get things done. Hell, a good deal of the UN countries (France) were making a buck off of Iraq while breaking their own UN resolutions. Heck if the UN dint follow its own resolutions, how could it enforce the 14 that it placed against Iraq? The world needs us arrogant, agressive Americans.

Trusca beat ya to this ... but hey .... NS is all about recycling ...

Anyway ... this isn't an apology. This is a man with a bent againt Muslims who seems to forget that no less than 6 million of the people he's sworn to protect (ie. American Citizens) are Muslim.

Frankly .... fuck him and the horse he rode in on ... he is what represents the "Ugly American" and I will not claim affiliation with him. He's useless and backwoods and should have been shot by his own CO.

Chest-thumping. How mature of a Lieutenant General.

The world needs us arrogant, agressive Americans.

Almost correct.

The worlds needs you arrogant, aggressive Americans to leave us all the Hell alone and stop interfering with our affairs.

There. Much better.

Trusca beat ya to this ... but hey .... NS is all about recycling ...

Anyway ... this isn't an apology. This is a man with a bent againt Muslims who seems to forget that no less than 6 million of the people he's sworn to protect (ie. American Citizens) are Muslim.

Frankly .... fuck him and the horse he rode in on ... he is what represents the "Ugly American" and I will not claim affiliation with him. He's useless and backwoods and should have been shot by his own CO.




Well thats okay, I personally dont want to claim affiliation with anyone who dosnt agree with this Lt Gen. But thats okay, I will still risk getting shot for you.

Almost correct.

The worlds needs you arrogant, aggressive Americans to leave us all the Hell alone and stop interfering with our affairs.

There. Much better.
What country you from there Dobbs? If your from a European country you can blow your that BS out the window. Its not like Europe didnt screw with other countries. DOnt get pissy now because Americans are now the big dogs.

What country you from there Dobbs? If your from a European country you can blow your that BS out the window. Its not like Europe didnt screw with other countries. DOnt get pissy now because Americans are now the big dogs.

And what if he's not from a European country? How are you going to casually dismiss his arguments then?

Well thats okay, I personally dont want to claim affiliation with anyone who dosnt agree with this Lt Gen. But thats okay, I will still risk getting shot for you.


Well then we can get shot together ...

*chuckle* ... now that's an evening, ain't it?

I wouldn't worry about this joker ... not only does he not speak for the American people, I doubt seriously that he speaks for the US Military.

What country you from there Dobbs? If your from a European country you can blow your that BS out the window. Its not like Europe didnt screw with other countries. DOnt get pissy now because Americans are now the big dogs.

Nice.

You can light my farts, okay?

Hmmm...Well can't they give him some sort of dishnourable discharge or something? Take all his medals, his memorabilia and kick him out of any ex-military organisations as well as deleting all military records of him.
I don't understand? Shouldn't people, without obligations to the contrary, be free to express their deeply felt opinions without government reprisals? Or is freedom of speech one of those privaleges that only the "right-thinking" people should be allowed to exercise.

He's given a lot of his life in service to his country. A debt that can never be fully repaid. I think at the very least, we could be magnanimous enough to let the man, who's invested so much in defence of the freedom, speak his peace.

If you want to know what it takes to be disremembered in America, Benedict Arnold is your man. But he leg is still heroic.

Hmmm...Well can't they give him some sort of dishnourable discharge or something? Take all his medals, his memorabilia and kick him out of any ex-military organisations as well as deleting all military records of him.

Yea they can kick him out of stuff...if they wanna violate his rights as a US Citizen...even though he is one of those people that think we are the best. I mean sure we're an ok nation but nothing to brag about. Yes we have done ALOT of things we shouldn't have. We've done a alot of things we should have. What he is saying is pretty much just wearing a sign around his neck that says "The US is the best always!" which is totally untrue. As for this apology he wrote...like my post kinda says...complete bullshit. This is my opinion not a fact so if you have even read this far before bashing me its my OPINION not a fact. As I'm only 15 I will be expecting to be bashed but hey, for only 15 I know alot more about the military and government then alot of people might think.

Leonstein this post was not ment at you it was ment for everyone to read.
Peace out and good night!

And what if he's not from a European country? How are you going to casually dismiss his arguments then?
Well lets look at other countries then. Any where in the MIddle East blows his argument to shit worse then a school bus of small children. Russia? Yeah, that is a nation of happiness. China, Korea? Yeah right. Hell not even Mexico has avoided empire building, it just took a few Texans to slap them down.

And I'm sorry mr. marine general that you had to have sex with another men through a barrel.

And I'm sorry that our rich population has been de-evolving (according to eugenics) because they don't do shit.

And I'm sorry that our President is the missing link between man and ape.

I'm sorry people spit on soldiers like you, who would nuke a million Muslim civilians and shed no tears.

I'm sorry we have to pass laws to prevent flag-burning, because people like you make us lose faith in America.

I'm sorry over 23,000 people had to die for Bush's oil-vested trust fund for retirement, and I'm sorry it had to be so Cheney can have a good job at Halliburton after resigning as Vice-President.

I'm sorry that your duty to defend America involves torturing prisoners and trying to cover it up.

And I'm sorry that they have to brainwash marines like you, by depriving you of food and sleep, just like they brainwash terrorists for Al-Qaeda.

Well lets look at other countries then. Any where in the MIddle East blows his argument to shit worse then a school bus of small children. Russia? Yeah, that is a nation of happiness. China, Korea? Yeah right. Hell not even Mexico has avoided empire building, it just took a few Texans to slap them down.

Goodie. Now do Canada.

Nice.

You can light my farts, okay?


Yes, that insightfull argument has shown me the errors of my ways. I was ready to counter history lessons or even dogma, but "light my farts?" that was too masterful to defend against

Wasn't that piece of patriotic hate mail posted a while ago by somebody else? Eutrusca? Or am I getting deja-vus?

Wasn't that piece of patriotic hate mail posted a while ago by somebody else? Eutrusca? Or am I getting deja-vus?

You are correct, sir.

Goodie. Now do Canada.


Okay, Canada is a little hard to argue. The only time the Canuks have gone to war has been in the aid of another country (Ie helping out the brits in WW2). I will give you that one. Its hard to be pissed off at them really, except for the fact they speank French. I think thats evil enough

but "light my farts?" that was too masterful to defend against

:p ROFL :p

Okay, Canada is a little hard to argue. The only time the Canuks have gone to war has been in the aid of another country (Ie helping out the brits in WW2). I will give you that one. Its hard to be pissed off at them really, except for the fact they speank French. I think thats evil enough

Canada is cool....they know when, and when not to send thier people over seas to be killed.

Okay, Canada is a little hard to argue. The only time the Canuks have gone to war has been in the aid of another country (Ie helping out the brits in WW2). I will give you that one. Its hard to be pissed off at them really, except for the fact they speank French. I think thats evil enough

Ding!

What's he win, Chet?

Wasn't that piece of patriotic hate mail posted a while ago by somebody else? Eutrusca? Or am I getting deja-vus?

I don't know about getting deja-vus, but I could really go for getting some roast beef au-jus right about now...

Ding!

What's he win, Chet?
Alright I will give you that then being in Canada, you can speak for peace. However, since you all havnt actually done much in the world besides make a new name for Ham, I dont think you all matter right now in the long scheme of things. After all, not getting involved in the world is in its own way just as useless as getting over involved.

Until we can admit that we're imperfect, how can we expect anyone to take us seriously and not just write all Americans off as arrogant jerks?
There is a world of difference between acceptance of imperfections and striving for better, and accepting the blame for every inconvience that anyone anywhere in the world suffers at the hands of any other party, with everyone with their hand out, not asking, demanding restitution and to be the sole center of American attention. Is it any wonder that so many Americans have stopped listening to what the world has to say?

Ding!

What's he win, Chet?

Hah hah!

Dislocation.

I don't understand? Shouldn't people, without obligations to the contrary, be free to express their deeply felt opinions without government reprisals? Or is freedom of speech one of those privaleges that only the "right-thinking" people should be allowed to exercise.

He's given a lot of his life in service to his country. A debt that can never be fully repaid. I think at the very least, we could be magnanimous enough to let the man, who's invested so much in defence of the freedom, speak his peace.

If you want to know what it takes to be disremembered in America, Benedict Arnold is your man. But he leg is still heroic.
Yes and no. As soon as the man, retired as he may be, starts including his credentials, he is speaking for your military. And he is speaking for mine as well, because our nations are allies.
Now is he was just some random nutcase spewing poison and encouraging genocide, I'd write his pathetic antics off to a lack of education. As it is, I think he deserves a thorough beating. That guy has no right to speak for me. He's not even an elected official. Basically he's borderline treasonous.
Regardless of what he'd written, it would be wrong. The fact that he's a homocidal maniac just makes it worse.

But it's refreshing to see so comparatively many Americans speaking out against him. Even if they are very young. It would help immensely if he was forced to denounce any affiliation with the military tho.

A man like him should know better than this. Trying to coin in on his career when insulting and threatning every Muslim in the world is insane. If he really gave a damn about his country and his military, he would know he is the last person who should write something like that. Regardless of how frustrated he is. If he doesn't know that, he should never have held that rank.

So what's his next great idea? Going back in active service and stage a coup because the government and population he's supposed to protect doesn't want him to bomb all the civillians he wants?

But why do I bother... No amount of reason ever worked on fascists. You'll always think you have the right to speak for everyone.

Alright I will give you that then being in Canada, you can speak for peace. However, since you all havnt actually done much in the world besides make a new name for Ham, I dont think you all matter right now in the long scheme of things. After all, not getting involved in the world is in its own way just as useless as getting over involved.

LMAO

What's the new name for Ham? And Why Are You Capitalizing It?

And I don't care if you think I, or my country matter (and this part really makes me giggle) "right now" in the "long scheme of things". Neither I, nor my country, put much stock in the judgemental musings of some random poster on NationStates at 3 in the morning.

*sigh*

I suppose I'm expected to rise to the bit of bait dangled at the end of your post. I'll indulge you some:

"Harrumph! Not getting involved in the world is in its own way just as useless as getting over involved, eh? Well, being useless in the world is in its own way just as over involved as not being useless, buddy! Rant, fume, snort, rinse, repeat."

I'm glad that this guy made a half-assed attempt to be clever.

I'm glad that this guy has so much anger that he can't stay on the damn topic. First he berates Islamic terrorists and dictatorships, then he insults Muslims in general at the end. It looks like his attempt to "prove" the good in America's recent string of geopolitical actions just turned into bigoted frustration.

I'm glad that this guy skews information in his favor to prove his point that America and the Bush Administration are infallible.

I'm glad this guy's argument degenerates into a childish and furious "If we have to, they have to" whine.

I'm glad this oaf wants to slaughter thousands in the name of peace.

You know why I'm glad? Because it makes it so much easier to mock his points. We don't need to take rights away from this brainless, violent, arrogant bigot to discredit him. He does a damn good job of that himself.

How do we know this was actually written by General Whosits? I don't recall seeing an external link in this thread. Something smells fishy in all this.

First off, I had forgotten about this thread. So its a bit late, but I shall apologize for the late response, but I digress. On to the areas of contention.

What if you met a German dissident in America in the 1940s denouncing the Holocaust. Would you go up and bitchslap him and tell him off for betraying his nation?

You do realize that I made a point of stating that, and I quote myself:

administration of their home country really takes offense to it

So in this context, it would not be me doing any 'bitchslapping' or anything of the sort. It would be the local government who would be doing it. And the usage of the term 'betraying his nation' has met some rather flexible definitions in the past. Case in point the recent uproar over Jane Fonda who as far as memory serves, did not actually violate any of the written definitions of being a traitor and yet there were some here, who I shall not name, that decided that she was.

If I met said German dissident in America, I would simply realize that if his or her home nation took sufficient displeasure over the actions taken, there would be charges levelled against the dissident eventually.

I do believe you have misunderstood the context of my original post Dragons Bay.

Umm, ever heard of the unalienable right of Freedom of Speech?

Indeed. But I should also point out that you appear to have misunderstood my original post in the same way that Dragons Bay has.

However, are you certain that the local government would not be able to see to your incarceration if you embarrass them enough? Perhaps incarceration would not be the correct term, but they will certainly see to it that your words will have minimal effect, whether it is by discrediting you or otherwise.

To believe a nation, any nation would allow dissidents to extensively damage their foreign relations without attempting to form some sort of damage control would be foolish at best.

Regardless, it would appear that said person happens to be retired from active military service, and thus, if challenged, will be replied with the standard "This person does not reflect the views of the government" response.

So as such. Nothing much will happen to said person.

The man isn't a crackpot, he's a real hero. His frustration is shared by a good number of us that served.

I share that frustration. I served during the Vietnam war. Thank you for serving.

Can anyone verify whether this really was written by some retired general, or if this is just run-of-the-mill racist claptrap?

Yes and no. As soon as the man, retired as he may be, starts including his credentials, he is speaking for your military. And he is speaking for mine as well, because our nations are allies. Basically he's borderline treasonous.

Trying to coin in on his career when insulting and threatning every Muslim in the world is insane. If he really gave a damn about his country and his military, he would know he is the last person who should write something like that.

So what's his next great idea? Going back in active service and stage a coup because the government and population he's supposed to protect doesn't want him to bomb all the civillians he wants?

But why do I bother... No amount of reason ever worked on fascists. You'll always think you have the right to speak for everyone.
No. If he was employed by the Department of Defense in a capacity that included writing press releases, presentations, holding press conferences, or the like. Then he'd be speaking for the armed forces. As it stands he's expressing his opinion, and providing a context for it. He's got a lot of experience, and distinguished himself in service to his country, and that says something. Does it mean his word is the gospel as delivered to Moses? No. McArthur was a meglomaniacle ass-clown who's place in history is defined by his egotism and not his competence. But does that mean he should have enjoyed a lesser freedom to speak his peace than other men? No. As it happens the General in question has an opinion that a lot of people share for various reasons. I can't say I agree with everything he wrote, I can certainly symapthise with much of it, but if I'm prepared to defend a Neo-Nazi, or a member of the KKK, or even more odious people with less appealing ideas, I'm sure as hell not going encourage the censoring of a man who risked everything he would ever have for the protection of the freedoms I enjoy. I might even be something of a coward, but I'm not so pathetic an individual with convictions so delicate that I would deny a couragous man his spoken opinion. Oh, I might hold it against him. I might ridicule him. I might do any number of things. But the freedoms I hold dear either extend to all of us or none of us. Your threshold for treason is pretty low. You'd hang anyone who said something that even modestly challenged your sensibilities. How many people do you suppose might look to apply your own sense of morality on you?

He can do what he likes with reguard to speaking about Muslims. At least its a language they'll understand. (The incendiary hyperbole, not the sarcasm.) As for controversy and American generals, I can only assume you've never read anything about American military history. Something like this would potentially keep him from being promoted. But it could also make him a viable candidate for elected office in the right era.

Talking of coups. He's not the one demanding people be denied basic freedoms. The arab world is ungreatful. If they had their way, they'd be locked in perpetual civil war. When the US came into its own as a world power, it had to work with what was there. Brutal dictatorships, the prefered form of Arab government, by their own choosing*. Instead of war, the US used principally its economic influence to encourage stability. And look, it was successful. (* Don't even bother bringing up Iran. A weak socialist Democracy who's first act is to pick a fight they know they can't win with a superpower in the middle of the Cold War isn't a viable government. It's the lemming racing into the surf. Natural selection in action.)

Reason? Where have your ideological kin ever employed that? I'll I hear from them is talk of feelings, sharing, and crying *together*. I can't say I see a great deal of reason from the neo-conservatives either. But they do try to create the appearance of it, something I have yet to see at all from the hemp cap brigade. Call me a facsist if you like. I'm the one espousing the idea that people shouldn't face government reprisal for the public expression of the personal opinion. You're lables (however inappropriately applied) don't change the content of anyone's arguments. Not mine, and not yours. With a little introspection, perhaps you'll see how easy it is for people to choose tyranny through what they believe to be the best of intentions. Or maybe not.

Can anyone verify whether this really was written by some retired general, or if this is just run-of-the-mill racist claptrap?
Does it even matter? What I find interesting is how common it is that people believe the right to express one's beliefs should be tied to some minority that might endorse them.

Let's assume for the moment that it is entirely racist hyperbole with absolutely no basis in fact. Is that then the sum of this hypothetical man? Should he deserve no more consideration, and recieve only our collective scorn and all the punitive measures we can devise? Gandhi was a real racist. He hated Africans, and everything they aspired to and stood for.

Canada is cool....they know when, and when not to send thier people over seas to be killed.

Canada has 'people' and 'ships'?

Mounted Patrol do not count. Let's be serious.

((It's hard being America's hat.))

I want to run up to that man and give him a hug for standing up for America. I can understand if you disagree with him, that's your right to do so. However, I DIDN'T WATCH THREE THOUSAND OF MY COUNTRYMEN DIE ON 9/11 SO SOME ARABS COULD COMPLAIN ABOUT OUR CONDUCT!

Sorry for that, I just get pissed sometimes...

Renshahi, what unit did you go to the sandbox with?

A little explanation...
I'm neither english nor american. I know perfectly well I come off as a bit antagonistic. In this particular case I regret it a little. You weren't the one I wanted to yell at it seems. I'm sorry about the heavy editing of your post, but if I wanted to write books, I'd be an author.

No. If he was employed by the Department of Defense in a capacity... <Snip>
True of course. I said borderline treasonous. Maybe I used the word wrong. I'll look it up later. Anyway, what I meant was: He uses his credentials to validate what he is saying. That means, whether he's putting words in my mouth in a legal sense or not, he is trying to. That's what lead to the remark about fascists by the way.
I can't say I agree with everything he wrote, I can certainly symapthise with much of it, but if I'm prepared to defend a Neo-Nazi, or ... <Snip>.. I might do any number of things. But the freedoms I hold dear either extend to all of us or none of us. Your threshold for treason is pretty low...<Snip>
While I agree, mostly, I would very much like to punch him in the face. I'm not about to say warheroes should be hung or anything like that. I regret if I gave you that impression. Maybe my language skills are overrated or maybe I just got carried away. Either way, I'll stick up for free speech any day, for anyone. But just like I won't sit idly by and watch a Nazi speak for me or beat up someone in my name, I'm not about to put up with that guy trying to throw some veight behind his inane ramblings by showing off his credentials. That open letter was from him and him alone. Sure some may agree with him, but others - like myself - don't. And no matter what you think of free speech, it does not include his right to insinuate I condone genocide. It's too insane for me to just shut up and let it fly.
I can only assume you've never read anything about American military history. Something like this would potentially keep him from being promoted. But it could also make him a viable candidate for elected office in the right era.
While I'm no historian, you're not correct in your assumption. Please reread what you wrote. You explained quite clearly why this particular man pisses me off.
Talking of coups. He's not the one demanding people be denied basic freedoms...<Snip>
We'll have to agree to disagree. Encouraging genocide is pretty much what I consider denying people their right to live. Trying to anyway. About the rest of it: I agree with you in large part. It has no meaning talking about the other side being insane though. Not in this context. I'm sure you'll agree excuses like that belongs in the school yard.
Reason? Where have your ideological kin ever employed that?..<Snip>
Please do not assume you know me. I agree with the part I snipped, but please. Don't assume anything about me. Ask me instead. And if you think I was unreasonable in my former post, what makes you think you're any better? Because you throw shit at left, right and center and not just one triggerhappy yankee?

Talking of coups. He's not the one demanding people be denied basic freedoms. The arab world is ungreatful. If they had their way, they'd be locked in perpetual civil war. When the US came into its own as a world power, it had to work with what was there. Brutal dictatorships, the prefered form of Arab government, by their own choosing*.

(emphasis mine)

So, first of all, of course this fellow has the right to say whatever he likes. This doesn't mean people can't find his views highly offensive and wish he wouldn't air them so publically and in a manner which suggests that he is speaking as a representative of anything other than himself.

That being said, both you and he seem to fall into the fundamental trap of forgetting that individual people are, well, individual people. "The Arab world" cannot be ungrateful. There is no universal Muslim "they" who all want to engage in civil war. That's a naive, black-and-white view of the world. Pointing out that we've defended Muslims, that it was Muslims who attacked the WTC, and so forth does not give us the right to mistreat other Muslims, unless the Muslims have gone and developed some sort of hive-mind while I wasn't looking and they're all secretly the same person. There is no all-encompassing "they," and it's silly to talk in such terms.

Of course, even if all Muslims really do share a hive-mind, it still wouldn't make mistreatment of them acceptable, unless we're back to the old "we can't be bad so long as other people are worse" argument....

I want to run up to that man and give him a hug for standing up for America. I can understand if you disagree with him, that's your right to do so. However, I DIDN'T WATCH THREE THOUSAND OF MY COUNTRYMEN DIE ON 9/11 SO SOME ARABS COULD COMPLAIN ABOUT OUR CONDUCT!
:D
You are funny!

I am sorry that no such call for an apology upon the extremists came after 9/11.
Right, ask them to apologise, that would have worked.

I am sorry that all of the murderers on 9/11 were Islamic Arabs.
Right, of course some of them were also American Muslims.

I am sorry that most Arabs and Muslims have to live in squalor under savage dictatorships.
Yeah, thats right, we should drop daisy cutters on them to improve their way of life.

I am sorry that their leaders squander their wealth.
Not the only leaders I can think of who do that.

I am sorry that their governments breed hate for the US in their religious schools, mosques, and government-controlled media.
And of course America teaches us all to love everyone and that we should all get along.

I am sorry that Yassar Arafat was kicked out of every Arab country and hijacked the Palestinian "cause."
I'm sorry about that too, meant we had to put up with him.

I am sorry that no other Arab country will take in or offer more than a token amount of financial help to those same Palestinians.
Syria and Iran donate 3Bn yearly unless I'm much mistaken.

I am sorry that our own left wing, our media, and our own brainwashed asses do not understand any of this (from the misleading vocal elements of our society, like radical professors, CNN and the NY TIMES).
Yup, he's got us there with that logical argument. He knows everything and is right about everything, we're just uneducated with regards to the evils of all Arabs.

I am sorry the United Nations scammed the poor people of Iraq out of the "food for oil" money so they could get rich while the common folk suffered.
America however, has helped the Iraqi's lifestyle tremendously

I am sorry that some Arab governments pay the families of homicide bombers upon their death.
I think the phrase is "suicide" bombers. This guys no genius.

I am sorry that those same bombers are brainwashed thinking they will receive 72 virgins in "paradise."
You got any evidence to refute it? Christians believe in Heaven too, so why shouldn't Arabs?

I am sorry that the homicide bombers think pregnant women, babies, children, the elderly and other noncombatant civilians are legitimate targets.
And I'm sorry that you think they are.

I am sorry that our troops die to free more Arabs from the gang rape rooms and the filling of mass graves of dissidents of their own making.
Oh don't apologise, I'm sorry your troops are still there, months after Saddam stopped posing any thread.

I am sorry that Muslim extremists have killed more Arabs than any other group.
Close call though, I think Americans could come a close second on that score.

I am sorry we don't drop a few dozen Daisy cutters on Fallujah.
Ah yes, the American right-wings answer to any problem. Bombs away!

I am sorry every time terrorists hide they find a convenient "Holy Site."
They hide in mosques, mosques are considered holy sites.

I am sorry they didn't apologize for driving two jets into the World Trade Center that collapsed and severely damaged Saint Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church - one of our Holy Sites.
Clearly this man hasn't been following the news. That was Al-Qaeda, Iraq is now home to a collection of terrorist groups, most of whom have no connection to Al-Qaeda.

I am sorry they didn't apologize for flight 93 and 175, the USS Cole, the embassy bombings, the murders and beheadings of Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl, etc....etc!
Maybe they will the day Bush and Blair apologise for their part in killing thousands of civilians.

I am sorry Michael Moore is American; he could feed a medium sized village
in Africa.
Wow, personal attacks. Mature as well as funny:rolleyes:

America will get past this latest absurdity. We will punish those responsible because that is what we do.
Oh good, and there was me thinking that Bush and Blair would get away with it. Thanks for easing my mind;)

We hang out our dirty laundry for the entire world to see. We move on. That's one of the reasons we are hated so much. We don't hide this stuff like all those Arab countries that are now demanding an apology.
You don't hang it out, you get caught in the act. Bush never came out and said "yeah, we torture people in Gitmo, now lets all forgive and forget" now did he?

Our compassion is tempered with the vivid memories of our own people killed, mutilated and burnt amongst a joyous crowd of celebrating Fallujahans.
Compassion? This is the same guy who just advocated dropping daisy cutters on Fallujah right? Talking about compassion?

If you want an apology from this American, you're going to have a long wait!
Its ok, I'm in no hurry. Let me know when you open your eyes.

.

And what if he's not from a European country? How are you going to casually dismiss his arguments then?
LOL....too funny!! :)

Perhaps he will check his "country bashing" rule book?

On snippage, no need to appologize. I edited your posts down too. If people wanted to read books, would they be reading the forums?

True of course. I said borderline treasonous. Maybe I used the word wrong. I'll look it up later. Anyway, what I meant was: He uses his credentials to validate what he is saying.
Punishment for treason in the US is hanging or being shot on the spot. What he did was make an appeal to authority, and the station of his experience. Which *is* considerable. But, as with McArthur, not always convincing. All he wanted, and got is his say. As it happens, it's trivial to demonstrate he's not alone in his feelings. If he used his station to provide a voice to that group of people, that's his choice. It's his station, and he earned it through a life time of hard work. Will his actions diminish that station, and squander that hard work? Perhaps. That's something time will tell us. Should the government step in and seize the fruits of that work based on the opinions of another vocal minority. No, that would actually be would actually be tyranny. The worth of the ideas should be judged by the marketplace. And so, as this thread ably illustrates, that is exactly what's taking place.

But just like I won't sit idly by and watch a Nazi speak for me or beat up someone in my name, I'm not about to put up with that guy trying to throw some veight behind his inane ramblings by showing off his credentials. That open letter was from him and him alone. Sure some may agree with him, but others - like myself - don't. And no matter what you think of free speech, it does not include his right to insinuate I condone genocide. It's too insane for me to just shut up and let it fly.
I think actually punching him in the face would be a mistake, for a number of reasons, not the least of which might be self-preservation. But the wanting, hey, who can't understand that. It's cheap to throw Nazi comparisions around (see Godwin's Law). I can't imagine anyone who'd be more incensed at that than actual Nazis. (They worked so hard to set the benchmark for depraved, inhumane, pure evil so high, and half a century later the guy who takes someone's parking place, or the guy who won't give someone the soup they want gets to share in the infamy? It's just not fair.)

That you don't agree with him. Great. Got a list of Marine jokes? Hey, who doesn't have a relative in the Navy, Air Force, and/or Army? Got a reasonable, and articulate argument? Who's stopping you? Got an emotional compelling argument ad populum? People eat that shit up. Have a just enough of a grasp of latin to appear a pretentious characiture of an otherwise reasonable man? We can form a club. Speak your mind, it's a pretty free country. But demanding his pention, and even more ridiculous things (as has been advocated elsewhere and by others), well, I'm not so quick to cry out for political re-education.

Hyperbole is fun, and until the coming of Danni Ashe, it's dissemination was the primary function of the internet.
While I'm no historian, you're not correct in your assumption. Please reread what you wrote.
Don't make me dig up quotes. Hell, I can stick to just the generals that are generally accepted to be great and find far more obnoxious behavior. And then there are the real ass-hats like Custer.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Encouraging genocide is pretty much what I consider denying people their right to live. Trying to anyway. About the rest of it: I agree with you in large part.
Maybe my reading comprehension is on the fritz. But no where in the original quote provided by B0zzy, does the presumptive General advocate genocide. At most he laments that precious American lives were risked stopping it. He doesn't think the freedom, the peace of those so saved is worth any more than the price they put on it. Simply, he believes they don't deserve American assistance and should be left to be consumed by their own troubles.

I half to ask myself, who would I chose between, the lives of a friend, cousin, father, uncle and son, or an anonymous muslim family that lives half a world away. Even if they were the most wonderful people I'd never met, it's not even a question. How can I, a fair person, demand another American family shoulder a burden there is no way in hell I would choose.
Please do not assume you know me. I agree with the part I snipped, but please. Don't assume anything about me. Because you throw shit at left, right and center and not just one triggerhappy yankee?
Well we all know what happens when we assume. But please note, while I obviously must acknowledge it was a guess. I think you'd have to agree it was a pretty good guess. Ooooh "better." Such a ticklish little word. I suppose first we'd need a standard. But how about this instead. Let's assume I'm no better. I think it's pretty difficult to prove I'm significantly worse. As such my critism of you, can be no more misplaced than your critism of our retired Lt. General. So the question before both of us is the same. Can we avoid being hypocrites, at least in this thread, by accepting our critics gracefully, and without demands for sanctions from powers greater than ourselves?

I am sorry this guy is such a biggoted prick.

I want to run up to that man and give him a hug for standing up for America. I can understand if you disagree with him, that's your right to do so. However, I DIDN'T WATCH THREE THOUSAND OF MY COUNTRYMEN DIE ON 9/11 SO SOME ARABS COULD COMPLAIN ABOUT OUR CONDUCT!

Sorry for that, I just get pissed sometimes...

So, how many Arabs died because of that by now?
Conservative estimates for Iraq alone say around 10 000 civilians have been killed by American troops ...
I would say you got even a LONG time ago...

Edit:
Go ahaed, have a go at me for my opinion...

So, first of all, of course this fellow has the right to say whatever he likes. This doesn't mean people can't find his views highly offensive and wish he wouldn't air them so publically and in a manner which suggests that he is speaking as a representative of anything other than himself.
Well, you'd think, but reading this thread, well, you might wonder a little too. People can wish as they may, but he's earned that title (at least as much as any MD, PhD, or DDS), and if they read the newspaper (much less the internet), occasionally they'll come across something that will startle them so greatly they pop their monocle out into their spot of tea.

That being said, both you and he seem to fall into the fundamental trap of forgetting that individual people are, well, individual people. "The Arab world" cannot be ungrateful. There is no universal Muslim "they" who all want to engage in civil war. That's a naive, black-and-white view of the world. Pointing out that we've defended Muslims, that it was Muslims who attacked the WTC, and so forth does not give us the right to mistreat other Muslims.

Of course, even if all Muslims really do share a hive-mind, it still wouldn't make mistreatment of them acceptable, unless we're back to the old "we can't be bad so long as other people are worse" argument....
Now that's disingenious. The arab world can be ungreatful. (And they are.) They can be a lot of things. In fact there's a whole field of mathmatics devoted to drawing out and quantifiying general truths about populations of individuals (which may or may not even be animate objects). While the sentimentality of the paragon of the individual is poetic, we've, as a species, found it to be a little less than practical. That millions of years have honed us to abstract and express such ideas so succinctly, accurately, and quickly, well, I think I'm safe in saying it wasn't coincidence.

That we're kind, generous, and powerful doesn't give us the right to be evil. You know what does give us that right in the cold wilderness in the world before the eyes of an uncaring universe. That we have the power to do it. That we excercise it doesn't necessarily make us wonderful people in the light of objective an universal truth either. But the right, as all rights, flow directly from the ability to execute that will. But beyond that, the ingratitude of the Arab/Muslim world does indicate we should take a serious look at whether they are worthy of our help. Everyone the world over decries the American willingness to actively guarantee the freedom of some, and when we don't guarantee the freedom of some others more pleading, pointing and blaming. No thanks for all America has done for world stability, which is more than any other force in human history. No thanks for all the American lives that were risked for nothing more than the freedom of others. No, just recrimination, after recrimination. Why SHOULD we bother? Why not keep our sons, and our wealth for ourselves? Why shouldn't we wield our power exclusively in the pursuit of our national interests. The world's view of America wouldn't change at all.

As for your final argument. If there is no differentiation between the small and great evils, then how dare anyone anywhere criticize US policy, for they are not blameless in their own lives. We know what America is. It's a promise of an ideal that will never be reached, not so long as mammals rule the earth, but which will always be pursued, on a journey that will feature the occasional wayward step. And that's a hell of a lot more than the vast majorty of humanity has got going for them. Anyone who doesn't think that's good enough, feel free to take the Pepsi challenge. Then tell me how you feel about the alternatives.

I feel the need to ask the question whether American lives are more important than any others. I get the feeling that American military operations don't do their utmost to prevent civilian life with the justification: "We're fighting a War."
I admit that President Bush is doing a good job preventing American civilians getting killed, I'm afraid that the cost is too great though. No matter how justified, killing civilians accidentally as it has been occurring at American checkpoints in Iraq and during operations, will continue to fuel hatred against the US. I doubt that those fires would go out if we stopped being the way we are, but it might help to reduce the threat considerably.
The war on terror is not a conventional war, as Bush says. It cannot be won simply with military means (if it can ever be declared as ended).
The general makes plenty valid points, but he leaves out that the world has plenty good reasons to hate America, and it ruins his argument. He's not sorry for the wrongs that have been done to us and that we aren't retaliating against the muslim world with utmost brutality. He doesn't sound like he's sorry for the World Bank and the IMF, and how they're policies, while not neccessarily malign, increase poverty instead of ending it. He doesn't sound sorry for the democracies we've toppled and the puppet dictators we've put in place. Does anyone think that those countries are sorry we screwed them over? It's that same mentality that he shows that generates hatred against us. It completely ignores the wrongs and puts whatever country one is from into the position of the victim.

butt sex with dogs

I feel the need to ask the question whether American lives are more important than any others. I get the feeling that American military operations don't do their utmost to prevent civilian life with the justification: "We're fighting a War."
I admit that President Bush is doing a good job preventing American civilians getting killed, I'm afraid that the cost is too great though. No matter how justified, killing civilians accidentally as it has been occurring at American checkpoints in Iraq and during operations, will continue to fuel hatred against the US. I doubt that those fires would go out if we stopped being the way we are, but it might help to reduce the threat considerably.
You see the pictures of the insurgents firing rifles and RPGs of US forces? No hold onto that image. What would happen if the US forces returned fire with anything appropriate to the threat? The photographer have a good chance at dying. Keep in mind these are these are people who are part of a military that could scoop cities off maps, and much worse. Tell me again they're not going above and beyond to protect civilians. You know who isn't? The insurgents that hide in civilian populations and use hostages as shields, that target bus loads of school children, that attack people in Mosques or at random on the streets when the US forces aren't at hand to have that one last chance at defending them. By the customs of war, which have been examined many times throughout history, the only people who bear any blame for civilian deaths are those forces who hide among them.

And Bush is doing a shitty job protecting Americans. The Department of Homeland security is a joke, the FBI is becoming one, to say nothing of his efforts to actually prevent the defending of American boarders. Luck, the CIA, and Osama's incompetence are working overtime.

Funny story. Thomas L. Friedman visited a religious girls school in Malaysia, prior to the American election in 2000. The women there considered themselves worldly, they read the internet (you're welcome bitches). They, get this, wanted Bush to win because he was "Good. A Christian. People of the Book." and Al Gore to lose because "He is a Jew." BWAHAHA. They got EXACTLY what they wanted.

Now that's disingenious. The arab world can be ungreatful. (And they are.) They can be a lot of things. In fact there's a whole field of mathmatics devoted to drawing out and quantifiying general truths about populations of individuals (which may or may not even be animate objects). While the sentimentality of the paragon of the individual is poetic, we've, as a species, found it to be a little less than practical. That millions of years have honed us to abstract and express such ideas so succinctly, accurately, and quickly, well, I think I'm safe in saying it wasn't coincidence.

I'll agree with "quickly," but I take issue with "accurately." You've offered no evidence of the accuracy of your argument other than essentially to say, "because I said so." So far, the only major examples of "ingratitude" I've seen seem to be (1) insurgents/terrorists blowing Americans up, who are not only not "the Arab world," but are in fact a minority whom most Muslims seem to dislike and disagree with, and (2) an awful lot of people saying that the U.S. shouldn't do stuff like torture people. If I'm missing something important, please tell me, but what I'm seeing there isn't ingratitude. It's a few evil/crazy people and a lot of people who don't condone evil behavior even from the nominally good guys. Your argument and that letter-writer's both seem to rely on a good "us" and a bad "them," and the world just doesn't work like that.


But the right, as all rights, flow directly from the ability to execute that will.

Rights are not defined by ability. I have the ability to go buy a gun and shoot children on a playground, but I most certainly do not have the right to do so. All that is defined by abilities are abilities, and the fact that I could theoretically go murder kindergarteners but don't does not give me some sort of position of moral superiority over someone too poor to afford a gun.

No thanks for all America has done for world stability, which is more than any other force in human history. No thanks for all the American lives that were risked for nothing more than the freedom of others. No, just recrimination, after recrimination.

Come now, that's beyond exaggeration. No thanks? Ever? No one, in the history of our country, has ever thanked any American soldier for donating their lives to a cause? Currently, a lot of people around the world despise Bush and what he stands for, but I've yet to hear any of them claim that America has never done anything good for the world and deserves only recriminations.

As for your final argument. If there is no differentiation between the small and great evils, then how dare anyone anywhere criticize US policy, for they are not blameless in their own lives.

GAAAH. Where on earth did I say that "small" evils and "great" evils are identical? Of course they're not. But, y'see, the funny thing about small and great evils is that they're both evil. (Being evil is sort of built into the definition of being an evil.) The fact that crashing a pair of planes into a building is really, really, really evil does not somehow make torturing people cease to be evil. And if people, Americans and non-Americans alike, aren't allowed to call our country on being evil, how can we retain any moral credibility with ourselves or the world?

Funny story. Thomas L. Friedman visited a religious girls school in Malaysia, prior to the American election in 2000. The women there considered themselves worldly, they read the internet (you're welcome bitches). They, get this, wanted Bush to win because he was "Good. A Christian. People of the Book." and Al Gore to lose because "He is a Jew." BWAHAHA. They got EXACTLY what they wanted.

I am going to have to call you to provide a link on that one.

You see the pictures of the insurgents firing rifles and RPGs of US forces? No hold onto that image. What would happen if the US forces returned fire with anything appropriate to the threat? The photographer have a good chance at dying. Keep in mind these are these are people who are part of a military that could scoop cities off maps, and much worse. Tell me again they're not going above and beyond to protect civilians. You know who isn't? The insurgents that hide in civilian populations and use hostages as shields, that target bus loads of school children, that attack people in Mosques or at random on the streets when the US forces aren't at hand to have that one last chance at defending them. By the customs of war, which have been examined many times throughout history, the only people who bear any blame for civilian deaths are those forces who hide among them.
There'd be a lot more dead American soldiers if they truly went "above and beyond" to protect civilians. The guy made a valid point about not dropping daisy cutters on Fallujah. The military is doing a lot to protect civilians in the countries they are, but they aren't top priority. If it's the soldiers' lives versus civilian lives, the directive is to shoot back. I agree that the insurgents are worse in all respects, but claiming they are isn't a justification. Civilian causualties don't mean losing a war, but they might mean losing the war on terror.

And Bush is doing a shitty job protecting Americans. The Department of Homeland security is a joke, the FBI is becoming one, to say nothing of his efforts to actually prevent the defending of American boarders. Luck, the CIA, and Osama's incompetence are working overtime.

When's the last time Americans got killed in a Terror Attack in America since September 11th? I personally HATE the way he's going on about it and luck plays a big role, but he has managed to get terrorists killing American soldiers and Arab civilians instead of American civilians at home.

Funny story. Thomas L. Friedman visited a religious girls school in Malaysia, prior to the American election in 2000. The women there considered themselves worldly, they read the internet (...). They, get this, wanted Bush to win because he was "Good. A Christian. People of the Book." and Al Gore to lose because "He is a Jew." BWAHAHA. They got EXACTLY what they wanted.
That is funny. Serves them right... :D

To MUSLIMS ...USMC Lt Gen. Pitman's Apology ,

This Letter of Apology was written by Lieutenant General Chuck H. Pitman, US Marine Corps, Retired:

"For good and ill", the Iraqi prisoner abuse mess will remain an issue. On the one hand, right thinking Americans will abhor the stupidity of the actions while on the other hand, political glee will take control and fashion this minor event into some modern day massacre.


I would hardly call it a minor event. It was a blatant disregard of human rights, and an affront not to muslims, but mankind as a whole regardless of religion.


I humbly offer my opinion here:

I am sorry that the last seven times we Americans took up arms and sacrificed the blood of our youth, it was in the defense of Muslims (Bosnia, Kosovo, Gulf War 1, Kuwait, etc.).


Bosnia: In the defence of muslims? Firstly, you were a bit late, and secondly, you did not a great job of it. Srebnica says it all, as do other tell tale mass graves in Bosnia.

Kosovo: Yeah, bomb some Serbs, bomb the Chinese embassy, failure to stop people being killed... marvellous job! Then begin to see that the KLA were not the freedom fighters you thought they were.



I am sorry that no such call for an apology upon the extremists came after 9/11.


I am sorry that in your ranting, you have not heard the apologies and sympathies because they have been drowned out due to your ranting and selective hearing.



I am sorry that all of the murderers on 9/11 were Islamic Arabs.


The majority of whom blamed America for installing a dictatorship upon them, and who saw US troops on their soil as an affront to their religion.


I am sorry that most Arabs and Muslims have to live in squalor under savage dictatorships.


The majority of such dictatorships which are supported by the US. Saddam of Iraq, Mubarak of Egypt being two examples.


I am sorry that their leaders squander their wealth.


The majority of such leaders are supported by the US.


I am sorry that their governments breed hate for the US in their religious schools, mosques, and government-controlled media.


Wow, such ill-informed widespread generalisation and assumption. Ever been to a mosque?


I am sorry that Yassar Arafat was kicked out of every Arab country and high-jacked the Palestinian "cause."


Are you sorry the Palestinians were kicked out of their homes in 1948 and have been refugees and outcasts, and treated as subhuman since? With the aid of the US?


I am sorry that no other Arab country will take in or offer more than a token amount of financial help to those same Palestinians.


Are you sorry your country won't offer more than a token amount of financial help as well? All the while arming Israel?


I am sorry that the USA has to step in and be the biggest financial supporter of poverty stricken Arabs while the insanely wealthy Arabs blame the USA for all their problems.


Saddam and Nasser, Mubarak and The Saud Family were far from poverty stricken, neither was that chap you funded called Bin Laden.


I am sorry that our own left wing, our media, and our own brainwashed asses do not understand any of this (from the misleading vocal elements of our society, like radical professors, CNN and the NY TIMES).


I am sorry that your own right wing biased media, analysts and government has brainwashed you and assures you do not understand the reasons or consequences of US Foreign Policy.


I am sorry the United Nations scammed the poor people of Iraq out of the "food for oil" money so they could get rich while the common folk suffered.


Are you sorry that after years of supporting Saddam Hussein and scamming the people out of freedom, allowing him to get rich while the people suffered, that the US invaded Iraq for oil and geopolitical positioning, scamming the people of Iraq out of their county's assets and making the people of Iraq suffer further?


I am sorry that some Arab governments pay the families of homicide bombers upon their death.


Are you sorry successive US Governments have paid Israel and armed Israel to use Tanks and rifles against Palestinian children armed with nothing more than stones whilst demolising their houses?



I am sorry that those same bombers are brainwashed thinking they will receive 72 virgins in "paradise."


Are you sorry that US Soldiers were brainwashed into thinking a 'God' was on their side by the US President, brainwashed into thinking the war was over because of the statement made "Mission accomplished" when the horrifying reality of war is still evident 2 years after such a statement was made?


I am sorry that the homicide bombers think pregnant women, babies, children, the elderly and other noncombatant civilians are legitimate targets.


Are you sorry that US Jet pilots think unarmed civillians are legitimate targets? Are you sorry that US Soldiers at checkpoints have often fired on unarmed cars, killing whole families? Are you sorry that US Tanks fired on journalists in Baghdad 2003?


I am sorry that our troops die to free more Arabs from the gang rape rooms and the filling of mass graves of dissidents of their own making.


Are you sorry you are so ill-informed and ignorant to believe you are freeing people from gang rape rooms, when gang rape took place at Abu Ghraib under US command, that mass graves were made for Iraqis killed in Fallujah, who appeared to be unarmed?


I am sorry that Muslim extremists have killed more Arabs than any other group.


Are you sorry that the CIA trained and set up the majority of these extremists, who then passed on knowledge to other extremists?


I am sorry that foreign trained terrorists are trying to seize control of Iraq and return it to a terrorist state.


Are you sorry that a contingent of the insurgents were CIA trained? Are you sorry you refuse to recognise a contingent of the insurgents are genuinely fighting for Iraq to be under no occupation, and most likely did the same against Saddam, which was likely not reported because of Saddam's censorship?


I am sorry we don't drop a few dozen Daisy cutters on Fallujah.



Are you sorry that you advocate the mass murder of everybody in Fallujah, regardless of being armed or not?


I am sorry every time terrorists hide they find a convenient "Holy Site."


Are you sorry US Soldiers have possibly irreversibly damaged The Hanging Gardens of Babylon by using it as a base?


I am sorry they didn't apologize for driving two jets into the World Trade Center that collapsed and severely damaged Saint Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church - one of our Holy Sites.

I am sorry they didn't apologize for flight 93 and 175, the USS Cole, the embassy bombings, the murders and beheadings of Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl, etc....etc!


Are you sorry that you have not heard the apologies because you rant so much?

Are you sorry the US had destroyed numerous mosques in Iraq, have bombed Fallujah indiscrimnately, killing many civillians?


I am sorry Michael Moore is American; he could feed a medium sized village
in Africa.


Are you sorry that you appear to be unable to criticise a man for anything more than he's weight?


America will get past this latest absurdity. We will punish those responsible because that is what we do.


Do you realise how Authoritarian and Nazi-like you sound?

Don't forget to heil your fuhrer.


We hang out our dirty laundry for the entire world to see.


Not before trying to cover it up, then attempting to dismiss it when you can't.


We move on.


You move on in the sense you try to disregard the disgusting atrocities and human rights abuses you commit, but the rest of the world will not let you, we will hold you to account. We did it with Hitler, and we'll do it with Bush. We will not let him become another Stalin or Pinochet, a murderous tyrant escaping justice.



That's one of the reasons we are hated so much. We don't hide this stuff like all those Arab countries that are now demanding an apology.


Oh but you do try to hide it, and you are hated so much for US greed and geopolitical meddling and positioning in it's foreign policy that has destroyed so many lives. You are hated for your hyprocrisy, spousing democracy while protecting and supporting the dictatorships around the world who constantly keep it under their heel. You are hated for that. Not for being America, but for how your government and those it is whose interest is to support it, and those who support it unquestioning are hated.



Deep down inside, when most Americans saw this reported in the news, we were like - so what? We lost hundreds and made fun of a few prisoners. Sure , it was wrong, sure, it dramatically hurts our cause, but until captured we were trying to kill these same prisoners. Now we're supposed to wring our hands because a few were humiliated?


Yes, it's called taking a stand, it's called differentiating oneself from one's enemy, it's called having morals.



Our compassion is tempered with the vivid memories of our own people killed, mutilated and burnt amongst a joyous crowd of celebrating Fallujahans.


You have no compassion. Only Hate.


If you want an apology from this American, you're going to have a long wait!

You have a better chance of finding those seventy-two virgins.


I see that if I want to see any intelligence from you, I'm going to have a long wait.

I have a better chance of finding those WMDS in Iraq.


Chuck H. Pitman

Lieutenant General
US Marine Corps (Retired)


Retired hmmm? I do not wonder why.

DISMISSED!

I'll agree with "quickly," but I take issue with "accurately." You've offered no evidence of the accuracy of your argument other than essentially to say, "because I said so." So far, the only major examples of "ingratitude" I've seen seem to be (1) insurgents/terrorists blowing Americans up, who are not only not "the Arab world," but are in fact a minority whom most Muslims seem to dislike and disagree with, and (2) an awful lot of people saying that the U.S. shouldn't do stuff like torture people. If I'm missing something important, please tell me, but what I'm seeing there isn't ingratitude. It's a few evil/crazy people and a lot of people who don't condone evil behavior even from the nominally good guys. Your argument and that letter-writer's both seem to rely on a good "us" and a bad "them," and the world just doesn't work like that.
5 of my 30 humanities credits were in a 200 level sociology class. The ability of humans to make surprisingly accurate snap judgements (not that there aren't failings) is well documented (as are the failings). Oh, but you'd like an example of Arab ingratitude? The parties after 9/11. Thank you and good night. But they're perfectly happy to talk to the BBC and the New York Times and people in their employ about their feelings in great detail, so I've always got the option to take them at their word. Or I could just read their news.

(1) Some of those people are in the US military, hey including the letter writer! (2) A lot of people confuse torture with personal inconvience, diminishing legitimate claims of torture. (3) The profound ethical dilemmas involving torture and murder are explored in US military exercises, which are a little more pragmatic than antiseptic absolutes. (4) Some of the torture prisoners endure in US custody is an improvement in their quality of life. (Sad but true)

That said, it was a nice attempt to divert the argument. Many of the people have alluded to the Lt. Generals acknowledgement that we've bothered to save Muslims from genocide as an endorsement of it. Never mind that the other NATO members left nail marks all across Europe when they were dragged to Kosovo, and Muslims around the world were silent. No no. It's never the US could do better, or will do better. It's ALWAYS "The US is the pinnacle of all evil in the world and it's because Americans are stupid."


Rights are not defined by ability. I have the ability to go buy a gun and shoot children on a playground, but I most certainly do not have the right to do so. All that is defined by abilities are abilities, and the fact that I could theoretically go murder kindergarteners but don't does not give me some sort of position of moral superiority over someone too poor to afford a gun.
And who guarantees the rights of those children? The SWAT team that would shoot you down. You don't have to like it. The truth exists without your consent. Might doesn't make right, but it does make rights. The rights you have are those the powerful agree you have. And for in the arena of American power, "the powerful" is the US Constitution, and the body of law our republic has derived from it.

Come now, that's beyond exaggeration. No thanks? Ever? No one, in the history of our country, has ever thanked any American soldier for donating their lives to a cause? Currently, a lot of people around the world despise Bush and what he stands for, but I've yet to hear any of them claim that America has never done anything good for the world and deserves only recriminations.
Oh sure there are some. The exceptions that prove the rule. (Bringing us back full circle to 200 level sociology courses.) Are there a few 70 yearold Koreans who remember the Korean war, and understand the stakes? Sure. And how do their numbers and ideology compare to those in younger demographics? Shall we talk poll numbers in Europe? Feel free to investigate other threads in this forum, surely some of the threads involving strategic air campaigns of WWII should prove a fertile ground for finding such comments. Or how about threads on humanitarian aid decrying American generosity. But forgive me, those are only the ones I've responded in recently. Oh, I know. Why not trot on over to slashdot's Hall of Fame and take a stroll through "Strike on Iraq" or "Fahrenheit 9/11 Discussion."


GAAAH. Where on earth did I say that "small" evils and "great" evils are identical? Of course they're not. But, y'see, the funny thing about small and great evils is that they're both evil. (Being evil is sort of built into the definition of being an evil.) The fact that crashing a pair of planes into a building is really, really, really evil does not somehow make torturing people cease to be evil. And if people, Americans and non-Americans alike, aren't allowed to call our country on being evil, how can we retain any moral credibility with ourselves or the world?
When you mischaracterised the moral argument put forth in the orignal post. You know quite well the American claim isn't of being a paragon of virtue, and you know quite well that there are far far greater villains. But no, instead the force of freedom, and wealth that America has been, and continues to be is discounted, ignored. And some choose to quibble over the fates of the accused (who have their case pending before the Supreme Court, as per their rights guaranteed by our Constitution) and the villains. Did Americans bury and obfuscate what happened in Abu Gharib, like the Japanese STILL do with the rape of Nanking, and their other attrocities, NNNOOOOOOO. We had it out on the late night, early morning, news at noon,4,5,6,7,10,11 and 24 hour news. Calley got off easier for his actions at My Lai, which again is COMMON knowledge in America. As is the Stanford study that so shockingly demonstrated the inevitability of such events, in the abscence of exacting care. The fact is, there are greater villains, but the sensitive people have no time for them (save in their defense). Because unlike the guys who deserve black hats, we take great care to air our dirty laundry in public, and it just takes too much time for sensitive people to be informed and sensitive.

For all America has done to preserve stability throughout the world, particularly in the Middle East, to promote freedom, trade and wealth, all the Arab lives that have been saved through averted wars, abreviated wars, aid, and looking out for their national interests before our own, for all the rebuilding that America did, the sacrifices, the gambles, our thanks on September 11th was parties in the Islamic world and faux sentiment nearly everywhere else. A few political allies remained, against the wishes of their respective populations. Even before the war in Iraq. While Powell was presenting his bullshit case to the UN, was their a strong international front for new, aggressive inspections, now? No. For handling North Korea, though it threatens the economic stability of all of Asia? Of course not. It's an American problem. And somehow, after all that shit, people are surprised when some Americans adopt a "Fuck you all" attitude? (I happen to find that less than practical. But the emotional appeal is undeniable.)

I am going to have to call you to provide a link on that one.
Oh dude. You have got to get yourself digital cable or the domestic equivalent. Discovery Times (http://times.discovery.com/convergence/rootsof911/rootsof911.html). They run the whole series. (I think that's the one, but he is quite prolific.) His crusade to provide insight and understanding into their worldview is largely responsible for my view of the Islamic world. The BBC and Frontline gets a nod too.

There'd be a lot more dead American soldiers if they truly went "above and beyond" to protect civilians. The guy made a valid point about not dropping daisy cutters on Fallujah. The military is doing a lot to protect civilians in the countries they are, but they aren't top priority
What? They should bum rush the ass-clowns with RPGs in an attempt to cuddle them to death? Or knife them? Sorry. Soldiers should protect himself. And once Fallujah was surrounded, and everyone who would and could get out, got out, it's not a population center, it's an enemy stronghold. That the insurgents are the ones violating the customs of war, which exist to protect civilian populations, is justification. Actually, as far as the governing bodies of the world are concered it's all of the justification necessary.

When's the last time Americans got killed in a Terror Attack in America since September 11th?
Um Anthrax letters? John Allen Mohammed? And by the way, even if none had been killed yet, that still would not be a meaningful measure of success. Preventing new cells from being established, and have a solid idea about the effectiveness of those efforts, as well as destroying in place cells would be better. If it's just who dies on which presidents watch...well...even I can't bring myself to by into *that* completely.

And who guarantees the rights of those children? The SWAT team that would shoot you down. You don't have to like it. The truth exists without your consent. Might doesn't make right, but it does make rights. The rights you have are those the powerful agree you have. false. slaves has the right for freedom even if their "employers" don't want to give it. every one has the right to live, as well as the right to property or the right to equality (in means of equal rights, and equal treatment by the laws). every criminal has the right to fair trial.
those rights didn't granted by anyone. nobody can take them away. this rights are granted to every human because he is human. because everybody deserve to have those rights.
maybe in some places, criminal and dictators prevent those rights from others. that acts are the exact thing that made them evil. no one has the right to take rights from others. limit them, perhaps in the name of other rights, but not take them away.

What? They should bum rush the ass-clowns with RPGs in an attempt to cuddle them to death? Or knife them? Sorry. Soldiers should protect himself. And once Fallujah was surrounded, and everyone who would and could get out, got out, it's not a population center, it's an enemy stronghold. That the insurgents are the ones violating the customs of war, which exist to protect civilian populations, is justification. Actually, as far as the governing bodies of the world are concered it's all of the justification necessary.
I'm not considering the insurgents civilians. I'm not suggesting that insurgents be cuddled to death. I'm saying a lot of civilians get killed because American soldiers need to go by the directive "When in doubt, shoot" in order to make it out alive. I'm saying that might lead to a military victory in conventional warfare against countries and that it could well spell defeat in the long run in a war on terror.
I find it hard to justify the decision of risking the lives of civilians in the area in order to save citizens at homw.

Um Anthrax letters? John Allen Mohammed? And by the way, even if none had been killed yet, that still would not be a meaningful measure of success. Preventing new cells from being established, and have a solid idea about the effectiveness of those efforts, as well as destroying in place cells would be better. If it's just who dies on which presidents watch...well...even I can't bring myself to by into *that* completely.
I kinda got the feeling that John Allen Mohammed was less of an islamic terrorist than some sick person seeking a feeling of power. It didn't seem like he was pursueing some higher goal. But you failed to mention anything that convinced me that there was a serious failure in protecting Americans at home... to be honest, I don't want to argue in favor of Bush, so please don't continue on the topic.

Apology letter to Lieutenant General Chuck H. Pitman

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry that the world has to live with a bastard like you.

I'm sorry that the USMC had to have their name tainted because of tards like you being associated with them.

I'm sorry that you can't view things from any other point of view than your own bigoted ones.

I'm sorry that you are extremely ignorant

I'm sorry that your government and your armed forces supported and supplied arms to the people you are currently trying to destroy.

I'm sorry that more bombs (tonnage) were dropped on Iraq in the two gulf wars than in world war 2.

I'm sorry that you can't manage to keep the discipline among the ranks of your subordinates.

I'm sorry that your country allows your pilots to kill allies.

I am sorry that your military bombed a children's hospital.

I am sorry that your country indebted itself to the Middle East.

I'm sorry that your military set up the impression on itself that is currently your downfall.

I'm sorry that you didn't relieve the world of a great threat by offing yourself.

I'm sorry that your military and country completely disregarded the U.N. rulings on Iraq, and are in the process of doing so in Iran.

I'm sorry that your military is setting a new trend in geography of attacks: oil rich sectors.

I'm sorry that your military's actions got your country booted off the Human Rights Commission.

I'm sorry that the freedom you so seem to cherish "should be limited" according to your furher...err, president.

More apologies to come....

Oh, and I'm sorry that an Lt. Gen. couldn't find anything better to do than write a bigoted letter of apology....go display some leadership and get your troops under control you pig.

Apology letter to Lieutenant General Chuck H. Pitman

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry that the world has to live with a bastard like you.

I'm sorry that the USMC had to have their name tainted because of tards like you being associated with them.

I'm sorry that you can't view things from any other point of view than your own bigoted ones.

I'm sorry that you are extremely ignorant

I'm sorry that your government and your armed forces supported and supplied arms to the people you are currently trying to destroy.

I'm sorry that more bombs (tonnage) were dropped on Iraq in the two gulf wars than in world war 2.

I'm sorry that you can't manage to keep the discipline among the ranks of your subordinates.

I'm sorry that your country allows your pilots to kill allies.

I am sorry that your military bombed a children's hospital.

I am sorry that your country indebted itself to the Middle East.

I'm sorry that your military set up the impression on itself that is currently your downfall.

I'm sorry that you didn't relieve the world of a great threat by offing yourself.

I'm sorry that your military and country completely disregarded the U.N. rulings on Iraq, and are in the process of doing so in Iran.

I'm sorry that your military is setting a new trend in geography of attacks: oil rich sectors.

I'm sorry that your military's actions got your country booted off the Human Rights Commission.

I'm sorry that the freedom you so seem to cherish "should be limited" according to your furher...err, president.

More apologies to come....

Oh, and I'm sorry that an Lt. Gen. couldn't find anything better to do than write a bigoted letter of apology....go display some leadership and get your troops under control you pig.

I'd just like to say that I'm sorry to hear you're running so low on detainees that you've had to resort to paying Afghani and Pakistani warlords $5,000 USD for each and every unsuspecting, noncombative Kuwaiti tourist they illegally abduct or kidnap, just to maintain appearances.

I'd just like to say that I'm sorry to hear you're running so low on detainees that you've had to resort to paying Afghani and Pakistani warlords $5,000 USD for each and every unsuspecting, noncombative Kuwaiti tourist they illegally abduct or kidnap, just to maintain appearances.what is it, formal "apologies" thread or something?

I would hardly call it a minor event. It was a blatant disregard of human rights, and an affront not to muslims, but mankind as a whole regardless of religion.



Bosnia: In the defence of muslims? Firstly, you were a bit late, and secondly, you did not a great job of it. Srebnica says it all, as do other tell tale mass graves in Bosnia.

Kosovo: Yeah, bomb some Serbs, bomb the Chinese embassy, failure to stop people being killed... marvellous job! Then begin to see that the KLA were not the freedom fighters you thought they were.




I am sorry that in your ranting, you have not heard the apologies and sympathies because they have been drowned out due to your ranting and selective hearing.




The majority of whom blamed America for installing a dictatorship upon them, and who saw US troops on their soil as an affront to their religion.



The majority of such dictatorships which are supported by the US. Saddam of Iraq, Mubarak of Egypt being two examples.



The majority of such leaders are supported by the US.



Wow, such ill-informed widespread generalisation and assumption. Ever been to a mosque?



Are you sorry the Palestinians were kicked out of their homes in 1948 and have been refugees and outcasts, and treated as subhuman since? With the aid of the US?



Are you sorry your country won't offer more than a token amount of financial help as well? All the while arming Israel?



Saddam and Nasser, Mubarak and The Saud Family were far from poverty stricken, neither was that chap you funded called Bin Laden.



I am sorry that your own right wing biased media, analysts and government has brainwashed you and assures you do not understand the reasons or consequences of US Foreign Policy.



Are you sorry that after years of supporting Saddam Hussein and scamming the people out of freedom, allowing him to get rich while the people suffered, that the US invaded Iraq for oil and geopolitical positioning, scamming the people of Iraq out of their county's assets and making the people of Iraq suffer further?



Are you sorry successive US Governments have paid Israel and armed Israel to use Tanks and rifles against Palestinian children armed with nothing more than stones whilst demolising their houses?




Are you sorry that US Soldiers were brainwashed into thinking a 'God' was on their side by the US President, brainwashed into thinking the war was over because of the statement made "Mission accomplished" when the horrifying reality of war is still evident 2 years after such a statement was made?



Are you sorry that US Jet pilots think unarmed civillians are legitimate targets? Are you sorry that US Soldiers at checkpoints have often fired on unarmed cars, killing whole families? Are you sorry that US Tanks fired on journalists in Baghdad 2003?



Are you sorry you are so ill-informed and ignorant to believe you are freeing people from gang rape rooms, when gang rape took place at Abu Ghraib under US command, that mass graves were made for Iraqis killed in Fallujah, who appeared to be unarmed?



Are you sorry that the CIA trained and set up the majority of these extremists, who then passed on knowledge to other extremists?



Are you sorry that a contingent of the insurgents were CIA trained? Are you sorry you refuse to recognise a contingent of the insurgents are genuinely fighting for Iraq to be under no occupation, and most likely did the same against Saddam, which was likely not reported because of Saddam's censorship?




Are you sorry that you advocate the mass murder of everybody in Fallujah, regardless of being armed or not?



Are you sorry US Soldiers have possibly irreversibly damaged The Hanging Gardens of Babylon by using it as a base?



Are you sorry that you have not heard the apologies because you rant so much?

Are you sorry the US had destroyed numerous mosques in Iraq, have bombed Fallujah indiscrimnately, killing many civillians?



Are you sorry that you appear to be unable to criticise a man for anything more than he's weight?



Do you realise how Authoritarian and Nazi-like you sound?

Don't forget to heil your fuhrer.



Not before trying to cover it up, then attempting to dismiss it when you can't.



You move on in the sense you try to disregard the disgusting atrocities and human rights abuses you commit, but the rest of the world will not let you, we will hold you to account. We did it with Hitler, and we'll do it with Bush. We will not let him become another Stalin or Pinochet, a murderous tyrant escaping justice.




Oh but you do try to hide it, and you are hated so much for US greed and geopolitical meddling and positioning in it's foreign policy that has destroyed so many lives. You are hated for your hyprocrisy, spousing democracy while protecting and supporting the dictatorships around the world who constantly keep it under their heel. You are hated for that. Not for being America, but for how your government and those it is whose interest is to support it, and those who support it unquestioning are hated.




Yes, it's called taking a stand, it's called differentiating oneself from one's enemy, it's called having morals.




You have no compassion. Only Hate.



I see that if I want to see any intelligence from you, I'm going to have a long wait.

I have a better chance of finding those WMDS in Iraq.



Retired hmmm? I do not wonder why.

DISMISSED!



Amen!

false. slaves has the right for freedom even if their "employers" don't want to give it. every one has the right to live, as well as the right to property or the right to equality (in means of equal rights, and equal treatment by the laws). every criminal has the right to fair trial.
those rights didn't granted by anyone. nobody can take them away. this rights are granted to every human because he is human. because everybody deserve to have those rights.
maybe in some places, criminal and dictators prevent those rights from others. that acts are the exact thing that made them evil. no one has the right to take rights from others. limit them, perhaps in the name of other rights, but not take them away.
African slaves were freed at the point of British sabers and cannon muzzles. Yes, it was the British who all but ended slavery in Africa. American slaves were freed by the economic power and needs of the North. Jim Crowe laws were abolished by the men who came back from WWII, who forced us to reinturpret our laws in the face of our stated ideals. Like wise the Native Americans suffered under every unfavorable reinturpretation of the treaties they signed at the hands of the American military, until we decided to follow our law and conscience.

The hand of God does not come down from Heaven to shield the just and vanquish the cruel. The rights you speak of are guaranteed by the supreme powers of the United States of America, the Constitution of our republic, and the people who are the current embodiement of that will to keep those ideals. And ultimately, by the willingness of a very few to kill and risk death in the defense of those ideals, and the execution of that will. These rights you write of are freedoms only a small minority of humans enjoy. (And even sporadically in the USA. Don't get a public defender if you're on trial for anything, esspecially in Texas). We as Americans hold it to be self evident, that everyone is deserving of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But also as Americans, we hold that it is NOT our responsability to provide that guarantee. And so we do so only when motivated to by the circumstances of the day. As we can plainly see in the world today, a right that is unprotected through the promise of swift and final reprisal is as every bit useful as the ideal that's been abandond.

I'm not considering the insurgents civilians. I'm not suggesting that insurgents be cuddled to death. I'm saying a lot of civilians get killed because American soldiers need to go by the directive "When in doubt, shoot" in order to make it out alive. I'm saying that might lead to a military victory in conventional warfare against countries and that it could well spell defeat in the long run in a war on terror.
I perhaps should be more clear. I don't think a war in Iraq enhances US security, in any way, outside of esoteric guess work that could probably be best described as "the fifty year plan." It's a giant ill-concieved debacle, that creates an unnecessary danger for Americans forces, for little reason. As to the implications of the "War on Terror" (LBJ would be so proud, or is that appalled?) I think Genghis Khan, Willaim Techumsa Sherman, and others have the most effective solution to that problem. But that's not what I'm speaking about. Almost all of the civilians that die in Iraq, die for fault of the insurgents and no one else. If a car gets shot approaching a US checkpoint, the insurgents fault, even if they weren't anywhere to be seen at that incident. If a tank has to fire into a Mosque, it's not a religious site after the insurgents entered it with weapons. When cameramen point their lenses at American (or British, Polish, whatever) forces are swiftly shot to death, the soldiers are BLAMELESS. Etc. And the Geneva Conventions agree with me.

I kinda got the feeling that John Allen Mohammed was less of an islamic terrorist than some sick person seeking a feeling of power. It didn't seem like he was pursueing some higher goal. But you failed to mention anything that convinced me that there was a serious failure in protecting Americans at home... to be honest, I don't want to argue in favor of Bush, so please don't continue on the topic.
I'm sure he and the boy suffer from moderate to severe mental illness. I'm sure that's true of any suicide bomber anywhere too. However, Mohammed was involved in militant islam, and travled all the way across the country, mudering people, from Seattle/Tacoma (you're welcome) to Washington DC where he set about terrorizing that city in particular. Keep in mind Seattle's a pretty large city in it's own right. The goal of terroism, is to make people afraid.

Well, it's pretty hard to argue in favor of Bush, I certainly wouldn't envy anyone who took on that task. But look into boarder control, particularly the Mexican boarder, and it's clear he's actually relaxed national security following 9/11. Or the relative pork and complete ineffectiveness, to downright incompetenece surrounding the Deptartment of Homeland security. The only possible conclusion is that actual security isn't a meaningful objective to him or his administration.

African slaves were freed at the point of British sabers and cannon muzzles. Yes, it was the British who all but ended slavery in Africa. American slaves were freed by the economic power and needs of the North. Jim Crowe laws were abolished by the men who came back from WWII, who forced us to reinturpret our laws in the face of our stated ideals. Like wise the Native Americans suffered under every unfavorable reinturpretation of the treaties they signed at the hands of the American military, until we decided to follow our law and conscience.you look at the issue in too much practical way.
it is true that in most of the case it had to be someone that will free the opperesed people and will let the enjoy the rights. but that not the question.
the rights are exist even if evil power "take them away. you as human, as the responsibility to ensure the other humans will get those basic rights. you had to understand that either you or your goverment or everybody else can't take the rights from other groups or persons.
without that understanting, there is neither democracy nor humanism principals, and even not security for you and for the society.
"all the humans born free with equal rights" (declaration of human and citizen rights/france,1789). this sentence is the main idea of the enlightenment movement that put the base to the modern values before hundreds of years. if you agree with that you had to understand the all thing. if you not, you ignore the original source for all the benefits you get as american citizen, including the american constitution.

The hand of God does not come down from Heaven to shield the just and vanquish the cruel. god as nothing to do with it, because those rights aren't connected to religion, race or socio-economic stage.
The rights you speak of are guaranteed by the supreme powers of the United States of America, the Constitution of our republic, and the people who are the current embodiement of that will to keep those ideals. And ultimately, by the willingness of a very few to kill and risk death in the defense of those ideals, and the execution of that will. sure, those rights should be defended as the democarcy should defend herself from the anti-democratic power. but even if it had to be defended it dosen't mean they don't stand by themselves. without those rights there is nothing you could defend. the rights are the base for ideal society, that the humanity should be fought for united. because it is right, because it is just, because we do care for the opressed where they will be. not just because "we had the power to do it".
dictator may take the rights by power, but he can't and will not take the ideas and the values of that rights and the right to get right wherever you are.
These rights you write of are freedoms only a small minority of humans enjoy. that is exactly one of the most sirious problems of the world, and should be change.
(And even sporadically in the USA. Don't get a public defender if you're on trial for anything, esspecially in Texas). who say that the utopian society is USA, if it already exist?
We as Americans hold it to be self evident, that everyone is deserving of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.I think you compliment yourself quite too much.
But also as Americans, we hold that it is NOT our responsability to provide that guarantee. you are the only superpower that exist. the UN is toothless organization. you enjoy that position every day.
it is your responsibility as it is the responsibility of every nation at the world, but you are almost the only ones who can make it. at least be "self-evident" as you claim to be.
And so we do so only when motivated to by the circumstances of the day. who say that the humans are above animals? they both do the same.
As we can plainly see in the world today, a right that is unprotected through the promise of swift and final reprisal is as every bit useful as the ideal that's been abandond.yes, the world isn't perfect. everybody know that. why don't anyone will act to change it?

To MUSLIMS ...USMC Lt Gen. Pitman's Apology ,

This Letter of Apology was written by Lieutenant General Chuck H. Pitman, US Marine Corps, Retired:

"For good and ill", the Iraqi prisoner abuse mess will remain an issue. On the one hand, right thinking Americans will abhor the stupidity of the actions while on the other hand, political glee will take control and fashion this minor event into some modern day massacre.

I humbly offer my opinion here:

I am sorry that the last seven times we Americans took up arms and sacrificed the blood of our youth, it was in the defense of Muslims (Bosnia, Kosovo, Gulf War 1, Kuwait, etc.).

I am sorry that no such call for an apology upon the extremists came after 9/11.

I am sorry that all of the murderers on 9/11 were Islamic Arabs.

I am sorry that most Arabs and Muslims have to live in squalor under savage dictatorships.

I am sorry that their leaders squander their wealth.

I am sorry that their governments breed hate for the US in their religious schools, mosques, and government-controlled media.

I am sorry that Yassar Arafat was kicked out of every Arab country and high-jacked the Palestinian "cause."

I am sorry that no other Arab country will take in or offer more than a token amount of financial help to those same Palestinians.

I am sorry that the USA has to step in and be the biggest financial supporter of poverty stricken Arabs while the insanely wealthy Arabs blame the USA for all their problems.

I am sorry that our own left wing, our media, and our own brainwashed asses do not understand any of this (from the misleading vocal elements of our society, like radical professors, CNN and the NY TIMES).

I am sorry the United Nations scammed the poor people of Iraq out of the "food for oil" money so they could get rich while the common folk suffered.

I am sorry that some Arab governments pay the families of homicide bombers upon their death.

I am sorry that those same bombers are brainwashed thinking they will receive 72 virgins in "paradise."

I am sorry that the homicide bombers think pregnant women, babies, children, the elderly and other noncombatant civilians are legitimate targets.

I am sorry that our troops die to free more Arabs from the gang rape rooms and the filling of mass graves of dissidents of their own making.

I am sorry that Muslim extremists have killed more Arabs than any other group.

I am sorry that foreign trained terrorists are trying to seize control of Iraq and return it to a terrorist state.

I am sorry we don't drop a few dozen Daisy cutters on Fallujah.

I am sorry every time terrorists hide they find a convenient "Holy Site."

I am sorry they didn't apologize for driving two jets into the World Trade Center that collapsed and severely damaged Saint Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church - one of our Holy Sites.

I am sorry they didn't apologize for flight 93 and 175, the USS Cole, the embassy bombings, the murders and beheadings of Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl, etc....etc!

I am sorry Michael Moore is American; he could feed a medium sized village
in Africa.

America will get past this latest absurdity. We will punish those responsible because that is what we do.

We hang out our dirty laundry for the entire world to see. We move on. That's one of the reasons we are hated so much. We don't hide this stuff like all those Arab countries that are now demanding an apology.

Deep down inside, when most Americans saw this reported in the news, we were like - so what? We lost hundreds and made fun of a few prisoners. Sure , it was wrong, sure, it dramatically hurts our cause, but until captured we were trying to kill these same prisoners. Now we're supposed to wring our hands because a few were humiliated?

Our compassion is tempered with the vivid memories of our own people killed, mutilated and burnt amongst a joyous crowd of celebrating Fallujahans.

If you want an apology from this American, you're going to have a long wait!

You have a better chance of finding those seventy-two virgins.

Chuck H. Pitman

Lieutenant General
US Marine Corps (Retired)

http://www.usmc.mil/genbios2.nsf/biographies/EA7025F431B3DF8C85256A40007188C6?opendocument

Ahhhhhh...the truth, so cool and refreshing.

would probably shop our heads off apology or no apology
without even thinking about it.

Who agrees or disagrees with me?

would probably shop our heads off apology or no apology
without even thinking about it.

Who agrees or disagrees with me?

Raises hand.
And for the muslim that wants to harm me or my family, just for not being a muslim, eat lead in the face, and die.

would probably chop our heads off and
not even think about it, who agrees with me and
who disagrees with me?

I get the feeling that Penn and Chewie here are one and the same. Anyone think so?

Same sentiments. Same sentence constructions. Same use of the general demonization brush.

What do you think?

you look at the issue in too much practical way.
it is true that in most of the case it had to be someone that will free the opperesed people and will let the enjoy the rights. but that not the question.
the rights are exist even if evil power "take them away.Too practical.... In the real world. And this is supposed to be a flaw in my reasoning? The idea of rights might survive or even be created by injustice, but the rights themselves are created, and protected through force.You as human, as the responsibility to ensure the other humans will get those basic rights. you had to understand that either you or your goverment or everybody else can't take the rights from other groups or persons.No. I have a lot of obligations. All of them are those I chose to keep. There is something of a covenant between me and my fellow man. In the US is essentially codified in our Constitution, and there's a little bit of cultural identity, and common mythology mix in. That a billion chinese choose to live lifes of quiet desperation under a brutal and secretive regime, despite the fact I'm something of a Sinophile, doesn't really distress me. I don't chose to protect or enrich those who wouldn't do the same for me.without that understanting, there is neither democracy nor humanism principals, and even not security for you and for the society.
"all the humans born free with equal rights" (declaration of human and citizen rights/france,1789). this sentence is the main idea of the enlightenment movement that put the base to the modern values before hundreds of years. if you agree with that you had to understand the all thing. if you not, you ignore the original source for all the benefits you get as american citizen, including the american constitution.We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
It is not America's job to save everyone. It is our perogative to save, and make a better world for OURSELVES. And needless to say, this is achieved through reason, and compromise where and when we deem it favorable and force of arms where we don't. The kind of "wait and be saved" philosophy you're endorsing is a good way to end up hoisted on the business end of a less idealistic man's pointy stick. So sayeth Sun Tzu. It's good for Catholics, bad for Americans.sure, those rights should be defended as the democarcy should defend herself from the anti-democratic power. but even if it had to be defended it dosen't mean they don't stand by themselves. without those rights there is nothing you could defend. the rights are the base for ideal society, that the humanity should be fought for united. because it is right, because it is just, because we do care for the opressed where they will be. not just because "we had the power to do it".We're clearly speaking a different language, figuratively too. The rights are somewhat a product of an ideal. They are the means to pursue it, a means that's provided through power. What keeps you free is the solem and serious promise someone you don't know has made to kill anyone who tries to steal it from you without the due process of law. The idea that everyone should be free (you included) might be why that person and others made that promise, but its the promise, and the occasional practice, that makes it possible.dictator may take the rights by power, but he can't and will not take the ideas and the values of that rights and the right to get right wherever you are.1984 it's a book. And you'd be surprised what people can get used to.that is exactly one of the most sirious problems of the world, and should be change.Well, they should get right on it then. But most people seem pretty content to live in misery and oppression, so I won't hold my breath.I think you compliment yourself quite too much.You've misunderstood. It's a simple restatement of a line from the Declaration of Independance. Self-evident means it is undeniably obvious.you are the only superpower that exist. the UN is toothless organization. you enjoy that position every day.1. Russia, China, Japan, and perhaps soon India are all superpowers. The United States is the only one that can guarantee air dominance and naval superiority nearly anywhere.

The UN is toothless because that's what the French, Chinese, and most of Western Europe (save the UK) wants. But there's still NATO. It's got all the teeth it needs to right injustice. But that's not what Europe wants. Is it?it is your responsibility as it is the responsibility of every nation at the world, but you are almost the only ones who can make it. at least be "self-evident" as you claim to be.Nope. It's ENTIRELY the responsability of those who would be free. They have to want it. Enough to kill for it. Enough to die for it. Enough to gamble everything they have on it's possiblity. If they don't want it badly enough they won't appreciate it when they have it.yes, the world isn't perfect. everybody know that. why don't anyone will act to change it?As stupid an idea as Iraq is, that's what it looks like. Well, normally it looks a whole hell of a lot worse. Normally, people don't have freedom imposed on them. Normally, it's bought at tremendous cost through civil war, after which the people select a new totalitarian government. Maybe it's the language barrier, but your argument seems more a lament. A lament that sounds a little like, "Why can't we all just live together in peace, love, justice and understanding." Well, the answer is because human beings are the deadliest and most opportunistic social predators that 4 billion years of evolution could produce.

Punishment for treason in the US is hanging or being shot on the spot. What he did was make an appeal to authority, and the station of his experience. Which *is* considerable. But, as with McArthur, not always convincing. All he wanted, and got is his say. As it happens, it's trivial to demonstrate he's not alone in his feelings. If he used his station to provide a voice to that group of people, that's his choice. It's his station, and he earned it through a life time of hard work. Will his actions diminish that station, and squander that hard work? Perhaps. That's something time will tell us. Should the government step in and seize the fruits of that work based on the opinions of another vocal minority. No, that would actually be would actually be tyranny. The worth of the ideas should be judged by the marketplace. And so, as this thread ably illustrates, that is exactly what's taking place.
I'll try to explain it again then. I didn't mean it was actual treason. I meant that a Lt. General using his credentials to spew murderous crap around is close to being it. Very close, because he's using his station to validate his rant. I did in no way mean to imply he should hang or anything like that, although I should like to see him degradated.
Sure, he earned his rank (I'll take your word for it anyway). But that does not give him the right to do what he did. Of all people, men like him should know not to behave like that. Instigators have no place in the military - not where I'm from anyway.
The government sets goals for the military and acceptable means for it to achive those goals. Everything else is up to the military itself. Where I'm from it is illegal to encourage murder. Whether you're in the military or not. I assume it's not like that in the US. Here he would've been fined and forced to retract his statements. The military would likely have kicked him out for breach of acceptable conduct.
I think actually punching him in the face would be a mistake, for a number of reasons, not the least of which might be self-preservation. But the wanting, hey, who can't understand that. It's cheap to throw Nazi comparisions around (see Godwin's Law). I can't imagine anyone who'd be more incensed at that than actual Nazis. (They worked so hard to set the benchmark for depraved, inhumane, pure evil so high, and half a century later the guy who takes someone's parking place, or the guy who won't give someone the soup they want gets to share in the infamy? It's just not fair.)
No need to worry about my well-being, I assure you ;) Anyway, you were the one who brought up Nazis etc. I wouldn't have mentioned anything of the sort had you not. And as I tried to explain previously, I brought up fascism because fascists usually think it's cool to speak for everyone and decide for everyone. And that's exactly what he is doing by including his credentials. I have no wish for my country or military to be tarnished by his personal idiocy, but he drags us into it regardless.
That you don't agree with him. Great. Got a list of Marine jokes? Hey, who doesn't have a relative in the Navy, Air Force, and/or Army? Got a reasonable, and articulate argument? Who's stopping you? Got an emotional compelling argument ad populum? People eat that shit up. Have a just enough of a grasp of latin to appear a pretentious characiture of an otherwise reasonable man? We can form a club. Speak your mind, it's a pretty free country. But demanding his pention, and even more ridiculous things (as has been advocated elsewhere and by others), well, I'm not so quick to cry out for political re-education.
That's not the point. If you'd written the open letter, I'd prolly not even bother replying. At least not unless you included your credentials and they happened to involve the army, higher level government or your forign ministery.
Don't make me dig up quotes. Hell, I can stick to just the generals that are generally accepted to be great and find far more obnoxious behavior. And then there are the real ass-hats like Custer.
FYI, I meant look at what I quoted you for saying, directly above that line. You stated various Generals etc. have made similar murderous, inane statements and have vastly improved their careers because of it. That - to me - seems like a very good reason to discharge him.
Maybe my reading comprehension is on the fritz. But no where in the original quote provided by B0zzy, does the presumptive General advocate genocide. At most he laments that precious American lives were risked stopping it. He doesn't think the freedom, the peace of those so saved is worth any more than the price they put on it. Simply, he believes they don't deserve American assistance and should be left to be consumed by their own troubles.
Levelling a city full of people from afar is genocide. That is what he calls for it would seem. Your interpretation of his argument is strange. Trashing a country, civil and military infrastructure alike, is all good. But trying not to kill the civillian population - who never asked for your help - is useless. Is that what you are saying? So this war for liberty thing is a hoax or what? It sounds to me like you advocate liberating people from evil dictators by killing them. I'm sure they'll be gratefull as hell for their "free" graves.
I half to ask myself, who would I chose between, the lives of a friend, cousin, father, uncle and son, or an anonymous muslim family that lives half a world away. Even if they were the most wonderful people I'd never met, it's not even a question. How can I, a fair person, demand another American family shoulder a burden there is no way in hell I would choose.
Like it or not, we are there. Hell I was against the war. I don't think it's any more reasonable to die for some miserable peice of dessert than you do. Only my country's government didn't listen to the 90% of the population who were against the war, so we're there. And now that we are there, we can't very well leave them to rot after blowing up every last bit of infrastructure and leaving a power vacuum. We made the mess. We have an obligation to unmake it. Whether they're grateful now or ever will be has nothing to do with it. We invaded them and right now thry're more miserable than they ever were with their dictator. They have no reason to be grateful. Hopefully thy one day will have, but that Lt. General's statements doesn't help.
Well we all know what happens when we assume. But please note, while I obviously must acknowledge it was a guess. I think you'd have to agree it was a pretty good guess. Ooooh "better." Such a ticklish little word. I suppose first we'd need a standard. But how about this instead. Let's assume I'm no better. I think it's pretty difficult to prove I'm significantly worse. As such my critism of you, can be no more misplaced than your critism of our retired Lt. General. So the question before both of us is the same. Can we avoid being hypocrites, at least in this thread, by accepting our critics gracefully, and without demands for sanctions from powers greater than ourselves?
I'll try again: I never meant the guy should be shot for his opinions. I am outraged he has the nerve to drag everyone into it by using his damn title. I hope it will have negative consequences for him, military-wise, but I'm not about to tell your army what it should or should not do. Your critique of me is almost completely misplaced however. This is my second attempt at making you realize it, and I shall make no further attempts. If this doesn't work, I'll assume it's because I lack language skills.
If you'd understood what I was trying to say, I suppose you'd be right. Execpt neither of our ramblings compares with encouraging genocide in my opinion. I'd still very much like 5 minutes alone with that Lt. General, and I really hope he'll face some sort of military punishment for his statements. I assume you have no laws against people encouraging murder/genocide in the US, thus I don't ask or hope for anything. I'll suggest it's a good idea to have laws against such things but that's not solely down to the Lt. General.
Finally, I hope only few shares his sentiments. They're not exactly enlightned, nor very reasonable. However, if people do, please don't share them in public in the manner he has done. Do not drag your allies or collegues into it.

I agree with this guy 100%. I dont think america is a perfect nation but the whole world seems to think were the essence of evil when were not.

My basic line on this is, America may be bad, but many Muslim nations are far, far worse.

I'll try to explain it again then. I didn't mean it was actual treason. I meant that a Lt. General using his credentials to spew murderous crap around is close to being it. Very close, because he's using his station to validate his rant. I did in no way mean to imply he should hang or anything like that, although I should like to see him degradated.
Sure, he earned his rank (I'll take your word for it anyway). But that does not give him the right to do what he did. Of all people, men like him should know not to behave like that. Instigators have no place in the military - not where I'm from anyway.
Well, that's the fun of hyperbole I suppose. But they are his (retired) credentials to use. As far as his life experience is worth something to his audiance in the context of his argument, well, that's as far as they'll consider it (and titles it may have provided). If they are clever members of his audiance they'll reflect upon the larger context, perhaps the thoughts of other generals, the geopolitical landscape as they understand it, their own personal experience in war, and perhaps a host of other things.

But what gives him "the right" is the wisdom of the first amendment. It's something that we trust in, even when faced with the cruel and the ugly ideas (at least for a little while longer). It's not his rank. Although, that he has actually greatly sacrificed in defense of that, and other, freedoms will tend to garner him greater deference in an already tolerant nation. We do this because we know that the popular ideas never have to be protected, but they're not always right. Our freedom of speech is a little different than yours. We can't necessarily say as much on corporate TV. But in practice ours is far more tolerant. I can say anything I like, so long as it's in jest, or I didn't know it was false, and it doesn't pose an immediate danger to the people around me. In fact, one episode of The Daily Show has a joke (nominally presented as fact) about Laura Bush telling a story about how George W. Bush wanted to jack-off one horse and suck-off another until he was covered in equine ejaculate. Ahh, and then there's Larry Flynt....
The government sets goals for the military and acceptable means for it to achive those goals. Everything else is up to the military itself. Where I'm from it is illegal to encourage murder. Whether you're in the military or not. I assume it's not like that in the US. Here he would've been fined and forced to retract his statements. The military would likely have kicked him out for breach of acceptable conduct.
You should look at American propaganda during WWII, and read a little bit on some of the American generals at the time. The vitrol produced against the Japanese and Germans was of the deadly serious, "Kill them all, they're all going to hell anyway" variety. And the bugs bunny cartoons of the time, well they don't rerun them anymore, but they're exquisit time capsules. What cost McArthur his job, was his public advocating of essentially starting World War III by detonating a line of atomic weapons along the Yalu river creating a radioactive noman's land between China and the rest of Korea. He did this without consulting the president and against his wishes. Even then there were doubts as to whether the President would actually be able to fire McArthur without serious consequences, or potentially creating a powerful political opponant. That's your highwater mark. Or we can go with Patton slapping an American soldier who was suffering from "shell shock;" a disorder Patton thought was invented by cowards to shirk duty.
No need to worry about my well-being, I assure you ;) Anyway, you were the one who brought up Nazis etc. I wouldn't have mentioned anything of the sort had you not. And as I tried to explain previously, I brought up fascism because fascists usually think it's cool to speak for everyone and decide for everyone. And that's exactly what he is doing by including his credentials. I have no wish for my country or military to be tarnished by his personal idiocy, but he drags us into it regardless.
That's not a quality exclusive to facists. In anycase it's not a quality of this man. He clearly was speaking for himself, and unsurprisingly, his comments found some resonance. That some will disagree, or agree is perhaps a natural consequence. But that some people might choose to disagree is certainly no reason for him, because he was successful, to be confined to a less robust freedom than we might accept for ourselves.
That's not the point. If you'd written the open letter, I'd prolly not even bother replying. At least not unless you included your credentials and they happened to involve the army, higher level government or your forign ministery.
Well, then aren't you to blame? Isn't it you, personally, that's placing an inordinate weight on his (retired) credentials? Putting them even above the ideas which you are so quick to exaggerate and dismiss? How can you feel threatened or dishonored by a man who no longer holds the authority of his office, who speaks only for himself? The ideas, even unexaggerated, might well be threatening to some, I'll grant you. But not this man. What you should worry about, were you given to it, are the people in power who silently agree. "Know your enemy, and know yourself," after all. But what of your strategy? Is your cry for more tyranny (and that what "less free speech for people I don't agree with" is.) the most effective way to sway them to what you see as a more just end?
FYI, I meant look at what I quoted you for saying, directly above that line. You stated various Generals etc. have made similar murderous, inane statements and have vastly improved their careers because of it. That - to me - seems like a very good reason to discharge him.
Not going to happen. US Generals (in particular) have a long and storied history of completely obnoxious behavior. Andrew Jackson attacked Spain (later to become Florida) with out explicit sanction went on to be President. And people assume that this still isn't part of the American psyche. It's may prove a fatal mistake. If it takes a black hat to do a job that needs doing, American history has shown time and time again, that we will gladly wear the black hat and wash our hands after the work is done. Besides, you can't fire someone who's retired.
Levelling a city full of people from afar is genocide. That is what he calls for it would seem. Your interpretation of his argument is strange. Trashing a country, civil and military infrastructure alike, is all good. But trying not to kill the civillian population - who never asked for your help - is useless. Is that what you are saying? So this war for liberty thing is a hoax or what? It sounds to me like you advocate liberating people from evil dictators by killing them. I'm sure they'll be gratefull as hell for their "free" graves.
No, the idustrialized murder of non-combatants is genocide. Destroying a city controlled by enemy forces from which all the non-combatants who could be evacuated were evactuated is strategic bombing.

Here's my point of view. Particularly when fighting people from a pre-industrial society, one would do well to rely on the teachings of Sun Tzu, the Romans, Genghis Khan, William Techumsa Sherman and others who brought peace to regions where it was thought impossible. When fighting industrialized opponants, the Geneva Conventions, and the philosophy from which they were derived should carry more weight. Why? Play the odds.

The lives that I care about are American lives. They're the kind people who stamped my hand so I could enjoy the freedom party. I *really* like the freedom party. And I've read enough to know that I don't want to leave the freedom party, not even as a tourist. That other people suffer unspeakable inequities, well, that is their choice and was the choice of their forebearers. And where their choices threaten American lives, where reason won't prevail, they should be met with swift, dispassionate, death that they never see coming.
Like it or not, we are there. Hell I was against the war. I don't think it's any more reasonable to die for some miserable peice of dessert than you do. Only my country's government didn't listen to the 90% of the population who were against the war, so we're there. And now that we are there, we can't very well leave them to rot after blowing up every last bit of infrastructure and leaving a power vacuum. We made the mess. We have an obligation to unmake it. Whether they're grateful now or ever will be has nothing to do with it. We invaded them and right now thry're more miserable than they ever were with their dictator. They have no reason to be grateful. Hopefully thy one day will have, but that Lt. General's statements doesn't help.
But how to do that? Isn't that the question. Despite the promotional materials for the Age of Enlightenment, people aren't predisposed to reason. (Which is something that industrialization demanded, and afforded the wealth to pursue.) And that's why ancient warfare looked like it did. The people who wouldn't bend, who couldn't be flexible and join the new world were cut down. It's a tragedy, but it's far better than the (perhaps perpetual) civil war that would have been left in its wake.
If you'd understood what I was trying to say, I suppose you'd be right. Execpt neither of our ramblings compares with encouraging genocide in my opinion. I'd still very much like 5 minutes alone with that Lt. General, and I really hope he'll face some sort of military punishment for his statements. I assume you have no laws against people encouraging murder/genocide in the US, thus I don't ask or hope for anything. I'll suggest it's a good idea to have laws against such things but that's not solely down to the Lt. General.
Finally, I hope only few shares his sentiments. They're not exactly enlightned, nor very reasonable. However, if people do, please don't share them in public in the manner he has done. Do not drag your allies or collegues into it.
At this point, I think it's because you're British and we necessarily have radically different ideas about what free speech is. That's cultural, and it's very much like the internet only with less porn and it occasionally knocks on your door. Perhaps its where we pick up some of our course nature. There are no laws preventing an abstract endorsment of murder or genocide. In fact there have been a couple cases where Republicans made oblique references to assasinating judges and Bill Clinton when he was still President. Such laws that we do have that would apply to such things apply only where their is a clear and immediate threat to public saftey. Such as a specific death threat, inciting a riot, or particularly abusive language which a reasonable person could not be expected to ignore (I believe this one is a state to state thing).

Why I prefer the American Plan: Hiding evil, particularly the dangerous or threatening kind, doesn't make it go away. Instead I would prefer that it be dragged out into the public area so that we might know who the people are that cling to these ideas, and so that the ideas might be ridiculed and destroyed. And if it's just patently offensive, well I can look away, find another diversion, it's a large arena. But more importantly, what's offensive to me, might be gosple truth to someone else. And my truth in turn might be deeply troubling to others. Perhaps even you. But through the arena, and this conflict of ideas, I trust that wisdom must inevitably result. That over time, truth is undeniable and irreducible. That deceptions wear thin and fade, unable to escape the constant pressure of the ceaseless conflict.

I've no doubt that your path produces a more polite existance. But as I've clearly evolved into something of an asshole myself, I'm sure I'd find it quite disagreeable to my elemental nature.