NationStates Jolt Archive

COMMENTARY: Outstanding! Just totally, totally outstanding!


Riders shield mourners


By Jennifer Harper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
March 24, 2006

The solemn escort, with American flags held high as a hearse passes: The respectful message of the Patriot Guard Riders has resonated around the nation.

The motorcycle group which has vowed to shield military families from protesters during the funerals of fallen troops has surged in the past five weeks, adding more than 15,000 riders.

"We've hit upon a raw patriotic nerve in Americans searching for a way to identify with those who are supporting and defending our freedoms," said Kurt Mayer of Houston, spokesman for the group founded in October by five Kansas military veterans who were outraged that an unscrupulous few would use a funeral to further their political or social agendas.

The riding ranks now include 20,000 members -- aged 14 to 84 -- from all 50 states, Puerto Rico, Guam and Germany. Bikes polished and flags ready, they attend a service only by family invitation -- sometimes arriving by the dozens, sometimes by the hundreds.

"We try to help the family. Maybe they are in a cemetery or a church, or riding in a limousine. But they will see American flags held by strangers to show their gratitude for that service member," Mr. Mayer said. "It comes right from our hearts."

Tomorrow, the guard's Maine chapter will join veterans to form a "corridor of honor" outside the funeral of Army Sgt. Corey Dan, 22, of Norway, Maine, who was killed in Ramadi, Iraq, on March 13. Bikers and vets will block out the view of an out-of-state protest group, according to police reports.

In the past weeks, guard members have exchanged much information about Sgt. Dan. They know he started boot camp on September 11, 2001; that he leaves behind a four-month-old son; and was killed by a roadside bomb with another soldier, Staff Sgt. Marco Silva, 27, of Alva, Fla.

The Florida chapter will be there for Sgt. Silva's memorial service tomorrow as well, and the guard will attend funerals for two other fallen soldiers in Michigan and Missouri. Families have appreciated their presence.

"Thank you for honoring our Soldier Girl -- PFC Amy Duerksen -- with roaring bikes and saluting hands. Thank you for honoring our family with kind words and outstretched arms. Thank you for honoring God with bowed heads and prayers in His name. Thank you for honoring our country with pure hearts, good deeds, and American flags," said a letter to the guard from the family of Army Pfc. Amy A. Duerksen, 19, of Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland, who died in Baghdad earlier this month.

In mid-March, Rep. Jerry Moran, Kansas Republican, introduced legislation to officially commend the Patriot Guard for shielding the families. Rep. Mike Rogers, Michigan Republican, also drafted legislation that would ban protests at national cemeteries. A dozen states, including Maryland, are now considering restricting demonstrations at military funerals.

"Patriotism has resurfaced," said Frank Baranyai of the guard's Virginia chapter. "You don't have to ride to be part of our group. You just need respect for our troops."

Vigilantesque.

I wonder where these people were when Phelps was picketing the funerals of non-soldiers.

I wonder where these people were when Phelps was picketing the funerals of non-soldiers.
Didn't you know? Only soldier matter. "Damn Queers" deserve it...and of course Eutrusca would have us believe that it's not the Phelps bunch, but the peace movement.

I see the pills must be making you forgetful, Eutrusca. You posted pretty much the exact same thread a couple of weeks back.

Odd no mention of Phelps in the article.

I saw a piece on BBC news.com about that- those 'protesters' were Phelps' crowd.

That is old and i am sure Eutrusca has already posted it.
CoughDementiacough

So let us make this thread worth something and view the wonders of the Easter eggs creation.
http://monkeypup.org/media/pics/makingEastereggs.jpg

So let us make this thread worth something and view the wonders of the Easter eggs creation.
http://monkeypup.org/media/pics/makingEastereggs.jpg
I'm gonna have nightmares about that pic tonight, I just know it.

Odd no mention of Phelps in the article.

I saw a piece on BBC news.com about that- those 'protesters' were Phelps' crowd.
Well, it's from the Moonie Times, so I'm not surprised that if they're talking about Phelps that they didn't mention it, not if there's a chance to subtly slam the anti-war crowd in the process.

That's right, riders, shield them from the reality that not everyone loves soldiers!

That's right, riders, shield them from the reality that not everyone loves soldiers!
Time and place. Funeral is neither.

I don't mind the riders except for the following:
The attempt to characterize Phelps' nutbags as the Peace Protesters

And, as Fass pointed out, Phelps has been doing this to family members of homosexuals for a while, where were they then?

Read my national moto. That is my opinion on Fred Phelps.
http://www.nationstates.net/the_jovian_moons

Read my national moto. That is my opinion on Fred Phelps.
http://www.nationstates.net/the_jovian_moons

*Applauds*

The riding ranks now include 20,000 members -- aged 14 to 84 -- from all 50 states, Puerto Rico, Guam and Germany. Bikes polished and flags ready, they attend a service only by family invitation -- sometimes arriving by the dozens, sometimes by the hundreds.
¿http://flamevault.com/~meeks/emoticons/wtf.gifhttp://flamevault.com/~meeks/emoticons/wtf.gifhttp://flamevault.com/~meeks/emoticons/wtf.gif?

http://flamevault.com/~meeks/emoticons/wtf.gifhttp://flamevault.com/~meeks/emoticons/wtf.gifhttp://flamevault.com/~meeks/emoticons/wtf.gif?

I guess you didn't get the memo.

Germany is ours now, bitch! HA! ;)

I guess you didn't get the memo.

Germany is ours now, bitch! HA! ;)
And you think the insurgencies in Iraq are bad? Wait till that message spreads - 9/11 will look like a kindergarten picknick :D

And you think the insurgencies in Iraq are bad? Wait till that message spreads - 9/11 will look like a kindergarten picknick :D

You just try to make us give up the land of chocolate!

*shakes fist*

You just try to make us give up the land of chocolate!

*shakes fist*
Dude, that's Switzerland! We do beer and cars... well, and tanks and U-Boats, for that matter.

I guess you didn't get the memo.

Germany is ours now, bitch! HA! ;)
MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I must be quite ill - for a moment there I thought I was reading a thread started by Eutrusca wherein people were poking great big holes in the old coots' sense of patriotism/sense of paranoia where dissent is concerned.

I must be quite ill - for a moment there I thought I was reading a thread started by Eutrusca wherein people were poking great big holes in the old coots' sense of patriotism/sense of paranoia where dissent is concerned.

Oh I've done that enough. Thought I'd give him a break this time around.

Then I'll go throw more eggs at my neighbor's house as I hear they're having funeral services for a dead baby killer this weekend.

MWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Harlesburg -> http://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/shock.gifhttp://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/sithlord.gif <- German Nightmare

Dance for the Fatherland, sucka, dance!

Oh I've done that enough. Thought I'd give him a break this time around.

Then I'll go throw more eggs at my neighbor's house as I hear they're having funeral services for a dead baby killer this weekend.
Make sure they're fertilized eggs--that'll make it even worse.

Harlesburg -> http://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/shock.gifhttp://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/sithlord.gif <- German Nightmare

Dance for the Fatherland, sucka, dance!
*DANCES*
http://img99.exs.cx/img99/4969/dancing_hitler_yey.gif

Hmmm which to choose...
Harlesburg-http://forums.thebattlefields.com/images/smilies/3/kill.gif-German Nightmare
Harlesburg-http://et-scene.de/forum/images/smilies/allied-med-kill.gif-German Nightmare
http://forum.skadi.net/images/smilies/Panzer.gif

Sgt. Corey Dan, 22, of Norway, Maine...
Pfc. Amy A. Duerksen, 19, of...
They're so... young :(

I was hoping they'd have horses. Horses would look a lot more impressive.

Oklahoma is solving the Phelps problem. The state legislature has passed a law making it illegal to protest two hours before and two hours after a funeral. That is for any funeral so everyone is treated equally.

Oklahoma is solving the Phelps problem. The state legislature has passed a law making it illegal to protest two hours before and two hours after a funeral. That is for any funeral so everyone is treated equally.

So they can't protest before or after a funeral? How will that achieve anything?

So they can't protest before or after a funeral? How will that achieve anything?

Famalies will not be bothered by protesters.

Famalies will not be bothered by protesters.

Whast about during the actual ceremony? Does that law encompass the two hours before the ceremony, the ceremony, then two hours after, or just the two hours before and after but not the ceremony itself?

Whast about during the actual ceremony? Does that law encompass the two hours before the ceremony, the ceremony, then two hours after, or just the two hours before and after but not the ceremony itself?

My point exactly. Now protesters just can't show up before hand(giving no warning to the families and removing and possibility to change their plans) and hang around afterwards

Didn't you know? Only soldier matter. "Damn Queers" deserve it...and of course Eutrusca would have us believe that it's not the Phelps bunch, but the peace movement.
Please point out where I have said that. I posted the article because I thought it was interesting. Actually, it's more the Phelps crowd than anyone else, but it's beyond dispute that some few in the war protestors indulge in similar behavior. Who's doing it is irrelevant.

As someone pointed out, this has been discussed before. If you'd rather not discuss it again, the solution is simple ... don't discuss it. ( shrug )

Thank God for lEDs
(Improvised Explosive Devices)
God Himself Has Now Become America's Terrorist, Killing
Americans in Strange Lands for "Brokeback Mountain Fag Sins.
WBC to picket funeral of Army Staff Sgt. Marcos Silva - at
10 a.m., Saturday, Mar. 25, at Palm Woodlawn Funeral
Home, Naranja, Florida. Killed in Iraq, by IED - like the IED
America bombed WBC with in a terroristic effort to silence
our anti-gay Gospel preaching by violence.
America bombed our church with an IED made by
fag students at Washburn U. in Topeka. In his
retaliatory wrath, God is killing Americans with
Muslim IEDs: "Saying, Touch not mine anointed,
and do my prophets no harm." 1 Chron. 16:22.
"For it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay,
saith the Lord." Rom. 12:19. God Almighty killed
Staff Sgt. Silva. He died in shame, not honor - for a
fag nation cursed by God: "Buried with the burial of
an ass." Jer. 22:19. He is now in Hell - sine die.

Link to Article (http://www.godhatesfags.com/fliers/mar2006/20060320_marcos-silva-funeral.pdf)

Please point out where I have said that. I posted the article because I thought it was interesting. Actually, it's more the Phelps crowd than anyone else, but it's beyond dispute that some few in the war protestors indulge in similar behavior. Who's doing it is irrelevant.

As someone pointed out, this has been discussed before. If you'd rather not discuss it again, the solution is simple ... don't discuss it. ( shrug )
You tried to paint this as part of the peace movement the last time you posted on the subject, even deflecting people who rightfully pointed out that it was the Phelps gang who did this. The Phelps involvement is documented, the peace movement involvement is all in your head.

You tried to paint this as part of the peace movement the last time you posted on the subject, even deflecting people who rightfully pointed out that it was the Phelps gang who did this. The Phelps involvement is documented, the peace movement involvement is all in your head.
No, it isn't, but quite frankly I don't care who's doing it, only that it's being done.

No, it isn't, but quite frankly I don't care who's doing it, only that it's being done.
Sometimes I wonder if you can actually see what you post...

Document it, champ. Prove your claim that this isn't anything more than the Westboro bunch.

As for you not caring, we have the other thread to document the dishonesty of that statement.

Sometimes I wonder if you can actually see what you post...

Document it, champ. Prove your claim that this isn't anything more than the Westboro bunch.

As for you not caring, we have the other thread to document the dishonesty of that statement.
Why must you constantly seek some sort of "dishonesty?" In this forum, any post much longer than about 300 words will be almost universally ignored. So a complete, properly annotated post with all the necessary qualifications and disclaimers is hardly ever posted.

As I have repeatedly said in the past ( funny you can remember some things i say and not others ) people have the absolute right to protest and express their opinions. Where the problem comes in is when they begin to "go beyond the pale" in the manner of their protests, including dishonoring the dead.

Quote anything I have said in the past about either not wanting people to protest in a sane and orderly manner, or about the primary source of this sort of protest being the Phelps mob.

Additionally, as I have repeatedly admitted, my experiences with protestors both during and after the time I was in Vietnam left a very, very bad taste in my mouth. Yes, I do tend to allow that to color some of my posts about protestors, but I do try to control it, given my position that only certain extreme forms of protest are unacceptable.

You seek some sort of specious total consistency from others, but obviously don't expect it from yourself.

*DANCES*
HAHAHA! I was actually thinking about the dancing Hitler when I said that. Glad you didn't let me down.

http://img4.smiliedb.de/sdb82797.gif__http://img4.smiliedb.de/sdb26577.gifhttp://img4.smiliedb.de/sdb57160.gifhttp://img4.smiliedb.de/sdb75896.gifhttp://img4.smiliedb.de/sdb77561.gifhttp://img4.smiliedb.de/sdb95344.gifhttp://img4.smiliedb.de/sdb83916.gifhttp://img4.smiliedb.de/sdb84752.gifhttp://img4.smiliedb.de/sdb10914.gifhttp://img4.smiliedb.de/sdb11317.gif

Why must you constantly seek some sort of "dishonesty?" In this forum, any post much longer than about 300 words will be almost universally ignored. So a complete, properly annotated post with all the necessary qualifications and disclaimers is hardly ever posted.
I don't seek it, you provide it. If engaged in a debate with someone who shifts positions or is dishonest about what they have said, sometimes within the same thread, it becomes an issue relivant to the discussion.

As I have repeatedly said in the past ( funny you can remember some things i say and not others ) people have the absolute right to protest and express their opinions. Where the problem comes in is when they begin to "go beyond the pale" in the manner of their protests, including dishonoring the dead.

Quote anything I have said in the past about either not wanting people to protest in a sane and orderly manner, or about the primary source of this sort of protest being the Phelps mob.
This is a red herring that does not address anything in my statements and is, in fact, an attempt to change the subject while making it look like it was what I was talking about.

Additionally, as I have repeatedly admitted, my experiences with protestors both during and after the time I was in Vietnam left a very, very bad taste in my mouth. Yes, I do tend to allow that to color some of my posts about protestors, but I do try to control it, given my position that only certain extreme forms of protest are unacceptable.
This does not excuse trying to paint the Phelps gang as representative of the peace movement as you did in the last thread on the subject.

You seek some sort of specious total consistency from others, but obviously don't expect it from yourself.
You have failed to illustrate this with this rant that had little to do with what was said.

I don't seek it, you provide it. If engaged in a debate with someone who shifts positions or is dishonest about what they have said, sometimes within the same thread, it becomes an issue relivant to the discussion.

This is a red herring that does not address anything in my statements and is, in fact, an attempt to change the subject while making it look like it was what I was talking about.

This does not excuse trying to paint the Phelps gang as representative of the peace movement as you did in the last thread on the subject.

You have failed to illustrate this with this rant that had little to do with what was said.
We obviously have a problem communicating. Have a nice day.

We obviously have a problem communicating. Have a nice day.
Apparently we do, because I asked you to prove your claims that the peace movement is involved and you answered that people have the right to protest. I imagine that our difficulty would be lightened if you addressed the questions asked rather than the ones you wish where.

Apparently we do, because I asked you to prove your claims that the peace movement is involved and you answered that people have the right to protest. I imagine that our difficulty would be lightened if you addressed the questions asked rather than the ones you wish where.
Maybe if his sycophants would stop swelling old Truss' head with notions of Godhood, he could pull it out of his ass long enough to catch your drift. Except I honestly think he likes it up there too much.

That is old and i am sure Eutrusca has already posted it.
CoughDementiacough

So let us make this thread worth something and view the wonders of the Easter eggs creation.
http://monkeypup.org/media/pics/makingEastereggs.jpg

You make me happy, Harlesburg. :)

COMMENTARY: Outstanding! Just totally, totally outstanding!


Riders shield mourners


By Jennifer Harper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
March 24, 2006

The solemn escort, with American flags held high as a hearse passes: The respectful message of the Patriot Guard Riders has resonated around the nation.

The motorcycle group which has vowed to shield military families from protesters during the funerals of fallen troops has surged in the past five weeks, adding more than 15,000 riders.

"We've hit upon a raw patriotic nerve in Americans searching for a way to identify with those who are supporting and defending our freedoms," said Kurt Mayer of Houston, spokesman for the group founded in October by five Kansas military veterans who were outraged that an unscrupulous few would use a funeral to further their political or social agendas.

The riding ranks now include 20,000 members -- aged 14 to 84 -- from all 50 states, Puerto Rico, Guam and Germany. Bikes polished and flags ready, they attend a service only by family invitation -- sometimes arriving by the dozens, sometimes by the hundreds.

"We try to help the family. Maybe they are in a cemetery or a church, or riding in a limousine. But they will see American flags held by strangers to show their gratitude for that service member," Mr. Mayer said. "It comes right from our hearts."

Tomorrow, the guard's Maine chapter will join veterans to form a "corridor of honor" outside the funeral of Army Sgt. Corey Dan, 22, of Norway, Maine, who was killed in Ramadi, Iraq, on March 13. Bikers and vets will block out the view of an out-of-state protest group, according to police reports.

In the past weeks, guard members have exchanged much information about Sgt. Dan. They know he started boot camp on September 11, 2001; that he leaves behind a four-month-old son; and was killed by a roadside bomb with another soldier, Staff Sgt. Marco Silva, 27, of Alva, Fla.

The Florida chapter will be there for Sgt. Silva's memorial service tomorrow as well, and the guard will attend funerals for two other fallen soldiers in Michigan and Missouri. Families have appreciated their presence.

"Thank you for honoring our Soldier Girl -- PFC Amy Duerksen -- with roaring bikes and saluting hands. Thank you for honoring our family with kind words and outstretched arms. Thank you for honoring God with bowed heads and prayers in His name. Thank you for honoring our country with pure hearts, good deeds, and American flags," said a letter to the guard from the family of Army Pfc. Amy A. Duerksen, 19, of Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland, who died in Baghdad earlier this month.

In mid-March, Rep. Jerry Moran, Kansas Republican, introduced legislation to officially commend the Patriot Guard for shielding the families. Rep. Mike Rogers, Michigan Republican, also drafted legislation that would ban protests at national cemeteries. A dozen states, including Maryland, are now considering restricting demonstrations at military funerals.

"Patriotism has resurfaced," said Frank Baranyai of the guard's Virginia chapter. "You don't have to ride to be part of our group. You just need respect for our troops."


About Damn Time! I congratulate these people and hope that the states restrict demonstrations at military funerals.

About Damn Time! I congratulate these people and hope that the states restrict demonstrations at military funerals.
Hooray for restricting rights. It's a great day when there's fewer options for freedom.

Hooray for restricting rights. It's a great day when there's fewer options for freedom.

Whatever happened to respect for the dead?

Whatever happened to respect for the dead?
That's optional in a democracy. This isn't Spain, and that's not Franco sitting in the Oval Office, chump.

That's optional in a democracy. This isn't Spain, and that's not Franco sitting in the Oval Office, chump.

:confused:

Your making noise but I'm not hearing anything at all. care to explain what the heck your talking about?

Whatever happened to respect for the dead?
Apparently that went the way of the Dodo, just like manners and having respect for other people who are still living. Sad. Very sad.

And some people wonder why there's so much conflict in modern society, or why one of the favorite expressions among some younger people is "Give me my 'props." [ Meaning "I'm entitled to proper respect just like everyone else." ]

:confused:

Your making noise but I'm not hearing anything at all. care to explain what the heck your talking about?
Damn! I was hoping no one would ask! :(

:confused:

Your making noise but I'm not hearing anything at all. care to explain what the heck your talking about?
You must be dumber than I thought.

Reading gives you trouble? I thought I spelled it out well enough. Only a damn fool'd welcome fewer rights.

Whatever happened to respect for the dead?
Nothing, it's a completely shitty thing to do, no doubt. But then, this is your ultimate test of your comitment to freedom of speech, the cornerstone of our society. It doesn't do any good to defend the rights of 'good speech,' it's only free when it's free for everyone-including the ones with piss poor taste.

I understand it's a shitty situation. It doesn't leave a good taste in my mouth to even have the passing thought that some one should be able to protest at a funeral, no matter who it's for. I can't find a scrap of agreement with the practice or idea, they are fucktards. But, if I am to believe in freedom of speech, and I do, I have to believe in thier freedom to speak. The out is that that freedom applies to everyone, including the riders and to me to say, "You are total fucktards, time and place. This is neither."

Apparently that went the way of the Dodo, just like manners and having respect for other people who are still living. Sad. Very sad.

And some people wonder why there's so much conflict in modern society, or why one of the favorite expressions among some younger people is "Give me my 'props." [ Meaning "I'm entitled to proper respect just like everyone else." ]

Respect is earned. It is not given out freely. I told a kid that one time and he looked at me like I had no idea what I was talking about. You are right in what you say Eutrusca. It is sad, very sad.

Respect is earned. It is not given out freely. I told a kid that one time and he looked at me like I had no idea what I was talking about. You are right in what you say Eutrusca. It is sad, very sad.
What's sad is old men and virgins saying they're just hunky-dory with needlessly restricting everybody's freedoms, then trying to pass their opinion off as that of the majority.

Nothing, it's a completely shitty thing to do, no doubt. But then, this is your ultimate test of your comitment to freedom of speech, the cornerstone of our society. It doesn't do any good to defend the rights of 'good speech,' it's only free when it's free for everyone-including the ones with piss poor taste.

I'm sorry but I feel that funerals are no places for protests and I do not care who died. They are solomn occassions. I'm just glad that I have yet to go to one for if I did and met a protestor there.......He'll need a bone doctor if he insults the dead in my presence.

I understand it's a shitty situation. It doesn't leave a good taste in my mouth to even have the passing thought that some one should be able to protest at a funeral, no matter who it's for. I can't find a scrap of agreement with the practice or idea, they are fucktards. But, if I am to believe in freedom of speech, and I do, I have to believe in thier freedom to speak. The out is that that freedom applies to everyone, including the riders and to me to say, "You are total fucktards, time and place. This is neither."

Let them protest elsewhere. A military Funeral is no place for a protest.

Let them protest elsewhere. A military Funeral is no place for a protest.
Anyplace is a place for a protest. Especially military funerals.

I'm sorry but I feel that funerals are no places for protests and I do not care who died. They are solomn occassions. I'm just glad that I have yet to go to one for if I did and met a protestor there.......He'll need a bone doctor if he insults the dead in my presence.
We are in agreement(except the violence part), but you know that since that's included in what you quoted me saying...

The issue isn't whether or not we think it's a good idea. It's our commitment to free speech.



Let them protest elsewhere. A military Funeral is no place for a protest.
Again, it's not an issue of whether we like it.

I'm sorry but I feel that funerals are no places for protests and I do not care who died. They are solomn occassions. I'm just glad that I have yet to go to one for if I did and met a protestor there.......He'll need a bone doctor if he insults the dead in my presence.



Let them protest elsewhere. A military Funeral is no place for a protest.
Hey, weren't you one of the people bashing Sweden for having laws against hate speech?

We are in agreement(except the violence part), but you know that since that's included in what you quoted me saying...

The issue isn't whether or not we think it's a good idea. It's our commitment to free speech.

There is such a thing as to much free speech. I believe this is part of to much free speech in protesting at a funeral.

Again, it's not an issue of whether we like it.

No, its just another issue for politicians.

There is such a thing as to much free speech. I believe this is part of to much free speech in protesting at a funeral.

Then you're some kind of Goddamn Communist, and I hope you go back to living in whatever Authoritarian country you emigrated from - and take your lack of respect for personal freedoms with you.

There is such a thing as to much free speech. I believe this is part of to much free speech in protesting at a funeral.



No, its just another issue for politicians.
I fear that is a dangerous step in the wrong direction for our society. As a test of commitment to the freedoms and ideals (the ideals that the soldier is there to protect) it is a failure. I am saddened.

Then you're some kind of Goddamn Communist, and I hope you go back to living in whatever Authoritarian country you emigrated from - and take your lack of respect for personal freedoms with you.

:rolleyes:

Hey, weren't you one of the people bashing Sweden for having laws against hate speech?

But, you see, being a jerk to fags and their families = OK. Being a jerk to soldiers and their families = not OK.

I fear that is a dangerous step in the wrong direction for our society. As a test of commitment to the freedoms and ideals (the ideals that the soldier is there to protect) it is a failure. I am saddened.

I just feel that military funerals should be protected. I guess I'm just bias towards them since most of my family either have served or still serving in the military.

I just feel that military funerals should be protected. I guess I'm just bias towards them since most of my family either have served or still serving in the military.
I'm sorry but I feel that funerals are no places for protests and I do not care who died. They are solomn occassions.
The two would seem mutually contradictory.

What's sad is old men and virgins saying they're just hunky-dory with needlessly restricting everybody's freedoms, then trying to pass their opinion off as that of the majority.
Tough. Live with it.

:rolleyes:
Don't roll your eyes at me, Mr. Junior-Fascist-Wannabe. We need fewer freedoms like you need to get laid less often.

The two would seem mutually contradictory.
How?

Anyplace is a place for a protest. Especially military funerals.
Have you protested at a military funeral?

Tough. Live with it.
Unfortunately, I have to, it seems - you pocket National Socialist types want to tell everybody what to think and feel, well that's not on anymore. America is about freedom. You aren't.

How?
The contrast between saying military funerals were special, and yet that all funerals were special.

Then you're some kind of Goddamn Communist, and I hope you go back to living in whatever Authoritarian country you emigrated from - and take your lack of respect for personal freedoms with you.
Aahahahahahaha! Calling Coneliu a communist! ROFLMFAO!!!

Have you protested at a military funeral?
Would that make a difference to you, Mr. Messiah?

Aahahahahahaha! Calling Coneliu a communist! ROFLMFAO!!!
Socialist, then. The two of you are obviously both unAmerican totalitarians.

Don't roll your eyes at me, Mr. Junior-Fascist-Wannabe. We need fewer freedoms like you need to get laid less often.
I don't want to get on your case, but this is kind of juvenile. "Gettin' some" wouldn't validate his ideas.

You'll just degenerate the discussion into quips.

Don't roll your eyes at me, Mr. Junior-Fascist-Wannabe. We need fewer freedoms like you need to get laid less often.
[ wonders how this dude can live with what amounts to terminal cognitive dissonance ]

Just a moment ago, you called him a communist. Now you say he's a fascist. Well, Mr. Knowitall, which is it???

Don't roll your eyes at me, Mr. Junior-Fascist-Wannabe. We need fewer freedoms like you need to get laid less often.

:rolleyes:

Aahahahahahaha! Calling Coneliu a communist! ROFLMFAO!!!

I did get a good laugh out of it. I wish I could get smileycentral onto my computer. I'd love to use those laughing smileys at a time like this.

The contrast between saying military funerals were special, and yet that all funerals were special.
All funerals are special to those who knew the deceased. Military funerals are special to folks like me because the deceased are my brothers and sisters.

[ wonders how this dude can live with what amounts to terminal cognitive dissonance ]

Just a moment ago, you called him a communist. Now you say he's a fascist. Well, Mr. Knowitall, which is it???
Well, whatever the two of you are, you sure as Hell don't believe in democracy.

All funerals are special to those who knew the deceased. Military funerals are special to folks like me because the deceased are my brothers and sisters.
I worked in a record store. Should the funerals of record store workers be off-limits to protesters, because they'd be dishonouring my brethren?

Well, whatever the two of you are, you sure as Hell don't believe in democracy.
Oh? So what was I doing serving in the US Army all those years? Strange, I thought it was because of my comittment to my Country, my brothers and sisters, and to democracy. Gee! And to think ... all those years I was sooo deluded. Tsk!

Oh? So what was I doing serving in the US Army all those years? Strange, I thought it was because of my comittment to my Country, my brothers and sisters, and to democracy. Gee! And to think ... all those years I was sooo deluded. Tsk!
You clearly weren't fighting for freedom of speech. Which would appear to be...oh yeah. A constitutional right.

I worked in a record store. Should the funerals of record store workers be off-limits to protesters, because they'd be dishonouring my brethren?
There's a vast difference between working at a job with those you hardly know and serving with people of great courage and comittment that you know better than anyone you've ever known before.

You clearly weren't fighting for freedom of speech. Which would appear to be...oh yeah. A constitutional right.
A specious allegation indeed.

A specious allegation indeed.
Not at all. You don't believe in freedom of speech. That's fine - you're entitled to your beliefs. But you don't believe in it.

There's a vast difference between working at a job with those you hardly know and serving with people of great courage and comittment that you know better than anyone you've ever known before.
Bullshit, there is no difference.

There's a vast difference between working at a job with those you hardly know and serving with people of great courage and comittment that you know better than anyone you've ever known before.
I got to know my colleagues pretty well, thanks. But I admit, I thought you were talking about all military funerals - now it just seems to be those of the people who were in your platoon/regiment/company.

Socialist, then. The two of you are obviously both unAmerican totalitarians.

Now that's 3 different groups you called me. Which group am I in?

Whast about during the actual ceremony? Does that law encompass the two hours before the ceremony, the ceremony, then two hours after, or just the two hours before and after but not the ceremony itself?

Yes. :headbang:

Well, whatever the two of you are, you sure as Hell don't believe in democracy.

If I didn't believe in Democracy, I wouldn't be voting and be advocating for a totalitarian police state. Since I'll be the first one to stand in line against a Totalitarian police state, that blows this thesis right out of the water.

There's a vast difference between working at a job with those you hardly know and serving with people of great courage and comittment that you know better than anyone you've ever known before.
And that's you argument for denying Americans their rights?

You're a goddamn traitor!

If I didn't believe in Democracy, I wouldn't be voting and be advocating for a totalitarian police state. Since I'll be the first one to stand in line against a Totalitarian police state, that blows this thesis right out of the water.
I'll give you the chance to cover-up your TRUE MOTIVATIONS, you unAmerican traitor.

Not at all. You don't believe in freedom of speech. That's fine - you're entitled to your beliefs. But you don't believe in it.
You're certainly entitled to believe whatever you choose to believe, no matter how wrong or demented.

If I didn't believe in Democracy, I wouldn't be voting and be advocating for a totalitarian police state. Since I'll be the first one to stand in line against a Totalitarian police state, that blows this thesis right out of the water.
Right. So you admit people have a right to protest, however, and wherever, and whenever, they wish to? That is functional democracy, which you claim to defend.

And that's you argument for denying Americans their rights?

You're a goddamn traitor!

That's enough! Now your treading onto flaming and that is not tolerated.

You're certainly entitled to believe whatever you choose to believe, no matter how wrong or demented.
Ooh, burn.

I'm seriously not picking at you for not believing in freedom of speech. It's fine - we both agree we're entitled to our beliefs.

Bullshit, there is no difference.
Go serve in a combat zone, then come back and tell me that. Until then, I will live with the fact that you're totally, completely, irredeemably wrong.

I'll give you the chance to cover-up your TRUE MOTIVATIONS, you unAmerican traitor.

Oh brother. I wouldn't tread into those waters Quibbleville. This can be considered flamebait and I'm not going to rise to it.

Right. So you admit people have a right to protest, however, and wherever, and whenever, they wish to? That is functional democracy, which you claim to defend.

I did? I believe in the right to protest but not at funerals.

I got to know my colleagues pretty well, thanks. But I admit, I thought you were talking about all military funerals - now it just seems to be those of the people who were in your platoon/regiment/company.
Well, you and I are done talking. Next!

Go serve in a combat zone, then come back and tell me that. Until then, I will live with the fact that you're totally, completely, irredeemably wrong.
Wait, what's that got to do with anything? Earlier, you were saying it was on account of your being close to people - now it's to do with violent experiences? Ok, so drug dealers and gang members should have rights of privacy at their funerals too?

I did? I believe in the right to protest but not at funerals.
So you don't believe in a right to protest. It's an absolute. Deciding when it's acceptable and when it's not dissolves the entire point of protest.

So you don't believe in a right to protest. It's an absolute. Deciding when it's acceptable and when it's not dissolves the entire point of protest.
And that's why I'm not wrong when I say these two are unAmerican.

Go serve in a combat zone, then come back and tell me that. Until then, I will live with the fact that you're totally, completely, irredeemably wrong.

Then soldiers who do not serve in combat do not qualify for this protection against protest?

This article has been quoted before somewhere.

So you don't believe in a right to protest. It's an absolute. Deciding when it's acceptable and when it's not dissolves the entire point of protest.

:confused:

:confused:
Ok. You said:

I believe in the right to protest but not at funerals.
That is a contradiction in terms. A right to protest is an absolute right. If you curtail it - by banning protest at funerals - then there is no longer a right at all: just a privilege of agreeing with the authorities. That is not a right to protest.

Then soldiers who do not serve in combat do not qualify for this protection against protest?
Sigh. Saderiji, how on earth did you derive that from what I said?

As a matter of fact, I don't think anyone's funeral should be the object of a protest, unless it's a protest directed at someone other than the deceased or their family ( perhaps a protest against allowing someone who may have caused the death of the deceased to go free would be a good example here ), and as long as said protest is peaceful and respectful of the deceased and their family.

People need time and space to grieve for loved ones who have died. Violent, or unseemly protest at a funeral denies them that.

Ok. You said:


That is a contradiction in terms. A right to protest is an absolute right. If you curtail it - by banning protest at funerals - then there is no longer a right at all: just a privilege of agreeing with the authorities. That is not a right to protest.

No its not a contradiction. I believe in the right to protest but I also believe in honor for the dead. If Clinton where to die right now, I wouldn't say anything bad about him because he is dead. That is called respecting the dead. These people are not respecting the dead.

I do not care if they protest the war but do it somewhere else.

No its not a contradiction. I believe in the right to protest but I also believe in honor for the dead. If Clinton where to die right now, I wouldn't say anything bad about him because he is dead. That is called respecting the dead. These people are not respecting the dead.
Why? What honour does dying bestow on anyone? If they've died in combat, then it's not their death that's honourable, it's their actions whilst living and their willingness to risk death. "Death" is not honourable. I freely admit, I have a great deal of respect for soldiers - they're far braver than I. That respect is independent of whether they are alive or not; that's the whole point of respect, isn't it?

Why? What honour does dying bestow on anyone? If they've died in combat, then it's not their death that's honourable, it's their actions whilst living and their willingness to risk death. "Death" is not honourable. I freely admit, I have a great deal of respect for soldiers - they're far braver than I. That respect is independent of whether they are alive or not; that's the whole point of respect, isn't it?

Do you respect or honor the dead?

Yes. :headbang:

Yes? That's not an answer. There are two options there. Saying 'Yes' chooses neither of them.

Sigh. Saderiji, how on earth did you derive that from what I said?

As a matter of fact, I don't think anyone's funeral should be the object of a protest, unless it's a protest directed at someone other than the deceased or their family ( perhaps a protest against allowing someone who may have caused the death of the deceased would be a good example here ), and as long as said protest is peaceful and respectful of the deceased and their family.

People need time and space to grieve for loved ones who have died. Violent, or unseemly protest at a funeral denies them that.

But we didn't see you getting so up in arms when they protested the funerals of homosexuals. Only when it happens to soldiers, do you start to move.

I hate to break it to you, but no, you are not more special or worth more because you are a soldier.

Do you respect or honor the dead?
What does that mean? I don't go round kicking corpses. But I'm not going to change my thoughts, speech or actions with regard to someone just because they've died. Dying is not an accomplishment.

Yes? That's not an answer. There are two options there. Saying 'Yes' chooses neither of them.

Unless he ment yes to *gasp* both.

But we didn't see you getting so up in arms when they protested the funerals of homosexuals. Only when it happens to soldiers, do you start to move.

I hate to break it to you, but no, you are not more special or worth more because you are a soldier.
I see him worth a helluva a lot more than you because at least he risked his life for his country.

Do you respect or honor the dead?

Did you before this became about the military? I really do doubt that.

What does that mean? I don't go round kicking corpses. But I'm not going to change my thoughts, speech or actions with regard to someone just because they've died. Dying is not an accomplishment.

Do you respect and/or honor the dead? Yes or no.

But we didn't see you getting so up in arms when they protested the funerals of homosexuals. Only when it happens to soldiers, do you start to move.

I hate to break it to you, but no, you are not more special or worth more because you are a soldier.

I'd also question what would happen if the soldier were a known homosexual. Would the Patriot Guard Riders still protect the funeral then?

Do you respect and/or honor the dead? Yes or no.
I'm asking you to explain what that means. I can't answer a question I don't understand.

Unless he ment yes to *gasp* both.

He can't, because they are two contradictory statements. Either the law covers before and after the funeral, or before, during and after the funeral. You can't answer 'Yes' for that. It has to be one or the other.

I'd also question what would happen if the soldier were a known homosexual. Would the Patriot Guard Riders still protect the funeral then?
Well, I would. Again, if someone has risked death for the sake of my country, I forget all things about them I don't like. I may not agree with his/her ideals, but they allow me to do such by risking their lives.

Did you before this became about the military? I really do doubt that.

Yes I did. I lost my grandmother in 2001, Lost my other grandmother a couple of years later and just recently lost my grandfather.

I believe in respecting the deceased and I do not care if the person was in the military, a politician, or someone who worked to feed his family. I believe in respecting the deceased.

I see him worth a helluva a lot more than you because at least he risked his life for his country.

How fortunate then that your estimate of value is worthless. Oh, and by the by, he didn't risk his life for his country - he was in Vietnam. He wasn't defending the US. He was furthering a beligerent foreign policy. That's what he risked life for - not his country.

Yes I did. I lost my grandmother in 2001, Lost my other grandmother a couple of years later and just recently lost my grandfather.

I believe in respecting the deceased and I do not care if the person was in the military, a politician, or someone who worked to feed his family. I believe in respecting the deceased.

So, where was your outrage when they picketed the funerals of homosexuals? Where were your cries for the curtailing of freedom of speech?

How fortunate then that your estimate of value is worthless. Oh, and by the by, he didn't risk his life for his country - he was in Vietnam. He wasn't defending the US. He was furthering a beligerent foreign policy. That's what he risked life for - not his country.
I disagree, but meh.

Dude, that's Switzerland! We do beer and cars... well, and tanks and U-Boats, for that matter.

Chocolate = Belgium
Beer = Belgium

guns = Belgium :p

How fortunate then that your estimate of value is worthless. Oh, and by the by, he didn't risk his life for his country - he was in Vietnam. He wasn't defending the US. He was furthering a beligerent foreign policy. That's what he risked life for - not his country.
Did he decide to go there? Probably not. But at least he did what he was told, unlike the worthless draft doggers.

Soldiers represent some of the best things about humanity. People that go out and die to protect what they believe in, to protect others, why, that's why I say I honor them more than you.

Name a great accomplishment in your life. If you have risked your life for someone else, I'll give you the honor you deserve.

Sigh. Saderiji, how on earth did you derive that from what I said?

Because it's what you said, smartass.

According to you, there is a world of difference between the rest of us and you and your military friends, in terms of the friendships we are able to form. The justification you used was "serving in a combat zone". Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that soldiers who never experience combat are unable to form the friendships that you and your military friends were able to form during warfare. You implied in post #84 that funerals for the rest of our friends shouldn't necessarily be off-limits to protestors because "there's a vast difference between working at a job with those you hardly know and serving with people of great courage and comittment that you know better than anyone you've ever known before." Since, as it would seem from your posts, you believe that people who are not in combat situations are unable to form the sort of close-knit friendships that deserve protection from protests during funerals, you should logically believe that even soldiers who are not in combat situations, as they are unable to form said relationships, are not entitled to the protection. That would mean that you would find it as acceptable for people to protest at non-combat soldiers' funerals as at any regular civilian's funeral. Namely, you might find it reprehensible, but you certainly wouldn't utter a peep against it.

But, I'm sure you'll bust out a trout smiley or a rolly eye smiley, utter a nonsensical dodge statement, and continue thinking your unlogic is still impervious. I've gotten further debating with the painting on my wall.

Hooray for restricting rights. It's a great day when there's fewer options for freedom.
I think it's fine to restrict options for bullshit. Would you want me to parade down the stree beside you and tell everyone how insane you are and all the sick demented things you do in your spare time? (It'd be outright lies but hey that's Free speech) ((Or at Least I hope they would be lies.))

Socialist, then. The two of you are obviously both unAmerican totalitarians.
You're calling Eutrusca UnAmerican? HAHAHAHA

Not at all. You don't believe in freedom of speech. That's fine - you're entitled to your beliefs. But you don't believe in it.
You seem to think since it's 'Free Speech' you can try and start Flame wars.

So, where was your outrage when they picketed the funerals of homosexuals? Where were your cries for the curtailing of freedom of speech?

First I heard of that but if true then those people are just as disgusting.

I disagree, but meh.
He is jealous, Eut. He has no respect for those who do better deeds than him becaue that means he would have to give him credit.

He is jealous, Eut. He has no respect for those who do better deeds than him becaue that means he would have to give him credit.
IIRC, Fass is a medical student. Seems like his line of work is all about saving people...

I'd also question what would happen if the soldier were a known homosexual. Would the Patriot Guard Riders still protect the funeral then?

If the soldier were a known homosexual, it would be moot, because Uncle Sam doesn't want you for the US Army if you like the same sex.

Did he decide to go there? Probably not. But at least he did what he was told, unlike the worthless draft doggers.

Soldiers represent some of the best things about humanity. People that go out and die to protect what they believe in, to protect others, why, that's why I say I honor them more than you.

Name a great accomplishment in your life. If you have risked your life for someone else, I'll give you the honor you deserve.

Draft Dodgers are worthless? So trying to get away from a pointless, imperialistic conflict that did not threaten the US in anyway makes someone worthless? I hardly see it that way. Makes them rather sensible really.

He is jealous, Eut. He has no respect for those who do better deeds than him becaue that means he would have to give him credit.

Hah! Better deeds. A soldier is no better than a doctor who is no better than, say, a fireman (No offense Fass). They all do what they're paid to do, they all save lives. Doctors and firemen often don't aid in the invasion of a soveriegn country that didn't threaten the US in any way.

Did he decide to go there? Probably not. But at least he did what he was told, unlike the worthless draft doggers.

So blind obedience is an attribute?

IIRC, Fass is a medical student. Seems like his line of work is all about saving people...
Good, now I honor him on par with that Eut.

But I still disagree with him utterly. Soldiers are still, in my opinion, some of the most respectable and honorable people on Earth.

Draft Dodgers are worthless?

They are nothing but cowards as are those who join the military and then get a conscience objector discharge are cowards too.

So trying to get away from a pointless, imperialistic conflict that did not threaten the US in anyway makes someone worthless? I hardly see it that way. Makes them rather sensible really.

Once your nation calls you to serve, YOU SERVE!

He is jealous, Eut. He has no respect for those who do better deeds than him becaue that means he would have to give him credit.

What better deeds was Eutrusca committing in Vietnam? How was he defending his country in Vietnam?

So blind obedience is an attribute?
Is it blind obedience to follow the law? You can disagree with it, but that doesn't mean you should break the law to make your point.

They are nothing but cowards as are those who join the military and then get a conscience objector discharge are cowards too.



Once your nation calls you to serve, YOU SERVE!
Finally, a nationalist. Brother, you're not alone.

They are nothing but cowards as are those who join the military and then get a conscience objector discharge are cowards too.

Once your nation calls you to serve, YOU SERVE!
"Nations" don't call. Governments do. And governments can be wrong. You really have that much faith in the opposition party?

Did he decide to go there? Probably not. But at least he did what he was told, unlike the worthless draft doggers.

Yes, being a drone in a war of aggression against people who posed no threat to the US is better than refusing to part of that.

Soldiers represent some of the best things about humanity. People that go out and die to protect what they believe in, to protect others, why, that's why I say I honor them more than you.

Again, he was in Vietnam. The US soldiers who were there, and who died there, didn't die for what they believed in, or were protecting anyone for that matter. Their lives were wasted.

Name a great accomplishment in your life. If you have risked your life for someone else, I'll give you the honor you deserve.

I'll decline any sort of "honour" that comes from your ilk, thank you.

They are nothing but cowards as are those who join the military and then get a conscience objector discharge are cowards too.



Once your nation calls you to serve, YOU SERVE!

"Service guarantees Citizenship!"

Seriously, look at what you're saying for a moment. If a person feels they have no desire to fight in an imperialistic conflict that may get them killed for no purpose, to not join up makes sense. They are not cowards. I would see them as brave for standing up for what they believe in, despite pressure and even jail time. Conscientious Objectors are not cowards, either. Once again, they stand up for what they believe in and do not mindlessly follow the war machine.

Is it blind obedience to follow the law? You can disagree with it, but that doesn't mean you should break the law to make your point.

If the law is unjust and you don't agree with it, but you follow it anyway, that is blind obedience.

Seems that breaking laws that we do not agree with is what the United States was founded on.

What better deeds was Eutrusca committing in Vietnam? How was he defending his country in Vietnam?
He had no choice, but the very fact that he took responsibility and went over there is enough to make me salute him.

Your type are the people who spit on the troops and called them "baby-killers" when they came back home. They expected to be welcomed with gratitude and awe, and instead, you treated them worse than dirt.

"Nations" don't call. Governments do. And governments can be wrong. You really have that much faith in the opposition party?

When you are called to serve in the military, you go! Period. That was the law at the time. By draft dodging, these people broke the law. These idiots shouldn't have gotten a reprieve. They should've been tossed in jail.

I hate lawbreakers.

As to the opposition party, they actually are not trusted on National Security for some reason. I do not know why.

Once your nation calls you to serve, YOU SERVE!

Once your nation calls you to kill Jews, YOU KILL JEWS!

Yay for Godwin.

First I heard of that but if true then those people are just as disgusting.

Yeah, it's not like we've had tonnes of threads on what Phelps did here, or that it made national news your country.

Forgive me for not believing in your ignorance this time.

He had no choice, but the very fact that he took responsibility and went over there is enough to make me salute him.

Your type are the people who spit on the troops and called them "baby-killers" when they came back home. They expected to be welcomed with gratitude and awe, and instead, you treated them worse than dirt.

Hey, time to bring out the ad hominem attacks, everyone! Anyone who disagrees with soldiers being faultless heroes are scum who spit on them. Hey, I didn't know that blanket statement was true!

He had no choice, but the very fact that he took responsibility and went over there is enough to make me salute him.

Your type are the people who spit on the troops and called them "baby-killers" when they came back home. They expected to be welcomed with gratitude and awe, and instead, you treated them worse than dirt.
With what, his Way-Back Machine?

He had no choice, but the very fact that he took responsibility and went over there is enough to make me salute him.

Your type are the people who spit on the troops and called them "baby-killers" when they came back home. They expected to be welcomed with gratitude and awe, and instead, you treated them worse than dirt.
Hold on. I thought military service was about honour and duty, not about expecting "gratitude and awe"?

Once your nation calls you to kill Jews, YOU KILL JEWS!

Yay for Godwin.

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH!

He had no choice, but the very fact that he took responsibility and went over there is enough to make me salute him.

Your type are the people who spit on the troops and called them "baby-killers" when they came back home. They expected to be welcomed with gratitude and awe, and instead, you treated them worse than dirt.

He had a choice. He could have said "I don't agree with this war. I won't serve."

No, my type are the people who don't instantly grovel before soldiers just because they've gone to war.

With what, his Way-Back Machine?

I was apparently spitting on soldiers 10 years before I was conceived.

I disagree, but meh.

I do understand your need for disagreeing. After all, you need a way to be able to live with yourself. All soldiers do. All people do.

Soldiers represent some of the best things about humanity. People that go out and die to protect what they believe in, to protect others, why, that's why I say I honor them more than you.

Soldiers represent some of the worst things about humanity. People that go out and kill for their own or some other persons pleasure. People who think there is glory in mowing down a group of men, just because somebody else told you to. People who will follow orders, without questioning them, regardless of the consequences.

If the law is unjust and you don't agree with it, but you follow it anyway, that is blind obedience.

Seems that breaking laws that we do not agree with is what the United States was founded on.
You make a valid point. However, at the time, the British government was evil. During Vietnam, the American government wasn't evil; foolish, without a doubt; misguided, yes; did it by its own crapola? Of course.

But it was not evil. The government didn't order any of the atrocities that happened there, that was the fault of individuals.

You should not mistake stupidity for evil.

He had a choice. He could have said "I don't agree with this war. I won't serve."

No, my type are the people who don't instantly grovel before soldiers just because they've gone to war.

Excellent point. I'll admit to being one of these brainless nationalist types, until I realised that most soldiers are often no more brave or worthy of respect than firemen, or doctors, or the ordinary citizen who saves a baby from a burning building. They did what they were either paid to do, or told to do. They also could have said 'No, I don't want to go' and gone to jail for a few years.

You make a valid point. However, at the time, the British government was evil. During Vietnam, the American government wasn't evil; foolish, without a doubt; misguided, yes; did it by its own crapola? Of course.

But it was not evil. The government didn't order any of the atrocities that happened there, that was the fault of individuals.

You should not mistake stupidity for evil.
No, no. There was none of this "evil" earlier. It was "when your nation calls, you serve!" You don't get to pick and choose based on moral constructs.

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH!
In that case, like I said before, the government was evil. It would have been wrong to follow.

But in the case of Vietnam, the government wasn't evil, just foolish.

You make a valid point. However, at the time, the British government was evil. During Vietnam, the American government wasn't evil; foolish, without a doubt; misguided, yes; did it by its own crapola? Of course.

But it was not evil. The government didn't order any of the atrocities that happened there, that was the fault of individuals.

You should not mistake stupidity for evil.

Wait a minute. In which period was the British government evil? I can't wait to hear this one.

He had no choice, but the very fact that he took responsibility and went over there is enough to make me salute him.

Your type are the people who spit on the troops and called them "baby-killers" when they came back home. They expected to be welcomed with gratitude and awe, and instead, you treated them worse than dirt.

You do know that some soldiers are baby kilers and worse than dirt? Try pulling your head out of their collective asses and looking at the people for who they are and not the uniform they wear.

Soldiers represent some of the worst things about humanity. People that go out and kill for their own or some other persons pleasure. People who think there is glory in mowing down a group of men, just because somebody else told you to. People who will follow orders, without questioning them, regardless of the consequences.
If it wasn't for soldiers, the world would be in utter chaos.

"Service guarantees Citizenship!"

Seriously, look at what you're saying for a moment. If a person feels they have no desire to fight in an imperialistic conflict that may get them killed for no purpose, to not join up makes sense. They are not cowards. I would see them as brave for standing up for what they believe in, despite pressure and even jail time. Conscientious Objectors are not cowards, either. Once again, they stand up for what they believe in and do not mindlessly follow the war machine.

The law at the time stated that once your drafted, you go and you serve. What makes you think that they actually might go to vietnam. The may not have gone to Vietnam. However, they choose, choose mind you, to break the law and they should've been punished for it. To be perfectly honest, there shouldn't be any deferments unless you were going to a military academy.

In addition, my father got a draft notice. However, he wasn't drafted because at the time, he was going to be going to the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs. This was back in the late 1960s. However, my father choose to serve in the military as an officer. Since his graduation, he has been to many hotspots around the world including getting shot at in Bosnia and Iraq.

As for Consciencous Objectors, they are cowards. They signed up to serve their country and when their unit gets called up, they leave it. Yes that's being a coward. I can understand being afraid. He who isn't scared is either dead or stupid. They signed up to do a job and by leaving, they forced someone else to do their job for them. I have no sympathy for these people.

I've gotten further debating with the painting on my wall.
Then I suggest you go do so.

You make a valid point. However, at the time, the British government was evil. During Vietnam, the American government wasn't evil; foolish, without a doubt; misguided, yes; did it by its own crapola? Of course.

But it was not evil. The government didn't order any of the atrocities that happened there, that was the fault of individuals.

You should not mistake stupidity for evil.

How was the British government evil? And why is it okay to blindly obey stupidity but not evil? I would think I'd want to question both.

If it wasn't for soldiers, the world would be in utter chaos.

Amusingly enough, soldiers make the world utter chaos.

Then I suggest you go do so.

See, I'd rather debate on here. Just not with you. Because you don't debate. You rant.

Once your nation calls you to kill Jews, YOU KILL JEWS!

There is such a thing as disobeying an illegal order and that order would've been illegal. And for your information, the German Army really didn't par take in it. It was mostly, hence the word mostly, the SS.

Hah! Better deeds. A soldier is no better than a doctor who is no better than, say, a fireman (No offense Fass). They all do what they're paid to do, they all save lives. Doctors and firemen often don't aid in the invasion of a soveriegn country that didn't threaten the US in any way.

Nobody is worth more than anyone.

The law at the time stated that once your drafted, you go and you serve. What makes you think that they actually might go to vietnam. The may not have gone to Vietnam. However, they choose, choose mind you, to break the law and they should've been punished for it. To be perfectly honest, there shouldn't be any deferments unless you were going to a military academy.

In addition, my father got a draft notice. However, he wasn't drafted because at the time, he was going to be going to the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs. This was back in the late 1960s. However, my father choose to serve in the military as an officer. Since his graduation, he has been to many hotspots around the world including getting shot at in Bosnia and Iraq.

As for Consciencous Objectors, they are cowards. They signed up to serve their country and when their unit gets called up, they leave it. Yes that's being a coward. I can understand being afraid. He who isn't scared is either dead or stupid. They signed up to do a job and by leaving, they forced someone else to do their job for them. I have no sympathy for these people.

Well, that's just your rather nationalistic opinion of things. The Objectors are not cowards - they merely stood up for what they believed in after being drafted. The same for the Draft Dodgers, only they didn't even go to begin with. Perhaps it's better you have no sympathy for them; your sympathy seems reserved for a very small group of people.

You do know that some soldiers are baby kilers and worse than dirt? Try pulling your head out of their collective asses and looking at the people for who they are and not the uniform they wear.
Yeah, but are the majority? Do they all need to be branded evil just because they did what a foolish government told them to do?

If the government was evil, it would be prudent to call the soldiers evil too.

I don't see how you people can see your very own military as something that should be hated. I understand doctors, policemen, and firemen, do things of the like, thus I treat them with the same amount of respect and honor as soldiers.

There is such a thing as disobeying an illegal order and that order would've been illegal. And for your information, the German Army really didn't par take in it. It was mostly, hence the word mostly, the SS.
It was neither - biggest killers of all were the Einsatzgruppe.

The order to kill Jews was not illegal. It did not violate German law.

Nobody is worth more than anyone.

Indeed so.

He is jealous, Eut. He has no respect for those who do better deeds than him becaue that means he would have to give him credit.
Well, I like Fass and consider him an e-friend. He and I disagree quite regularly, but that's because we have different world-views. On some issues, our views are congruent, such as full rights for gays. On others, we're poles apart, but I still admire his devotion to his chosen profession ( physician ) and his tenatious defense of what he believes.

Amusingly enough, soldiers make the world utter chaos.
So if there were no soldiers, you think the world would be any better?

Well, that's just your rather nationalistic opinion of things. The Objectors are not cowards - they merely stood up for what they believed in after being drafted. The same for the Draft Dodgers, only they didn't even go to begin with. Perhaps it's better you have no sympathy for them; your sympathy seems reserved for a very small group of people.

My sympathy is reserved for those who actually do their civic duty and Go do their jobs as proscribed in their oaths as officers and enlisted personel in the military. My sympathy is reserved for firefighters and policemen and medical personel as well as those that carry the mail.

There is such a thing as disobeying an illegal order and that order would've been illegal. And for your information, the German Army really didn't par take in it. It was mostly, hence the word mostly, the SS.

None of the orders given to the Wehrmacht or SS were illegal under German law, and to disobey would have broken the oath they had sworn to Hitler when he ascended as Chancellor in 1933, the soldiers oath. Thus why many high-ranking General's chose to obey him even to the end of the war.

Well, I like Fass and consider him an e-friend. He and I disagree quite regularly, but that's because we have different world-views. On some issues, our views are congruent, such as full rights for gays. On others, we're poles apart, but I still admire his devotion to his chosen profession ( physician ) and his tenatious defense of what he believes.
I know, I get way too enthusiastic about topics, I need to learn to control that.

Did he decide to go there? Probably not. But at least he did what he was told, unlike the worthless draft doggers.


Yes, how dare anyone not wish to be forced into servitude! Shame on them!

PS - It's 'dodgers.'

I don't see how you people can see your very own military as something that should be hated. I understand doctors, policemen, and firemen, do things of the like, thus I treat them with the same amount of respect and honor as soldiers.

Doctors and firemen save people more often.

Policemen I am rather ambivalent about.

As far as soldiers go, majority of them are trained to kill.

It was neither - biggest killers of all were the Einsatzgruppe.

The order to kill Jews was not illegal. It did not violate German law.

Today it would be however you are right about the Einsatzgruppe. But it wasn't the German Army.

There's a vast difference between working at a job with those you hardly know and serving with people of great courage and comittment that you know better than anyone you've ever known before.


Amen brother. Unfortunately, so many just can't understand the camaraderie of military life. It is totally different from anything civilians, with the exception or police or firemen, experience.

So if there were no soldiers, you think the world would be any better?

Actually... Yes.

My sympathy is reserved for those who actually do their civic duty and Go do their jobs as proscribed in their oaths as officers and enlisted personel in the military. My sympathy is reserved for firefighters and policemen and medical personel as well as those that carry the mail.

Ah yes. Damn those people who might have an independent thought and not want to serve in the military when ordered, especially in an imperialistic conflict where their country wasn't threatened, directly or indirectly.

There is such a thing as disobeying an illegal order and that order would've been illegal. And for your information, the German Army really didn't par take in it. It was mostly, hence the word mostly, the SS.

"And for your information"? You've got some nerve to lecture me about any sort of knowledge, kid.

You're retreating. If an order is legal, you must obey it. If the government makes the orders legal, they're legal. If the government legalizes the killing of all French people in the world, and drafts you to go invade Bordeaux and kill its inhabitants, you must do it. Because when the government tells you to do something, you do it.

Today it would be however you are right about the Einsatzgruppe. But it wasn't the German Army.
But it wasn't an illegal order then. Disobeying it would have been illegal.

None of the orders given to the Wehrmacht or SS were illegal under German law, and to disobey would have broken the oath they had sworn to Hitler when he ascended as Chancellor in 1933, the soldiers oath. Thus why many high-ranking General's chose to obey him even to the end of the war.

As I pointed out, it wasn't the German Army that was killing Jews.

But it wasn't an illegal order then. Disobeying it would have been illegal.

I already said your right.

Now i'm off to lunch. I'm hungry.

Doctors and firemen save people more often.

Policemen I am rather ambivalent about.

As far as soldiers go, majority of them are trained to kill.

So what would happen if we got rid of the military in this counrty

As I pointed out, it wasn't the German Army that was killing Jews.

So what would you have thought of those Germans who refused to serve to defend a vicious and genocidal totalitarian regime?

Yes, being a drone in a war of aggression against people who posed no threat to the US is better than refusing to part of that.

Again, he was in Vietnam. The US soldiers who were there, and who died there, didn't die for what they believed in, or were protecting anyone for that matter. Their lives were wasted.
I'm a "drone?" :eek:

Obviously, this is one of those areas where there is just a smidgeon of disagreement between us. ;)

"And for your information"? You've got some nerve to lecture me about any sort of knowledge, kid.

You're retreating. If an order is legal, you must obey it. If the government makes the orders legal, they're legal. If the government legalizes the killing of all French people in the world, and drafts you to go invade Bordeaux and kill its inhabitants, you must do it. Because when the government tells you to do something, you do it.

Are we talking about an order like that today or back before Genocide was recognized as a warcrime?

As I pointed out, it wasn't the German Army that was killing Jews.

No, they were just killing peasants in Eastern Europe, so they could spread Nazism. Doesn't that make them, oh, so much better?

"And for your information"? You've got some nerve to lecture me about any sort of knowledge, kid.

You're retreating. If an order is legal, you must obey it. If the government makes the orders legal, they're legal. If the government legalizes the killing of all French people in the world, and drafts you to go invade Bordeaux and kill its inhabitants, you must do it. Because when the government tells you to do something, you do it.

Damn straight. Anything else, such as independent thinking, is treacherous and you are a filthy traitor.

So what would happen if we got rid of the military in this counrty

Which country?

Are we talking about an order like that today or back before Genocide was recognized as a warcrime?

If your government tells you to do something that you disagree with, such as genocide, would you or would you not do it?

He had no choice, but the very fact that he took responsibility and went over there is enough to make me salute him.
I hate to spoil this "conversation," but I volunteered to join, volunteered to become an officer, volunteered to go to Vietnam, and volunteered to stay ... repeatedly, until they finally ordered me to go home.

Are we talking about an order like that today or back before Genocide was recognized as a warcrime?

'Recognised'? It doesn't matter if it was officially recognised as a warcrime. It's still a warcrime whether or not there's a nice legal meaning in a rulebook somewhere. Piling people into gas chambers and shooting them en masse is still a crime, recognised or not.

I got to know my colleagues pretty well, thanks. But I admit, I thought you were talking about all military funerals - now it just seems to be those of the people who were in your platoon/regiment/company.

You may have come to know your colleagues pretty well, but never as well as in the military. In the military you live with, sleep in the same barracks with, eat with, socialize with, and in some cases even risk your life for those you work with. I'm sure he was talking about all military funerals.

Which country?

Any

Here is my opinion, hate it or love it, here it is:

Soldiers are no better or worse than anyone else, that is true. But they deserve to be commended for protecting the right for you and me to say what we want, without getting thrown into a jail cell.

Are some soldiers scumbags? Yes. As are some doctors, some lawyers, some scientists, all politicians, some priests, some businessmen, some factory workers, etc.

Are the majority of soldiers good people? Yes. As are most doctors, most lawyers, most scientists, most priests, most businessmen, and most factory workers.

But the thing here is: You don't have to support what an individual does in the military, but it would be best to support the military, unless all of them are doing something you consider to be evil and wrong.

That brings up another point: Is the Iraq War evil and wrong? No.
Was it a mistake? Maybe. Was the timing correct? No. Are the troops evil? No.

The military is a group to be respected, not hated, like all groups (except terrorist groups)

You may have come to know your colleagues pretty well, but never as well as in the military. In the military you live with, sleep in the same barracks with, eat with, socialize with, and in some cases even risk your life for those you work with. I'm sure he was talking about all military funerals.
So, as I said, violent gang members should be granted similar immunities?

I hate to spoil this "conversation," but I volunteered to join, volunteered to become an officer, volunteered to go to Vietnam, and volunteered to stay ... repeatedly, until they finally ordered me to go home.
Well, God bless you either way.

I'm a "drone?" :eek:

When it comes to military issues, you do have a certain dronish quality. You've admitted so yourself.

Obviously, this is one of those areas where there is just a smidgeon of disagreement between us. ;)

When have I been known for blowing smoke up your arse because you're such a "hero," Eut? :p

Amen brother. Unfortunately, so many just can't understand the camaraderie of military life. It is totally different from anything civilians, with the exception or police or firemen, experience.

The camaradarie formed in military life is obviously different from that formed in other walks of life. What does that have to do with anything? Military funerals shouldn't be allowed to be protested because solidiers form a fairly unique camradarie? That's a weak reason at best.

You may have come to know your colleagues pretty well, but never as well as in the military. In the military you live with, sleep in the same barracks with, eat with, socialize with, and in some cases even risk your life for those you work with. I'm sure he was talking about all military funerals.

Offshore oil drillers do all that too. As do deep sea fishermen. And prisoners.

Soldiers are no better or worse than anyone else, that is true. But they deserve to be commended for protecting the right for you and me to say what we want, without getting thrown into a jail cell.
Yep, so protesting at funerals should be legal. End of story.

Soldiers are no better or worse than anyone else, that is true. But they deserve to be commended for protecting the right for you and me to say what we want, without getting thrown into a jail cell.

Then protesting at military funerals should be allowed, because they died to protect that right.

Soldiers represent some of the worst things about humanity. People that go out and kill for their own or some other persons pleasure. People who think there is glory in mowing down a group of men, just because somebody else told you to. People who will follow orders, without questioning them, regardless of the consequences.
I can't count the times on here when I have pointed this out to the uninformed, but ...

I can't speak for the military personnel of other nations, but in America, soliders can be court martialled for OBEYING an unlawful order. Just thought it needed saying ... again and again and again.

Any

Iceland doesn't have any, they're doing great.

The only reason to have a military is because someone else has one.

The only military I can see the western world needing at this moment is: 1) A purely defensive military and 2) A military capable of performing actual peacekeeping missions.

Anything else is a bit of a waste.

Maybe later, we won't even have a need for a defensive military, if everyone else also switches over to defensive militaries. But with the people advocating that soldiers are good people, that isn't going to happen.

Yep, so protesting at funerals should be legal. End of story.
It should be legal, but is it respectful? No. It should also be legal to peacefully escort a funeral service for a soldier.

Offshore oil drillers do all that too. As do deep sea fishermen. And prisoners.

Oil, and fish, and gangbanging. God bless those brave men!

It should be legal, but is it respectful? No. It should also be legal to peacefully escort a funeral service for a soldier.

Why not for a funeral service for a fireman or a doctor then?

Iceland doesn't have any, they're doing great.

The only reason to have a military is because someone else has one.

The only military I can see the western world needing at this moment is: 1) A purely defensive military and 2) A military capable of performing actual peacekeeping missions.

Anything else is a bit of a waste.

Maybe later, we won't even have a need for a defensive military, if everyone else also switches over to defensive militaries. But with the people advocating that soldiers are good people, that isn't going to happen.
What the problem with you is is that you think that only nations attack other nations.

So please explain what 9/11 was then.

It should be legal, but is it respectful? No. It should also be legal to peacefully escort a funeral service for a soldier.
Sure it's a shitty thing to do, but they have every right to.

I can't count the times on here when I have pointed this out to the uninformed, but ...

I can't speak for the military personnel of other nations, but in America, soliders can be court martialled for OBEYING an unlawful order. Just thought it needed saying ... again and again and again.

The problem I am addressing is that it's a generalization to say soldiers are good people, just like it is to say they are bad people.

A soldier, as a person, is no better or worse than anyone else.

A soldier, as a profession, is far from the best available. They may be better than thugs and criminals, but the majority of them do not perform services that benefit anyone.

Why not for a funeral service for a fireman or a doctor then?
That's fine by me. Anyone who saves lives deserves much respect at a funeral.

Iceland doesn't have any, they're doing great.
This is because no one wants iceland. Many other countries would be invaded in seconds if they had no military.

You do know that some soldiers are baby kilers and worse than dirt? Try pulling your head out of their collective asses and looking at the people for who they are and not the uniform they wear.
Some gays are rapists. Your pont?

What the problem with you is is that you think that only nations attack other nations.

So please explain what 9/11 was then.

But what is having an army going to help?

9/11 was a terrorist attack performed by a group with violent means (i.e. soldiers basically). It killed about 4000 people, most of them from the US, Canada and western Europe.

It hasn't happened for five years.

In contrast, the US military has killed 30k civilians+ in Iraq over the past two-three years.

The problem I am addressing is that it's a generalization to say soldiers are good people, just like it is to say they are bad people.

A soldier, as a person, is no better or worse than anyone else.

A soldier, as a profession, is far from the best available. They may be better than thugs and criminals, but the majority of them do not perform services that benefit anyone.
I thought soldiers are the reason why you even have a nation to live in where you can say what you are saying.

I can't count the times on here when I have pointed this out to the uninformed, but ...

I can't speak for the military personnel of other nations, but in America, soliders can be court martialled for OBEYING an unlawful order. Just thought it needed saying ... again and again and again.

But you do understand that you seeing your soldiers as a force of "good" and theirs a force of "evil" is quite arbitrary? And we haven't even gone into ICC jurisdiction territory, yet.

I thought soldiers are the reason why you even have a nation to live in where you can say what you are saying.

Nope, a benevolent monarch back in the 1800s is the reason why Denmark is what it is today.

I thought soldiers are the reason why you even have a nation to live in where you can say what you are saying.
Oh and what about all those military juntas that are the reason there is no freedom of speech?

I know, I get way too enthusiastic about topics, I need to learn to control that.
I'm working on that as well. Heh! :D

The camaradarie formed in military life is obviously different from that formed in other walks of life. What does that have to do with anything? Military funerals shouldn't be allowed to be protested because solidiers form a fairly unique camradarie? That's a weak reason at best.

A person claimed they knew their co-workers as well as the military knows their co-workers, which is not true.

As far as funerals go, no person deserves to have any protest at thier funeral. You might not like the person or what the person did, but protesting in front of a grieving family is just plain wrong.

But what is having an army going to help?

9/11 was a terrorist attack performed by a group with violent means (i.e. soldiers basically). It killed about 4000 people, most of them from the US, Canada and western Europe.

It hasn't happened for five years.

In contrast, the US military has killed 30k civilians+ in Iraq over the past two-three years.
Because we attacked the bastards is why they stopped.

The death of 30,000 civilians in Iraq is horrible yes. But the difference between the U.S. military and the terrorists is that the terrorists intended to harm innocent lives. The military does not. Does that mean no soldiers intentionally kill civilians? No. But it does mean that a vast majority of the U.S. military had no wish to kill innocent civilians.

As far as soldiers go, majority of them are trained to kill.
Reeeealy?? OMG! Oh noes! :rolleyes:

Because we attacked the bastards is why they stopped.

The death of 30,000 civilians in Iraq is horrible yes. But the difference between the U.S. military and the terrorists is that the terrorists intended to harm innocent lives. The military does not. Does that mean no soldiers intentionally kill civilians? No. But it does mean that a vast majority of the U.S. military had no wish to kill innocent civilians.

Bali, Madrid, London...they haven't stopped. Merely shifted targets.

I thought soldiers are the reason why you even have a nation to live in where you can say what you are saying.

You do understand the other side has soldiers, too. Are they honourable for wanting to take those rights away?

Because we attacked the bastards is why they stopped.

The death of 30,000 civilians in Iraq is horrible yes. But the difference between the U.S. military and the terrorists is that the terrorists intended to harm innocent lives. The military does not. Does that mean no soldiers intentionally kill civilians? No. But it does mean that a vast majority of the U.S. military had no wish to kill innocent civilians.

Point to me where you attacked them.

Police forces in Northern Ireland and Spain have been doing a better job.

A person claimed they knew their co-workers as well as the military knows their co-workers, which is not true.

As far as funerals go, no person deserves to have any protest at thier funeral. You might not like the person or what the person did, but protesting in front of a grieving family is just plain wrong.
It's a shitty thing to do, but they are well within their rights.

Oh and what about all those military juntas that are the reason there is no freedom of speech?
What are you talking about? What you're saying right now is the use of your freedom of speech.

Listen all you people who support THIS kind of Free speech, can I stand outside your house with a Bullhorn and shout nasty things about you and your family? Because it's well within my right to free speech according to you.

Amen brother. Unfortunately, so many just can't understand the camaraderie of military life. It is totally different from anything civilians, with the exception or police or firemen, experience.
Thank you. It's comforting to know there's at least one other person on here who understands that about which I speak. :)

Reeeealy?? OMG! Oh noes! :rolleyes:

:p I do hope you realize this is why I oppose soldiers :p if they were trained to actually defend people, my opinion might be very different.

Hence why I have nothing against medics who do not carry guns or non-combat personnel.

Listen all you people who support THIS kind of Free speech, can I stand outside your house with a Bullhorn and shout nasty things about you and your family? Because it's well within my right to free speech according to you.

You're welcome to. You might have to deal with a few hundred pissed off students, but yep. Anything else is restriction of freedom of speech.

The death of 30,000 civilians in Iraq is horrible yes. But the difference between the U.S. military and the terrorists is that the terrorists intended to harm innocent lives. The military does not. Does that mean no soldiers intentionally kill civilians? No. But it does mean that a vast majority of the U.S. military had no wish to kill innocent civilians.

The latter is debatable, as it is most certainly not an internationally held truth.

Bali, Madrid, London...they haven't stopped. Merely shifted targets.
True as that may be, they haven't attack the US because they know we will bomb the hell out of them if they attack us again. Does that mean the other places they attack are weak? No. But it does mean that they see us as a target that can get back much more efficently.

What are you talking about? What you're saying right now is the use of your freedom of speech.

There are some places where the military decided to make a coup.

Spain.
Greece.
South American states.
African states.
Japan almost had a coup back in WWII

the list could go on, but I won't bother.

Eutrusca isn't there a rules of Engagement list? If there is could you post it if you have a copy on your computer?

Thank you. It's comforting to know there's at least one other person on here who understands that about which I speak. :)
Some of my best friends were in the military if you trust some one with your life you are friends for life

True as that may be, they haven't attack the US because they know we will bomb the hell out of them if they attack us again. Does that mean the other places they attack are weak? No. But it does mean that they see us as a target that can get back much more efficently.

How do you know they haven't tried to attack again and just been stopped? You don't. They'll keep trying, and they'll hit you again eventually. Carpet-bombing won't stop them - raw power never will.

Point to me where you attacked them.

Police forces in Northern Ireland and Spain have been doing a better job.
We began in Afghanistan. Iraq was stupid, yes, but the world is still better with Saddam gone. Iran will probably be next with how everythings going.

Soldiers = people

People = no better or worse.

I have to go.

A soldier, as a profession, is far from the best available. They may be better than thugs and criminals, but the majority of them do not perform services that benefit anyone.

Well, I thought the service they performed in WW I and WW II benefited a hell of a lot of people. Just as the services they perform today beneit people, like those in south Louisiana, Missippi, and Alabama. :eek: