They will never be fogotten

[scaredyclassic]

Can real heroism exist in a completely unnecessary war?

Can the bad side in a war have heroes?

How have losing countries in wars treated returning soldiers? Are the also seen as heroes?

Do other countries believe that their military is “defending their freedomes” or is the question more local, more about territorial integrity?

Is obl a hero or a “hero”?

[Arraya]

[quote=walterwhite]
Is obl a hero or a “hero”?[/quote]

Life is full of paradoxes. It’s fascinating that the military used the code name “Geronimo” for the raid that killed Osama bin Laden

If the original ‘Geronimo’ had been trained as a militant and financed by the US government, was sent to organize unknown operations against various other groups, and then decided to change sides and fight against his original recruiters, would he be a traitor, a ‘terrorist’ or a freedom fighter? Pretty much depends on your point of view, doesn’t it?

[scaredyclassic]

I think we can all see native America warriors as heroes even when killing Americans; i mean, we are as likely to root for indians as cowboys in that type of film. why?

it was a reasonable resistance to unreasonable power. you can legitimately root for them without feeling a pererted sense of justice.

is it just the passage of time?

[Rhett]

It’s become painfully obvious to me that this thread will never be forgotten.

[Anonymous]

[quote]You either fail to pick the right word(s), or you do pick the right word(s) and then back water by attempting to say you meant something else.[/quote]

This is becoming bizarre.

I “back watered” in this thread?

After your initial challenge for me to explain the Pearl Harbor “engagement” thing, I see at least three posts where you reference my use of the word “engaged,” specifically using my name, but using slightly different interpretations each time.

All the while, I never did provide you with a response to your question – i.e. I didn’t say anything at all!

And yet you call that “back watering” and “[me] saying I meant something else?”

You were having a conversation with someone else, or perhaps yourself, I’m not sure.

But anyway…

[quote]Hussein not only had a well-developed chem- and bio-weapons capability, he had used it before and inflicted tens of thousands of casualties in so doing.[/quote]

And the The Smiths were on top of the pop charts – in the 1980s.

We’re talking about 2003 here. And Hussein had squat then.

Plus, the only WMDs that matter are nuclear – because bio and chemical weapons really aren’t any more effective than advanced conventional weapons at causing “mass destruction.” Hussein could have produced a similar outcome at Halabja with cluster bombs.

Hussein was never even close to producing nukes – and we knew it.

Your arguments about intel always being sketchy are absurd: “Hey, the intel picture isn’t clear – maybe he has this, stuff maybe he doesn’t – so let’s go ahead and launch the largest military operation since WWII just to be sure…”

This is not an “I told you so” – I supported the Iraq war also because I believed what I was told. Especially because Powell was one of the people telling me.

It is a “wake up and smell the coffee.” Lots of bad guys in the world are working to get their hands on nasty weapons – some of them have even succeeded in the past decade. But in 2003, Hussein didn’t have them, and the right people had every reason to know he didn’t have them.

But we used it as justification for war nonetheless.

Some people are still trying to justify it.

[scaredyclassic]

1983 mustve been different if the smiths ruled the airwaves.

Loyalty matters. We instinctually dislike disloyal people. My country right or wrong is a sentiment I can embrace.

But it still seems reasonable to question actions.

Is it just actions that are heroic? Can a bad man be a hero? Or is all heroism based on working for the right side?

Imagine a skyscraper in Dubai and owned operated and entirely staffed by terrorist supporters. Say we struck it with a missile and the result were similar to the plane strike on 9-11. If similar Arab rescue personnel were risking or giving their lives to save the terrorist bureaucrats, would their actions be heroic? Would we admire them in the same way?

It’s difficult to picture the tv special. Heroism disconnected from our political reality is unlikely to move us in the same way.

Is it reallythe pure abstract actions of the personnel workers that move us or are they meaningless without context?

[KSMountain]

For me, it is the altruistic actions of individuals that are the most touching.

[scaredyclassic]

Does meaningful altruism exist without social context?

If some terrorist had donated his kidney to save obl’s life it would altruistic but you probably wouldn’t be touched.

Altruism doesn’t move you in a vacuum.

[all]

[quote=walterwhite]
How have losing countries in wars treated returning soldiers? Are the also seen as heroes?
[/quote]

Some get to be elected representatives on their way to jail (see Duke Cunningham)

[briansd1]

[quote=Jacarandoso]We don’t randomly blow up messed up places.
[/quote]

A bully doesn’t randomly beat-up people or steal lunch money at ramdom.

I beleive, in a historical context, our predicament in Iran/Iraq is of our own making.

We overthrew a democratically elected leader (Mossadegh) who implemented modern reforms and provided continuity for Iran.

Countries can adapt and evolve if left to their own devices. The external shocks are what bring about tyrants and dictators.

So in Iran, we overthrew a progressive leader for the benefit of big oil. That led to the Iranian revolution, the Iran/Iraq war (which we supported), and the current situation now.

Iraq will likely align with Iran if we leave.

Was it worth all the blood and treasure and all the resources that our government spent to affect the events?

Over decades, lives were upended, millions of people died.

[scaredyclassic]

Ultimately all Internet discussions come down to Nazis but maybe it’s relevant here? Did ordinary Germans thank their soldiers for their service, call them heroes, tell stories about acts of selfless bravery? It’s my understanding that post war Germans were deeply ashamed of the war, didn’t make movies about it or have heroes glorified, etc.

Is it the losing badly that matters, or the context (jeez the whole country went nuts, let’s try to move on).

A soldier is a soldier after all, and the bravery and loyalty and willingness to sacrifice all is a constant. What is the appropriate response to a military that is fighting a truly shameful war. Should ordinary Germans have been grateful for the service of returning warriors?

[Anonymous]

You don’t even have to go the Nazi extreme to ask the question.

How many Iraqi rescue personnel (fire/police/etc.) risked their lives to save others during the US air raids?

There were lots of “infrastructure” targets, such as power-plants, bridges, etc. where civilians were present. The number of civilian casualties, even by conservative estimates, is staggering:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

With that many people being killed or wounded as a result of violence, there were sure to be plenty of heroes in the mix as well.

Of course we don’t acknowledge the heroism of the enemy. But then I thought the Iraqi people weren’t supposed to be the enemy…

[briansd1]

If the people who died in the World Trade towers were heroes for just being there, does that mean the human collateral damage of the bombings in Iraq are heroes as well?

[all]

I lived in Germany for few years and I have relatives who are second generation there. I did not get many chances to discuss the topic with the natives (ausländers don’t get to interact with locals the same way furriners do here) and I was mostly passive observer, but my understanding is that public expression of patriotism was discouraged. E.g. the absence of the national flag in display matches the omnipresence of the flag in the U.S.
Germans see the 2006 World Cup as a turning point where they re-asserted their right to display their flag and generally feel proud to be German in public. They consider Waffen-SS to be bad guys and the rest of Wehrmacht to be the true German soldiers (tough, loyal to the country and the people, well-trained, honest, just, restrained in victory, etc. – pretty much the same attributes every other nation applies to its military force).

The zeal with which the German court persecuted John Demjanjuk made me a bit sick. Millions of German soldiers survived the war and continued to live their lives, including hundreds of thousands SS troops and thousands of those who served in concentration camps, but they pick a 22 year old prisoner of ward from Ukraine who was acquitted by Israeli Supreme Court to be the last person tried for WWII atrocities. Clearly because it’s all his fault and now all the bad guys are either dead or in jail.

[briansd1]

Arraya posted before about how nationalism can easily be manipulated with propaganda.

What do you guys think about the pledge of allegiance?

Like Martin Rosenthal, I believe it has no place in the classroom:
http://www.npr.org/2011/09/19/140600621/parents-fight-over-pledging-allegiance-in-schools

[Author]

Posts