Should peaceful Americans feel sympathy for 'Wounded Warriors?'

Forums: War, News, Vfw, War Vets, Wounded Warriors
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Wounded US combat veterans volunteered to be soldiers and go to war to murder other human beings. Can argue the semantics if you like, but both Einstein and the 'Red Baron' themselves call killing in war "murder."

If the USA is a nation of peace-loving good people, why are we being condityioned to feel sorry for US veterans who got injured doing what they chose to do? No one's drafted anymore. If you were dragged kicking and screaming into a warzone there's a cause to feel sorry for you. If you volunteered, none at all.

Some graphic images below showing what the 'proud, noble, honorable' people do for a living that never makes it onto tv news. Maybe if we saw these images once in a while we wouldn't regard war in such clean sterile terms?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_qUFDMUpk9jE/S5s1x1Ta-BI/AAAAAAAAfOs/UJTAA_6XFRA/s400/Fallujah%2Bmassacre.jpg

http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/data/upimages/kunar_nato_airstrike_children_victims_apr_7_13.jpg

http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2014/08/11/amnesty-slams-us-poor-record-of-probing-civilian-killings-in-afghanistan.html

http://u2r2h-documents.blogspot.com/2010/08/routine-massacre-of-civilians-in-iraq.html
"Former GIs Describe US Policy of Firing on Civilians"

http://stopwar.org.uk/news/yes-isis-are-barbaric-savages-but-what-should-we-call-us-and-uk-mass-murderers-of-civilians

"According to the UK-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism, some 2,400 people were killed by US drone strikes in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen during the first five years of Barack Obama’s presidency. The study claims that as many as 951 of these deaths were civilians and that almost 200 of the victims were children.

These numbers are corroborated by another study conducted by the Columbia Law School which reports that approximately 600 people were killed by US drone strikes in Pakistan in 2011. According to the report, as many as 155 of those killed were civilians. Together, these two reports suggest that 30 to 40 percent of people killed by US military operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan are civilians."

Until we recognize that terrorism is the result of these kinds of atrocities by our own side, we'll continue authorizing our government to do what resulted in the terrorism in a vicious never-ending circle of murder and horror. ISIL didn't wake up one day and arbitraily decide to attack the US. They woke up one day and started attacking the US becuase we'd been killing their family members.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 5 • Views: 2,362 • Replies: 9

No top replies

Interesting tag choice, 'coward.' Funny how it was posted anonymously. If not a coward yourself, why not identify yourself and stand by what you write?

1 Reply

@HesDeltanCaptain,

HesDeltanCaptain wrote:

If the USA is a nation of peace-loving good people, why are we being condityioned to feel sorry for US veterans who got injured doing what they chose to do? No one's drafted anymore. If you were dragged kicking and screaming into a warzone there's a cause to feel sorry for you. If you volunteered, none at all.

You are looking at the history from a micro view. In a macro view, eliminating the draft stopped the anti-draft movement. However, it also allowed many families to be willing to come to the U.S., since they did not have to worry that their son's would wind up in the military, in some war zone. In effect, by eliminating the draft, the country got the benefit of having a military that could be taught more sophisticated weaponry, since they would likely be in for more than two years of a draft, plus the country benefited by having different demographics come here that had a work/study/entrepreneurial ethic. The country benefited in more than one way.

And, since the wounded warriors have charitable organizations that solicit for some of their post service needs, the country benefits by having some of the cost defrayed in helping these ex-military.

To survive into the future centuries, I would think that there is a chance that some universal mandatory service will eventually be instituted, whether it is military, or helping a deprived region in the U.S. And, then the country will benefit by having young people from very different ethnicities/races meet and marry, and finally there will be a United States nationality.

It's all about what benefits the country.

0 Replies

@HesDeltanCaptain,

I feel sympathy for anyone who suffers injury or death for doing what he or she believes is moral and right. I believe I can assert that without support for their cause.

1 Reply

@HesDeltanCaptain,

I think your premise is off. First, people volunteer for the military for lots of reasons that have nothing to do with going "to war to murder other human beings". For many people it has more to do with economic considerations. I will tell you from my experience, there are more peace loving citizens inside the military than outside of it. The second premise that I think you miss on is that "peace-loving good people" are not responsible for US military actions. We elected our government and we are responsible for its actions. Even if you didn't vote for this politician or that one, you still own it all. We sent those people to war to kill other people and be killed in return so yes, I am sympathetic.

0 Replies

@neologist,

Like, ISIS and al Qaeda, for example?

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Like, ISIS and al Qaeda, for example?

I didn't say I supported any cause, I just feel sorry for those duped into the sacrifice.

That is not to say I don't grieve for their victims. This is a world of pointless and heartless violence.

1 Reply

@HesDeltanCaptain,

HesDeltanCaptain wrote:

Interesting tag choice, 'coward.' Funny how it was posted anonymously. If not a coward yourself, why not identify yourself and stand by what you write?

I certainly did not add the tag...never have added a tag to any thread, but...

...

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1499879/thumbs/o-POT-MEET-KETTLE-570.jpg

0 Replies

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
Like, ISIS and al Qaeda, for example?
I didn't say I supported any cause, I just feel sorry for those duped into the sacrifice.

That is not to say I don't grieve for their victims. This is a world of pointless and heartless violence.

You did say, however, that you feel sympathy for anyone who suffers injury or death for doing what he or she believes is moral and right, and certainly, ISIS and al Qaeda suffer injury and death for doing what they believe is moral and right.

So, you feel sorry for those selfsame individuals who suffer injury and death for doing what they believe is moral and right because they're duped into the sacrifice, like ISIS and al Qaeda volunteers and the US combat veteran volunteers that HesDeltanCaptain is referring to.

0 Replies

@HesDeltanCaptain,

HesDeltanCaptain wrote:

If the USA is a nation of peace-loving good people, why are we being condityioned to feel sorry for US veterans who got injured doing what they chose to do? No one's drafted anymore. If you were dragged kicking and screaming into a warzone there's a cause to feel sorry for you. If you volunteered, none at all.

Because we understand that it is necessary to have our military defend us from the bad guys.

Our soldiers are volunteering to risk their lives to protect us.

HesDeltanCaptain wrote:

Some graphic images below showing what the 'proud, noble, honorable' people do for a living that never makes it onto tv news. Maybe if we saw these images once in a while we wouldn't regard war in such clean sterile terms?

If those thugs didn't want to suffer the effects of our self-defense, then they shouldn't have attacked us.

Seriously, you're starting to sound like Palestinian vermin here, the way the little freaks whine when Israel defends themselves.

HesDeltanCaptain wrote:

"Former GIs Describe US Policy of Firing on Civilians"

The US has not had a policy of targeting civilians in more than 100 years.

HesDeltanCaptain wrote:

"According to the UK-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism, some 2,400 people were killed by US drone strikes in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen during the first five years of Barack Obama’s presidency. The study claims that as many as 951 of these deaths were civilians and that almost 200 of the victims were children.

These numbers are corroborated by another study conducted by the Columbia Law School which reports that approximately 600 people were killed by US drone strikes in Pakistan in 2011. According to the report, as many as 155 of those killed were civilians. Together, these two reports suggest that 30 to 40 percent of people killed by US military operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan are civilians."

Collateral damage is a shame, but if they didn't want to suffer the effects of our self defense, they shouldn't have attacked us.

HesDeltanCaptain wrote:

Until we recognize that terrorism is the result of these kinds of atrocities by our own side, we'll continue authorizing our government to do what resulted in the terrorism in a vicious never-ending circle of murder and horror. ISIL didn't wake up one day and arbitraily decide to attack the US. They woke up one day and started attacking the US becuase we'd been killing their family members.

What is the world coming to these days? A bunch of Islamic thugs can't try to conquer the entire world and commit genocide against all non-Muslims without the US acting to stop them? The horror!

For what it's worth, I tagged this silly thread "intolerant anti-war extremism".
http://able2know.org/user/oralloy/tags/intolerant_anti-war_extremism/

So far it hasn't shown up, but it is not my intent to be anonymous.

0 Replies

Should peaceful Americans feel sympathy for 'Wounded Warriors?'

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know