1
   

What Noble Cause Did Casey Sheehan Die For?

 
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 09:20 am
Lash wrote:
Kicky--

Cutting the theatre for a minute--I do believe that anyone who tries to blame the war, 911 or a laundry list of other stuff on Jews or Israel is a Jew hater--and I'm shocked and very worried at how many are crawling out of the woodwork. She is one of them.


Again, what was the specific thing she said that makes her a Jew-hater in your mind? Did she say "Jews suck." or "I hate Jews."?
0 Replies
 
terrygallagher
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 10:17 am
If Sadam had WMDs then the may of been used to kill many people is flawed logic for going to war.

Sadam HAS WMD and WILL kill many people is reasonable logic for going to war.

The problem with IFs and MAYBEs is that they can be used in anyway, for example I could say IF you have a knife you MAY kill somebody and by the logic used to invade Iraq you would have to be arrested for conspirasy to commit murder.

Although it's undersandable to not trust Sadam it doesn't mean that it's right for us to attacking him anyway. The Bush administration I think would agree with me here because before the war there were arial picture of "nuclear plants" and intelligence released to back up the claim that Sadam did had WMDs. This however turned out to be wrong, Sadam didn't have WMDs.

Seeing as the war was justified on the basis that many people may die if Sadam had WMD, the war can not be justified as he didn't. Many people dieing may have been a conciquence of Sadam having WMDs but as he didn't have WMD that senario would not of been possible.

So the WMD arguments for war were wrong. The only arguments I can see as being worth while now is whether the troops should be withdrawn and was the errornios argument for was a diliberate attempt to mislead the people or just a huge mistake (either way I think the people responsible for the war should be removed from power because whichever it is it clearly shows they should not be running nations).

I've seen there's a post about removal of troops so I won't comment on that but I think paul Wolfowitz did away with any need for a debate on the second point when he said

"The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil."
0 Replies
 
Chrissee
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 10:33 am
Even if Cindy were Adolf Hitler in drag, how does that affeact the answer to the BIG question.

For what noble cause are our soldiers dying?
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 04:59 pm
Chrissee wrote:
Quote:
After all,neither Germany or Japan had the capability to actually invade the US,so our 1st amendment rights were never threatened then either?


Whoa! Germany declared war on us and had u-boats off our coast and I guess you FORGOT the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. First amendment rights? WTF are you talking about.
I hadnt forgotten that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor,nor have I forgotten that a Japanese submarine shelled Santa Barbara.
BUT,they were no threat to our 1st amendment rights because they could not,nor did they have any plans to,invade the mainland.
Yes,they did invade 2 UNINHABITED islands in the Aleutian chain off of Alaska,but that was used solely as a diversion for the attack on Midway.

So I repeat,the Japanese were no threat to your 1st amendment rights.

The German govt declared war on 12/11,the same day we declared war on them.
http://www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html

And yes,I know that German submarines were sinking ships in our territorial waters before the war.
But,submarines cannot take and hold ground,they cannot be used on land,and they cannot be used to control a nations population.

So I repeat,that neither the Germans nor the Japanese were any threat to our constitution or our 1st amendment rights.

So,since PDiddie said...
Quote:
Yes, if Casey Sheehan had somehow died defending my (or your) 1st Amendment rights, then that would have been dying for a noble cause.


then my question stands.
Were the soldiers killed in WW2 fighting for a "noble cause" even though our 1st amendment rights were not threatened in any way by the axis powers?
0 Replies
 
terrygallagher
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 05:14 pm
It depends on what you see as a noble cause.

If you think the was in Iraq was unjustified or illegal or a terrible scar on humanity then you won't think dieing for it is noble.

If however you think the war in Iraq has saved thousands prehaps millions of lives the you would think of the death as being for a noble cause.


Having said that...

I don't really know who this guy is or the story behind it, but from what I've read in this thread he went to try and rescue a group of soilders who had been ambushed. I would say that to die tring to save anothers' life is a noble cause to die for, the good or bad, hows and whys of how the situation arose are not that important (although it has been all that has been mention in so far so I stuck with that in my previous post). If I've made a mistake in thinking he was trying to save somebody then I don't know what noble cause he died for.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 05:21 pm
terrygallagher wrote:
It depends on what you see as a noble cause.

If you think the was in Iraq was unjustified or illegal or a terrible scar on humanity then you won't think dieing for it is noble.

If however you think the war in Iraq has saved thousands prehaps millions of lives the you would think of the death as being for a noble cause.


Having said that...

I don't really know who this guy is or the story behind it, but from what I've read in this thread he went to try and rescue a group of soilders who had been ambushed. I would say that to die tring to save anothers' life is a noble cause to die for, the good or bad, hows and whys of how the situation arose are not that important (although it has been all that has been mention in so far so I stuck with that in my previous post). If I've made a mistake in thinking he was trying to save somebody then I don't know what noble cause he died for.


He died trying to rescue some of his buddies that had gotten cut off and ambushed.
He did not have to go,nor was he asked to.
He volunteered.
He was doing what any soldier would do,and following unnoficial military policy...LEAVE NO MAN BEHIND.
He gave his life for that ideal,yet there are people on here saying his death meant nothing,that he died needlessly,etc.

Those people have most likely never worn the uniform,never been under fire,and will never understand the bond that forms with yor buddies in combat.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 05:24 pm
Quote:
Those people have most likely never worn the uniform,never been under fire,and will never understand the bond that forms with yor buddies in combat.

Bullshit
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 05:37 pm
dyslexia wrote:
Quote:
Those people have most likely never worn the uniform,never been under fire,and will never understand the bond that forms with yor buddies in combat.

Bullshit


Are you one of the ones that are saying his death was meaningless?
If you are,then you are included in my comment,even if you are a veteran.
If you arent,then my comment didnt apply to you.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 05:44 pm
Yes I am saying his death (in the scheme of things) was meaningless, yes I am a veteran. There are numerous veterans on this forum and you will find a full range of opinions from each and every one of them, liberal and conservative, your stupid indictment of "liberals" not knowing **** about war is just about the most inane observation I have ever seen.(you're not the first to post such gross stupidy and, I'm sure, not the last)
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 05:49 pm
dyslexia wrote:
Yes I am saying his death (in the scheme of things) was meaningless, yes I am a veteran. There are numerous veterans on this forum and you will find a full range of opinions from each and every one of them, liberal and conservative, your stupid indictment of "liberals" not knowing **** about war is just about the most inane observation I have ever seen.(you're not the first to post such gross stupidy and, I'm sure, not the last)


That is not even close to what I said.
My comment was directed specifically at those people that are calling his death meaningless without even knowing the circumstances.
I have no problem with you being opposed to the war.
I have been to Iraq,so after seeing the truth and actually having been there I have a different opinion.

But,if you are saying that a man dying while trying to save his buddies died needlessly,then you have no respect or class.
Are you saying that trying to save his friends was a needless,stupid way to die?
0 Replies
 
Diane
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 05:51 pm
From Op/Truth======

On Monday night, a vandal in a pickup truck ran over hundreds of small white crosses that had been installed in Crawford, Texas as a simple memorial to the Troops killed in Iraq. The vandal, who police say is Waco resident Larry Northern, was soon arrested, and OpTruth's Perry Jefferies managed to find his e-mail address. Here's what he had to say:


Mr. Northern:

I am a Veteran of the Iraq war, having served with the 4th Infantry Division on the initial invasion with Force Package One.

While I was in Iraq,a very good friend of mine, Christopher Cutchall,was killed in an unarmoredHMMWV outside of Baghdad. He was a cavalry scout serving with the 3d ID.Once he had declined the award of a medal because Soldiers assigned to him did not receive similar awards that he had recommended. He left two sons and awonderful wife. On Monday night, August 16, you ran down the memorial cross erected for him by Arlington West.

One of my Soldiers in Iraq was Roger Turner. We gave him a hard time because he always wore all of his protective equipment, including three pairs of glasses or goggles. He did this because he wanted to make sure that he returned home to his family. He rode a bicycle to work every day to make sure that he was able to save enough money on his Army salary to send his son to college. At Camp Anaconda, where the squadron briefly stayed, a rocket landed inside a tent, sending a piece of debris or fragment into him and killed him. On Monday night, August 16, you ran down the memorial cross erected for him by Arlington West.

One of my Soldiers was Henry Bacon. He was one of the finest men I ever met. He was in perfect shape for a man over forty, working hard at night. He told me that he did that because he didn't have much money to buy nice things for his wife, who he loved so much, so he had to be in good shape for her. He was like a father to many young men in his section of maintenance mechanics. They fixed our vehicles with almost no support and fabricated parts and made repairs that kept our squadron rolling on the longest, fastest armor advance ever made under fire. He was so very proud of his son-in-law that married the beautiful daughter so well raised by Henry. His son-in-law was a helicopter pilot with the 1st Cavalry Division, who died last year. Henry stopped to rescue a vehicle belonging to another unit on what was to be his last day in Iraq. He could have kept rolling - he was headed to Kuwait after a year's tour. But he stopped. He could have sent others to do the work, but he was on the ground, leading by example, when he was killed. On Monday night, August 16, you took it upon yourself to go out in the country, where a peaceful group was exercising their constitutional rights, and harming no one, and you ran down the memorial cross erected for Henry and for his son-in-law by Arlington West.

Mr. Northern - I know little about Cindy Sheehan except that she is a grieving mother, a gentle soul, and wants to bring harm to no one. I know little about you except that you found your way to Crawford on Monday night in August with chains and a pipe attached to your truck for the sole purpose of dishonoring a memorial erected for my friends and lost Soldiers and hundreds of others that served this nation when they were called. I find it disheartening that good men like these have died so that people like you can threaten a mother who lost a child with your actions. I hope that you are ashamed of yourself.

Perry Jefferies, First Sergeant, USA (retired)
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 06:07 pm
Quote:
Are you saying that trying to save his friends was a needless,stupid way to die?

I am saying, and quite obviously as well, that the Invasion of Iraq was/is stupid, ergo, all deaths resulting from said war are stupid, the death of individuals as a result of their circumstances is not stupid. TGhis is not a comment about any individual, it is about the invasion of Iraq. Battlefield heroism does not covert a stupid war into a just one no matter how you spin it.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 06:11 pm
dyslexia wrote:
Quote:
Are you saying that trying to save his friends was a needless,stupid way to die?

I am saying, and quite obviously as well, that the Invasion of Iraq was/is stupid, ergo, all deaths resulting from said war are stupid, the death of individuals as a result of their circumstances is not stupid. TGhis is not a comment about any individual, it is about the invasion of Iraq. Battlefield heroism does not covert a stupid war into a just one no matter how you spin it.


I have no problem with your comment,but lets take it all the way.

EVERY war is stupid,so EVERY death is a needless,stupid waste and those killed deserve no honor or individual recognition.
Would you go along with that?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 06:12 pm
Every individaul who dies in war deserves recognition for whatever he/she has done in his/her life to warrent such recognition. Same as every other human being.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 07:30 pm
In the Mexican War, the United States lost thirteen thousand men. Based upon the number of troops which we committed to the war, that makes it the bloodiest war in our history. The unexamples heroism of individual American soldiers and entire units stands out as an everlasting testimony to the willingness of American volunteers to trust their government, and give "the last full measure of devotion."

Every American army in Mexico was outnumbered when they fought. With courage and the professionalism of the officer corps, they overcame the discrepancy to win consistently. At Monterrey, Jefferson Davis' volunteers hacked their way through walls of houses using their bayonets and their bare hands, and cleaned out the defenders in the next house before moving on, because to go into the streets swept with Mexican artillery was suicide. At Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma, American infantry, unsupported, made bayonet charges against dug-in Mexican artillery supported by lancers. At Buena Vista, a two-gun section of American artillery held off the attack of more than four thousand Mexican infantry for more than an hour, defending a gap in Zachary Taylor's lines, until units could be brought up to their support, and to drive back the Mexicans. At Contreras, American artillery of inferior calibre dueled all day with Mexican guns in superior numbers, until all the guns were dismounted or the gun crews too decimated to continue to serve their guns, so that American infantry could cross a steep and dangerous ravine to get on the Mexican flank. That sacrifice lead directly to meeting engagement at Churubusco which sealed the fate of the city of Mexico. At Molino del Rey, because their officers told them to, American infantry and Marines launched themselves in a useless and bloody assault against a heavy fortified and defended Mexican position, and drove superior numbers of the enemy from that position at terrible cost. Winfield Scott acknowledged the same day that he had been wrong, and that the attack wasn't needed. Following Molino del Rey, the Americans assaulted the heavily defended castle at Chapultepec--the Mexican Military Academy--to take down the last Mexican defense outside the city walls. Lieutenant Thomas Jackson took his two gun artillery section through ground so swept with Mexican artillery fire that all of the horses were killed, and most of the gun crews deserted--it was too much for them--and one of the two guns was dismounted. With the help of a sergeant and a handful of gunners he man-handled one gun into position, while his commander, Captain John Magruder, walked into the maelstrom of Mexican artillery fire to drag gunners out of cover by main force, and then re-mount the damaged gun and drag it through the ditches to Jackson. Ordered to retreat, Jackson refused, saying his men would all be killed or wounded if required to cross that ground again. The Mexicans became obsessed with "getting" Jackson, and soon turned every gun they could on his position, where he and his men continued to serve the guns. This crucial action allowed the American "forlorn hope" of infantry and Marines to rush the walls with far fewer casualties, and drive the Mexicans from their position. The Mexican defense collapsed thereafter, and individual Lieutenants and Sergeants lead bands of men they picked up in a rush upon the gates that lead to the evacuation of the capital by Santa Anna, and the final defeat of Mexico.

One of those Lieutenants was "Sam" Grant. Although an infantry officer, and although his unit was not then engaged, he rounded up a sergeant and some infantry men, and remounted a dismounted American howitzer, which they dragged by main force to the top of a church steeple, and used it to sweep the causeway to the San Cosme gate, resulting in the entry of American troops into the city.

This is what Grant has to say about the Mexican War in his memoirs:

Ulysses Grant wrote:


There are but few instances in American military history in which professional soldiers and volunteers consistently exhibited such a high order of courage and successful valor on the battlefield--certainly i would contend that there are none in which they were excelled. None of that changes the ugly facts surrounding that war and the outright theft from Mexico of one third of its sovereign territory, largely intend to provide territory from which new slave states could be created.

As Dys cogently observes, that an honorable man die honorably in a war does not make the war honorable.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 07:33 pm
Dys: So then do you agree that Casey Sheehan died for a noble cause or not?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 07:41 pm
Casey Sheehan, like so many of my friends, died doing his job (honorably), for a noble cause= NO! But I would say tico, I would love to pursue this issue of dying for a noble cause in a much more personal venue, a separate topic perhaps?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 07:44 pm
Ggo for it Tico, it could be informative as well as educational.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 07:44 pm
How do you mean? Isn't that the topic of this thread?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Aug, 2005 07:47 pm
not at all Tico, I mean just you and me and death among the the ruins of war and how that responds to honor.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 02/23/2025 at 01:02:58