We're not anti-US, we're just reporting the news...

[TheBloods]

Out of curiousity...what, or who do you consider to have an extreme opinion.

And what makes there opinions extreme, and, for example, yours not.

And do you also argue against 'extreme' pro-US posters (for example -- CamSmith) or is it only anti-US extreme's that you have in your firing line?

A lot of the extreme anti-US stuff is quite obvious and often fills these boards.

As for the extreme pro-US stuff, that is here too although not to the same degree and it's far less often that it begins threads.

My criticism of the pro extreme is rare. Perhaps that is remiss of me as I think some of that stuff is quite stupid. However, some of the stuff I disagree with is so stupid that I know it is hardly going to be accepted by many people and it will be very quickly and easily jumped on by the anti squad. I have never failed to witness that so I don't comment. If it would make you happier then I will make comments on those occasions.

However, there is far more anti-US extreme both here and in the general mainstream and a reasonable amount of it is based on erroneous opinions or mistaken facts or interpretations. These are the parts I try to point out, simply to provide some balance not to convince anyone that the US is great (which I don't believe, however it's certainly not as "evil" as some people say).

 

[CoggaRules]

and in accepting that the "terrorists" use torture, we can safely turn a blind eye to it.

Yes, we need to highlight problems with our own side, but not to the point where we ignore both sides of the equation - as happens on here far too often.

who is ignoring what otaku?
Lets put it this way, how many "allegations" have been levelled at US troops' abhorent behaviour, and how many times have they ended up in an inquiry finding that one or two were responsible?
Now, those who defend the coalition's actions, continually suggest that there are always bad apples in a group of apples, shyte happens.
With this incident, not only does the report suggest, that an Iraqui policeman, "said" that it "looked like" the bodies had been tortured, so he is automatically someone that knows what torture looks like, i guess.
But like clockwork, we discount that there could have been the work of a couple of bad apples on the other side, dont we?

 

[Lestat]

who is ignoring what otaku?
Lets put it this way, how many "allegations" have been levelled at US troops' abhorent behaviour, and how many times have they ended up in an inquiry finding that one or two were responsible?
Now, those who defend the coalition's actions, continually suggest that there are always bad apples in a group of apples, shyte happens.
With this incident, not only does the report suggest, that an Iraqui policeman, "said" that it "looked like" the bodies had been tortured, so he is automatically someone that knows what torture looks like, i guess.
But like clockwork, we discount that there could have been the work of a couple of bad apples on the other side, dont we?

A classic case of 'extreme biases' at work.

 

[TheBloods]

who is ignoring what otaku?
Lets put it this way, how many "allegations" have been levelled at US troops' abhorent behaviour, and how many times have they ended up in an inquiry finding that one or two were responsible?
Now, those who defend the coalition's actions, continually suggest that there are always bad apples in a group of apples, shyte happens.
With this incident, not only does the report suggest, that an Iraqui policeman, "said" that it "looked like" the bodies had been tortured, so he is automatically someone that knows what torture looks like, i guess.
But like clockwork, we discount that there could have been the work of a couple of bad apples on the other side, dont we?

No. But we have plenty of threads on the US 'bad apples' but not on the other side. That is point.

 

[otaku]

Just out of curiousity...did you feel sympathy for Al-Zarquawi?

AS a man who was killed, yes. Sympathy for his aims and desires, no.

 

[CoggaRules]

No. But we have plenty of threads on the US 'bad apples' but not on the other side. That is point.

why do you think that happens NMW? Think about it.

 

[otaku]

who is ignoring what otaku?
Lets put it this way, how many "allegations" have been levelled at US troops' abhorent behaviour, and how many times have they ended up in an inquiry finding that one or two were responsible?
Now, those who defend the coalition's actions, continually suggest that there are always bad apples in a group of apples, shyte happens.
With this incident, not only does the report suggest, that an Iraqui policeman, "said" that it "looked like" the bodies had been tortured, so he is automatically someone that knows what torture looks like, i guess.
But like clockwork, we discount that there could have been the work of a couple of bad apples on the other side, dont we?

who is discounting anything?? Your leaps of "logic" are astounding cogga.

I have stated that we need to keep a balance in our views, and keep in mind that atrocities happen on both sides of the fence.

How does that translate to you saying "But like clockwork, we discount that there could have been the work of a couple of bad apples on the other side, dont we? "???

 

[Lestat]

AS a man who was killed, yes. Sympathy for his aims and desires, no.

A mans aims and desire's maketh the man.

 

[KissStephanie]

No. But we have plenty of threads on the US 'bad apples' but not on the other side. That is point.

Probably because the Bush administration has a lot of blood on their hands. It was the wrong war at the wrong time. There was not a plan and the enemy was underestimated. It has led to the deaths of many coalition forces, civilians, and increased terrorism.

I feel outrage for the way that these two GI's must have suffered, and immense sympathy for their family and friends.

 

[CoggaRules]

who is discounting anything?? Your leaps of "logic" are astounding cogga.

I have stated that we need to keep a balance in our views, and keep in mind that atrocities happen on both sides of the fence.

How does that translate to you saying "But like clockwork, we discount that there could have been the work of a couple of bad apples on the other side, dont we? "???

i understand that atrocities happen on both sides. What you seem to lose sight of is that we are suppose to be the good guys, so when you use the word atrocities, how does that make us the good guys?
I will take a guess on what you mean when you suggest atrocities on both sides. Us, there is a house, info suggests that there is an "insurgent" in it.
Troops arrive and shoot everyone dead, men,women, children, to make sure that the "insurgent" was got, if indeed the info was correct.
Is that an "atrocity" or is it more to do with "collateral damage"?
Now think about the neighbours who are watching this unfold in front of their eyes, what do they deem Us to be. Saviours or Invaders?

 

[otaku]

i understand that atrocities happen on both sides. What you seem to lose sight of is that we are suppose to be the good guys, so when you use the word atrocities, how does that make us the good guys?
I will take a guess on what you mean when you suggest atrocities on both sides. Us, there is a house, info suggests that there is an "insurgent" in it.
Troops arrive and shoot everyone dead, men,women, children, to make sure that the "insurgent" was got, if indeed the info was correct.
Is that an "atrocity" or is it more to do with "collateral damage"?
Now think about the neighbours who are watching this unfold in front of their eyes, what do they deem Us to be. Saviours or Invaders?

Whoa there Cogga... One big assumption you have made is that we are the good guys and they are the bad.

I dont agree with that.

They are on one side, we are on another. Simplifying it down to "good" and "bad" is just pointless.

Now, how does my saying we need to keep our eyes on both sides lead you to the comment "But like clockwork, we discount that there could have been the work of a couple of bad apples on the other side, dont we?"?

 

[Richo83]

Another thread discussing the inconsistencies and inbalances of an internet forum.

It's an internet forum, what else would it be? One of the key features of net forums are hyperbolic opinions and unbalanced argument.

That's not to say it's right, just that it's inevitable. We all have our opinions which all drive our arguments on this board, that's what being human is all about. You can't stop the slant that exists in bigfooty without some sort of screening process. Every media outlet, every discussion board has a slant towards one way, that's just what happens.

NMWBloods is trying to even up this effect by trying to display some of the atrocities committed to the US. Some might say thats bad, I would say, if they werent in Iraq in the first place, this wouldn't happen. In effect, Bloods is highlighting his own opinion, just adding to the problem.

Plus, everyone determines that your opinion must be based on the left-right notion. Can opinions draw from other reasonings? Of cource not.

Posters complain about not enough pro-US threads or anti-insurgency (or whatever is attacking the US today) threads, my solution: make them! Don't just sit there and whinge. The main reason why JM creates so many threads is because he had the abition to do it.

 

[otaku]

A mans aims and desire's maketh the man.

So, I guess tat wasn't what you wanted to hear from me? What were you wanting to hear, LEstat? And Why?

 

[BIG COUNTRY]

Sounds awful.

But why do you expect people to be filled with sympathy for the soldiers of an aggressor nation?

The soldiers arent responsible for all the atrocities in Iraq. I am very much against the unjust war and against Bush however I also know that 95-99% of the soldiers are good people who try to do their best. Many of these soldiers dont want to be in iraq and joined after 9/11. These men are being played like a fiddle by the Bush administration, thats why I feel bad and its tragic. not to mention theyre humans who had families.

 

[bunsen burner]

Another thread discussing the inconsistencies and inbalances of an internet forum.

It's actually pointing out the imbalances of individual posters rather than the forum as a whole.

It's an internet forum, what else would it be? One of the key features of net forums are hyperbolic opinions and unbalanced argument.

But those people who are ridiculously imbalanced don't know it and sometimes need it pointed out. If you read the thread you'll realise that even after having it explicitly pointed out they are in denial. They actually think some of the balanced people are just as bad (just because they have a different view).

NMWBloods is trying to even up this effect by trying to display some of the atrocities committed to the US.

No he's not. You miss the point.

In effect, Bloods is highlighting his own opinion, just adding to the problem.

Again, you miss the point.

Posters complain about not enough pro-US threads or anti-insurgency (or whatever is attacking the US today) threads,

No they don't. Again, you miss the point.

 

[Lestat]

So, I guess tat wasn't what you wanted to hear from me? What were you wanting to hear, LEstat? And Why?

I wanted to hear your true opinion. Alas, I was disapointed.

Of course you didn't feel sympathy for Al-Zarquawi. Lets be honest, none of us did.

And why, it was because of his aims, and desires, and what he had done, his actions which determine your opinion of him. Not the fact that he's 'human'.

Which is exactly how some people see the US troops in Iraq. As the aggressors, invading a country, I have no sympathy for them, as I have no sympathy for Al-Zarquawi. They are soldiers of an invading force which has caused the deaths of countless of innocent civilians. Woman, children, elderly, etc, etc.

The fact that they are human is irrelevant...it is there actions, there aims, there desires which truly makes one human.

So how bout you forget the petty point scoring, and actually admit what we all know to be the truth. You felt no sympathy for Al-Zaquawi....actually, I'll go as far as saying that you probably felt joy when you heard of his death. (this is not a criticism by the way).

 

[bunsen burner]

Many of these soldiers dont want to be in iraq and joined after 9/11.

Then they shouldn't have joined the army in the first place. The army isn't about getting what you want but about doing what you're told.

 

[Borgsta]

to be fair though, most of the anti US threads are stated by Just Maybe.

 

[otaku]

I wanted to hear your true opinion. Alas, I was disapointed.

Why would I bother lying to you?

Of course you didn't feel sympathy for Al-Zarquawi. Lets be honest, none of us did.

He was a man with a Family - of course I feel sympathy. How can you not?

And why, it was because of his aims, and desires, and what he had done, his actions which determine your opinion of him. Not the fact that he's 'human'.

You are getting the two concepts confused, Lestat. Just because his aims and opinions dont match mine, and I disagree with what he did, doesnt stop me from understanding he was a human being with thoughts and feelings.

Which is exactly how some people see the US troops in Iraq. As the aggressors, invading a country, I have no sympathy for them, as I have no sympathy for Al-Zarquawi. They are soldiers of an invading force which has caused the deaths of countless of innocent civilians. Woman, children, elderly, etc, etc.

I feel sorry for you then.

The fact that they are human is irrelevant...it is there actions, there aims, there desires which truly makes one human.

It is not irrelevent - they are human beings - and to be tortured and killed is something that I wouldnt wish on anyone.

So how bout you forget the petty point scoring, and actually admit what we all know to be the truth. You felt no sympathy for Al-Zaquawi....actually, I'll go as far as saying that you probably felt joy when you heard of his death. (this is not a criticism by the way).

And it is complete bollocks. I was more upset to hear children had been killed at the same time, it is true - but there was no joy in hearing of his death. Unlike some people I dont take joy in people being killed or tortured.

 

[Lestat]

The soldiers arent responsible for all the atrocities in Iraq.

If the soldiers refused the orders given from above, then there would be no attrocities. Therefore, they are responsible.

Soldiers are humans, and therefore have the ability to choose. They can choose to follow an order, or refuse. If they chose to follow an order, which results in the deaths of innocent civilians, then are just as responsible as those who gave the order. At the end of the day, if they didn't pull the trigger, the deaths would not take place.

I am very much against the unjust war and against Bush however I also know that 95-99% of the soldiers are good people who try to do their best.

Agreed, which makes this all the more depressing. What would make good people travel accross the world and commit attrocities? (not all of course)

Many of these soldiers dont want to be in iraq and joined after 9/11.

Then why don't they leave. They can request a discharge? Or go AWOL. They don't, therefore they must be responsible for there actions.

These men are being played like a fiddle by the Bush administration, thats why I feel bad and its tragic. not to mention theyre humans who had families.

There victims also have families, and as another poster put it, if they weren't there, none of this would be happening.

The Administration power comes from these soldiers.

 

[DaveW]

The soldiers arent responsible for all the atrocities in Iraq. I am very much against the unjust war and against Bush however I also know that 95-99% of the soldiers are good people who try to do their best. Many of these soldiers dont want to be in iraq and joined after 9/11. These men are being played like a fiddle by the Bush administration, thats why I feel bad and its tragic. not to mention theyre humans who had families.

Sure. I guess I was dispassionately looking at it from the point of view of what the soliders represent, rather than who they are.

NMWBloods started this thread as an argument with the anti-war left. Surely it's not hard to understand that those who see this as a war of America's making, also see the US as being ultimately responsible for the deaths of their own countrymen. As you alude to - it's Bush who put his soldiers in harm's way.

If anything, the consistency that Bloods craves can only mean further condemnation of the US's actions.

 

[BIG COUNTRY]

Then why don't they leave. They can request a discharge? Or go AWOL. They don't, therefore they must be responsible for there actions.



There victims also have families, and as another poster put it, if they weren't there, none of this would be happening.

The Administration power comes from these soldiers.

I agree with a lot of your post however stepping away isnt as easy as it seems. Ive talked to soldiers who came back from nam and they hated that war and everything about it. However they would kick themselves to the grave if they ever quit and felt like they were letting thier friends and fellow soldiers down. I feel bad for innocent Iraqi families getting hurt in the unjust war, however many of these soldiers as pointed out need to do what theyre told and thats why they joined the army.

Many didnt expect an unjust war they thought they would go after real enemies. Plus many of these soldiers only fight so they can get a paycheck to help/support their families. I hate this administration and we are definitely the aggressor, however I respect these soldiers. nam saw how bad the US people treated other humans and that is why it is a lost generation. Soldiers there saw hell, came back and were abused, thats why they turned to drugs and suicide and became mentally unstable. these were humans, thats why I feel for these soldiers, until it is shown that these 2 gunned down families I will feel sorrow for them and their families.

 

[DaveW]

No. But we have plenty of threads on the US 'bad apples' but not on the other side. That is point.

Just on this point about double standards. What you see as "anti-US" can quite arguably be considered inherently pro-US.

Whilst the viscous deeds of terrorists are shocking and loathesome, it's hardly unexpected that terrorists would behave like, well... terrorists. The US on the other hand, is supposed to be a great liberal democracy which places high importance on liberty and justice. Is it really so unfair that higher standards would be expected of the world's sole superpower?

It seems like an obvious point, yet missed by so many on the right.

 

[TheBloods]

It's an internet forum, what else would it be? One of the key features of net forums are hyperbolic opinions and unbalanced argument.

Why does that have to be the case?

 

[TheBloods]

to be fair though, most of the anti US threads are stated by Just Maybe.

True, and most of us have the same opinion of him.