skippy the wonder dog Wrote:The point isn't that service isn't voluntary. The point is that someone bears responsibility for what happens to soldiers.
Nobody wanted to guess who, so I'll tell you: go look in the mirror.
That's right. American soldiers wouldn't be dying in Iraq if the American people didn't ultimately support it. Same goes for Canadians who died in Bosnia, Croatia, Afghanistan and whereever else.
And that's why I don't have a lot of patience with this too-bad-so-sad, you-volunteered garbage. They volunteered. You didn't.
Armchair generals die in bed.
with all due respect, neither Esthete or myself are dismissing the concerns of soldiers when it comes to the problems they face in Iraq or other combat situations. The soldiers who serve our country in combat are doing the best possible job, despite some of the equipment shortages and tactical problems. And I feel the US government is doing its best to effectively respond to these problems in a timely manner, but i don't think we can expect perfection. I am defending the Iraq war as a necessary national security issue that helped prevent a loony tunes dictator from killing his own people and threatening the regional security of the Middle East. I'm not kidding myself by believing everything is coming up roses in Iraq or Afghanistan but there are more good things happening there with respect to giving the people of Iraq and Afghanistan a say in the political process after being ignored and crushed by saddam and the taliban, respectively.
I don't know... Cuba has fallen off of the map in the terms of restoring political acknowledgement. The cold war has been over for 15+ years, the US was(kinda is) freely trading with China, North Korea is one of the US's biggest threats, Russia is now considered a major US ally... When Cuba isn't even a concern for most of America, and the US is in a war that more than half of the country disagrees with, Cuba seems childish. American's like there cigars, sugar and fruit... maybe Bush can pull a rabbit out of his hat and just try to restore the forgotten (and forgotten only by the US)... What do you say Mr. President? One less day on the ranch, one more day on the phone...
skippy the wonder dog Wrote:The point isn't that service isn't voluntary. The point is that someone bears responsibility for what happens to soldiers.
Nobody wanted to guess who, so I'll tell you: go look in the mirror.
That's right. American soldiers wouldn't be dying in Iraq if the American people didn't ultimately support it. Same goes for Canadians who died in Bosnia, Croatia, Afghanistan and whereever else.
And that's why I don't have a lot of patience with this too-bad-so-sad, you-volunteered garbage. They volunteered. You didn't.
Armchair generals die in bed.
Look in the mirror? I have nothing to do with any soldier who dies in war. My country is against the war.
Tigerthelion, you might be forgetting the Canadians killed in Afghanistan. Remember them? Or were you waiting for the 11th to overcome your amnesia?
Or the recent incident involving a fire on a submarine ... remember that one? If the investigation shows the boat itself was the problem, who are we to blame? Do you think the public bears no responsibility for the state of our armed forces?
Soldiers die. That's their job. Just don't forget who sends them out to do it.
skippy the wonder dog Wrote:Tigerthelion, you might be forgetting the Canadians killed in Afghanistan. Remember them? Or were you waiting for the 11th to overcome your amnesia?
Or the recent incident involving a fire on a submarine ... remember that one? If the investigation shows the boat itself was the problem, who are we to blame? Do you think the public bears no responsibility for the state of our armed forces?
Soldiers die. That's their job. Just don't forget who sends them out to do it.
I didn't forget the soldiers who died but I can't say I'm the most informed either. I couldn't tell you how many soldiers died.
I cay say though that personally, I feel no guilt whatsoever. Did I send the troops over? I have no say in that if I didn't vote the party into office. How would I be responsible? Was there a referendum in Canada in which I voted to send troops over? I don't remember that. :roll:
I feel no guilt, because I believe it was right to send them. But guilt and responsibility aren't the same thing.
Some of us are willing to accept our responsibility for our government. Others, apparently, are not.
skippy the wonder dog Wrote:I feel no guilt, because I believe it was right to send them. But guilt and responsibility aren't the same thing.
Some of us are willing to accept our responsibility for our government. Others, apparently, are not.
You are correct. I'm not willing to accept responsibility for what Paul Martin and his henchmen decide. I still don't understand why I should accept responsibility but whatever.
We shouldn't feel guilt because the soldiers did a noble thing. We're not decision makers, we aren't responsible for what the soldiers are ordered to do. All we can do is hold those responsible accountable for their decision. In the eyes of the free world, the Canadian soldiers who have died in Afghanistan (three so far, but the "wounded' in war, of which there are many more, have that legacy haunting them for the rest of their life. We're not talking flesh wounds here) did a noble thing, as soldiers everywhere do. But the difference is Al Qaeda, a threat to the free world, clearly DID exist in Afghanistan, with the complicity and even aid of the Taliban. It was a terrorist state. We have looked at the situation and decided it was right to send our people there.
However, I have never been prouder of our country than when our leaders, whose decision it was, regardless of popular support, decided that Iraq did not present a threat to us or anyone else in the free world, did not harbour or aid any of the 9/11 terrorists, and therefore any invasion would be pre-emptive and, as we have seen from missing weapons and civil unrest in Iraq, COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. This is why the US government should not just be held responsible but condemned as guilty for sending tens of thousands of their people over there, over 1,100 of whom have died in addition to between fifty and a hundred thousand Iraqi civilians (that's not including Iraqi military casualties).
Nothing was to be gained by invading Iraq. Much was to be lost. Now, instead of an uncomfortable distrust of the former leader, we have no leadership at all and mob rule is the order of the day. 1/3 of the geographic area of the country has been deemed TOO DANGEROUS for the US to send troops into! You now have a boiling kettle on your hands instead of a simmering pot. I hope another 1,100 Americans don't have to die before this is all over, but it's too late. I doubt there will ever be a stable Iraq ever again. I think this has destabilized the entire middle east even more than it already was, and the US will pay the price for it, just like they did when they trained Al Qaeda to fight the Soviets (who, once again, were not a "true" threat to the US because the only alternative to the stalemate was nuclear holocaust).
grooveless touque Wrote:We shouldn't feel guilt because the soldiers did a noble thing. We're not decision makers, we aren't responsible for what the soldiers are ordered to do. All we can do is hold those responsible accountable for their decision.
By doing so, you're accepting responsibility for what they decide.
That's democracy.
We're not accepting responsibility for what they decide - we're reacting to it. The fact that "they" chose to do something doesn't mean in any way it's my responsibility, especially if I'm opposed to what they decided! In the case of Bush and his misguided attempt to convince Americans that attacking Iraq helps national security, we are forcing accountability upon them for their decision.
I don't want to get into the argument and any attempts are made to argue with me about my viewpoint I will not respond.
I just wanted to say I am not happy with how the elections turned out here. That is all.
thipfan73 Wrote:I don't want to get into the argument and any attempts are made to argue with me about my viewpoint I will not respond.
I just wanted to say I am not happy with how the elections turned out here. That is all.
:lol: That's probably the most logical, well-stated "argument" yet, Wendy. Good for you! :thumb:
Grooveless, if I screw up my boss is responsible. He may fire me because I'm to blame for the screwup, but he does that because he's responsible for me.
I may not agree with what my lackeys in Ottawa do, but I can't help but be responsible for what they do on my behalf.
For a concrete example, take the Sea Kings. Are the Liberals to blame for not replacing the Sea Kings? Undoubtedly. Is the Canadian public as a whole? You bet. Because, although our selective memories have forgotten it, trashing the Sea King replacement program was an election promise Chretien made in the course of trouncing Kim Campbell -- a promise made to appeal to a public that viewed replacing the Sea Kings as an unnecessary expense.
Individuals may decry responsibility because they voted against Chretien, but the electorate is undeniably responsible as a whole.
scottitude Wrote:thipfan73 Wrote:I don't want to get into the argument and any attempts are made to argue with me about my viewpoint I will not respond.
I just wanted to say I am not happy with how the elections turned out here. That is all.
:lol: That's probably the most logical, well-stated "argument" yet, Wendy. Good for you! :thumb:
Thanks. It's the 31st anniversary of my birth today so I made a rule :wink:
skippy the wonder dog Wrote:Grooveless, if I screw up my boss is responsible. He may fire me because I'm to blame for the screwup, but he does that because he's responsible for me.
I may not agree with what my lackeys in Ottawa do, but I can't help but be responsible for what they do on my behalf.
For a concrete example, take the Sea Kings. Are the Liberals to blame for not replacing the Sea Kings? Undoubtedly. Is the Canadian public as a whole? You bet. Because, although our selective memories have forgotten it, trashing the Sea King replacement program was an election promise Chretien made in the course of trouncing Kim Campbell -- a promise made to appeal to a public that viewed replacing the Sea Kings as an unnecessary expense.
Individuals may decry responsibility because they voted against Chretien, but the electorate is undeniably responsible as a whole.
So all those citizens who voted for Gore in 2000 should feel responsible for the Iraq war?
cratch:
See that's the thing. My boss hired me directly and if I screw up, yes he is responsible. I didn't directly hire the MP's. They don't represent me as a whole because I didn't vote for the party in office. Sure there are PCs in office but they can't really get much done in parliament because there aren't enough members. The Liberal gov't doesn't represent me because I didn't vote them into office.
Sorry, I feel zero responsibility for anything my country leaders decide to do that I don't agree with. I'm in the minority on Hipbase in that I wanted Stephen Harper in office. Most people were just brainwashed into believing Nader and M. Moore who said, "oh look out for Harper, he's no good because he'll turn you guys into the US". I didn't agree with everything Harper believed but I thought he was the best candidate available. It's funny because most people think he's a bad guy for being against abortion and gay marriage. OH yeah, he's evil!!
cratch: If Harper's party would have been voted in to make him PM, then maybe I would feel a little responsible for supporting him if he ended up doing something tragic to hurt the country. I have zero say in what Martin decides, thus I don't feel responsible for anything. I don't have time in my life to feel responsible for other people's mistakes. I don't hate Paul Martin though and my living conditions are good under the Liberal government.