 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
The Prototype 
Paint my face with a good-for-nothin smile.
Joined: 23 Apr 2003
Location: Hobart, Tasmania
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| David wrote: | http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnWCGLwSDqg
Oh, for heaven's sake. Negus was just making a joke about muscular men in general. Totally harmless. Stynes' comment was a bit more uncalled for, but hardly reason to announce martial law. She suggested that a soldier was stupid; would anyone have complained if she'd made the same comment about a rugby league player? |
Didn't a presenter or something once come out and call NRL players stupid?
I think it may have happened... I could be wrong.
Maybe it was someone else making comments about NRL players on youtube... 
_________________
Ðavâgé
https://www.facebook.com/davehardingphotography
https://www.facebook.com/Davage |
|
|
|
 |
David 
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: | | David wrote: | | Doc63 wrote: | | David wrote: | Having watched half of that (fawning) interview, I've heard him admit to killing three people during this targeted assassination job alone. How many people has the Corporal 'engaged' in his career, I wonder? I dare say a few more than Julian Knight.
TP, have you ever stopped to think about the families of those 'insurgents' (i.e. local citizens fighting against foreign invaders)? How many wives have lost their husbands; how many children have had their Dads killed by this war hero? And people are getting in a lather over some tv personalities taking the piss out of him. 
It's so easy to minimise these events by saying "It's just war" or using euphemisms like "engaged". It's easy to think of Afghani insurgents as evil, black-hearted Muslims who don't deserve to live, but it's important to remember that this is what war is; this is what we glorify when we carry on about war heroics. |
That is pretty much unforgivable. Simplistic nonsense in the extreme, like most of your arguments. When you are in a war zone, you expect to get shot at. You don't expect to get shot at while driving along Hoddle Street.
When someone signs up for the armed forces, they go where the government of the day sends them, and do what they are ordered to do. If they don't want to do that, they shouldn't join up in the first place.
If we'd never had armed forces, you'd be typing in Japanese. |
That's actually kind of a myth, but that's beside the point: I've already said that I believe in having an operational defence force.
Re: Knight, I wasn't asserting an equivalence between the two, I was simply pointing out the high irony in the polarised reactions to two killers. I see that point has flown over most people's heads, though. |
David, that's not over our heads, it's just unbelievably insulting.
Someone fought and died for your rights, don't you ever forget that.
And yes, if a soldier from the other team, jumped in front of gun s to save his mates, I'd call him a hero to, you can believe what you want. |
Even if he killed Australians in the process? I'd be surprised, but, ok.
As I said in my first post, the vast majority of Australian soldiers who have fought in wars were not fighting for your rights or mine, or those of our grandparents, for that matter. South Africa, Gallipoli, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan: none of these were wars fought in Australia's national interest. That doesn't mean that we were wrong to fight them (although we definitely were in some cases), but the Australian Way of Life was never on the line—so please, spare me the jingoistic slogans about people dying for me.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
Doc63
Joined: 06 May 2004
Location: Newport
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| ^ You just cant argue with that kind of "logic". As Karl Pilkington says: "Its done my head in!!" |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
My daughter turned 18 last week, and got her licence.
i posted a comment on my facebook when she picked junior up from school. something along the lines of ..scary...
my dad made the comment"see Jo, i told you, ONE DAY YOU WILL GET IT."
David, i truly hope you do
over and out!!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Pi 
Joined: 13 Feb 2006
Location: SA
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | Even if he killed Australians in the process? I'd be surprised, but, ok.
As I said in my first post, the vast majority of Australian soldiers who have fought in wars were not fighting for your rights or mine, or those of our grandparents, for that matter. South Africa, Gallipoli, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan: none of these were wars fought in Australia's national interest. That doesn't mean that we were wrong to fight them (although we definitely were in some cases), but the Australian Way of Life was never on the line—so please, spare me the jingoistic slogans about people dying for me. |
Actually, historically and logically speaking all of those wars were fought in the national interest or at least the apparent national interests of the government of the day that the Australian people elected. Perhaps you meant national survival, who knows…
Whether or not a given individual supports the reasons for current or past involvement in conflicts is irrelevant. What matters is that people are acknowledged for their service without reference to political or moral approval from a person who was not involved and doesn’t seem to understand military operations in their own historical context.
Jingoistic slogans, nationalistic or otherwise come from all directions; even ones claiming ethical superiority get tedious.
You got tedious about six pages ago….. 
_________________
Pi = Infinite = Collingwood = Always
Floreat Pica |
|
|
|
|
rocketronnie
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Location: Reservoir
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pi wrote: | | David wrote: | Even if he killed Australians in the process? I'd be surprised, but, ok.
As I said in my first post, the vast majority of Australian soldiers who have fought in wars were not fighting for your rights or mine, or those of our grandparents, for that matter. South Africa, Gallipoli, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan: none of these were wars fought in Australia's national interest. That doesn't mean that we were wrong to fight them (although we definitely were in some cases), but the Australian Way of Life was never on the line—so please, spare me the jingoistic slogans about people dying for me. |
Actually, historically and logically speaking all of those wars were fought in the national interest or at least the apparent national interests of the government of the day that the Australian people elected. Perhaps you meant national survival, who knows…
Whether or not a given individual supports the reasons for current or past involvement in conflicts is irrelevant. What matters is that people are acknowledged for their service without reference to political or moral approval from a person who was not involved and doesn’t seem to understand military operations in their own historical context.
Jingoistic slogans, nationalistic or otherwise come from all directions; even ones claiming ethical superiority get tedious.
You got tedious about six pages ago….. |
Tedious? I'd say making a lot of sense mostly.
Lol Governments can find reasons for anything they want to do - In the case of most of our wars, these are more like other Government's reasons or justifications adapted for our domestic consumption.
There is also no way I would ever just accept an individual's military service without some sort of moral reference. Our soldier's actions are subject to external criteria (rules of engagement, Hague Conventions etc) and these provide moral reference points to judge how individual soldiers and the services per se perform. These are ignored at our peril. In most cases this is an innocuous process but not always perhaps. To say we accept our's soldiers' service unconditionally is vacuous and smacks of "my country right or wrong" BS, and is essentially a recipe for military excess.
In a robust democracy such scrutiny is vital. Without it the danger of serious and potentially tragic military excesses increases.
_________________
"Only the weak believe that what they do in battle is who they are as men" - Thomas Marshall - "Ironclad". |
|
|
|
|
Member 7167 
"What Good Fortune For Governments That The People Do Not Think" - Adolf Hitler.
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Location: The Collibran Hideout
|
| Post subject: | |
|
David Wrote
"none of these were wars fought in Australia's national interest"
So David, does that mean that counties can do what they want to countries that would be our traditional allies and we won't get involved as long as we are not threatened directly?
Once they have conquered these countries what do you think they would do next?
I would rather see good men (and non aggressive democratic countries) stand together and protect their mutual interests from an aggressor than see them stand alone and fall. This applies to bullies as much as rouge states.
Using your theory what would have happened to Australia if Japan had attacked us first and not the USA. Should they have sat on the sideline and observed us being annihilated?
_________________
Now Retired - Every Day Is A Saturday |
|
|
|
|
rocketronnie
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Location: Reservoir
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Member 7167 wrote: | David Wrote
"none of these were wars fought in Australia's national interest"
So David, does that mean that counties can do what they want to countries that would be our traditional allies and we won't get involved as long as we are not threatened directly?
Once they have conquered these countries what do you think they would do next?
I would rather see good men (and non aggressive democratic countries) stand together and protect their mutual interests from an aggressor than see them stand alone and fall. This applies to bullies as much as rouge states.*
Using your theory what would have happened to Australia if Japan had attacked us first and not the USA. Should they have sat on the sideline and observed us being annihilated? |
Silly question. (a) they didnt and (b) They wouldn't have as strategically it made no sense whatsoever to do so.
Still its good to see you peddling the good old Domino Theory, it always gets a run sooner or later in moments like this.....
* - If some dictator chooses to wear lipstick, well that's his or her choice. I'm not going to war over that
_________________
"Only the weak believe that what they do in battle is who they are as men" - Thomas Marshall - "Ironclad". |
|
|
|
|
Member 7167
"What Good Fortune For Governments That The People Do Not Think" - Adolf Hitler.
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Location: The Collibran Hideout
|
| Post subject: | |
|
RR,
you have left me a little rouge in the face.
Whilst I agree that the Domino Effect in respect to the spread of Communism in Asia did not eventuate, many aggressive states have worked their way from one contry to another. Certainly the Japanese did this in WW2 as did the Romans when growing their empire.
_________________
Now Retired - Every Day Is A Saturday |
|
|
|
|
Pi
Joined: 13 Feb 2006
Location: SA
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| rocketronnie wrote: | Tedious? I'd say making a lot of sense mostly.
Lol Governments can find reasons for anything they want to do - In the case of most of our wars, these are more like other Government's reasons or justifications adapted for our domestic consumption.
There is also no way I would ever just accept an individual's military service without some sort of moral reference. Our soldier's actions are subject to external criteria (rules of engagement, Hague Conventions etc) and these provide moral reference points to judge how individual soldiers and the services per se perform. These are ignored at our peril. In most cases this is an innocuous process but not always perhaps. To say we accept our's soldiers' service unconditionally is vacuous and smacks of "my country right or wrong" BS, and is essentially a recipe for military excess.
In a robust democracy such scrutiny is vital. Without it the danger of serious and potentially tragic military excesses increases. |
Define right or wrong, it depends on your perspective…. And what you regard as ‘national interest’ and those are subject to change every few years, via the ‘robust’ democracy we currently have. National interests evolve, mostly for very pragmatic reasons, but the actions of an individual soldier remain frozen in the context of which they happen.
Are you going to charge someone with a war crime because your political views two generations down the track differ?
Are you going to inspect the personnel file of every serviceman and reconstruct every action to ensure it meets with your current world view?
As you point out, modern Australian soldiers are subject to fairly rigorous standards, more stringent than those they are fighting in most cases. Soldiers are more accountable than politicians have ever been, for that alone they deserve acknowledgment.
The social demonization of Vietnam veterans in 1970’s was hardly a step in the right direction of a ‘progressive’ society. Let’s save the contempt for governments and the media because they are guaranteed to f$%$k things up.
_________________
Pi = Infinite = Collingwood = Always
Floreat Pica |
|
|
|
|
sq3
Joined: 30 Mar 2004
Location: Gold Coast/Tampa
|
| Post subject: | |
|
David - We can only hope that one day we never have to rely on pacifists or people like you to defend any person or country.
As I say to my wife whenever we see a peace rally - the muslim armies would slaughter all these people without a single thought - but these 'do gooders' seem to live live in Wonderland where everyone is good and nothing bad really happens.
One day you may see it differently.
_________________
Coaches give you direction but skills win you matches. |
|
|
|
|
5150 
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The panic merchant sponsers are dropping like flys. Now Jamaica Blue (a coffee or something?) has bailed.
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/sponsors-ditch-circle-amid-dudroot-fallout-20120305-1uceo.html
In a statement today, Jamaica Blue's owner, Foodco Group, said it had axed it sponsorship of The Circle "after much deliberation".
"As Foodco has previously stated, we do not – in any way – endorse nor condone the offensive remarks broadcast on The Circle last week regarding SAS Corporal Roberts-Smith," the company said.
"We're grateful to our many customers who have contacted us via Facebook and other channels to express their strong feelings concerning Jamaica Blue's association with The Circle.
"Foodco's decision to end our partnership with The Circle was ultimately based on a range of factors – including the strong feedback of our Jamaica Blue customers." |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Member 7167 wrote: | David Wrote
"none of these were wars fought in Australia's national interest"
So David, does that mean that counties can do what they want to countries that would be our traditional allies and we won't get involved as long as we are not threatened directly?
Once they have conquered these countries what do you think they would do next?
I would rather see good men (and non aggressive democratic countries) stand together and protect their mutual interests from an aggressor than see them stand alone and fall. This applies to bullies as much as rouge states.
Using your theory what would have happened to Australia if Japan had attacked us first and not the USA. Should they have sat on the sideline and observed us being annihilated? |
I make an exception for our military activity in South-East Asia in WW2. Whether Japan were a direct threat or not, they were certainly perceived to be. Our activity in North Africa and the Middle East, however, had little to do with Australia's interests; it was at the behest of the Empire. Now, we may rightly look back on those battles with pride considering the malevolence of Hitler and Mussolini, but I think it's important to save the 'dying for our country' rhetoric for where it's warranted. While that doesn't make the deaths of Australian soldiers any less tragic or less brave, it does mean that we should consider typical war rhetoric more skeptically.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
David
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 5150 wrote: | The panic merchant sponsers are dropping like flys. Now Jamaica Blue (a coffee or something?) has bailed.
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/sponsors-ditch-circle-amid-dudroot-fallout-20120305-1uceo.html
In a statement today, Jamaica Blue's owner, Foodco Group, said it had axed it sponsorship of The Circle "after much deliberation".
"As Foodco has previously stated, we do not – in any way – endorse nor condone the offensive remarks broadcast on The Circle last week regarding SAS Corporal Roberts-Smith," the company said.
"We're grateful to our many customers who have contacted us via Facebook and other channels to express their strong feelings concerning Jamaica Blue's association with The Circle.
"Foodco's decision to end our partnership with The Circle was ultimately based on a range of factors – including the strong feedback of our Jamaica Blue customers." |
Geewhiz. I hope people realise that, whatever their thoughts on Negus and Stynes' comments, this is an incredibly sinister outcome: essentially, corporate censorship. We're fast becoming a very thin-skinned society.
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
rocketronnie
Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Location: Reservoir
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | Member 7167 wrote: | David Wrote
"none of these were wars fought in Australia's national interest"
So David, does that mean that counties can do what they want to countries that would be our traditional allies and we won't get involved as long as we are not threatened directly?
Once they have conquered these countries what do you think they would do next?
I would rather see good men (and non aggressive democratic countries) stand together and protect their mutual interests from an aggressor than see them stand alone and fall. This applies to bullies as much as rouge states.
Using your theory what would have happened to Australia if Japan had attacked us first and not the USA. Should they have sat on the sideline and observed us being annihilated? |
I make an exception for our military activity in South-East Asia in WW2. Whether Japan were a direct threat or not, they were certainly perceived to be. Our activity in North Africa and the Middle East, however, had little to do with Australia's interests; it was at the behest of the Empire. Now, we may rightly look back on those battles with pride considering the malevolence of Hitler and Mussolini, but I think it's important to save the 'dying for our country' rhetoric for where it's warranted. While that doesn't make the deaths of Australian soldiers any less tragic or less brave, it does mean that we should consider typical war rhetoric more skeptically. |
I regard World War 2 as perhaps the first war that met just war principles. No matter what front it was fought on, the implications of defeat was dire indeed. I consider Allied soldiers who fought and/or died as fighting for humanity more than anything else.
_________________
"Only the weak believe that what they do in battle is who they are as men" - Thomas Marshall - "Ironclad". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
