The video that purports to show a US Marine killing a puppy has created quite a stir.
Obviously, killing puppies is wrong. I don’t even see a need to argue for that claim. If the video is not faked, then the person who killed the puppy is clearly an evil person or has serious defects in his mental workings (or both).
The video has been put to use as a propaganda piece that purports to show the evil of America and its soldiers. However, the obvious reply to this is that the video, at most, shows that the person who killed the puppy is a bad person. This hardly serves as evidence that the military and America are evil.
In fact, the American reaction to it shows quite the opposite. Americans, as the Michal Vick case showed, generally love dogs (even more than they love NFL quarterbacks) and hence the majority of Americans are appalled by what this video allegedly depicts. Further, the Pentagon makes it clear what the military position is on such cruelty:
[This video came to our attention this morning, and we have initiated an investigation. We do not tolerate this type of behavior and will take appropriate action.
The vast majority of Marines conduct their duties in an honorable manner that brings great credit upon the Marine Corps and the United States. There have been numerous stories of Marines adopting pets and bringing them home from Iraq or helping to arrange life-saving medical care for Iraqi children. Those are the stories that exemplify what we stand for and how most Marines behave.”
The Department thanks the numerous citizens who brought the video to our attention. ]
This might just be dismissed as calculated to respond to the outcry against the video. However, reason should make it clear that the Pentagon does not encourage or endorse cruelty to animals. Most American soldiers, like most Americans, are opposed to such cruelty. If the military encouraged soldiers to be cruel to animals, why then would they bring therapy dogs to Iraq to help soldiers? Why then would the military have a K-9 corps which is well known for the bonds between the soldiers and their dogs?
While the act shown in the video is despicable, what shows the true character of America is how rational people are responding to the situation: if it is real, those involved will be found and punished for their misdeeds. America is, overall, devoted to the rule of law and doing what is right.
A rather disturbing aspect of this situation was the comments that begin to pile up on various blogs calling for the horrible death of the person in the video. His alleged name and address were published online and numerous calls were made to harm him and his family.
While a person who kills a puppy should be punished, calling for his death is not a call for justice. It is merely an expression of senseless anger. To call for death in response to this shows that a person does not really think much of the value of life. Yes, if there is a guilty person, then he should be properly punished after a proper trial. While people no doubt feel tough when they cry out for someone’s death, they put themselves closer to being the sort of person who would kill a puppy than the sort of person who holds to what is right.
Thanks for adding some reason to the otherwise deplorable punch-bowl of hateful and immoral rhetoric I’ve seen on blogs, concerning this event…
It must also be pointed out that:
1) It is yet to be determined if the video is real.
2) If it is, how do we know the puppy died?
3) How do we know that the person in the video is David Motari? Just because someone has a MySpace page with a picture of a soldier, listing his name as David Motari means next to nothing. The only thing we know is there there is a person named David Motari in the Marine Corps. At least I think we know that… And who the heck was it that put that name out there? Where is the person that identified him in the video?
4) General George Patton–Yes–THE General Patton, once pulled out his pistol and shot a donkey that was blocking a bridge, just so he could keep his troops moving…Today, PETA would be doing things to George Patton that only the Cenobytes in Hellraiser could have thought up…
Well, what makes me wonder about this situation, is how many innocent Iraq families met a fate of death similar to this puppy at the hands of these “marines”.
Gee, madcat, thanks for adding your unbiased voice of reason to the discussion…go piss up a fucking rope douchebag…
Killing a puppy is one of those things in my mind where any kind of lawful punishment is insufficient. To me it falls under the category of unthinkable things for humans in our culture to do, including cannibalism and rape (especially involving incest). Of course, rape, &c. are prosecuted by the law, but if I were in the position where I saw someone do one of these unthinkable things, I would have a very hard time not murdering him/her. My first reaction would be to kill the person out of anger, and probably not regret it.
sent from: fav.or.it [FID36704]
Yeah, loannus, and THAT’S why your’re NOT in that situation. Because you’re a degenerate. Go down to your local Huimane Society and see what’s going on with the unclaimed dogs. Cannibalism? What are you smoking? Rape?
I’m glad I don’t have to meet many of the people on WordPress. I wouldn’t feel very safe around them. Not safe at all…
Why would lawful punishment be insufficient? If you think the laws are not severe enough in their punishment, start a campaign to make them more severe. One of the many virtues of democratic states is that if you think the laws are unjust, there are means to change them.
As far as committing murder out of anger and without regret, that would be morally wrong. One purpose of law is so we act as rational beings and not as monsters. Killing a puppy is a monstrous act. Murdering a puppy killer in rage and without a trial would also be a monstrous act.
A respect for justice and reason is part of what makes us properly human. That is what people who kill puppies for amusement are not proper humans-they act unjustly and out of accord with reason. In short, they are evil.
i think that the marine that killed the puppy should be shot and this shown on televison. the marines that were with him should also be shot. unless their commanding officer can prove with out question that he had no idea that the men were so evil as to do this sort of thing he should be shot .
the family of the marine should also be question at lenght and if it is determined that they new of him harming animails before this event and they did not report this to at least one medcail doctor then they should face prison time.
the president of the united states has failed to respond to this matter correctly so he is failing in his job. he should be removed from office as commander of the armed forces . he could remain the president but not have any say as to what the military is doing. then once he is out of office he should stand trial in the international court not only for this puppy matter but for his well known lying to the world regarding iraq .
he should also be charged with breaking known world aggrements on the treatment of the enemy.
all in all really i wish they all would be killed this should be made more public then anything ever on the face of the earth. all mankind all world leaders should see that behavior such as the marines and the president will not go unpunished
There’s a Moonbat in here! It’s Ok though; I’m a professional.
Come ‘er Moonbat, come ‘er! That’s right, that’s good…a little closer. It’s OK–it’s organic. No, it doesn’t shed CO2.
“The people run amok, when they have no vision of God”~ Proverbs 29:18
Gotcha! You little rascal. A verse from scripture is always enough to stun a Moonbat, and then it’s easy to send them on their way.
Just to let you know, Philosopher, Moonbats congregate around talk of government conspiracies, and they became extremely vicious when the military is mentioned. I mean INSANE! Look at poor Sandy here. She obviously got a touch of Bush Derangement Syndrome, and left untreated, look what happened: Full blown Moonbattery!
Too bad they havev’t found a cure for it. I wonder if Sandy is one of those “smart” Moonbats, you know the ones readng Noam Chomsky, or if she’s just one of the unprotected variety, wearing tin-foil hats….
If you have anymore problems, give me a call. There’s plenty more scripture to be read…
Magus, you are a dolt. Go ahead and brandish your lack of competence in all things psychological. People who abuse animals do so because they lack proper prefrontal development. This is the reason that they are determined to be “at risk” to society. Whether or not you agree with the animal rights crowd, you must certainly have some reverence for human life. This is the crux of the arguments against the pseduo-marine’s thoughtless and cruel display.
You also make light of very real environmental issues. This is probably due to a fatalistic religio-doltery that consumes so many irrational fools such as yourself. You’ve long ago convinced yourself that a loud and great ‘man’ in the sky has chosen you to be his friend (because he’s lonely) and that he wants you to do his “will” (because omnipotence isn’t enough). You, and your kind, are vastly delusional (by medical definition) and require a reality check. Unfortunately, you’ve forgotten how to interpret or react to reality, so it’s a lost cause. The answer:
1. Start taxing your little workshops as the businesses they are.
2. Require the prefix Dr. and suffix Ph.D. to be based on tangible and measurable work, and not mere conjecture regarding the composition of fairy dust and the philosophy of burning bushes.
>>>>Whether or not you agree with the animal rights crowd, you must certainly have some reverence for human life. This is the crux of the arguments against the pseduo-marine’s thoughtless and cruel display.
Huh? You KNOW the video’s real? You agree with Sandra, that the guy should be put to death and the president should be brought to trial? If you value human life, then you would argue against the vitriol spilling from sandra’s keyboard, not to mention the run-on sentences and conspiratorial horse-pucky…
If you had anything useful to offer, I’m sure you would have at least seen that it’s not me with the PHD, I was commenting on someone else’s blog. I don’t have a PHD, I live in a van down by the river, and me and my drinking buddies came up with my blog as a joke, to see what we could make people believe–and you believed it!
Oh–and I think I hit a nerve with the CO2 comment. Good. Walk to work tomorrow. Turn your computer off, because it spews more CO2 that the airlines: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/can-green-computers-help-save-the-world-453073.html
Stop eating meat, stop smoking, don’t BBQ–STOP BREATHING… 28 molecules out of over 100,000 in the air. You believed it was killing us, and now, even Al Gore has figured it out: http://aphilosopher.wordpress.com/2008/03/09/wheres-al/
Noexcuses, you can’t possibly be so thick as to have failed to notice the irony and sarcasm in my response to sandra’s insanity. Yet another Moonbat, me thinks–definitely the Noam Chomsky Genus. Dr. Noam Chomsky, PHD….
***Huh? You KNOW the video’s real? You agree with Sandra, that the guy should be put to death and the president should be brought to trial? If you value human life, then you would argue against the vitriol spilling from sandra’s keyboard, not to mention the run-on sentences and conspiratorial horse-pucky…***
Your assumptions regarding my argumentative intent are, much like your knowledge of environmental systems, lacking. I never quoted nor agreed with Sandra’s statements regarding the Marine’s punishment or the President’s responsibility regarding the matter. I do, however, place a value on human life, though not one predicated on a naïve and uninformed brand of speciesism. My principle contention, in the paragraph you so neatly parsed, is that individuals who abuse animals tend to demonstrate a statistical prevalence towards abusing other people.
***If you had anything useful to offer, I’m sure you would have at least seen that it’s not me with the PHD, I was commenting on someone else’s blog. I don’t have a PHD, I live in a van down by the river, and me and my drinking buddies came up with my blog as a joke, to see what we could make people believe–and you believed it!
If it is humor that you intend to impart here then you should invest more effort in your delivery.
***Oh–and I think I hit a nerve with the CO2 comment. Good. Walk to work tomorrow. Turn your computer off, because it spews more CO2 that the airlines: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/can-green-computers-help-save-the-world-453073.html
Why is it that the simpletons contend the CO2 issue cannot be addressed because our lifestyles are so intrinsically reliant on systems which alter the global environment? Anthropogenic climate change can be mitigated by readjusting our energy portfolios. And no, I don’t believe solar or wind will ever provide the emission offsets required.
CO2 isn’t the only greenhouse gas. H20 has properties which reflect radiation as well which is one of the reasons the planet Venus demonstrates a runaway greenhouse effect. The reason CO2 and CH4 (methane) get such notoriety is because they are supremely efficient at radiative forcing (which is a measure of the net radiative balance as managed by the planet’s atmosphere).
The amount of CO2 emitted per unit of energy generated over time is related to the energy source’s chemical structure. If my computer were powered by nuclear-fission based electricity, then my CO2 (in addition to my U and PU) emissions would be nil. My state employs nuclear-fission electricity generation which accounts for over 30 percent of its base-load portfolio. Therefore, my computer is indirectly causing far less emissions than would be caused from the combustion of jet fuel. Jet-fuel combustion is an issue, however, partly due to the altitude of its combustion rather than its combustion byproducts. But I need not go on because I’m sure you long ago decided that your fate was in the “hands” of your invisible and illiterate deity.
***Stop eating meat, stop smoking, don’t BBQ–STOP BREATHING… 28 molecules out of over 100,000 in the air. You believed it was killing us, and now, even Al Gore has figured it out: http://aphilosopher.wordpress.com/2008/03/09/wheres-al/
Actually, I do not eat meat nor do I smoke. I shall breathe, though, because I see no to be had in life if breathing were disallowed. I comprehend that the ecosystem which we inhabit is specifically maintained according to a number of related values. Our species does not survive within a vacuum. But since this is 7th grade biology I must conclude that you are either scientifically inept or generously optimistic of the baseless prose of the unrecognized and unpublished wizards that thought up such tripe as creationism and virgin births.
***Noexcuses, you can’t possibly be so thick as to have failed to notice the irony and sarcasm in my response to sandra’s insanity. Yet another Moonbat, me thinks–definitely the Noam Chomsky Genus. Dr. Noam Chomsky, PHD….
Sandra was upset over a vile abuse of power. I do not believe I understand whether you disagree with the Marine’s alleged behavior or the authenticity of the record of his alleged behavior. If it were simply the latter then I imagine you would employ a bit more tact. Thus, I doubt your claims of mere sarcasm and irony with regard to your counter post.
In closing, I must say that I don’t get the Noam Chomsky references. Certainly, you must appreciate that some people have contributed myriad opinions and works over the course of their lives. What specifically stimulates your disgust about the man? Perhaps you also dislike Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins. If so, then you need not elaborate because I care not for revelations rooted in the bronze-age psalms of a nomadic and quixotic people’s dogma.
I’m not surprised that you don’t eat meat…It makes Moonbats sick.
And you used a lot of words to say what George Orwell could have said in half that, and much more eloquently.
“My state employs nuclear-fission electricity generation which accounts for over 30 percent of its base-load portfolio. Therefore, my computer is indirectly causing far less emissions than would be caused from the combustion of jet fuel. Jet-fuel combustion is an issue, however, partly due to the altitude of its combustion rather than its combustion byproducts. But I need not go on because I’m sure you long ago decided that your fate was in the “hands” of your invisible and illiterate deity.”
It must that a lack of B vitamins, caused b a vegetarian diet, thats making you so hateful–and is making you allegories so weak.
Chris Hitchens is a good writer, Dawkins says nothing new nor profound, he just writes books that say what Moonbats like yourself want to hear.
Have fun in your Godless, blind, black, Greenhouse Gas filled universe. And yes, Moonbaticus Maximus, I knew that CO2 was not the only Greenhouse Gas. That’s kind of my point, but subtle humor goes way over your head.
***I’m not surprised that you don’t eat meat…It makes Moonbats sick.
Your ad hominem remarks demonstrate to me that you have no real substantive points to make. Please expand your pejorative vocabulary.
***And you used a lot of words to say what George Orwell could have said in half that, and much more eloquently.
Perhaps I command a greater competence of the subjects on which I argue and you have nothing of substance to offer as reasoned retort.
***It must that a lack of B vitamins, caused b a vegetarian diet, thats making you so hateful–and is making you allegories so weak.
Or it could be that the toxic buildup of mercury and bovine growth hormone that have degenerated what few and weak neuronal connections which remain in your thick skull that prompt you to repeatedly pursue such a puerile line of dreary insults against my reasoned arguments. Or perhaps the carrion which has been fermenting in your colon over the years has backed up so far as to profusely exude from your mouth as so much of the witless and fetid defecate which you probably imagine to be wise cracks against the godless fellows you so often deride.
***Chris Hitchens is a good writer, Dawkins says nothing new nor profound, he just writes books that say what Moonbats like yourself want to hear.
You lack the competence to comprehend the principles described in either of these authors’ works. Instead of proffering intelligent principles for debate you pursue simple jabs at rather insightful and substantive written works.
***Have fun in your Godless, blind, black, Greenhouse Gas filled universe. And yes, Moonbaticus Maximus, I knew that CO2 was not the only Greenhouse Gas. That’s kind of my point, but subtle humor goes way over your head.
Translation:
Godless—a failure to bandwagon a popular consensus on a subject that lacks substantive objectivity by which to posit little more than faith-based conjecture.
Blind—a failure on the part of sane and thinking skeptics to adhere to what the uneducated masses interpret from centuries old fables centered on hate, destruction, and myriad other irrational human passions.
Black—the perception by the witless faithful that those offering reasonable doubt concerning the origins of biblical verse are ultimately consumed with perceptions of reality which, though based on reason, are irrelevant due to the fact that they fail to recognize 2000-year-old hand-me-down verse as literal.
I would think a 37-year-old man would have a far greater command of the English language. But, like all of god’s puppets, a weak literary competency is seemingly endimic. After all, it takes rather weak mind to attribute even the smallest grain of legitimacy to the archaic notions you so fervently defend.
Personally, I am not in a position to argue against the possibility that a god (supernatural force) may exist, but I have yet to encounter convincing evidence that this force has a personal interest in the affairs of humankind. In the mean time, people such as yourself are prepared to commit to destructive and apathetic pursuits the world over for mere belief. This irrational motivation is appalling especially when its pursuits are directed by self-proclaimed rational actors.
“Instead of proffering intelligent principles for debate you pursue simple jabs at rather insightful and substantive written works.”
Proffering? Proffering? Hahahaha….More M+Ms please….
Ad Hominem, huh?
Who wrote this? “Magus, you are a dolt.”
The aggressor sets the rules, noexuses.
Magus: Since you’ve posted in the response section of this blog, I assumed that you have an opinion about the topic discussed. However, whenever someone proffered from what I’ve conjectured as a dissenting viewpoint from your own, you’ve responded with nothing but ad-hominem attacks against the previous poster. This shows that either A: you’ve had no argument to begin with and this is typical internet posturing, or B: you’ve had no opinion of the prevalent topic and the only reason you’ve posted in this blog was in the hope to rile up the “moonbats” as you’ve so eloquently iterated. One of the great things about the internet is that it allows for the proliferation of information, ideas, and opinions at an accelerated pace that wasn’t feasible before. However, the flipside of both of these attributes is that it allows people who do not have the cognizant faculties to use reason and logic to have their “opinions” heard also , which unfortunately amounts to nothing more than mindless caterwauling. Instead of using your “cleverly” crafted word-smithery to fling insults, how about offering up some reasonable counter-arguments to any of the claims that were offered, or just concede to the notion that you have nothing relevant to say and slink off to some other blog to troll.
beacon,
I’m sure you’ve read some of my other comments on other postings and know that not all of my comments are ad hominem.
I find it interesting that a certain group seems free to post the most absurd and even threatening comments without fear of being called out for their behavior. Did you actually see what and who started this whole thing? Did you see the comment that Sandy left, commenting on how the US President is responsible for this, along with a lot of other weirdness. I’ve blogged extensively on this puppy/marine video here: http://magus71.wordpress.com/tag/puppy/ if you wish to look at my blogs on the issue, and I found that this subject brought some downright crazy people out from under some damp rocks. THESE are the people who are trolls. I give my name, my profession and present a picture of myself on my blog. I have nothing to hide, I don’t lie and I don’t make death-threats, but I have been called an idiot, a dolt and a few other choice names, merely for expressing non-Left opinions. Those opinions did not include personal attacks on anyone. Sometimes, many times, I write with a polemic style. Maybe it’s my personality, but I usually reserve the polemics for the most outrageous posts, and I’ll continue to point absurdity. Yes, that means Moonbats are my number one target because on blogs, they’re like shooting fish in a barrel.
So, the accusation that I have nothing to say on the subject simply isn’t true. However, I do tire of people using every damn thing that happens anywhere involving a soldier to gain leverage for attacks on the President and the best country this Earth has ever given birth to.
Why is it that you haven’t made similar comments to the others who made ad-hominems? Do you agree with them?
***The aggressor sets the rules, noexcuses.
Magus, your memory conveniently fails you. You first response raged:
***“Gee, madcat, thanks for adding your unbiased voice of reason to the discussion…go piss up a fucking rope douchebag…”
Oh look…a contradiction, how quaint.
***Maybe it’s my personality, but I usually reserve the polemics for the most outrageous posts, and I’ll continue to point absurdity. Yes, that means Moonbats are my number one target because on blogs, they’re like shooting fish in a barrel.
Some of the early posts were outrageous because they pushed for action which overrode jurisprudence. I stated that I disagreed with the nature of vigilante justice. I also stated that the allegations regarding actions of the individual in the video were of a serious concern because it didn’t help America’s image dilemma in the region.
I also consider the possibility that al Qaeda and others in Iraq who are displeased with America’s presence in the region routinely seize any opportunity to sell shock-value media to an emotionally-sheltered American public.
Shooting fish in a barrel? Magus, nothing you have posted thus far has scored any critical counter-points to MY posts. Your hubris is truly phenomenal.
With regard to the puppy video, I agree with you on many of your comments on other blogs. With regard to your assertion of a stellar morality of this nation, I strongly disagree. I believe that many legal principles which guide our intra and international relations are far superior to the majority of nations, but I hold strong reservations on the actual level of moral development of this nation. As an example, we allow for the routine violation of the right of bodily integrity for infant males.
noexcuses,
I make no apologies for my statements to madcat. He makes the allegation that Americans must be killing innocent people, all because of a video of someone throwing a puppy–all which MAY be fake. He set the rules.
But of course, you then attacked me, and started on a tangent about global warming, and now you’re delving into circumcision. You’re a liberal. So, what that usually means in my observations over the years, is that you will pick apart the smallest injustices before you address the largest ones. Actually, you were completely confused as to who made what comments in this posting, because first you began spewing your hatred at the blog’s author, a friend of mine. Yes, the one with the PHD.
People have been completely ridiculous about the puppy video. You commented because you didn’t like something I said. But you haven’t made one comment about the subject of this particular posting.
So go away, please. You’re not witty, you’re not clever, my neuronal pathways are completely intact despite the fact that I eat meat, and lots of it (Just ask the Eskimos how it works for them–that’s all they eat: meat and fat…gasp). The Earth is not dying because of us. America is a great country, and you only feel safe criticizing it because it is a great and moral country–not perfect–but great.
Remember what Thucididyes said:
“The strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must.”
You’re weak.
People don’t like to hear direct speech–but that’s what I think about you. I think you’re part of the cancer that’s eating at this country, killing it from the inside: Cynicism. You just want to sit back and be critical and suspicious of everything, all so you can look clever. But it’s not the overly critical or the people that are afraid the sky is always falling that make this world move forward, and they hardly ever motivate others. No, the truly great people are those that go to work everyday, come home to their families and try to make things better for themselves and their families, not he people who run around like chickens with heads cut off, railing against the government, the invisible gases in the sky or how bad every thing is. It’s the people who admit that life is for the tough, and teach others how to become tough enough to match life.
Great text.., bro
If I am weak, then why is it that you are allowing the “rules” of a discussion to be set by another enraged poster?
***But of course, you then attacked me, and started on a tangent about global warming, and now you’re delving into circumcision. You’re a liberal. So, what that usually means in my observations over the years, is that you will pick apart the smallest injustices before you address the largest ones. Actually, you were completely confused as to who made what comments in this posting, because first you began spewing your hatred at the blog’s author, a friend of mine. Yes, the one with the PHD.
No, your hippocampus is failing you again. You were the first to mention and mock the scientific consensus on a topic which you are unprepared to debate. And no, I said nothing in direct response to the blog’s author.
What are these large injustices that I’m failing to address? Maybe I should lash out against same-sex marriages, fetal termination, and a whole host of First Amendment rhetoric.
***The Earth is not dying because of us. America is a great country, and you only feel safe criticizing it because it is a great and moral country–not perfect–but great.
Why is it that you have to speak for me to counter me? Indeed, the Earth cannot die but its environmental composition can be altered so as to render advantages to some species and disadvantages to other species. It is an immutable truth that species will always fair according to their adaptive success.
America is a great country and I offer criticisms against many great things. It is perfectly normal to strive for continual improvement. This is why minorities vote, women run for public office, and the ISS is bridging nations. But America can do more and I am exited about the opportunities available in and for this country.
Your morality is ethnocentric and subjective. Step off your stump for a moment and consider that 40% of the world’s population does not have access to basic sanitation. Most of the world’s children go to bed hungry. Desertification is real and expanding. There are a host of issues relevant to the survival and lifestyles of people the world over and you’re worried about what?
Remember what Thomas Stearns Eliot said:
“Humankind cannot bear very much reality.”
***You just want to sit back and be critical and suspicious of everything, all so you can look clever. But it’s not the overly critical or the people that are afraid the sky is always falling that make this world move forward, and they hardly ever motivate others. No, the truly great people are those that go to work everyday, come home to their families and try to make things better for themselves and their families, not he people who run around like chickens with heads cut off, railing against the government, the invisible gases in the sky or how bad every thing is. It’s the people who admit that life is for the tough, and teach others how to become tough enough to match life.
Yes, am intently curious about the world and its myriad levels of social, political, and physical functioning. This is why I pursued two undergraduate degrees and intend to pursue a PH.D in Medical Anthropology. Motivating people to better their conditions often involves promoting the pertinence of inconvenient truths and distasteful acknowledgments. Your whole paragraph is pathetic and droning.
Political and technological innovators and passionately dedicated humanists pursuing ways to improve the lives of the great majority make the world move forward. You have a terribly distorted sense of rationality. Life is tough because many people pursue ambitions that, once realized, disadvantage ‘others’. Your impracticable nationalism and fanatical impatience for reasoned discourse is the real disease propagating in this country.
“This is why I pursued two undergraduate degrees and intend to pursue a PH.D in Medical Anthropology.”
That explains just about everything….
“Your morality is ethnocentric and subjective.”
I’m betting I’ve had more contact with the real world than most undergrads.
“No, your hippocampus is failing you again. You were the first to mention and mock the scientific consensus on a topic which you are unprepared to debate. And no, I said nothing in direct response to the blog’s author.”
The debate ended with the first sentence of your first comment.
“Your whole paragraph is pathetic and droning.”
Remember, B vitamin deficiency can cause moodswings, nerve damage, and blindness.
Again, you didn’t comment on th epuppy video.
Now, go spar somewhere else, I have things to do.
This is obviously an outrageous event, and the kid, if responsible, should be punished. I do think the Patton comment is slightly disingenuous (what’s the military purpose of this?) but the general concern about some of this outcry is on point.
Calling for death is over the top. I was disgusted upon seeing the clip, but the military has a very professional legal process for a reason. This marine is going to be charged, probably with several crimes (I’d imagine an orders violation, plus service discrediting). I imagine that he will receive a punitive discharge. A young kid, for something he did in Iraq in a stupid moment, will probably have to tell every potential employer for the rest of his life that he received a punitive discharge from the marine corps. He’s going to be punished, assuming the video is real (and if it’s not, people are calling for the death of someone who is innocent, so perhaps we can let the process play itself out). Let’s not pretend that this is going to be swept under the rug.
I’m not trying to lessen what this kid did. As someone who wears the uniform, it brings discredit to myself and the rest of the armed forces. But people need to think about what it must be like to be 19 and in Iraq. War makes people do messed up things. Maybe this kid needs help more than he needs a bullet in the head. I’m sure if half the posters here had a friend or loved one with PTSD they’d look at this differently.
lawyerish,
You’re only about the fourth person who’s put forth a reasonable comment on this issue, it seems, on the entire internet. Thank you for that.
Of course, punitive action assumes that the video is in actuality, what it depicts. I’m not sure of that at all, but we’ll see.
That’s just my view as a JAG attorney. Perhaps I have a weird way of viewing things.
I notice that you’re a servicemember too. Perhaps we just look at things differently (read: more rationally).