I received this in a care package from a random school child. I am serving currently in Afghanistan.

SerialATA_Killer · 4 days

I agree, and like I suggested in my last post, I don't think the wars are just, at least not in practice. In Iraq, the US had opportunities to help get rid of Saddam earlier, and failed to do so (thats my understanding at least; anyone who has a good source on the war and the politics leading up to it, please tell me). I think the US was less responsible for the events leading up to the war in Afghanistan, but I also think NATO has killed too many civilians (though I believe I've seen data claiming that insurgents and other natives have killed more).

Whether or not this information is accurate, my main point still stands; it must be extremely hard to control feeling hatred for people who kill your friends and fellow soldiers. It doesn't justify the wars, but it helps me to sympathize with the soldiers.

Count_Takeshi · 5 days

Ok. I still don't like the negative connotation, but that's his to add.

TylerX5 · 5 days

Well spoken, and I agree with most of what you said. I misinterpreted your post, and thought you were saying that consent wasn't just inviolable, but unimportant. I agree that its not inviolable.

However, I disagree with your claim that there is no consent in the current system; there's a certain amount of consent in a free market. Besides those living off government money or interest, most people who are rich got their money because other's gave it to them, consensually, for a product or a service.

I also recognize that people can and have been manipulated into consent, and that the system we're in isn't a genuine free market.

TylerX5 · 5 days

Why does the fact that there are more poor people increase the power of their interests? Isn't the emphasis on quantity also a result of self interest on behalf of the many?

In your particular example, consent can work against the rich man. If he lied or coerced them, then he worked around their consent, so others do not need to respect his consent. If he earned the money based on a system in which the poor people knowingly consented too, his consent still matters. However, if the poor people are asking for their money back, this implies that they no longer give consent, so if the rich man continues to take money, the money taken after this is not rightfully his.

Count_Takeshi · 5 days

Why is the universe a "mistake"? Mistake implies it should have been another way. How is accepting that the universe was a mistake acceptance?

philipTraum · 5 days

I believe you're saying that engineering pleasure so that it exists for every concievable experience is morally superior to engineering pleasure so that it limits experience.

But if the pig has no desire for multiple experiences and receives as much pleasure from one as from many, isn't the number of experiences arbitrary?

And if the pig experienced pleasure from wanting to be eaten and from not wanting to be eaten, wouldn't it be immoral if he wasn't used for the purposes of another being with a limited idea of pleasure?

SerialATA_Killer · 5 days

This kid was probably told to draw something nice for the soldiers in class, right? Aside from guns and helmets and such, which the teacher probably discouraged, there aren't many things the kid would associate with the military.

I don't see how a drawing of some flag-colored stars translates to a disturbingly high level of patriotism, especially since writing to the troops was probably not his idea.

I'm also going to come out and say Reddit is being too harsh on the military. Yes, they do some fucked up stuff. Yes, Iraq and Afghanistan were both mismanaged and terrible for the people of both countries. Yes, some soldiers are asshats. Yes, blind patriotism is terrible, and yes, none of what I'm about to say should be used to support an unjust war.

But when you're overseas and half the foreigners seem to jump out and kill your fellow soldiers it's probably really damn hard not to hate them. A large portion of the atheists on reddit blames the Koran and religion for most of the violence there, and yet soldiers who similarly stereotype those people as "corrupted" or somehow "lesser" are bashed for disrespecting that same culture.

The US is responsible for that violent culture too, don't get me wrong. I'll be honest and say I know about the past 60 or so years of US involvement in the middle east only from what I've parsed over on wikipedia, but I think the US has made some real bad policy decisions, particularly the sanctions in Iraq and the failure to support a rebellion against Saddam, despite a speech in which support was implied.

But I still think its a bit unfair to take the moral high ground without recognizing or sympathizing with why many people in the military are unable to do so.

b0red · 7 days

I did say its a terrible position to be in; my point is they still need an army, whether these particular people want to or not.

b0red · 7 days

In 2003, yeah, I think you're right. But since then I think civilian casualties due to oppositional forces has exceeded those due to coalition forces.

I don't like how the US has managed the war any more than most people, but calling some Iraqi who can't do jumping jacks (I suspect this video is fake, btw) "smart" because he isn't making use of US training isn't right. I know there's a lot of subtle anti-Iraqi propaganda out there, but they still have some serious internal issues. Neglecting training because you want money is moronic in the long term, unless they think they can do better in an unstable country. In that case they're allowing room for another civil war.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to take the moral high ground. Its a terrible position to be in; I don't think Iraqi police get much respect from anybody, and a lot of people expect them to get walloped when the US leaves. But calling them "smarter" than US soldiers who've gone to help in Iraq (not the small portion of sick soldiers who go to wreck things), despite the risk to themselves, is unfair and disrespectful. Even if the war isn't helpful, and killing is shameful, a lot of US soldiers have excellent intentions.

In short, call the policy makers dumb before the soldiers.

b0red · 7 days

Ideally they'd be killing "countrymen" who've spent over a decade blowing up their own civilians.

Contammanate · 8 days

What I don't understand is why the mob's going after him even if he was lying. His stories can't hurt anyone, even if they're untrue. That is, aside from people with low self esteem who have resisted telling such stories and gotten nothing for it. But I personally find it much more disturbing that he's being targeted and threatened. Why? Because he made those people feel bad by making up stories about himself? I really don't get it; I understand how it would make one feel betrayed, but I don't understand the backlash.

I'm also 60/40 in terms of whether his stories were true/lies.

dragonworthy · 9 days

*write

busman · 9 days

*recollection

Its_aTrap · 13 days

As long as you'd still try to prevent them from harming themselves and help get them treatment, I think you're still a long way from losing your humanity.

Doctors have to get desensitized to this stuff eventually too, right? They're pretty humane.

zombies4breakfast · 13 days

...until we perfect gene therapy.

SCIENCE :D

College_Erwoks · 14 days

Sure thing :)

fryzoid · 16 days

I totally agree, and I know where you're coming from. I just think its important to recognize that abuse and being physically/verbally reprimanded are not always the same thing.

You weren't too harsh at all :) I think we just have different definitions of violence and abuse. Striking fear into your child is shitty parenting. I just don't think that was the intention of 1Ender's Dad.

fryzoid · 16 days

Probably not; but there could be.

Insomniac7 · 16 days

The way the video was constructed seems to suggest he committed suicide, even though one wouldn't normally use "fell" the way it was used in the video. Maybe they just wanted to soften the language.

I'm guessing he killed himself. Poor kid, regardless.

EDIT: Looked at some of the links other people provided, apparently I was wrong about the suicide.

seltsame · 16 days

Yep. Though I think forgiveness is generally a better policy than zero tolerance, so long as you can forgive a person while ensuring they are incapable of committing the same crime again. I also think many of the soldiers were far less criminal than their bosses and some of their fellow soldiers.

fryzoid · 16 days

This sounds like such a good rule, but I think its too simplistic. Virtually any form of punishment is some form of force or intimidation; the reason some forms of punishment are ok is that some forms are directed at a behavior, not the child, where that particular behavior is legitimately preventable and bad for the child ("being gay" is an example of a behavior that isn't preventable or bad, and therefore shouldn't be punished).

I'm not saying people should go around yelling at and hitting their kids. Obviously you want to try to get as much done by simply talking to your kids, and shouldn't police behavior more than you absolutely have to. And when you do "hit" your kid (that sounds so bad D:), if it comes down to it, what I'm thinking of is not anger driven at all, and not intended to harm; its like saying "wake up!" or "stop that!" and is not really violent or aggressive.

As I said before, I think it all depends on the context, the intentions and the effects.

seltsame · 16 days

Yeah, I have to agree. But I still sympathize with people in that position, and believe they could retain many elements of a decent person.

FYI, I thought your first post needed to be said, so I didn't downvote it.

seltsame · 16 days

Relevant video

College_Erwoks

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login