Gary82
Called Up to the Major Leagues
except the libertarians, if you even consider them conservative.
Why Do Liberals Hate 'American Sniper'?
- Thread starter Tomahawking4life
- Start date
except the libertarians, if you even consider them conservative.
That's not the first thought that comes to mind when I think of Libertarians.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
So, yeah. Do we have to have an army? Sure. Do we have to send them to the Tigris Valley to shoot a very ill-defined and often-changing bad guy? Maybe not. You and I have a vote on that score.
weso1
<B>Clique Leader</B>
I think it's important too. I just think it's naive to think that the warriors we ask to fight just wars are ready to make undeniably positive moral judgements while they take these shots. While your position sounds great on a Hallmark card, I just don't buy it in the real world. While Isis is chopping the heads off of morally strong civilians and journalists you're trying to find the perfect moral soldier to fight them. The perfect moral soldier is getting his head chopped off.
I mean it's a strong theoretical argument, but it's a weak realistic argument. The soldier is relatively unimportant compared to the policy.
I think this unfairly discounts the ethos of soldiers. Guys like Chris Kyle are trained specifically to engage in heinous acts with one unassailable reasoning: for country. They aren't permitted the liberty of active discernment as to whether or not a conflict or particular kill is justifiably moral. The rules of engagement have been clearly outlined - our President and/or congress dictated the terms, and they are the nation's elected voice. Beyond that the soldier answers only to their God or conscience.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Well the issue is, does the heroification of soldiers further perpetuates the military industrial complex which is what Julio was largely alluding to as the larger context. I think the answer is yes. The deification of a soldier is relatively new in America.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
And that's a huge ****ing problem with our country—and a state-of-affairs to which I resoundingly object. We shouldn't be training people to commit heinous acts; we should be a nation that strives to produce citizens who are able to act heroically if called upon, but whose ethos doesn't include the uncalculating commission of heinous acts.
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."
Dwight D. Eisenhower
btw saying liberals are anti-war is just as dumb as saying they are "pro abortion"
Dwight D. Eisenhower
btw saying liberals are anti-war is just as dumb as saying they are "pro abortion"
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
i understand what you are saying
i just disagree with it
almost completely actually
every person has to make up their own mind and the "just following orders" line is bull****
it's bull**** for many reasons but mostly in this conversation cause we as a country said it is a bull**** line in the 40's
Good points.
Just wondering, the last two times Obama was elected I heard so much noise from the right how we would all be in Nazi Concentration camps, all of our guns would be taken away, etc.
So when Supreme Leader Obama was going to flip the country over and start going door to door of his dissidents and dragging them into the streets, who were the people that were going to do his dirty work?
Military? Hates him.
FBI? Hates him.
CIA? Hates him.
Local Police? Most hate him.
Homeland Security? Meh.
If you answer was either one of these, perhaps it's time to think about the following orders logic and if any of these branches of government would follow such orders, then the bigger issue is why are we training these people to "think" that way and just blindly follow orders.
And I'm not directing that at you Hawk, you're more level headed, but guys on here like kg and even gilesfan have all spoken with that gloom and doom.
If we're training and conditioning these guys in the military to commit these heinous acts without any regard or thought, what does that say about our values as a country?
57Brave
Well-known member
Read this and thought it needed passing along. I am an admirer of Michael Moore always have been . He has stood up to the people that destroyed his home town , the Military - Industrial Complex , the NRA and the health / insurance industry. And now this. I find the characterization quoted below of an American ISIS pretty spot on.
Now let's talk about who unhinges who. Does Palin enrage the Left as she is fond of saying or is Moore the provocative lightening rod that will and in fact does drive the Right (Amer ISIS ?? ) to distraction.
I still laugh at his interview with Charlton Heston. And then, have a laugh over the story about filming the movie Spartacus. Heston was a dolt and literally a tool ( used like a screw driver or wrench - unthinking and pretty much more more than a piece of metal in the hands of a mechanic ) that had it coming
http://www.salon.com/2015/01/30/mic...t_sniper_american_sniper_is_a_mess_of_a_film/
"
"They are our American ISIS" This is a very sad and profound truth, but on reflection I think America's always had that element - the Confederacy, NRA, Birchers, KKK, etc... and always will. As usual Michael Moore hits this very bad nail square on its head and the American ISIS are furious. He's been an incredibly brave crusader for right for decades and deserves a medal of freedom. I'd love to see the American ISIS froth at the mouth on that one. There is absolutely no denying, though, that Michael Moore has given a voice to millions who otherwise have none and speaks truth to wolves cloaked in American flags whose beliefs are patently un-American. He's our generation's Ralph Nader and Woody Guthrie. I just hope we see another Michael Moore for future generations. He'll always be needed.
Now let's talk about who unhinges who. Does Palin enrage the Left as she is fond of saying or is Moore the provocative lightening rod that will and in fact does drive the Right (Amer ISIS ?? ) to distraction.
I still laugh at his interview with Charlton Heston. And then, have a laugh over the story about filming the movie Spartacus. Heston was a dolt and literally a tool ( used like a screw driver or wrench - unthinking and pretty much more more than a piece of metal in the hands of a mechanic ) that had it coming
http://www.salon.com/2015/01/30/mic...t_sniper_american_sniper_is_a_mess_of_a_film/
"
"They are our American ISIS" This is a very sad and profound truth, but on reflection I think America's always had that element - the Confederacy, NRA, Birchers, KKK, etc... and always will. As usual Michael Moore hits this very bad nail square on its head and the American ISIS are furious. He's been an incredibly brave crusader for right for decades and deserves a medal of freedom. I'd love to see the American ISIS froth at the mouth on that one. There is absolutely no denying, though, that Michael Moore has given a voice to millions who otherwise have none and speaks truth to wolves cloaked in American flags whose beliefs are patently un-American. He's our generation's Ralph Nader and Woody Guthrie. I just hope we see another Michael Moore for future generations. He'll always be needed.
I think ever since the end of WW2 the mentality in this country is to not allow a conflict to grow into epic proportions. Does that lead to miscalculations on the right targets? Of course, but I think the world learned its lesson from WW2 to not ignore something that is clearly turning into a global problem.
I think with advances in technology we don't have to try and preemptively stop conflicts before they grow into epic proportions. Back in WW2 it was about what you heard on the radio or read in the newspaper, information didn't travel around the world as fast as today.
With satellites, the internets, social media, our government pretty much can keep an eye on everything major developing on this planet. Even with North Korea being so isolated, we probably have them under surveillance from every angle.
I think a result of our advanced communications we are identifying situations that need to be engaged to prevent a larger scale conflict. Its not always right and too often backfires but the whole concept of these small skirmishes is to prevent that larger issue which is brewing.
Obviously not since Boko Haram is running wild in Nigeria. The US works as how it always has, if we have any stakes in a situation we'll act accordingly, otherwise it's not in our interest to do so.
Boko Haram, Mexican student massacre, Darfur, North Korea, Syria, etc. There's no profitability in fixing those problems. Getting rid of Saddam and having access on Iraq's oil potential? Check. Bend over to the Saudi's for oil, despite them being some of the biggest offenders of human rights? Help overthrow Ghaddafi to have access to Libya's oil? Check.
sturg33
I
If that is the case then you don't know what conservative means.
50PoundHead
Hessmania Forever
It was the conservatives that tried to keep us out of WWI and WWII. The "America First" movement has conservative, isolationist roots. What has happened is that Woodrow Wilson's liberal internationalism morphed into the muscular, ideology-based foreign policy that has largely been adopted by the current crop of Republicans.
What about ISIS? The minor league team that caught Obama off guard after they ransacked through the desert?
They're not a state government.
Like Al Qaeda, they're spread out. We're not really aggressively pursuing them just like we didn't really aggressively pursue Bin Laden either. If they posed as big of a threat as you think, we would've sent more support than just air strikes and "trainers". With state governments you can topple them and influence their control and resources early.
ISIS and Al Qaeda will still exist for many years. Always need a bad guy to distract the public from your own problems at home.