He did a lot of other things before he got captured and killed you know. He isn't glorified simply because he was captured and killed by the British, if they were the criteria for glory we'd have a lot of bloody 'heroes' here in Ireland and Scotland.deeznutz1245 wrote:
William Wallace got captured and killed. He is a little bitch too.
Jessica Lynch was worthless
Right, but I am using Braddock logic here. He was captured, therefore he is a failure. McCain had many militant success' before his capture, but you don't recognize those because...oh thats right. You can't be wrong, I forgot. So instead of admitting you made a very disrepectful, unthoughtful statement you just change the rules. William Wallace wore a skirt too, little bitch.Braddock wrote:
He did a lot of other things before he got captured and killed you know. He isn't glorified simply because he was captured and killed by the British, if they were the criteria for glory we'd have a lot of bloody 'heroes' here in Ireland and Scotland.deeznutz1245 wrote:
William Wallace got captured and killed. He is a little bitch too.
Malloy must go
Exactly my point, thank you. That means he is no better or worse than any of his counterparts. That does not make him, nor his fellow captive soldiers failures as Braddock pointed out they were.wah1188 wrote:
I guess that's retaliation for Braddock's post, considering he is a DST regular I would of expected him to type up his post in a more respective manner.deeznutz1245 wrote:
William Wallace got captured and killed. He is a little bitch too.
Well anyway I'm sure he endured horrific things in that camp that we could never imagine. However the dude typing up the article is right all the other POW's got the same treatment or probably suffered even more. He did what he was expected to do.
Malloy must go
Ya Braddock you definitely aren't right on this one man. Getting shot down/getting killed doesnt have anything to do with skill. 90 percent of the time its just bad luck.
Unless you also argue that because McCain survived he was better than other pilots and aircrews who got shot down and killed?
Unless you also argue that because McCain survived he was better than other pilots and aircrews who got shot down and killed?
its bad decision making on mccains part on this one.
For sure bro, I think he exploited his experiences for political gain which, in our world (military), is not a very noble or admirable thing to do**. However, I think you would agree that nobody or nothing can take away what he lived through and sacrificed. That in itself is heroic. It's just what he did with it afterwards that is not. Heroes are silent, ya know.God Save the Queen wrote:
its bad decision making on mccains part on this one.
**unless it is to convince chicks at the bar to go home with you for some no pants dance. Only exception.
Last edited by deeznutz1245 (2008-09-16 14:57:05)
Malloy must go
Why doesn't he bang on a bit more about his successes then instead of his failures? All we seem to hear about are the stories of being shot down and captured, it's like he wants the sympathy vote or something.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Right, but I am using Braddock logic here. He was captured, therefore he is a failure. McCain had many militant success' before his capture, but you don't recognize those because...oh thats right. You can't be wrong, I forgot. So instead of admitting you made a very disrepectful, unthoughtful statement you just change the rules. William Wallace wore a skirt too, little bitch.Braddock wrote:
He did a lot of other things before he got captured and killed you know. He isn't glorified simply because he was captured and killed by the British, if they were the criteria for glory we'd have a lot of bloody 'heroes' here in Ireland and Scotland.deeznutz1245 wrote:
William Wallace got captured and killed. He is a little bitch too.
I clarified my position on the issue of heroism at the bottom of the last page, maybe some people missed it...
If you still think my opinion is disrespectful in light of this then I'm afraid we just have a difference of opinion.Braddock wrote:
I should clarify my position on this.
I acknowledge usmarine's point that self-sacrifice in the name of fellow troops or civilians is an act of bravery and heroism (the act of saving your fellow troops, or civilians, could be seen as the objective in this case) but the acts of being either A captured or B injured do not, on their own, qualify as acts of heroism. Surviving such things may be an indication of a person being incredibly tough and durable but not necessarily heroic.
My point is that the acts of being injured or captured are, if we're being brutally honest with ourselves, acts of failure. They are what can happen if the job does not get done properly. It may be noble that a man or women has given their lives to serve a cause and meet their end in this way but it is not heroic.
Is bad luck a qualifier for heroism then in that case? I think people are missing my point here.Spearhead wrote:
Ya Braddock you definitely aren't right on this one man. Getting shot down/getting killed doesnt have anything to do with skill. 90 percent of the time its just bad luck.
word. but, you gotta admit, if anyone could criticize mccains 5 1/2 years in a POW camp, the dude that spent 8 1/2 years in one can.deeznutz1245 wrote:
For sure bro, I think he exploited his experiences for political gain which, in our world (military), is not a very noble or admirable thing to do**. However, I think you would agree that nobody or nothing can take away what he lived through and sacrificed. That in itself is heroic. It's just what he did with it afterwards that is not. Heroes are silent, ya know.God Save the Queen wrote:
its bad decision making on mccains part on this one.
**unless it is to convince chicks at the bar to go home with you for some no pants dance. Only exception.
and jessica lynch was worthless. that shit is embarrassing
Last edited by God Save the Queen (2008-09-16 15:00:19)
Um....politics. I could easily accuse many a politician from either party of campaign BS, another topic though..Braddock wrote:
Why doesn't he bang on a bit more about his successes then instead of his failures? All we seem to hear about are the stories of being shot down and captured, it's like he wants the sympathy vote or something.
No, I just see you dodging my point. Am I a failure too Braddock? Am I a failure because I was wounded in combat, in a fire fight? Please enlighten me, but make sure you follow your same logic please.Braddock wrote:
I clarified my position on the issue of heroism at the bottom of the last page, maybe some people missed it....
Last edited by deeznutz1245 (2008-09-16 15:04:25)
Malloy must go
Jessica Lynch is a fucking pogue who didn't even fire her weapon. But hey, the media was dying to give us this war's hero.God Save the Queen wrote:
and jessica lynch was worthless. that shit is embarrassing
Malloy must go
I'll give you an example of heroism on the battlefield of war. Oliver Stone got a purple heart after being injured in combat. He was injured in the act of single-handedly trying to take on an advancing Vietnamese platoon (supposedly the inspiration for the scene in which Willem Dafoe goes on the attack on his own prior to being killed in the film Platoon). Now he would fit the description of a war hero in my book... but not simply because he was injured.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Um....politics. I could easily accuse many a politician from either party of campaign BS, another topic though..Braddock wrote:
Why doesn't he bang on a bit more about his successes then instead of his failures? All we seem to hear about are the stories of being shot down and captured, it's like he wants the sympathy vote or something.No, I just see you dodging my point. Am I a failure too Braddock? Am I a failure because I was wounded in combat, in a fire fight? Please enlighten me, but make sure you follow your same logic please.Braddock wrote:
I clarified my position on the issue of heroism at the bottom of the last page, maybe some people missed it....
Imagine boxer X takes on the heavyweight champion of the world and gets knocked out after 10 seconds.
Now imagine boxer Y takes on the heavyweight champion of the world and gets knocked out in the last round after a grueling hard fought battle.
Now they both got knocked out, but could you describe the efforts of both as heroic?
Last edited by Braddock (2008-09-16 15:24:40)
While at the same time smearing them.. haditha etc.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Jessica Lynch is a fucking pogue who didn't even fire her weapon. But hey, the media was dying to give us this war's hero.God Save the Queen wrote:
and jessica lynch was worthless. that shit is embarrassing
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Takes a lot of courage to step into the ring.Braddock wrote:
I'll give you an example of heroism on the battlefield of war. Oliver Stone got a purple heart after being injured in combat. He was injured in the act of single-handedly trying to take on an advancing Vietnamese platoon (supposedly the inspiration for the scene in which Willem Dafoe goes on the attack on his own prior to being killed in the film Platoon). Now he would fit the description of a war hero in my book... but not simply because he was injured.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Um....politics. I could easily accuse many a politician from either party of campaign BS, another topic though..Braddock wrote:
Why doesn't he bang on a bit more about his successes then instead of his failures? All we seem to hear about are the stories of being shot down and captured, it's like he wants the sympathy vote or something.No, I just see you dodging my point. Am I a failure too Braddock? Am I a failure because I was wounded in combat, in a fire fight? Please enlighten me, but make sure you follow your same logic please.Braddock wrote:
I clarified my position on the issue of heroism at the bottom of the last page, maybe some people missed it....
Imagine boxer X takes on the heavyweight champion of the world and gets knocked out after 10 seconds.
Now imagine boxer Y takes on the heavyweight champion of the world and gets knocked out in the last round after a grueling hard fought battle.
Now they both got knocked out, but could you describe the efforts of both as heroic?
Are you serious? Why don't you stop talking about boxer x, the director of Any Given Sunday and spare me the semantics? What you said about McCain was fucking stupid, just admit it. You flat out called him a failure because he was shot down and because he was wounded. Those two reasons, aside from his political ventures, was your logic for calling him a failure. You can't put aside the fact you don't like him, you just want to smear him it's as simple as that and that is why you have lost respect in my book. Not that you care because I don't excpect you to value my opinion, however, this is a debate forum and your logic has failed you in this thread. You either (A) Truly believe what you said and that makes you a nutless bitch who can Google all the answers, and give excpert opinion on combat without ever picking up a weapon, or (B) too stubborn to admit you are wrong. I hope it's the latter, honestly I do.Braddock wrote:
I'll give you an example of heroism on the battlefield of war. Oliver Stone got a purple heart after being injured in combat. He was injured in the act of single-handedly trying to take on an advancing Vietnamese platoon (supposedly the inspiration for the scene in which Willem Dafoe goes on the attack on his own prior to being killed in the film Platoon). Now he would fit the description of a war hero in my book... but not simply because he was injured.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Um....politics. I could easily accuse many a politician from either party of campaign BS, another topic though..Braddock wrote:
Why doesn't he bang on a bit more about his successes then instead of his failures? All we seem to hear about are the stories of being shot down and captured, it's like he wants the sympathy vote or something.No, I just see you dodging my point. Am I a failure too Braddock? Am I a failure because I was wounded in combat, in a fire fight? Please enlighten me, but make sure you follow your same logic please.Braddock wrote:
I clarified my position on the issue of heroism at the bottom of the last page, maybe some people missed it....
Imagine boxer X takes on the heavyweight champion of the world and gets knocked out after 10 seconds.
Now imagine boxer Y takes on the heavyweight champion of the world and gets knocked out in the last round after a grueling hard fought battle.
Now they both got knocked out, but could you describe the efforts of both as heroic?
Last edited by deeznutz1245 (2008-09-16 16:24:32)
Malloy must go
That's true, but there's still a huge difference between the achievements of the two boxers... that's my point.wah1188 wrote:
Takes a lot of courage to step into the ring.Braddock wrote:
I'll give you an example of heroism on the battlefield of war. Oliver Stone got a purple heart after being injured in combat. He was injured in the act of single-handedly trying to take on an advancing Vietnamese platoon (supposedly the inspiration for the scene in which Willem Dafoe goes on the attack on his own prior to being killed in the film Platoon). Now he would fit the description of a war hero in my book... but not simply because he was injured.deeznutz1245 wrote:
Um....politics. I could easily accuse many a politician from either party of campaign BS, another topic though..Braddock wrote:
Why doesn't he bang on a bit more about his successes then instead of his failures? All we seem to hear about are the stories of being shot down and captured, it's like he wants the sympathy vote or something.
No, I just see you dodging my point. Am I a failure too Braddock? Am I a failure because I was wounded in combat, in a fire fight? Please enlighten me, but make sure you follow your same logic please.
Imagine boxer X takes on the heavyweight champion of the world and gets knocked out after 10 seconds.
Now imagine boxer Y takes on the heavyweight champion of the world and gets knocked out in the last round after a grueling hard fought battle.
Now they both got knocked out, but could you describe the efforts of both as heroic?
Let's also not forget that medals and awards for injuries incurred during combat are just a way in which the state can 'glorify' loss and sacrifice in its name. Even Islamic extremists get their virgins in heaven supposedly if they give their lives for 'the cause'. I know what I'm saying is not 'popular' with many people but I'm just being objective and critical.
Proof right there that pussy causes war.Braddock wrote:
Even Islamic extremists get their virgins in heaven supposedly if they give their lives for 'the cause'. .
Malloy must go
my CIB just means Im a man and everyone else is just a little girl.
Spare me the "I served in combat" bullshit, everyone is entitled to an opinion when it comes to fundamental principles and concepts. We are talking about bravery and heroism here. I'll spell it out for you if you're having difficulty with what I'm saying...deeznutz1245 wrote:
Are you serious? Why don't you stop talking about boxer x, the director of Any Given Sunday and spare me the semantics? What you said about McCain was fucking stupid, just admit it. You flat out called him a failure because he was shot down and because he was wounded. Those two reasons, aside from his political ventures, was your logic for calling him a failure. You can't put aside the fact you don't like him, you just want to smear him it's as simple as that and that is why you have lost respect in my book. Not that you care because I don't excpect you to value my opinion, however, this is a debate forum and your logic has failed you in this thread. You either (A) Truly believe what you said and that makes you a nutless bitch who can Google all the answers, and give excpert opinion on combat without ever picking up a weapon, or (B) too stubborn to admit you are wrong. I hope it's the latter, honestly I do.
In all of McCain's previous military missions he may very well have been quite the hero (I don't know because all I ever get to hear about is the time he was shot down and captured).
In the mission where he was shot down and captured he failed his objective.
You may very well think I'm "nutless" because of my views but at least I'm consistent. I am not attacking only soldiers with these opinions, I made the point in a previous thread that Jews who survived the holocaust were not heroes merely because they survived, the Jews that gathered the courage to mount the rising in the Polish ghettos on the other hand were most definitely heroes. If you have trouble grasping the concept I am describing then I am very sorry but for me heroism requires a proactive effort of courage and bravery, not a passive act of suffering or bad luck.
Real Hero
I must admit I agree with Braddock. Especially his last 9 words fit in perfectly with my own feelings. Sorry Mr Mccain.
I must admit I agree with Braddock. Especially his last 9 words fit in perfectly with my own feelings. Sorry Mr Mccain.
Good example.jord wrote:
Real Hero
I must admit I agree with Braddock. Especially his last 9 words fit in perfectly with my own feelings. Sorry Mr Mccain.
I don't know whether it's that other people here are misunderstanding my point of view or whether they actually believe that the act of simply being killed, shot down or captured qualifies as 'heroic'?
a hero is not giving into torture and actually coming back from a beating and grinning to fellow POW's. oh, and refusing the chance to go home and stop the torture because he did not want to leave the men behind. thats heroic and i dont give a flying fuck what you say.
I responded to this in the other thread in case you think I'm ducking you by the way.usmarine wrote:
a hero is not giving into torture and actually coming back from a beating and grinning to fellow POW's. oh, and refusing the chance to go home and stop the torture because he did not want to leave the men behind. thats heroic and i dont give a flying fuck what you say.
Perhaps McCain's camp should talk more about his actual heroics and less of his military failures (yes, being shot down counts as failing in my book... I'm sorry I don't buy into the concept of ribbons and prizes for people who finish outside the 'medal positions').
Thank God it's not up to you to decide who we consider a war hero and who we don't.Braddock wrote:
If I were an American I'd prefer a candidate who could make it through a war without getting shot down, captured, tortured or injured... you know, an actual war hero.
Not some guy who couldn't get the job done and subsequently decided to embark on a political career off of the back of his military failures.
The guy made O-6 and retired honorably. Hardly a "military failure".
Your characterization of what makes an "actual war hero" is ridiculous. He endured less than some, but far more than most. Like him or dislike him, but don't ridicule what he went through. Perhaps you should read up a bit on the individuals who didn't "make it through a war without getting shot down, captured, tortured or injured"...then compare that to those who did.
But...let's talk about "change", shall we?
What "change" has Obama enacted since he's been in elected office?
What "change" has McCain enacted since he's been in elected office?
Which of the two candidates has been sideways with his party over key reform issues?
Which of the two candidates has voted 100% with his party?
You know definitively what he campaigned on in all four campaigns? Again...don't let the facts stand in the way of your blind hero-worship.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
And what did he run on? War Hero and "I was tortured". Facts, lol. You haven't been concerned with those for 8 years. Don't start now.FEOS wrote:
That and 22 years in the Senate. But don't bother with those pesky facts.Mason4Assassin444 wrote:
McCain's whole career is based off "I was tortured".
BTW: You haven't the slightest fucking clue what I have or haven't been concerned with for 8 years.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
And to think people cry about the "wussification" of America!FEOS wrote:
Thank God it's not up to you to decide who we consider a war hero and who we don't.Braddock wrote:
If I were an American I'd prefer a candidate who could make it through a war without getting shot down, captured, tortured or injured... you know, an actual war hero.
Not some guy who couldn't get the job done and subsequently decided to embark on a political career off of the back of his military failures.
The guy made O-6 and retired honorably. Hardly a "military failure".
Your characterization of what makes an "actual war hero" is ridiculous. He endured less than some, but far more than most. Like him or dislike him, but don't ridicule what he went through. Perhaps you should read up a bit on the individuals who didn't "make it through a war without getting shot down, captured, tortured or injured"...then compare that to those who did.
Being shot down, killed or tortured does NOT make you a war hero. However, if these things happen to you while you are acting above and beyond the call of duty then yes, you ARE a hero. Heroism is not an everyday thing, it is not part of the "9 to 5" of military activity, it is not something that occurs while you are going through the numbers doing the job you signed up to do. Being shot down, tortured and killed are coincidental factors when it comes to heroism, not qualifying factors. The idea of handing out medals purely because someone gets injured is an extension of the philosophy of handing out ribbons to people who finish lower then third place in a race. Just stick your medals up your arse and pay the soldier's medical bills. Heroes are people who do things, not have things happen to them.
Military heroes do exist and John McCain can even be described as one... but not because he shot down and captured.