Hurricane
Banned
+1,153|7068|Washington, DC

c14u53w172 wrote:

you invaded iraq to help little children (that were wounded by your armed forces)?!
don't you have a nazi to surrender to?
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|7081

c14u53w172 wrote:

you invaded iraq to help little children (that were wounded by your armed forces)?!
yes, thats exactly it.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6848|'Murka

c14u53w172 wrote:

you invaded iraq to help little children (that were wounded by your armed forces)?!
Actually, that kid was wounded by insurgents...just like thousands of other children, women, old, and infirm in Iraq.
“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
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7038|132 and Bush

c14u53w172 wrote:

you invaded iraq to help little children (that were wounded by your armed forces)?!
Soldiers don't make the policy.

If you would like to know the story behind that picture ...
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/little-girl.htm
Mosul

Major Mark Bieger found this little girl after the car bomb that attacked our guys while kids were crowding around. The soldiers here have been angry and sad for two days. They are angry because the terrorists could just as easily have waited a block or two and attacked the patrol away from the kids. Instead, the suicide bomber drove his car and hit the Stryker when about twenty children were jumping up and down and waving at the soldiers. Major Bieger, I had seen him help rescue some of our guys a week earlier during another big attack, took some of our soldiers and rushed this little girl to our hospital. He wanted her to have American surgeons and not to go to the Iraqi hospital. She didn’t make it. I snapped this picture when Major Bieger ran to take her away. He kept stopping to talk with her and hug her.

The soldiers went back to that neighborhood the next day to ask what they could do. The people were very warm and welcomed us into their homes, and many kids were actually running up to say hello and to ask soldiers to shake hands.

Eventually, some insurgents must have realized we were back and started shooting at us. The American soldiers and Iraqi police started engaging the enemy and there was a running gun battle. I saw at least one IP who was shot, but he looked okay and actually smiled at me despite the big bullet hole in his leg. I smiled back.

One thing seems certain; the people in that neighborhood share our feelings about the terrorists. We are going to go back there, and if any terrorists come out, the soldiers hope to find them. Everybody is still very angry that the insurgents attacked us when the kids were around. Their day will come.

[Post Script]
The reaction to my photo of Major Bieger cradling Farah, the little girl who died in his arms, provoked a flood of messages and heartfelt responses from caring people around the world. I have spent the last several days trying to read every message, and respond to as many as possible, but the flow has finally outpaced me, much as the swiftness of a river will finally defeat even the most determined swimmer.

This morning there was a banging on my door. It was “Q,” loaded for battle, weapon in hand, wearing the military radio headphones with the microphone that wrapped around his face. Bang, Bang, Bang! Q hit my door.

“Mike! Where are you?!”
“Hold on,” I said, opening the door.
“Why aren’t you ready! Grab your gear . . . we’re going!” My worn-out boots sat empty in the corner.
“I can’t go today,” I said, glancing in the direction of my laptop.
“What?”
“Just tell them I can’t go today.”
“Okay!” And Q trotted off back to his Stryker, leaving me behind. The soldiers rolled out on their mission without me.

And now I sit here, answering a few final emails, while the men of Deuce Four patrol in Mosul. My hands may be here, but my head and heart are on the streets in the struggle. I’ve been riding the wave of interest and feedback from that photo, but I need to get back to what I seem best equipped to do–posting dispatches about what is happening here in Iraq. I will continue to read every message, and I offer my sincere thanks in advance for everyone who takes the time to send one, but, alas, with this dispatch, I must swim to shore.

Michael
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Flecco
iPod is broken.
+1,048|7103|NT, like Mick Dundee

Just want to thank everybody for their contributions. More food for thought for me to digest.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6843|North Carolina

Flecco wrote:

Right, something Sarrk just said, possibly in jest, has got me thinking a little...

He stated that I should have fun with my guns and remember that I have no honour. Is modern combat without honour?

Has honour ever actually shown it's face in combat?


I would argue yes. Honour is a human concept, and as such, is applicable to the human condition even in an environment of modern, chaotic combat.  Particularly hoping for imput from the members of the forums who have done a tour of duty or two, or just spent time serving in an armed force.
Honor is mostly subjective.  If we go with a relativistic definition of honor, then being honorable in war involves fighting in ways that do not violate your own ethics.  Granted, your ethics will often be very different from your enemy's.

I really don't think guns have much of anything to do with it....
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|7081

Turquoise wrote:

Honor is subjective
c14u53w172
Member
+31|6436|tomania

Hurricane wrote:

c14u53w172 wrote:

you invaded iraq to help little children (that were wounded by your armed forces)?!
don't you have a nazi to surrender to?
haha. i'm from germany. don't you wanna surrender to me?!

this iraq thing has been discussed for a long time and very extensively on this forum. i won't start another debat about it.

just that: iraq would be better off even with saddam. and that picture is just ridiculously solemn.

Last edited by c14u53w172 (2007-12-01 02:32:22)

psH
Banned
+217|6821|Sydney
holy shit i can't believe i clicked the DST forum link.


but i, also, want to join the Australian Army, RAAC to be exact *looks at avatar*. Is honour really what your looking for when you join flec? combat? or just a job to feed a family and get income off of?

Last edited by Ashlite (2007-12-01 03:40:55)

B.Schuss
I'm back, baby... ( sort of )
+664|7279|Cologne, Germany

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Honor is subjective
seconded. From their perspective, even suicide bombers die a honorable death.

to me, war is about death and destruction, and there ain't honor in either.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6848|'Murka

So long as they don't target non-combatants, then sure.

War is about death and destruction, true. But just because war has a horrible purpose does not mean that honor cannot be found in it.

I disagree that honor is subjective. The rightness or wrongness of reasons for going to war is certainly subjective, but the nature of the actions of individuals within that war is not.
“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
[pt] KEIOS
srs bsns
+231|7090|pimelteror.de
It is honourable, to minimize any casualties at all. I´ve heard a story about the difference between british and american attacks against iraqi tanks in desert storm. The brits destroyed only some tanks, so the iraqis could leave their vehicles to surrender, before they destroyed the whole convoy. The americans just destroyed all. So what the brits were doing was more honorable, than what US Forces did - but how can it be an honour at all, to kill other families father/brother/sons?

You might act more honourable than others in war - still killing people is against humanity.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6848|'Murka

I would like to see your source for that anecdote, as not all ground components had the same objectives. Different forces had different tasks to accomplish, so comparing how the Brits handled theirs to how the US handled theirs is really apples and oranges without the broader context.

But your last point is well made. War is terrible...the taking of life should never be entered into lightly. But I don't think that's what this thread is getting at...not the morality of war, but whether is is possible to have honorable behavior in such a dichotomous situation.
“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
Flecco
iPod is broken.
+1,048|7103|NT, like Mick Dundee

Ashlite wrote:

but i, also, want to join the Australian Army, RAAC to be exact *looks at avatar*. Is honour really what your looking for when you join flec? combat? or just a job to feed a family and get income off of?
A few reasons, in dot-point form...

[*]Financial incentive. I'll be able to leave home immediately and have some cash.

[*]Sounds like an interesting job.

[*]Can't see myself happy if I don't try it sometime.

[*]Wouldn't mind seeing what I'm made of and whether I can make it in the army.
[/list]

There's more but it's after midnight and I can't be bothered dredging them up.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
Commie Killer
Member
+192|6825
If you join the military looking for honor or glory, do everyone a favor and kill yourself, your stupidity will possibly get you fellow squad mates killed/wounded.
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|7081

FEOS wrote:

So long as they don't target non-combatants, then sure.

War is about death and destruction, true. But just because war has a horrible purpose does not mean that honor cannot be found in it.

I disagree that honor is subjective. The rightness or wrongness of reasons for going to war is certainly subjective, but the nature of the actions of individuals within that war is not.
nobody loads a VBIED with five 155MM artillery shells intending to bomb a market, thinking "Im going be dishonorable today"
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6848|'Murka

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

nobody loads a VBIED with five 155MM artillery shells intending to bomb a market, thinking "Im going be dishonorable today"
True. But the US soldier doesn't ruck up and say, "I'm going to be honorable today" either.

Whether an action is honorable or not is decided after the fact, normally by observers rather than participants.
“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
Hunter/Jumper
Member
+117|6792

c14u53w172 wrote:

you invaded iraq to help little children (that were wounded by your armed forces)?!
how about the little girls who would grow up to be cattle, do they count ?
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|7127|Tampa Bay Florida
All situations in war are not the same, so I don't think there's a definite answer to this.

I'd say mostly no, I see no honor in killing other people.  But sometimes honorable things do happen.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard