Anyone else horrified their tax dollars buy death?

[Mississippi Steve]

Here are a few reason why a 12 year old should not be allowed to marry. For one they are too young to deal with all the emotional stresses that come with marriage and bearing children. Another is they are taken advantage of or sold off to some husband five times their age. Are you really telling me you think a 12 year old is capable of comprehending what marriage means for them? Do you think they are developed enough to make that choice themselves or be forced into it? Now about the patriotism. To be patriotic you do not have to fully agree with everything your country does or be proud of that. What I am proud of is what my country is suppose to stand for and hopefully one day will. I am proud of all the people who died fighting for my and your right to say what the hell ever we want. I am proud that no matter the cost we will defend freedom. If you can't find one reason to be proud of your country well....lets just say I am glad you are not American. For we do not need anymore sunshine patriots.

AMEN BROTHER!

[overgrowthegovt]

In Nam, little kids would walk up to soldiers, drop a live grenade at their feet and run.... I am surprised they are not having that prob in Iraq, or having probs with sappers either. I guess they are having enough problems with IEDs and car bombs. vigilance means you keep on living, indiference and/or letting your guard down can cost you and your fellow brothers in arms their lives. but they don't show those kinds of things in the media. They only show what they can sensationalize.

Yes I am a Viet nam era vet, and I still remember.

Can you blame the kids? The soldiers were there, after all, to wreak death and destruction on their countrymen.

To whoever was talking about the U.S. defending freedom...you poor, naive bastard. The backing of the East Timor slaughter was not a defense of freedom, nor is the support of Israel's right to tyrannize whoever happen to live in the land of the chosen people, nor was the shit they've pulled in Haiti, Iran, Puerto Rico, etc. They act in their national interest, not to defend true freedom, but to defend their narrow definition of freedom, which means laissez faire corporatism at the expense of human dignity. In fact, their key position in the International Monetary Fund has led to them pressuring countries in debt to lower economic intervention and cut spending on health and education. No, they defend freedom the way the Soviets defended the Czechs' freedom in 1968 (the justification then being the defense of freedom from poisonous capitalistic tendencies).

Face it, patriots...what your country is doing in the world is purely self-serving, CEOs are the primary beneficiaries, and no amount of lust for security can justify constant pre-emption. "We'd rather fight them over there than over here"...sounds reasonable, but after decades of the violence happening over there, maybe it'd be fair to have some of it over here. Maybe then the horrors of war will be felt as a reality, not as a remote campaign that doesn't interfere with Sunday dinner.

[luciddreamer]

Here are a few reason why a 12 year old should not be allowed to marry. For one they are too young to deal with all the emotional stresses that come with marriage and bearing children. Another is they are taken advantage of or sold off to some husband five times their age. Are you really telling me you think a 12 year old is capable of comprehending what marriage means for them? Do you think they are developed enough to make that choice themselves or be forced into it?

Why are they too young? Only because Western society deems them too young. In other societies they are taught these things and it is the norm, so when they are twelve they are fully ready. Maybe not fully, but is anyone here even fully ready to have a kid? no you can't be until you have one.
I'm not talking about selling kids, I'm talking about legitimate marriage or having kids.

And yeah as overgrow said, fighting wars has nothing to do with freedom. Let alone freedom of speech as people are saying. How the hell does blowing someone up give you freedom of speech huh?

[apocolips31]

A child should be playing with their friends and learning not being a mommy and house wife. Just because they can bear children doesn't mean they are ready to. Also their are plenty of studies which show a child's brain at that age is no where close to be fully developed. So what is the harm of marrying at an older age? Why do they want them so young? I will tell you why because they are sick child molesters and you are starting to sound like one too. Just trying to justify your sick fantasy's? If I am wrong I apologize but, that is how you are coming off to me. As for the part of freedom of speech and you failing to comprehend the connection between that and war. Blowing something up will help you gain freedom of speech, if what you are blowing up is what is prohibiting you from speaking in the first place. Did not our revolutionary war set the stage for us to create our own country? In turn giving us all the rights we enjoy today. So you see war and freedom are very closely linked, because if their is not a way to protect your self you will at some point fall victim to someone. If we couldn't repel the forces of the axis do you think we would be living as we do today? I wonder would their even be a thing called a "right" in such a world?

[Mississippi Steve]

Can you blame the kids? The soldiers were there, after all, to wreak death and destruction on their countrymen.

To whoever was talking about the U.S. defending freedom...you poor, naive bastard. The backing of the East Timor slaughter was not a defense of freedom, nor is the support of Israel's right to tyrannize whoever happen to live in the land of the chosen people, nor was the shit they've pulled in Haiti, Iran, Puerto Rico, etc. They act in their national interest, not to defend true freedom, but to defend their narrow definition of freedom, which means laissez faire corporatism at the expense of human dignity. In fact, their key position in the International Monetary Fund has led to them pressuring countries in debt to lower economic intervention and cut spending on health and education. No, they defend freedom the way the Soviets defended the Czechs' freedom in 1968 (the justification then being the defense of freedom from poisonous capitalistic tendencies).

Face it, patriots...what your country is doing in the world is purely self-serving, CEOs are the primary beneficiaries, and no amount of lust for security can justify constant pre-emption. "We'd rather fight them over there than over here"...sounds reasonable, but after decades of the violence happening over there, maybe it'd be fair to have some of it over here. Maybe then the horrors of war will be felt as a reality, not as a remote campaign that doesn't interfere with Sunday dinner.

How many years did you serve in the military?? None I bet.... What have you done to help secure your freedoms?? probably not much there either.
Maybe you should go to Iraq and explain the error of their ways. After all, they have only been at war for 4,000 years, and they treat their women like chattel, and kill them with minimum provocation by some very cruel means.
Feel free to go over there an tell them its not right. But unless you have first hand experience, you might want to re-think what you read in the biased media, and books. I don't mind fighting a war for human rights.....been there, done that. Come talk to me whan you can say the same.

[Breukelen advocaat]

I thought that was sarcasm when I first read it. That is how dumb you sound.
I do not care if the people of Afghanistan want the Taliban. We were sending millions in foreign aid to Afghanistan prior to 9/11. Not only did we do no harm to the country, we also helped them to oust the Soviets. They paid us back by sheltering and supporting bin Laden.

So it doesn't matter that they're bombing the shit out of their own civilians but a couple of U.S people means they should be destroyed?
If you read what I said, you'd see that I supported bombing them in the hills, in their ratholes, rather than in the major cities and populated areas.

I'd say the only reason to destroy them is coz they are evil bastards.
I can tell you're one of those 'patriotic' people who would just nuke the whole middle east if you could.
I am more in favor of using economic boycotting than nuclear weapons, to force these countries to deal with their lunatic fringes and corrupt governments.

Honestly I don't understand patriotism either. Why would you be proud of your country? Unless it's murder, rape etc. free and everyone is happy most of the time there is no reason to be proud.
There are times when there are reasons to be proud, and other times dissapointed.

Anyway....
If the U.S really thinks they are so bad, they would bomb them to high heaven. It's not what it's about. Think about that.
The Taliban and al Quada cannot be dealt with in the way they expect - we must hit them like there's no tomorrow. I'd make them think that the Crusades was like a walk through the Botanical Gardens.

The culture and belief systems of Islam are horrific, for the most part, but I'm all for just leaving them alone (not including finding and punishing criminals like bin Laden)......unless they start fucking with us again. Then you take the gloves off and wipe out their ability to fight for good. There seems to be a trend of less Islamic radicalism for the past few years. Maybe some have learned their lesson, but we shouldn't let our guard down, because their religion demands Jihad, and some will never be satisfied until they've killed off everybody that isn't a Muslim.

[overgrowthegovt]

How many years did you serve in the military?? None I bet.... What have you done to help secure your freedoms?? probably not much there either.
Maybe you should go to Iraq and explain the error of their ways. After all, they have only been at war for 4,000 years, and they treat their women like chattel, and kill them with minimum provocation by some very cruel means.
Feel free to go over there an tell them its not right. But unless you have first hand experience, you might want to re-think what you read in the biased media, and books. I don't mind fighting a war for human rights.....been there, done that. Come talk to me whan you can say the same.

You seem to be quite fond of playing the age card and the veteran card with me as a strawman to shut me up...yeah, I'm young, and as a conscientious objector I plan on never serving in the military, but that doesn't invalidate my opinions. Also, believe me, nobody hates the biased media more than I do, and I currently don't obtain my views and opinions from it. Here in Canada, in fact, our media regularly shows its support for the war in Afghanistan, something that irks me to no end.

I've never violently secured my freedoms, no, and I don't plan on doing so--I keep informed and I write transgressional poetry, trying to maintain my freedom of mind by keeping my head above the propaganda waters. I could easily ask you condescendingly how many hours you've spent studying the ideas of the great philosophers, but I prefer to argue without degrading "come talk to me" ultimatums.

If it is indeed womens' rights that you believe in fiercely enough to justify carnage and destruction, then we should invade Saudi Arabia at once--oh, but they're economically more cooperative, so you won't hear any talk of that anytime soon. At least half of the countries in Africa could use a good pro-human rights bloody invasion too...where is the line drawn? I propose drawing it at not using violence as an engine of social change.

[FreshNugz]

In Nam, little kids would walk up to soldiers, drop a live grenade at their feet and run.... I am surprised they are not having that prob in Iraq, or having probs with sappers either. I guess they are having enough problems with IEDs and car bombs. vigilance means you keep on living, indiference and/or letting your guard down can cost you and your fellow brothers in arms their lives. but they don't show those kinds of things in the media. They only show what they can sensationalize.

Yes I am a Viet nam era vet, and I still remember.

Look, I know you probably hate me for the views I hold, but I think we can look through that.
I realize that was a part of the war in Vietnam. And I thought about that as I posted, I really did. But we're referring to a particular situation here, about a video where marines are having fun with a couple of kids. It's one actual piece of possibly positive news in that land of hell..and for someone to talk about shooting them in the situation we're referring to is sickening. Child VietCong is a complete other story, and I sympathize with soldiers who were faced with a decision like that one. I know you don't think so, but I do.
This has turned into a wider discussion on the morality complex(if any) of war. That's a whole other debate, first off. And second, wars are different. I feel differently about particular ones than I do about this current one, or I do about Vietnam.
I regret that I seem to have offended you, and your service for your country. I didn't intend it, please forgive it.
Keep on keepin' on.

[GrinKyle]

I love how Mississippi Steve brought up Vietnam... and how children would drop grenades and run....

I would to, If i was a child of that era, living in Vietnam, I would have ALSO tried to kill you Steve, with whatever I had. You know why?

CAUSE YOU INVADED MY HOMELAND.

But keep combating that communism, or fascism, or is it socialism now? I forgot, it changes every 15 years, its hard to keep up.

***
Obviously people FOR the Iraq war, are reliving the Vietnam era over again, and they never were taught to learn from the history books.

in 30 years, our grandchildren will be taught in school how much of a failure and wrong circumstances we got ourselves into this war, and how our fear and policies made it worse.

too bad history is repeating itself, its a shame nobody learned. At least the people that have the power to act didn't.

But I want Steve to come back here and clarify if he thinks Vietnam was a just(sp?) war. I interpreted that he thinks it was.

[Mississippi Steve]

***
Obviously people FOR the Iraq war, are reliving the Vietnam era over again, and they never were taught to learn from the history books.

in 30 years, our grandchildren will be taught in school how much of a failure and wrong circumstances we got ourselves into this war, and how our fear and policies made it worse.

too bad history is repeating itself, its a shame nobody learned. At least the people that have the power to act didn't.

But I want Steve to come back here and clarify if he thinks Vietnam was a just(sp?) war. I interpreted that he thinks it was.

I never said that Viet Nam was just.... but you can believe what you want.