Outrage at US Marine throwing puppy to its death in Iraq

[emma69]

My objection to the post was that it was calling for the dishonorable dishcarge of the soldier in question. I have reservations about the soldier being punished. I have punished soldier myself for an awful lot less. However, I wanted to bring people's attention to the fact of what a dishonourable discharge means, especially in a country with no universal health care. Throwing young men and women out on the streets, with inadequate provision for health care is not, IMO, the way any human being should be treated. I think so many cries for help are ignored, then people wonder why the authorities didn't spot the 'warning signs' as they like to call them - a classic one being a person who has demonstrated cruelty to animals, then goes on to hurt a human being. I am asking that perhaps just this once, they heed the warning signs, and rehabillitate this man, in prison if they feel needs be, but for goodness sake, don't deprive him of the mental health care he clearly needs by discharging him.

BTW, it is a matter of record where the military recruits from - there is a reason you don't see recruiting offices in affluent neighbourhoods in the UK. Having worked in the forces, I know that many of the men are poorly educated, come from deprived areas (the army is seen as a 'way out' and a means to gain a skill) and often broken homes. Quite frankly it amazes me looking back that people with education, degrees, and plenty of choices available to them choose to serve in the forces (I was one of them) The salary is appaling, the living conditions aren't exactly the Hilton, and you risk life and limb virtually every day (the number killed or injured outside of war zones is truely astonishing). Yet something, perhaps the desire to see the world as a better place, to protect the weak and helpless, and to protect the freedoms that the average citizen takes for granted, means that we keep signing up.

 

[emma69]

"They are not trained to rape children and women or throw small puppies off a cliff"

No, but they are trained to kill women and children, and animals. It is a horrid fact, but the people that our soldiers are fighting against know that they often cannot bring themselves to shoot women and children, it goes against everything that is ingrained. So they make women and children carry suicide bombs into groups of soldiers. They make women conceal weapons and ammunition, knowing that we will abide by the Geneva Conventions and rules of warfare and will not strip search them unless it can be done by a female. Given that neither the US or British army has front line women troops (ha bloody ha) this often means they cannot be searched. So if you have a child, or a woman coming towards you, who may well be carrying a bomb, based on other factors, and they do not heed your instructions to halt, do you shoot them? A very tough call. Yet it is one we ask our soldiers to make with frequency. And that can really screw someone up.

 

[emma69]

My goodness, you really are rather naive. When recruiters talk to the men they are trying to enlist, they don't list off the fact that you will be expected to shoot men women and children, or excavate mass graves with still rotting corpses in, or ignore cries from dying people as you press on to secure your objectives. They don't tell you that if your best friend is shot, all you can do for him is put an ampule of morphine in him and hope for the best while you run on into a rain of bullets, anymore than they tell you that if you eat the rations they will make you constipated or that idiots will jeer at you when you go on a Rememberance Day parade. No, they tell you how you can go on sailing courses, or ski for your country, play polo each afternoon, or learn how to parachute, ride a horse, or play rugby to a near professional level. You can't just quit the moment they ask you to do something difficult, you can't just walk out because you don't like it, or realise perhaps all those smiling men and women in the glossy brochures perhaps posed for the photo - and once you get to that point it is rather moot to wonder if you perhaps shouldn't have applied to flip burgers instead.

 

[voicesforhorses]

Emma69 - “My objection to the post was that it was calling for the dishonorable dishcarge of the soldier in question.

The post that started this did not call for the dishonorable discharge of the soldier. The site that the post links to does I think - but that’s their decision/responsibility. I don’t believe the soldier is fit for duty possibly as a result of his experiences or perhaps not. It does not mean I wish him to be treated with same callous disposal of the puppy. Two wrong don’t make a right.

Sooty - “ I am not saying all soldiers behave like this, but it is a risk you take when you recruit from the poorer sections of society”

That is very different from saying

Sooty - “It is a fact that the American military is recruiting youngsters from deprived backgrounds”

Sooty – “Please do not attempt to dictate to me what I can and cannot discuss on a thread. This matter has already been discussed at some length in the Soapbox prior to your post, in a thread where everybody was allowed to express their opinion freely.”

Are we not both expressing our views openly and freely?
How can I dictate what you can and cant say – you have free will……

Nolongeramember - “Sooty I quite agree at being able to discuss this subject freely since it was not so long ago I was shot down by the OP on a thread about licensing of breeders/dealers and I was sick of people arguing about it all so I said people should stop arguing about who was going to pay for the licensing ( since it was the dealers who were kicking up a fuss about it). I was pretty much told that debate was healthy and made to feel that I was wrong in making such a comment and do you know what it really PISSED me off!
That is why I cannot understand why your valid points raised on this thread about the puppy are being criticised to the point of almost censorship by the OP.
While I do not agree with the killing of this puppy ( if that did in fact take place) the act of throwing the animal has more far reaching implications not least of which the mental state of those individuals who are facing traumatic experiences day in day out all in the name of war and control.
To the OP you cannot have it both ways.
If debate is healthy then it should be allowed to continue no matter what the subject matter and its sensitivity.”

You both seem to think I have some ability to direct and censor this thread????

I think people have added fantastic insightful posts intrinsic to the subject of a young mans relationship with the value of life. I found it really interesting to read the different constructive views put forward and commented when I believed the core of the subject diverted.

JM07 - “unfortunately with these type of threads if anyone dissagrees with the OP's opinion,whoever and whatever they may be, then you are deemed to be "ignorant" of the "facts"....TBH this forum is turning into an off-shoot of PETA with all the petitions we are asked to sign, campains to support etc etc...”

I have challenged Sooty and I guess anyone else who believed the most important point about the original post was the 90,000 innocent victims of the war and because we disagree that this particular point is crucial to the subject you accuse me of classing them as ‘ignorant of the facts’…….Please show me my posts that justify your accusation.

I admit to posting campaigns and petitions on this forum but nobody is forcing you to sign them…………

It appears I have outstayed my welcome so I will sign off from this thread with a couple of thoughts…….

Harry Patch a world war one veteran (in a time where there was no support or understanding for the damaged military mind) said - “We never wanted to shoot to kill – we always aimed for the legs”

I do not believe all military personnel - back then or now are all killing machines. Trained to kill yes but thats different.

Some may say - So a soldier killed a puppy – so what - it’s horrific but in the scheme of things it is insignificant…….but what isn’t insignificant is when a human for what ever reason kills for killing sake. Born like it or made like it - victim or not I believe if we can find justification for a senseless act of cruelty or put importance only on ‘bigger horrors’ we run the risk of crossing a very fine line into a place where the value of life is measured only in numbers or by species.

I for one am relieved that there are people here who feel passionate about the needless death of one puppy or indeed the needless act of throwing a dead puppy off a cliff (if that is what happened) I am relieved that there are people who have not become so numb that we have to talk in numbers before it touches us.

Emma
www.voicesforhorses.co.uk

 

[Sooty]

And I am glad there are other members on this forum capable of actually understanding what I write.

 

[emma69]

Certainly my interpretation of the link and the information therein was that the charity wanted the soldier sacked.

Harry Patch a world war one veteran (in a time where there was no support or understanding for the damaged military mind) said - “We never wanted to shoot to kill – we always aimed for the legs”

Or the flip side of the same argument - anti personnel mines are not designed to kill people, neither is the shrapnel in bombs, it is designed to injure the person. For the same reason, soldiers sometimes shoot to wound, not to kill. A dead soldier removes 1 from the field of battle. An injured soldier removes 2-3 - the soldier himself, and the one or two people it takes to remove him from the battle field and care for him. It has always been a strategy of warfare to injure more people than you kill, ideally permanant, but certainly enough to strech the enemy's resources to the absolute limit. Additionally, the hit to the morale from sending soldiers home missing limbs etc hits home far more than dead bodies you never see, persuading those at home not to enlist.

 

[alleycat]

[ QUOTE ]
Some may say - So a soldier killed a puppy – so what - it’s horrific but in the scheme of things it is insignificant…….but what isn’t insignificant is when a human for what ever reason kills for killing sake. Born like it or made like it - victim or not I believe if we can find justification for a senseless act of cruelty or put importance only on ‘bigger horrors’ we run the risk of crossing a very fine line into a place where the value of life is measured only in numbers or by species.

I for one am relieved that there are people here who feel passionate about the needless death of one puppy or indeed the needless act of throwing a dead puppy off a cliff (if that is what happened) I am relieved that there are people who have not become so numb that we have to talk in numbers before it touches us.



[/ QUOTE ]

I feel you have entirely missed the point of the posts referring to the sheer scale and horror of war- this war and wars generally. No-one here is saying- "Its only a puppy- so what?" but what a lot of rather more realistic people seem to be saying is "What happened to that puppy was horrific- now what about the rest?"

I'm afraid we do tend to measure the value of life by numbers AND by species- therefore the brutal treatment of one cute, helpless puppy which we can see on video is going to get a massive amount of attention compared to the faceless thousands of human casualties, whether physically injured or mentally scarred.

Nor is it a matter of finding justification; who, here, has tried to JUSTIFY what happened? I certainly haven't; I don't feel it CAN be justified; someone is definately guilty...... its just that I can't help feeling it isn't the person you might think at first sight.

IMO it could even be said that a good measure of guilt lies with someone who was, himself, happy to play the cute furry animal card for the sake of votes, at much the same time as jumping on the bandwagon of the illegal war in which rather less cute, not-so-furry human beings have been slaughtered in droves. (And to thnk I used to vote Labour.... Not any more...)

 

[EstherSupporter]

It's such a shame that there are one or two users who have to post comments to personally insult other members.

It does amuse me that these persons seem to think they are the only people who are actually educated and able to read and understand posts and their opionions are the only valid ones posted and if anyone has a different opinion to theirs it is reguarded as invalid and stupid.

Can anyone tell me if there is a statement on this forum which states that all patitions MUST BE read and signed by all members and that all threads/campaigns of NO INTEREST to them must be read by them and commented on.

 

[BBH]

I think people should feel free to express their views but those who hijack posts with very passionate forceful views dismissing the thoughts of others run the risk of being less credible and written off as ranters. Food for thought !!

 

[Natch]

voicesforhorses what a good post, thank you. I hope you're not leaving the forum for good as you have some really good food for thought to contribute, and I don't think your posts are offensive to anyone, I think you go deliberatley out of your way to be objective and polite in putting your point of view across, and I wish everyone had your tact and were that sensible!

This seems to be turning into the next Jamie Grey post. he said/she said/you don't know the facts/you're ignorant/you're stupid/you're wrong/you're out of order

(The above only an illustration of the general gist not actual quotes before anyone picks me up on that.)

I'm going to make this my last post on this thread as I'm sure I'm probably only fuelling the fire, which isn't my intention, but I will say I think it is a real pity that there seem to be personal remarks being made on here, be they deliberate or unwitting. If you think someone is wrong then DO challenge it - but there are ways of doing so without getting personal which IMHO is what has been going wrong on here.

I hope the debate about the video, war atrocities and service personnel continues, but I hope it does so without resorting to personal attacks.

 

[Sooty]

I totally agree. I think you will find it is hard to rant in a few short sentences.

 

[khan]

i am in such a rage about this f***ing w@**er, why why why why why !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[BBH]

Oh I don't know, from what we see some manage it quite well !! To be honest all this long winded diatribe is actually quite boring. Going back to the post subject what this guy did was very wrong. People need to be accountable for their actions, period.

 

[Sooty]

Oooh are you more than one person? As in the royal 'we'? If you find this thread boring, I am puzzled as to why you would read it.

 

[itsme123]

There is no excuse for his behaviour. None at all.

Sick. I hope he suffers as much pain as that poor puppy.

 

[BBH]

Because a lot of people who have posted have had very valid relevant comments.

PS. silly comments do make people lose credibility.

 

[Sooty]

[ QUOTE ]
There is no excuse for his behaviour. None at all.

Sick. I hope he suffers as much pain as that poor puppy.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the great scheme of things, that puppy's suffering was very brief. Don't forget, it won't have been aware that it was going to die, just that it was experiencing something unusual. I am not in anyway excusing the action (I cannot abide even the idea of pulling wings off flies, and I spend all summer waging war against them!), just trying to put it into perspective.

 

[Sooty]

[ QUOTE ]


PS. silly comments do make people lose credibility.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not sure if you are stating the obvious, or trying to make a point.

 

[itsme123]

as it hit the rocks it probably would have suffered internal and external injuries. It may have taken it some time to die.

I don't call that brief suffering

 

[Sooty]

I guess we'll never know, but I certainly hope its suffering was brief.

 

[Ninfapaola]

When I hear things like this I am ashamed to be a member of the human race.

 

[Talan]

My dad has seen action in the Forces, but that wasn't an excuse for him to lose his humanity. When a neighbour was beating a puppy he shot round and sorted the guy out, not usng physical force but effectively. Soldiers need to retain a balance of compassion and a respect for life, all life. It's only a series of small steps from a puppy to a child in my opinion.

 

[eqsiu]

[ QUOTE ]

i always throw my mind back to the way the vietnam war had an adverse effect on the minds of US soldiers..and unfortunately, tings seem to be travelling on a paralel in Iraq....

[/ QUOTE ]

Hopefully all the idiots who voted for W will realize that this is not what the US needs to be doing. There was no reason to circumvent the UN, but sadly my countrymen have a history of doing what they damn well please regardless of outside input.

For what it's worth, most people in the US military are normal people who just want to pay for college. The sick ones are in the minority (but unfortunately are the ones who stay in and aquire rank).