OP
- Thread Starter
- #21
Honestly, I don't see the difference between the two. I KNOW the difference, but beyond (official) definition, no, there's no difference.
Afghan Civilians Slaughtered By U.S. Troops
- Thread starter MA-Caver
- Start date
Honestly, I don't see the difference between the two. I KNOW the difference, but beyond (official) definition, no, there's no difference.
Sorry, bro, but I am unable to make sense of this statement.
Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk
OP
- Thread Starter
- #23
How about... Racism & Bigotry... one and the same thing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17349736
I'm sure this makes sense to someone somewhere ...the Afghans kill an Afghan soldier at the site of the massacre. If ever there was a country where life was cheap...
I'm sure this makes sense to someone somewhere ...the Afghans kill an Afghan soldier at the site of the massacre. If ever there was a country where life was cheap...
And if the soldier turns out to not be white and/or Christian?
I'm not saying you are not correct about the soldier or the circumstances; but at the moment, I don't think there is any evidence available to suggest you're right, either. Does this reveal a bias in your way of thinking?
The results could end up being the same thing, and they are both based on hatred, but of course they are not the same thing.
However, I'm a little concerned with "Well, I'll bet he was white and Christian" statements at this stage of the game. If one is simply betting the odds, it's probably a safe bet. On the other hand, if one is suggesting that this happened BECAUSE the soldier is white and/or Christian, then one is suggesting that there is a racial or religious component to this. And while that may also turn out to be the case, my concern is this; saying "Well, I'll bet he was white..." is as racist a statement as if someone said "Well, I'll bet he was black...." Think about it. Racism is racism, even if it's not against a minority.
At the moment, to the best of my knowledge, we do not know the shooter's name or particulars, which makes statements about his probable skin color or religion somewhat curious to me at best.
In his line of work, I would not be surprised if he is just playing the odds.
I might have my numbers confused, but I seem to recall that white males have a higher instance of loosing their marbles. Religion can be a factor, but I don't think there is enough out thee to support or defute that (I don't think there are enough white people out there who don't claim Christianity in some form or another, but I am guessing here)
I guess it falls under the same heading as serial killers...hardly one among them who is not white and male....
But it is absolutely tragic, no matter who pulled the trigger.
Yes, it is.
But imagine someone had piped up and said "I'll bet the guy who did this was black!" Would that sound like someone just expressing the feeling that this was a tragic event, or someone with a bias? Change the word 'black' to 'white' and suddenly it's not a racist statement? I don't think so. If the statement was not about skin color and/or religion, then why mention it at all? You might just as well say "I'll be the shooter owns a Chevy and not a Ford." Might be true, but a total non-sequitur. Hence my question - what is the point here? The shooting, or the shooter's skin color?
EDIT: For what it's worth, I take the same exception when we have a crime here in the USA, and someone immediate asserts that it was an "illegal alien" or a "Muslim" who did it. Might be, might be, but it reveals that the person's concern is on something other than the crime itself; it reveals biased thinking (IMHO).
If we have any clues to what has happened it may be more in the fact that the soldier was reported to have family problems, spouses/partners leaving soldiers especially when they are on deployment can have the most devasting effect on military people. Many can put up with the worst conditions going if they know they have the love and support of their families, take that away and many feel there's little to live for, something which can go a couple of ways.
Considering I have the most random ideas pop into my head at the most inopportune times, I am not faulting the man. Josh that is....
But you do get a feel over time when stuff happens, you know exactly who done it.
just heard a thing on the news...
kid gets shot in a gated neighborhood. Shooter is not in jail even 2 weeks after the incident.
care to venture as to the ethnicity of the participants? Considering that it was probably the reason why it made the news on a somewhat national level.....
There are things I think that I do not say. Even I have a filter on my mouth sometimes.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #33
To me this whole thing isn't about racism or bigotry (by whatever definition)... it's about an AMERICAN soldier going out and killing un-armed NON-combatants! It's about how that one slipped through the cracks and was allowed to commit this inhuman act. It's no different (to me) if it were some nut-job cop going to some neighborhood in good ole U.S.A. and start picking off people. Either way since it has happened before and the U.S. military has made a history of it (Mai-lai during the Vietnam war... oh sure a whole squad/platoon did that, not a lone gunman in this case... doesn't matter they were AMERICAN soldiers) what message does that send to the rest of the world?
And people wonder why the rest of the world hates us. We're so VAIN that we think it's because we're the best and have the best. :barf:
And people wonder why the rest of the world hates us. We're so VAIN that we think it's because we're the best and have the best. :barf:
Move somewhere else, then.
The US has the largest number of currently working serial killers, too...
So one soldier having his cheese slip off the cracker does not cause me anti American sentiments.
You have to take people as they are, there aren't any others out there....
Yes. But do you state it because the mathematical odds favor it (percentage of white versus black soldiers) or because of some other reason? And in any case, it's curious that you feel it important to mention. As well as "Christian," which you also tossed into the mix.
I have to smile to myself here because Caver accused me of being anti American when it seems clear where that hat belongs.
The American army is huge, American population is huge so yes you will have greater numbers of killers and nutters but the thing would be to actually work out properly... I don't do maths ... what the percentages are ie if you have 40 killers and a population of a billion over a huge distance you have less killers than a country that has 40 killers but a population of a couple of hundred thousand living in a tiny country.
To assume that someone allowed the killer to go out and kill those people is to make a huge assumption that is verging on hysteria. I've said this before on another thread but sometimes bad things happen and there's no rhyme or reason for it, it just does. We may never know what caused this man to snap and it's likely that no one knew it was going to happen, people can be very good at hiding their feelings. How often do you hear of a suicide when people have said afterwards they didn't know he was depressed or that she had everything to live for? Some people want this to be a conspiracy, they want that because it's an easy answer, it means that someone knew something and that's more comfortable than having something happen that we don't understand and may never understand. We can't understand shooting all these people including children and the majority of soldiers won't understand it either.
I doubt this soldier had in his mind that this would mean that his country and his fellow service people as well as Allies would be in danger because of his actions, he seems to have totally lost the plot. It's one of those things, not good, not easy to understand but such things happen, we have to live with it and try to do the best we can.
Perhaps one of the pressures put on soldiers is to be the perfect automatons that some people want them to be instead of feeling human beings who do the dirty work others don't want to. To expect a soldier to lay down his life, to kill and do all the other things they are expected to without having feelings, stresses or things like missing their families is inhuman, some will crack undoubtably. However they don't crack just to annoy Caver, they don't rampage just so he can scream how awful it all is. It's far more awful than you can imagine if you haven't been in a war, the amazing thing is that due to the strength, courgae and resilance and sheer bloody mindedness of the military that this is a very rare occurance. According to Wiki you have 1,430,895 people on active duty and you go mad because one guy, one soldier does something horrible? Yes it's horrible, yes it's inexcusable but you need to look at the other 1,430,894 who didn't do anything like this.
The American army is huge, American population is huge so yes you will have greater numbers of killers and nutters but the thing would be to actually work out properly... I don't do maths ... what the percentages are ie if you have 40 killers and a population of a billion over a huge distance you have less killers than a country that has 40 killers but a population of a couple of hundred thousand living in a tiny country.
To assume that someone allowed the killer to go out and kill those people is to make a huge assumption that is verging on hysteria. I've said this before on another thread but sometimes bad things happen and there's no rhyme or reason for it, it just does. We may never know what caused this man to snap and it's likely that no one knew it was going to happen, people can be very good at hiding their feelings. How often do you hear of a suicide when people have said afterwards they didn't know he was depressed or that she had everything to live for? Some people want this to be a conspiracy, they want that because it's an easy answer, it means that someone knew something and that's more comfortable than having something happen that we don't understand and may never understand. We can't understand shooting all these people including children and the majority of soldiers won't understand it either.
I doubt this soldier had in his mind that this would mean that his country and his fellow service people as well as Allies would be in danger because of his actions, he seems to have totally lost the plot. It's one of those things, not good, not easy to understand but such things happen, we have to live with it and try to do the best we can.
Perhaps one of the pressures put on soldiers is to be the perfect automatons that some people want them to be instead of feeling human beings who do the dirty work others don't want to. To expect a soldier to lay down his life, to kill and do all the other things they are expected to without having feelings, stresses or things like missing their families is inhuman, some will crack undoubtably. However they don't crack just to annoy Caver, they don't rampage just so he can scream how awful it all is. It's far more awful than you can imagine if you haven't been in a war, the amazing thing is that due to the strength, courgae and resilance and sheer bloody mindedness of the military that this is a very rare occurance. According to Wiki you have 1,430,895 people on active duty and you go mad because one guy, one soldier does something horrible? Yes it's horrible, yes it's inexcusable but you need to look at the other 1,430,894 who didn't do anything like this.
Sure. Absolutely. I'll admit bias. I have no problem with profiling. If someone attempts an attack on an airport or a suicide bombing, I'll lay strong odds they're Muslim. If a guy goes nuts and kills a bunch of people for no good reason, I'll lay strong odds they're white and claim to be Christian. There are of course, exceptions, but that's why I talk about odds.
And the guy's from JBLM. Most of our crazies are white. Likely, that is because the majority of JBLM's population is white.
In Washington, we have a radio station that plays a game called "black, white, mexi, or jew", where the announcers give the details of a crime, and the callers guess the race of the criminal. You might be suprised how often the callers guess correctly.
Someone could make an anthropological statement about how this works.
More details are emerging. It is clear that the soldier's name is being kept back for now.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...istan-dec-3-as-details-emerge-on-soldier.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...istan-dec-3-as-details-emerge-on-soldier.html
