Medal of Honor - 3rd since Vietnam

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Sgt. Smith is more than worthy of it. He was said to save over a hundred lives. An honorable life indeed.
 
Why venerate a war criminal?

Edited to add: As a man sows, thus shall he reap.
 
Last edited:
As I said/implied, a man who spreads violence and war must not chicken out of the consequences of his illegal war-mongering, much as some would wish to venerate illegality and criminality. But not me.

When pigs fly, and when bullshit smells of roses, and when Ireland win more gold medals in the Olympics than Australia I'll venerate war mongerers.God gave you eyes to see, that's all I'd say.
 
This is the actions of one man in a combat situation that saved the lives of his comrades, how is he a war criminal.
 
Without question, yes, he is. And I refuse to commemorate the death of a war criminal. What exactly requires clarification?


Incidentally, how many Iraqis do you need to murder before you get this medal?
 
Last edited:
Allright so you think that he is a war criminal because he killed Iraqi soldiers. Does this make every coalition soldier who has killed anybody a war criminal too?
 
In this war, clearly, yes as the war itself is illegal. Therefore, the correct and moral decision for any US or British (or other) troops called up for "service" was to desert. Anyone who did not choose this option must bear the consequences of their direct participation in criminality.

There may be degrees of criminality - as for example (just raising an example off the top of my head) in the case of George W Bush who was only convicted on DUI once, whereas Cheney was convicted twice - so one has the worse criminal record than the other.

However that does not change the simple fact of criminality - some "Allied" troops were worst criminals than others - we now know that some shot civilians in cold blood, and tortured them for kicks for example - these are murderers, nothing more.

Others may have killed people in self defence - their crimes may have been less serious. However, all that fought on the "Allied" side were and are criminals, to a greater or lesser extent.

Therefore anyone fighting in it (on the "Allied" side) is a war criminal. Every event since the invasion has proven Chirac ( and Schroder) absolutely correct. They are the true leaders of Europe, unlike the GWB coward/lap dog Blair.

As I said previously, as a man sows thus shall he reap.

The wages of sin, is death.

Having said that the war criminals should be granted justice and a fair trial, which is more they gave for all the civilians they butchered.
 
Last edited:
financeguy said:
In this war, clearly, yes as the war itself is illegal. Therefore, the correct and moral decision for any US or British (or other) troops called up for "service" was to desert. Anyone who did not choose this option must bear the consequences of their direct participation in criminality.

There may be degrees of criminality - as for example (just raising an example off the top of my head) in the case of George W Bush who was only convicted on DUI once, whereas Cheney was convicted twice - so one has the worse criminal record than the other.

However that does not change the simple fact of criminality - some "Allied" troops were worst criminals than others - we now know that some shot civilians in cold blood, and tortured them for kicks for example - these are murderers, nothing more.

Others may have killed people in self defence - their crimes may have been less serious. However, all that fought on the "Allied" side were and are criminals, to a greater or lesser extent.

Therefore anyone fighting in it (on the "Allied" side) is a war criminal. Every event since the invasion has proven Chirac ( and Schroder) absolutely correct. They are the true leaders of Europe, unlike the GWB coward/lap dog Blair.

As I said previously, as a man sows thus shall he reap.

The wages of sin, is death.

Having said that the war criminals should be granted justice and a fair trial, which is more they gave for all the civilians they butchered.

The war was authorized by 3 different UN Security Council resolutions. Resolutions 678, 687, and more recently 1441 authorize the use of all means necessary to bring Iraq into compliance with 17 different UN resolutions all passed under chapter VII rules of the United Nations as well as the March 1991 Gulf War Ceacefire agreement.

Not only was this war legal from the political and diplomatic perspective, it was both necessary for the security of the region and the planet, and morally vital given the hell that Saddam had put the region and his people through and was continuing to do so.

All of the coalition troops, diplomatic personal, and other aid workers from all countries across the globe are hero's for what they have done in Iraq. They have removed a terrible menace to the planet and replaced it with a growing democracy. Only through the most disgusting and strange form of logic could one consider coalition personal as a whole to be criminals. Then again, there are people who accuse the Pope of being a criminal, so I guess such thoughts are possible.

My friends are NOT war criminals, nor are any of the other great men and women who have served over there. Their service is changing the world and making it a better place. The lives of Iraqi's are being improved on a daily basis and the Iraqi people now have the opportunity for a bright future, with a growing democracy, and the chance for great prosperity.

Every event since the invasion has proven Chirac and his side kick Schroder to be foolish. "Leaders" who could care less about what is in the best interest of the Persian Gulf Region or in fact their own countries vital interest as well.

Ten years and Twenty years down the road, when Iraq becomes a stable democracy, people will remember how France and Germany did little if anything to help the situation and instead tried to prevent the removal of SADDAM. Far better to question if Germany and France's actions were "criminal".
 
STING2 said:
My friends are NOT war criminals, nor are any of the other great men and women who have served over there. Their service is changing the world and making it a better place.

I'm genuinely sorry if you have friends who died or were injured in the conflict, but it doesn't change my fundamental view of the overall situation to be honest.
 
STING2 said:
Only through the most disgusting and strange form of logic could one consider coalition personal as a whole to be criminals. Then again, there are people who accuse the Pope of being a criminal, so I guess such thoughts are possible.

Disgusting and strange to you, perhaps. What I (and most of the world) would consider disgusting and strange is the disgusting and strange veneration of criminality that carries on here on a regular basis, as though because a man is dressed up in US army fatigues he must be venerated as some kind of hero.

And I'm not sure what the relevance of the Pope is to this thread.
 
At least you don't pretend you oppose the war but support the troops ~ financeguy you are not a hypocrite.
 
Well you're certainly not a hypocrite either, I'd give you that for sure!

As I'd implied earlier on, my views on this issue are probably seen as far out, bizarre, even wicked or perverse on this forum. Most of the world, in Europe definitely, my views on the issue , rightly or wrongly, are the norm if anything.
 
financeguy said:


I'm genuinely sorry if you have friends who died or were injured in the conflict, but it doesn't change my fundamental view of the overall situation to be honest.

Thats not surprising considering what it must take to have such views.
 
financeguy said:


Disgusting and strange to you, perhaps. What I (and most of the world) would consider disgusting and strange is the disgusting and strange veneration of criminality that carries on here on a regular basis, as though because a man is dressed up in US army fatigues he must be venerated as some kind of hero.

And I'm not sure what the relevance of the Pope is to this thread.

I'm sorry, but since when do you speak for the planet? Do not confuse mere opposition to the war to mean one considers the soldiers who fought in the war to be criminals. Your democratically elected government lets the US military use Shannon and other airports in Ireland to transport troops to and from Iraq. Several of my friends have stopped in Shannon Ireland on their way back from Iraq and they were treated like Kings not criminals.

The British government currently has over 10,000 troops in Iraq and had two to three times that number during the invasion. I don't see or hear the majority of people in England calling them criminals and in fact there has been enough support for the operation to keep it going for the past two years and on into the future.

I used the fact that people consider the POPE to be a criminal to show that such absurd thinking out there towards individuals and groups is not just reserved for the military.

People honor those who have served in Iraq because of what they have done there, not simply because they put on the uniform.
 
STING2 said:


I'm sorry, but since when do you speak for the planet? Do not confuse mere opposition to the war to mean one considers the soldiers who fought in the war to be criminals. Your democratically elected government lets the US military use Shannon and other airports in Ireland to transport troops to and from Iraq. Several of my friends have stopped in Shannon Ireland on their way back from Iraq and they were treated like Kings not criminals.

I used the fact that people consider the POPE to be a criminal to show that such absurd thinking out there towards individuals and groups is not just reserved for the military.

People honor those who have served in Iraq because of what they have done there, not simply because they put on the uniform.

You are correct about the use of Shannon - the use of which most Irish people oppose according to opinion polls. In regard to the Pope, he was strongly against the Iraq war so it's a curious analogy to bring up to defend your case. Unfortunately in this regard he who pays the piper calls the tune, and the Irish economy is too dependent on US investment to piss off the US Government by refusing the use of Shannon. I wouldn't mistake your friends being treated like kings for support for the war by the Irish people.

I don't know anyone who supported it and most of my friends are on the right politically or centrists, certainly not far out lefties. I can think of a few journalists who voiced support in our media but they were definitely in the minority. And leaving aside the question of Shannon the government and all political parties here with the exception of the UUP in Northern Ireland were against the war.

The anti war demonstration in Dublin just before the outbreak of the war was the biggest ever, and though I wasn't at it myself it wasn't just the usual left wing types who oppose the US government no matter what it does (and I am certainly not in that category and would agree with many US government actions, such as GWB's oft declared support for a Palestinian state, succesive presidents support for the NI peace process, and many other decisions and actions).
 
STING2 said:


Thats not surprising considering what it must take to have such views.

Alright, fair enough. I was over the top in describing all soldiers serving in the Iraq war as criminals. This was an over the top statement and I apologise and retract it. In practical terms, most of them are just following orders and desertion is not a practical option even for those who disagree with the war (and many do).
 
A_Wanderer said:
At least you don't pretend you oppose the war but support the troops ~ financeguy you are not a hypocrite.
I do have to comment on this statement. I think you can support the lives and well-being of the troops without supporting the government's actions. I won't say it rings true for everyone out there who "supports the troops." With that said, the hypocrites that boil my blood the most are those who "support the troops" and run around proclaiming that they're dying in vain.
 
Back
Top Bottom