Has Your Support Of The Troops Changed From A Month Ago?

[rucky]

[daa]

1. I was not trainied

that way. If you read Col Hackworth or even Powell you will see that is totally unacceptable behavior. I did not do that, I WOULD not do that. You are taught name, rank and serial number to give and that is what you are to receive.

[rucky]

7. There's the rub

The fact that soldiers are (were?) trained to observe the Geneva Convention backs up the Administration's "Just a Few Bad Apples" excuse. But we know some kind of orders came from above. We WANT to hold Rumsfeld - even Bush - accountable for this crap. How can you do that without excusing the guards for "just following orders" (which leaves an equally bad taste in my mouth)?

So if you still support the troops & blame the admin, you excuse the behavior. If you don't support the troops, you support the "Bad Apples" excuse. Fine line to walk.

[daa]

22. Col Hackworth

blew this wide open by sending the poor guy to CBS after Senators, including Hilary, did nothing. I do not support the troops that did this. They were trainded to no obey an unklawful order. Period. As for the hirer ups that ordered this I personally would be in of seeing Rumsfuck and Wolfie gang-raped and then shot by a firing squad.

[wryter2000]

2. Still support them

In any large group of people there will be some bad apples. For the rest of them who abused prisoners, remember the Milgram and Zimbardo studies. Even normal people will do abnormal things under the right circumstances. Most of the troops aren't involved in caring for prisoners at all.

Think of all the kids who thought they were going to be part-time soldiers putting out forest fires and things. Think of all the lost jobs, lost businesses, ruined marriages. And those are the ones who've survived.

I remember the mistake of denigrating the troops during Viet Nam, and I'm not going to do that again.

And remember it was an enlisted grunt who blew the whistle.

[cjbuchanan]

3. What do you mean by "the troops?"

Are you talking about the private - sergeant or are you talking officers or are you talking about everyone.

Seeing that privates have really no say it what they do, I do not think they are the ones to blame for all the crap that is going on. Sergeants have a little say, but still, they are at the will of their superiors. Above that, they are the ones making the daily decisions and they are the ones I blame.

[rucky]

9. What are the ranks in the torture photos?

Do you blame everybody in those pictures, or just the high-ranking ones?

It doesn't seem right to excuse any of this - orders or no.

[cjbuchanan]

10. It is a shame that people would do this

no matter what their rank, but if a private refuses a direct order, his or her life becomes complete hell. They are trained to take orders without question.

It is up to the superiors to say we are not going to do this.

Please remember, this would not happen if those with authority did not let it to happen.

[beyurslf]

4. I always supported them and that won't change.

I didn't support the war and that won't change either.

The blame for the abuse lies above the "troops" level.

[mike_c]

12. watch this video if you think the "troops" are so pristine--

http://www.newsfrombabylon.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=getit&lid=82

[Columbia]

17. Biased Sample

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/biassamp.html

This is a fallacy affecting statistical inferences, which are arguments of the following form:
N% of sample S has characteristic C.
Therefore, N% of population P has characteristic C.
(Where sample S is a subset of set P, the population.)

[mike_c]

21. more "frat pranks" and "bad apples," no doubt....

Sorry, they're all culpable IMO. Those soldiers are not necessarily a "biased sample", remember, even a small sample can represent the central tendency of the whole population. Much of the rest of the news about the military's personal conduct in Iraq supports this sample's inference: that MANY of the "troops" are engaged in war crimes as SOP.

[Columbia]

23. Well, you might as well spit on me too then

[mike_c]

27. ok, consider yourself spat upon...

...if it makes you feel righteous. How about a graphic: :puke:

[LoZoccolo]

24. Learn stats.

Those soldiers are not necessarily a "biased sample", remember, even a small sample can represent the central tendency of the whole population.

Yes, but with a ferocious margin of error. Learn what you are talking about and come back.

[LoZoccolo]

25. Actually no, I take that back.

The principles behind margin of error don't even apply unless it's a random sample. So it is a biased sample.

[mike_c]

26. when n=1 there is no "margin of error...."

Among other things, I teach data analysis, so don't lecture me about sample bias. Since we know nothing about the population in question, there is no reason to believe that this single sample is not representative of military behavior toward wounded Iraqis-- except the assumption that it is not representative because it doesn't reinforce your pre-conceived ideas. And of course it's not "random"-- only newsworthy events get published.

Furthermore, there seems to be an awful lot of independent substantiation for the notion that the video I linked is not abberant behavior, but rather is pretty much the norm in Iraq.

[LoZoccolo]

28. Oh please.

Among other things, I teach data analysis, so don't lecture me about sample bias.

Doesn't give you license to pretend you're temporarily incompetent for sake of trying to win an argument.

Since we know nothing about the population in question, there is no reason to believe that this single sample is not representative of military behavior toward wounded Iraqis-- except the assumption that it is not representative because it doesn't reinforce your pre-conceived ideas.

Yeah there is a reason not to believe it. I should not have to tell someone with a PhD this. Actually, you know what, fuck it. This is useless. If you don't know this by know, I don't know how to make you. Plus everyone else sees this argument is full of shit anyways; you don't have to pretend that it's not. You painted yourself in a corner and now you're acting like a jerk. I like how you throw the "pre-concieved ideas" thing at me first so it looks bad if I turn around and say "no YOU...".

I remember seeing some racist website where they'd parade a bunch of news stories around about black criminals in defense of their racist views - as if the people they had selected to use as representatives represented the population because, as you say, "there is no reason to believe that this single sample is not representative" of the entire black population.

Actually, tell you what. When the soldiers start coming back, I dare you to ask them what horrid shit they participated in. Not if they participated in it, but what they participated in - remember, there's no reason to believe they didn't! Of course you won't because you don't believe your own bullshit.

Man, this whole argument is weird.

There is no reason to believe that people in academia don't all hide behind their titles to try and foist spurious (and stupid) arguments on the rest of us without said titles (based on this one sample here, of course).

[mike_c]

31. lame defense of military dishonor....

Watch the video. Then tell me that you support that kind of behavior. If you do, then I guess I don't have anything further to add. If you don't, then I'd suggest you spend some time thinking about how so many bad apples and frat boys ended up concentrated in Iraq, i.e. how so many military personnel at the tail of the decency distribution got the call to commit war crimes in our names. Are you PROUD of this crap?

[LoZoccolo]

33. Bahahahaha woo hoo I win!

I didn't say anything about the video.

[Left_Wing_Fox]

5. The same

I still want our troops safe and home, and the ones in charge arrested on war crimes.

I do think those involved in prisoner abuse should still be tried and convicted for following illegal orders, but every link along the chain of command needs o be prosecuted.

[w13rd0]

6. Seeing as how the soldier that went AWOL got the same sentence...

...as one of the torturers, it's a hard call. I "support the troops" in the sense that I'd rather see as few lives as possible permanently scarred by this administration. Bring them home before more lives are lost and forever ruined. Do I "support their efforts"? No, not really. I don't support the "mission", I don't support the actions, and I definately don't support the culture that presently allows those who object to bad policy (domestic and military) with the same heavy hand as those who torture and kill.

[cheezus]

8. Our troops are geting screwed worse now than ever

and as such they need my support even more. I was against the war from the start, but I know the difference between supporting a war and supporting those forced to fight it. These are primarily brave young people who are trying to get a better life through military service. I support that. Now that the administration is trying to shirk off their responsibility onto our soldiers, I must support them even more.

[malatesta1137]

11. I have no respect for the military

I am sure there are legitimate, decent and honest people who serve, but I never liked people in uniform, and I don't like the way they think. Some choose the career because they're fascinated with guns, power and domination of others. Some have disturbed and disturbing personalities.

They think they are superior to others, but in fact they have no interest in foreign culture, they are ignorant of art, music and literature. They are shallow, hollow and dull.

As for the police, I have a lot of respect for cops who risk their lives to protect orders and maintain the law, but a lot of cops are lazy, corrupt and uninteresting.

Will society someday be free of the all the need for police and the military?

[onehandle]

13. This is an offensive poll.

It's great when we do conservative media's job for them.

[rucky]

15. It's a shame you don't want to talk about it

Read the thread. There have been many thoughtful posts. I'm still trying to get in touch with my feelings about this whole thing. I know there's alot of emotion involved.

[Jack Rabbit]

14. "Support the troops"

Support for the troops is necessarily given in a general mode. It does not preclude that there will be some individuals whose actions are reprehesible and deserving of punishment.

I support the troops. I wish no harm to any one of them. I wish each and every one of them a safe return. The best way to accomplish that is to admit the invasion was folly, recognize a credible leader as the interim head of Iraq and withdraw.

[Claire Beth]

16. I support the troops, it's the commander in chief that is a

piece of shit!

[Webster Green]

18. Loaded question......

No one wants to see them in harms way, but how can anyone support what they are doing in our name?

To support the troops implies that you support the occupation. If you don't support the occupation, then you support terrorism.

Its a bullshit question.

[Ernesto]

19. This is NOT the fault of the troops

The blame belongs to the naive chickenhawks that cooked this mess up..... In Vietnam, VC pow's were commonly slapped, punched & kicked while blind folded with their hands tied behind their backs. I witnessed it many times.... Geneva conventions, my ass. Ever think about the "legality" of using a shotgun or a 50 cal. machine gun on personel?.... well it happened every day folks.... The problem we have is a foolish adminisration and sheeple supporters that had no idea of what war does to people (on both sides). Only combat veterans (and their civillian victoms) know just how f*#ked war is...... "Now, the 'chickenhawks' are coming home to roost" and 'Merica can't seem to stomach the harvest that it sowed.

[OneBlueSky]

20. my support = "Bring 'em home!" . . . always has been . . .

always will be . . . we never should have invaded Iraq in the first place, and the best support I can offer out troops is to keep lobbying to bring them home asap . . . that's been my position from Day One, and it will remain my position until we do in fact bring them home . . .

[Hubert Flottz]

29. I support the troops, but I don't support Bush!

Or anything he stands for!

[Cleita]

30. I feel sad for every young American, who was ripped from their

lives and family at the bidding of a demagogue, who can't tie his own shoelaces. This was not a just war to defend our country, but we knew that, didn't we?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

32. I find it difficult to lump those soldiers that have not participated in..

...torture together with those that have.

IMHO, those that HAVE participated in torture, military as well as civilian, deserve EVERY punishment that can be given to them. Included in that group should be any soldier that also participated in torture in Afghanistan as well as Gitmo. And that includes every single individual up the chain of command that ordered that the torture be conducted, and/or passed the orders along without asking any questions. I have a sneaking suspicion that the orders were given at the highest possible levels.

IMHO, those that HAVE NOT participated in torture, hopefully a very large percentage, deserve our prayers for a safe return. And even though I understand that they volunteered to join the military, it is NOT their fault that they have been thrust into a situation beyond their wildest fears. They are in a war that can no longer be justified, if it could ever be justified in the first place.