09-27-2005, 12:33 AM
Pages: 1 2
09-27-2005, 12:33 AM
09-27-2005, 12:38 AM
I'd go a long way for some good jerkin material but that might be a bit much
09-27-2005, 01:29 AM
jesus
09-27-2005, 02:17 AM
Is this worse than a bunch of pictures of gore from Iraq? I don't get the claim that people are trading porn for pictures of dead soldiers. maybe I'm missing something from that site. I didn't click most of the links and really put a lot of time into, but I don't see how these pictures are any worse than everything you see on Ogrish. In fact, I'm pretty sure I've seen some of those pictures before (I doubt the girl with the shaved bush is Iraqi/Afghani - wouldn't that send them to hell for grooming themselves in that manner?)
It just seems to be a place of really gorey and close up pictures of dead people.
Now, it's bad and all, but where do you think that sites like Ogrish get their pictures? Cops and firemen are on the scene of gruesome car wrecks and murder scenes and what not and they mail them into the websites or post them or whatever.
If the argument is that the military should be classier and above it all, it's not like you have Rhodes scholars entering the military. It's mostly kids who are in need of money, can't get into college, are discipline problems, etc. Give the dumb, poor, and angry a bunch of guns and power and carte blanche to kill whatever they see, what do you expect other than shit like this and the Lynde England debacle
It just seems to be a place of really gorey and close up pictures of dead people.
Now, it's bad and all, but where do you think that sites like Ogrish get their pictures? Cops and firemen are on the scene of gruesome car wrecks and murder scenes and what not and they mail them into the websites or post them or whatever.
If the argument is that the military should be classier and above it all, it's not like you have Rhodes scholars entering the military. It's mostly kids who are in need of money, can't get into college, are discipline problems, etc. Give the dumb, poor, and angry a bunch of guns and power and carte blanche to kill whatever they see, what do you expect other than shit like this and the Lynde England debacle
09-27-2005, 02:30 AM
Galt Wrote:Is this worse than a bunch of pictures of gore from Iraq? I don't get the claim that people are trading porn for pictures of dead soldiers. maybe I'm missing something from that site. I didn't click most of the links and really put a lot of time into, but I don't see how these pictures are any worse than everything you see on Ogrish. In fact, I'm pretty sure I've seen some of those pictures before (I doubt the girl with the shaved bush is Iraqi/Afghani - wouldn't that send them to hell for grooming themselves in that manner?)You are not that obtuse.
It just seems to be a place of really gorey and close up pictures of dead people.
Now, it's bad and all, but where do you think that sites like Ogrish get their pictures? Cops and firemen are on the scene of gruesome car wrecks and murder scenes and what not and they mail them into the websites or post them or whatever.
If the argument is that the military should be classier and above it all, it's not like you have Rhodes scholars entering the military. It's mostly kids who are in need of money, can't get into college, are discipline problems, etc. Give the dumb, poor, and angry a bunch of guns and power and carte blanche to kill whatever they see, what do you expect other than shit like this and the Lynde England debacle
Fuck...
09-27-2005, 02:30 AM
ah, OK. I see it now. I missed the original story that this blog entry was discussing.
09-27-2005, 02:32 AM
please the story was like a fucking Wikipedia article. Like I'm going to click the 90 links the douchebag had. Give me a break. I'm multitasking.
When Andy called the Warden obtuse he threw him the hole for 60 days.
When Andy called the Warden obtuse he threw him the hole for 60 days.
09-27-2005, 02:35 AM
Thank God those dumb poor people get to do all the fighting while rich smart people can laugh at them.
09-27-2005, 02:36 AM
Galt - I have no fucking idea where you're coming from.
09-27-2005, 02:41 AM
Care to correct the error in my logic? Is it not true that the military is mostly filled with the misfits of the younger generation? The it's mostly the 18-25 year olds with the least promise ahead of them that decide to enter? That it's mostly the less educated or the discipline problems that result in poor grades, or the borderline kids who are just too poor to afford college that end up going into the military. And therefore you have hundreds of thousands of 20 year olds who are either angry at society for their lot in life (not arguing they don't have a reason to be) and/or are just complete douchebags? Couple that with the fact that even most sane, rational, intelligent 20 year old is still a jackass.
Are you honestly surprised that this type of shit goes on?
Are you honestly surprised that this type of shit goes on?
09-27-2005, 02:45 AM
They shouldn't be taking pictures of corpses as souveniers. They shouldn't be stacking naked prisoners in pyramids and taking pictures of their genitals. They shouldn't be trading pictures for porn. It's all illegal (or should be) and they should all be discharged, sent to jail, treated as criminals.
I just don't understand how people get shocked given how the system is, and who ends up being forced to join the military.
I just don't understand how people get shocked given how the system is, and who ends up being forced to join the military.
09-27-2005, 03:02 AM
Shocked? I'm not.
Of course the poor and/or stupid are who end up fighting wars. Not that it's always been that way (you're a baseball fan, you know WWII), but who is in charge?
Who let soldiers take pictures of naked butt pyramids?
Who let soldiers drag prisoners around in dog collars?
And who let soldiers take pictures of fucking dead people or parts of dead people?
Why did it take a BLOG to discover this?
And if our goal in Iraq is to convince them that our way is the best way, is taking pictures of their dead and/or dismembered brothers and sisters the best way to achieve that goal?
Of course the poor and/or stupid are who end up fighting wars. Not that it's always been that way (you're a baseball fan, you know WWII), but who is in charge?
Who let soldiers take pictures of naked butt pyramids?
Who let soldiers drag prisoners around in dog collars?
And who let soldiers take pictures of fucking dead people or parts of dead people?
Why did it take a BLOG to discover this?
And if our goal in Iraq is to convince them that our way is the best way, is taking pictures of their dead and/or dismembered brothers and sisters the best way to achieve that goal?
09-27-2005, 03:13 AM
It wasn't that way when we had a draft. Vietnam era was a corrupt and people were buying their way out of it. Though society as a whole is also entirely different, so you can't really say it's cause and effect. But the atrocities in Vietnam dwarf anything that's been exposed in Iraq or Afganistan. Slaughtering entire villages, gangbanging pre-pubescent girls, and throwing civilians out of helicopters make the Abu Girab stuff look tame.
The "people in charge" are sitting in offices, not on the field. You can't watch everyone do everything. You just have to set up chains of command, hope those beneath you aren't psychotics and can curb the mob mentality and peer pressure which brings out the worst in humanity.
When someone fucks up, you get rid of them and hopefully put in controls to prevent it from happening again. You can't prevent everything. You can't watch everyone. it's just not feasible. So you punish those that fuckup and move on.
And yes, taking pictures of them at their most vulnerable is the best way to achieve the goal of democracy.
Edited By Galt on 1127790909
The "people in charge" are sitting in offices, not on the field. You can't watch everyone do everything. You just have to set up chains of command, hope those beneath you aren't psychotics and can curb the mob mentality and peer pressure which brings out the worst in humanity.
When someone fucks up, you get rid of them and hopefully put in controls to prevent it from happening again. You can't prevent everything. You can't watch everyone. it's just not feasible. So you punish those that fuckup and move on.
And yes, taking pictures of them at their most vulnerable is the best way to achieve the goal of democracy.
Edited By Galt on 1127790909
09-27-2005, 03:28 AM
So let's say you, in your dream world, are a corporate executive.
One of the peons makes a mistake and costs you a million dollars. Stockholders are outraged, call for your head, say you can't control your own workforce.
Do you take the blame?
If you take the blame you might hold your job. If you pass the blame to others you might lose your job when it is revealed that you were out having some sex with a hot chick (like Drusilla).
It's fucking amazing to me that higher-ups aren't held responsible for letting dumb kids torture Iraqis. They know fucking better, but THEIR higher-ups let it happen.
Which is what we're seeing here. There is no way stupid, poor, almost-retarded soldiers would be ALLOWED to put pictures of themselves with dead sand-niggers on the internet unless they were TOLD THEY CAN! And if they weren't told, then we have a serious management problem.
Either way, we do.
One of the peons makes a mistake and costs you a million dollars. Stockholders are outraged, call for your head, say you can't control your own workforce.
Do you take the blame?
If you take the blame you might hold your job. If you pass the blame to others you might lose your job when it is revealed that you were out having some sex with a hot chick (like Drusilla).
It's fucking amazing to me that higher-ups aren't held responsible for letting dumb kids torture Iraqis. They know fucking better, but THEIR higher-ups let it happen.
Which is what we're seeing here. There is no way stupid, poor, almost-retarded soldiers would be ALLOWED to put pictures of themselves with dead sand-niggers on the internet unless they were TOLD THEY CAN! And if they weren't told, then we have a serious management problem.
Either way, we do.
09-27-2005, 03:43 AM
they have access to the Internet just like you do. Are you told what you can and can't do? I don't think many would be opposed to blocking all those sites for Military servers, but they don't. So kids have cameras, kids have Internet, kids upload whatever they want. My cousin is in iraq, goes on Myspace all the time, instant messages all the time. I'm sure they monitor some of it, but they don't block shit.
They aren't in jail and so they aren't told everything they can and can't do. You give them the basics of how to act, and let them make their own decisions. When the fuck up, you can them. Do you expect the military to have a big brainstorming session and list all the million bad things that could happen and tell everyone what not to do?
now as to the first part of your post. The top is NEVER held responsible unless it's the top doing the fucking up. The CEOs of Tyco and Worldcom and all those places got fucked because it was their direct subbordinates (or themselves) who were breaking the laws or fucking up. When it's some drone in sector 7G who screws up and costs the company millions, why would the CEO take responsibility? If it's someone 8 layers of management beneath him/her, what control do they have over that person? Sure, you take figurehead responsibility. You speak for the company, but it's not your responsibility. That's why there are layers of command. That's why the CEO doesn't have to sign off on every single decision. You delegate responsibility, and thefore you asign blame to whoever was directly overseeing the fuck-up.
They aren't in jail and so they aren't told everything they can and can't do. You give them the basics of how to act, and let them make their own decisions. When the fuck up, you can them. Do you expect the military to have a big brainstorming session and list all the million bad things that could happen and tell everyone what not to do?
now as to the first part of your post. The top is NEVER held responsible unless it's the top doing the fucking up. The CEOs of Tyco and Worldcom and all those places got fucked because it was their direct subbordinates (or themselves) who were breaking the laws or fucking up. When it's some drone in sector 7G who screws up and costs the company millions, why would the CEO take responsibility? If it's someone 8 layers of management beneath him/her, what control do they have over that person? Sure, you take figurehead responsibility. You speak for the company, but it's not your responsibility. That's why there are layers of command. That's why the CEO doesn't have to sign off on every single decision. You delegate responsibility, and thefore you asign blame to whoever was directly overseeing the fuck-up.
09-27-2005, 04:02 AM
Yeah fuck all those dumb people from West Point and Annapolis, they are dumb poor people who couldn't do better.
09-27-2005, 04:22 AM
And what % of those people make up the ground troops?
09-27-2005, 04:34 AM
I didn't read most of this thread but galt is right that most of the military is poor stupid jerks.
09-27-2005, 04:50 AM
Those guys are the ones in charge of the troops, and they ain't sitting in offices all day long, they are in the field, with their men.
These troops aren't being led around by a bunch of poor dumb niggers. You can't just go ahead and chalk another one up to the poor people for reprehensible actions. This isn't Louisiana.
These are people who volunteered to defend this country, and this is the way they promote us? By wearing our military uniform and then advertising to their friends and people on the internet images that make American soldiers looks like animals.
The military isn't the fucking office. They don't pussy out and pass out the blame. You're responsible for the man to the left and to the right of you. And the leader of that group is responsible for those actions as well.
Simply put, if soldiers can't refrain from humiliating and degrading their enemy on film, making Americans look even worse than we already do, then no personal cameras should be allowed in the field, period. It's the military, not democracy.
These troops aren't being led around by a bunch of poor dumb niggers. You can't just go ahead and chalk another one up to the poor people for reprehensible actions. This isn't Louisiana.
These are people who volunteered to defend this country, and this is the way they promote us? By wearing our military uniform and then advertising to their friends and people on the internet images that make American soldiers looks like animals.
The military isn't the fucking office. They don't pussy out and pass out the blame. You're responsible for the man to the left and to the right of you. And the leader of that group is responsible for those actions as well.
Simply put, if soldiers can't refrain from humiliating and degrading their enemy on film, making Americans look even worse than we already do, then no personal cameras should be allowed in the field, period. It's the military, not democracy.
09-27-2005, 07:45 AM
Quote:they have access to the Internet just like you do. Are you told what you can and can't do? I don't think many would be opposed to blocking all those sites for Military servers, but they don't. So kids have cameras, kids have Internet, kids upload whatever they want. My cousin is in iraq, goes on Myspace all the time, instant messages all the time. I'm sure they monitor some of it, but they don't block shit.
They aren't in jail and so they aren't told everything they can and can't do. You give them the basics of how to act, and let them make their own decisions. When the fuck up, you can them. Do you expect the military to have a big brainstorming session and list all the million bad things that could happen and tell everyone what not to do?
now as to the first part of your post. The top is NEVER held responsible unless it's the top doing the fucking up. The CEOs of Tyco and Worldcom and all those places got fucked because it was their direct subbordinates (or themselves) who were breaking the laws or fucking up. When it's some drone in sector 7G who screws up and costs the company millions, why would the CEO take responsibility? If it's someone 8 layers of management beneath him/her, what control do they have over that person? Sure, you take figurehead responsibility. You speak for the company, but it's not your responsibility. That's why there are layers of command. That's why the CEO doesn't have to sign off on every single decision. You delegate responsibility, and thefore you asign blame to whoever was directly overseeing the fuck-up.
Galt, the point you seem to be missing is that THIS IS THE MILITARY. THESE PEOPLE REPRESENT AMERICA. ANYTHING THESE "KIDS" DO WRONG GETS PEOPLE KILLED, AND HURTS OUR CAMPAIGN IN IRAQ.
Comparing this shit to me going out and getting drunk and banging some ho hurts our country.
Quote:You give them the basics of how to act, and let them make their own decisions. When the fuck up, you can them. Do you expect the military to have a big brainstorming session and list all the million bad things that could happen and tell everyone what not to do?
I can't believe you think this way. No fucking "making their own decisions" decisions are made for them. That's how it's worked since before the revolution.
Quote:now as to the first part of your post. The top is NEVER held responsible unless it's the top doing the fucking up. The CEOs of Tyco and Worldcom and all those places got fucked because it was their direct subbordinates (or themselves) who were breaking the laws or fucking up. When it's some drone in sector 7G who screws up and costs the company millions, why would the CEO take responsibility? If it's someone 8 layers of management beneath him/her, what control do they have over that person? Sure, you take figurehead responsibility. You speak for the company, but it's not your responsibility. That's why there are layers of command. That's why the CEO doesn't have to sign off on every single decision. You delegate responsibility, and thefore you asign blame to whoever was directly overseeing the fuck-up.
You said before "it's not like you have Rhodes scholars entering the military".
I agree with that. So we need people to watch these non-Rhodes scholars. I'm not necessarily saying blame goes all the way to the top, but damn, if people in command weren't aware that soldiers were taking pictures of dead Iraqis and trading them for porn on the internet, our fucking military is a joke and OUR TAXES are being wasted.
And that angers me.
Pages: 1 2