What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy finds gold in Iowa. view!
youtube.com - Best Buy employee, Danielle Kelly, sings her way into holiday campaign.
277 Comments
- tk0680, on 12/01/2008, -13/+76Because if they didn't, they killed someone for nothing.
Sky is blue! - TheFoshizzler, on 12/01/2008, -14/+72Of course. And I don't blame them, either. They know that they're going to have to live with that fact for the rest of their lives, so the only thing they can do is somehow justify it. I really feel for those guys, must really suck. Not to mention, that families of the people that have been killed...
War is hell. - clintmaher, on 04/21/2009, -11/+51It has to be a tough gig for those guys, justify to themselves for their actions. I don't envy them for what they had to do. No one should have to do such a thing.
- chicagojack, on 12/01/2008, -15/+40Maybe it is not that those who kill happen to defend the war, but those on the front lines seeing the positive effects of the war defend it. It just so happens that there is a high correlation of front line soilders and kills
- tk0680, on 12/01/2008, -6/+30Nobody has to do such a thing. It's a choice you make when you enlist and "defend yourself" by going to the other side of the planet. What did people think they'd be doing when they signed up?
- mlssls, on 12/01/2008, -1/+24psychological studies
- brianrwalters, on 12/01/2008, -2/+21War... war never changes.
- Spire3660, on 12/01/2008, -10/+28Of course they do, its their justification for killing. I get it. Psych 101
- Nidy1, on 12/01/2008, -1/+18http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
No *****. - angelgabe, on 12/01/2008, -1/+18I had 2 brothers in Iraq and they both told me the same thing when they got back. "I don't know if it was my bullet that killed anyone." Not to add or take anything away from all the discussions going on in this thread. Just an insight I hope people can use. In most situations soldiers are shooting at relatively distant targets and they're not the only ones shooting at that particular target. In many ways that protects the soldier both physically and psychologically.
- Jeepinator, on 12/01/2008, -2/+19Establishment of causality is important and I think you just introduced a shadow of doubt into this report's conclusion. Good insight, possibly.
- elliotys, on 12/01/2008, -2/+17War. What is it good for?
- inactive, on 12/01/2008, -9/+24But the options for advancement in this society when you come from the bottom rung are pretty much limited to military alone. There isn't much of a choice when the alternative is poverty.
Hell, look at the no child left behind act. If I were more paranoid I would say it is a conspiracy to try to keep kids dumb enough to recruit. - MalarkeyPN, on 12/01/2008, -3/+17I don't see why killing someone in a war should make you more qualified to decide whether or not the war is justified. If you're going to take this study seriously, clearly the act of killing biases a soldier in favor of war, and that bias is a psychological defense mechanism against the crushing guilt they would otherwise have to feel. Sounds like trauma to me.
- deslock, on 12/01/2008, -1/+15Nice quote but it doesn't make sense without this one added to it:
"Because America’s decision to go to war was the sole reason these soldiers killed, they “now depend on that policy to justify their actions,” Klug believes. Those who disagree with the policy, then, become automatic enemies" - MalarkeyPN, on 12/01/2008, -6/+18I imagine they're also more likely to suffer PTSD.
- DeepFriedFetus, on 12/01/2008, -6/+18Exactly how are they protecting our freedoms? We've lost more freedoms under Bush's reign than ever before in our history, and you think that the soldiers serving him are somehow defending freedom?
- Dundasbro, on 12/01/2008, -1/+13Say it again yeah!
- HalsMyPal, on 12/01/2008, -2/+13i have been on the receiving end of this view.
i got into a discussion about the war with an army recruiter who had been there and no matter what i said about oil, policing the world, the lack of wmds etc. his arguments always came back to centering around justifying the actions of him and his fellow soldiers and the only way to do that was to support the war completely. I eventually had to stop because when it came down to that question of whether or not they killed or died for something i didn't believe in i had to submit because i do respect them and what they have signed up to do and the argument wasnt important enough for me to make the guy question his past. If that is what it takes to get through something like killing another person then let them have it they did sign up to defend the country with their life whether we believe it justly or not. - waxoff, on 12/01/2008, -3/+14Speaking as a veteran, I'd say most people, even from countries against the war, have treated me well. Most people are able to discern between U.S. policy and an individual soldier caught in the middle of it. The things that stand out most in my mind were people literally clapping for us at the airport on the way home (just like the Bud commercial) Or eating out at a restaurant a few times only to find someone had anonymously paid for not only my dinner, but the whole table. A gas station owner refused my money another time.
I've also seen the "F*** the Troops" signs though. (I live in DC) That stings. I'll never forget the chick at a bar who called me a rapist when she found out I was a vet. She apologized later, but seemed to remain convinced that most soldiers are rapists and murderers. I refused the drink she offered in concession. And I think we all know Digg has some nut jobs. But, at least in person, these people are few and far between.
That being said though, the study isn't talking how vets are treated. It has to do with how vets cope with having killed someone. If the war was unjustified, then the assumption by the vet is that he was unjustified in his actions. So in the mind of some vets by claiming the war itself was illegal, you are by implication calling him a criminal. Given the sacrifices he has had to make, and the nature of war that can be very offensive. - pintomp3, on 12/01/2008, -11/+22why? what insight to you gain by killing someone? does it magically make saddam have wmds? does it magically make saddam responsible for 9/11?
- MalarkeyPN, on 12/01/2008, -5/+16I didn't live through it and I can defend it. As horrific as the nukes were, a land invasion of Japan would have likely resulted in more deaths for both the Japanese and the Americans.
- iticu, on 12/01/2008, -19/+29You mean, killers are trying to justify their rationale for killing?
NO WAI! - uncleosbert, on 12/01/2008, -1/+11this is why soldiers don't usually end wars. that role falls to the people who are not strangers in a strange land trying to survive.
- Khast, on 12/01/2008, -4/+13well, ok, I agree with my brother's opinion then, he was on the frontline in Iraq, and he still says the war is wrong. he says that though we've helped out a lot over there, we also have done some pretty awful things as well, of which he can't say...due to security.
- chevyorange, on 12/01/2008, -2/+11The first thing about this "war" is that it should never have been.
- lovemorgul, on 12/01/2008, -9/+17The veterans are aware of their status as the ‘stepchildren’ of polite American society, a sense that’s enhanced by their abysmal treatment upon returning
- tk0680, on 12/01/2008, -6/+14Fair point, but if you offered me the choice of killing people for a cause I didn't believe in or poverty, I'd take poverty.
- inactive, on 12/01/2008, -4/+12tk0680,
his point is that you had better teachings and probably better opportunities than the people he is talking about,
many of them are literally recruited right after high school and these kids come from low income families and to them the amount of cash offered by the army is a great deal, not to mention they won't have to worry about housing and food.
And don't say you'll take poverty that fast, hunger will change everything you know about philosophy in 3 days - uncleosbert, on 12/01/2008, -2/+10and that is why we're at war. why are we the people silent while the army gets decimated? the soldiers are living the war... they don't get the news about how it began, they don't spend their time reading editorials about how much it costs or how many years it will take or the fact that we were wrong about the wmds... they're too busy getting shot at.
if enough of us were like you, we would always be at war. you think they like getting shot at? did you even read the article?
"Because America’s decision to go to war was the sole reason these soldiers killed, they “now depend on that policy to justify their actions,” Klug believes. Those who disagree with the policy, then, become automatic enemies."
you trust the people who trusted us. you're failing them. - FredFredrickson, on 12/01/2008, -1/+9Guess what - nobody had to go fight a war in Iraq, because nobody would have died if we hadn't have gone over there. Preemptive war changes the rules.
- wsevens, on 12/01/2008, -2/+10Absolutely Nothing
- pintomp3, on 12/01/2008, -1/+9no, we want them to be in the comforts of their homes and offices too. do you have something against bring the troops home to be with their families? it is war supporters like you who want soldiers to remain there to be shot at.
- MalarkeyPN, on 12/01/2008, -13/+21... because they agree with you?
- malex, on 12/01/2008, -0/+8"Those that oppose the wars sometimes are saying they'd rather those people be shot."
Whatever other arguments you have heard for or against this war, nobody is suggesting what you're saying here. Don't distort the issues. - gilgamesh23, on 12/01/2008, -1/+9Wrong... The Japanese kill allot of civilians during Pearl Harbor.
Also the Japanese military had several hairbrained ideas for unmanned air balloons to float across the Pacific and drop bombs on California, Portland, and Washington. They just didn't work. Let us not forget how many people that the Japanese slaughtered during their occupation of China during WWII.
Please read the history of the Japanese occupational empire. They were monsters that killed more people that the Germans did and with the full backing of the Japanese citizenry. - EricSchC1, on 12/01/2008, -4/+12True, however sometimes that profound effect can be profoundly bad on one's perception of things.
- Dundasbro, on 12/01/2008, -3/+10Sure, being shot at can give you a new perspective on life and so on, but I hardly see how it lends greater legitimacy to someone's political opinion.
- NolanFinn, on 12/01/2008, -0/+7This might be an actual textbook example of cognitive dissonance.
- enantiodromia, on 12/01/2008, -1/+8so when you have countless street cops who say the war on drugs is bogus, and pot should be legal, do you trust them more than the politicians who say we should continue wasting money and building more and more prisons to house casual users?
- ParkerGrove, on 12/01/2008, -2/+9That was applicable in WW2 any war after that your argument has no merit. If we did not go into iraq we would not be speaking arabic and have shari law.
- Paulorific, on 12/01/2008, -4/+11Kolobcreek, I'm not going to insult you, just ask you a question. What freedoms were in jeopardy and how have they been defended?
- pixburgher, on 12/01/2008, -2/+9And by the same logic, if you didn't actually live through the holocaust you are not permitted to denounce it.
- enantiodromia, on 12/01/2008, -0/+7i'll see this assertion, and raise you a "family members of those who have died in Iraq are more likely to defend sending our troops home"
- r3s0p, on 12/01/2008, -0/+6your sockpuppet is showing...lol
- scabbers, on 12/01/2008, -7/+13There are tons of Americans who defend dropping nukes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
- aptanalogy, on 12/01/2008, -1/+7Well, there are different kinds of killing, certainly, but the moral connotations are irrelevant; if you kill someone, you are, by definition, a "killer".
- UselessTrivia, on 12/01/2008, -6/+12They're only treated poorly by the government, not by the rest of us.
- bakamas, on 12/01/2008, -3/+9Ryan, you're an idiot. You must be one of those soldiers that got in after they lowered the standards.
This war was a war of choice. We're not being hippie- "war is always wrong" crowd when we say that. This war should never have happened because it was a huge mistake. Feel free to live in denial and pretend you served your country. You didn't. You've been used. - pintomp3, on 12/01/2008, -11/+17people always rationalize their actions.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 295 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is