PDA

View Full Version : See me, and weep.



ATG
02-18-2008, 04:06 PM
YouTube - The best video you'll see this year!

OchrisO
02-18-2008, 04:09 PM
This is me, not weeping.


In fact, the making of what should have been an intensely personal moment between father and son into a media moment(look at all the pictures and cameras in the background) kind of annoys me.

ATG
02-18-2008, 05:13 PM
Well, I did.

ZoNeSeeK
02-18-2008, 06:03 PM
Nothing distracts from the actual betrayal of a government engaging in war than touching pieces from the frontline!

ATG
02-18-2008, 06:35 PM
The cynicism is thick here.

OchrisO
02-18-2008, 06:50 PM
The cynicism is thick here.

Have you evr went to pet a dog that has been badly abused by a previous master and no matter how nice you try to be, it always shys away from you?
It is sort of like that.

Daghain
02-18-2008, 06:55 PM
I have to agree. I'm glad the kid got to see his dad, but I fucking hate the fact that the media used it for propaganda.

ATG
02-18-2008, 07:46 PM
If it's propaganda it's anti war propadanda. It's shows distinctly how a boy needs his dad.

What if he was returning from Afganistan and not Iraq? Would that make it more palatable?

OchrisO
02-18-2008, 09:10 PM
I wouldn't say propaganda as much as misdirection, in the same way that the media spins the "support the troops, not the war" concept to the war machine's advantage.

ZoNeSeeK
02-18-2008, 09:50 PM
Was the soldier conscripted to fight? Or was he defending his own soil from invasion?

i.e. Was his being away the result of something out of his control, or did he exercise his ability to make a choice, and that was the consequence of that choice?

Of course I wish that all troops return home safe and well. I actually wish they were never in Iraq to begin with. But then again, we all have the freedom to make decisions, don't we.

Daghain
02-18-2008, 10:33 PM
If it's propaganda it's anti war propadanda. It's shows distinctly how a boy needs his dad.

What if he was returning from Afganistan and not Iraq? Would that make it more palatable?

I'm sorry, are you new???? That is TOTALLY pro-war propaganda. Oh, lookit, the big brave soldier came home for his son...

I don't give a rat's ass what country he came home FROM, that is, IMHO, pure and simple, a "let's-tug-on-America's-hearstrings" piece of propaganist BS.

Had we NOT stuck our noses where they didn't belong (and, just so you know, I VOTED FOR Bush, twice) we would not be seeing that.

Again, I think it's GREAT the kid got to see his dad. I think it's GREAT the man believed strongly enough in his county's policies that he fought for our country.

What I have a HUGE FUCKING PROBLEM WITH is the media's need to cash in on this. Why??? Think about it.

ETA: I have a hard time respecting this particular soldier, as well. WTF??? Why, why, WHY would you make a reunion with your kid a media event? Seriously?

Erin
02-18-2008, 10:52 PM
Was the soldier conscripted to fight? Or was he defending his own soil from invasion?

i.e. Was his being away the result of something out of his control, or did he exercise his ability to make a choice, and that was the consequence of that choice?

Of course I wish that all troops return home safe and well. I actually wish they were never in Iraq to begin with. But then again, we all have the freedom to make decisions, don't we.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: Well stated.

Brice
02-19-2008, 05:09 AM
I kinda' gotta' agree with most everyone on this. This is just taking what should have been a sweet beautiful moment between a boy and his dad and twisting it for political purposes. To me it is sickening. It is no more than diversion and disinformation.

I'm not sure if I'd blame the father any though. He may have had little or no say in the cameras being there...or been so happy to see his boy that he didn't give it a whole hell of a lot of thought.

jayson
02-19-2008, 05:14 AM
This is me, not weeping.


In fact, the making of what should have been an intensely personal moment between father and son into a media moment(look at all the pictures and cameras in the background) kind of annoys me.


Nothing distracts from the actual betrayal of a government engaging in war than touching pieces from the frontline!


I have to agree. I'm glad the kid got to see his dad, but I fucking hate the fact that the media used it for propaganda.


I kinda' gotta' agree with most everyone on this. This is just taking what should have been a sweet beautiful moment between a boy and his dad and twisting it for political purposes. To me it is sickening. It is no more than diversion and disinformation.


Agree with all of the above.

Odetta
02-19-2008, 07:34 AM
What if he was returning from Afganistan and not Iraq? Would that make it more palatable?

At the moment, Canada has most of our troops trying to sort out the shit in Afghanistan and a lot of Canadians want our troops out of there... it is really no different than how you feel about Iraq, to be honest.

Brice
02-19-2008, 08:44 AM
What if he was returning from Afganistan and not Iraq? Would that make it more palatable?

At the moment, Canada has most of our troops trying to sort out the shit in Afghanistan and a lot of Canadians want our troops out of there... it is really no different than how you feel about Iraq, to be honest.


Canada has a military??? :arg: :beat: :orely:

Daghain
02-19-2008, 08:48 AM
:rofl:

Brice
02-19-2008, 08:49 AM
What's funny?

Daghain
02-19-2008, 08:58 AM
Your "Canada has an army?"

Brice
02-19-2008, 09:01 AM
Oh, I know. I was kidding when I asked the second question too. :lol: I knew what you meant.

Daghain
02-19-2008, 09:12 AM
I thought so. Dork. :lol:

LadyHitchhiker
02-19-2008, 09:38 AM
I have never ever heard a single thing about the canadian military and I live four hours away from Canada. Isn't that strange?

Matt
02-19-2008, 09:50 AM
I'm not sure I would classify this as a "media event" other than on the local level. I sure didn't see it on the national news. I know it aired but it wasn't advertised or anything.

Not only that but the guy may not have had a choice about weather it was being covered. His boy was there, so was he, so was the cameras. I'm not saying that is what it was but the media really isn't interested in anything "prowar" for the most part.

For myself, its touching. Not because the kid is a part of a war that was fought wrong but because he went away, he missed his dad, and now he is back. Win/win

OchrisO
02-19-2008, 02:22 PM
Political diversion is insidious in nature, and if done properly, should never be advertised, otherwise it looks blatantly like exactly what it is.

Most likely, a local CBS affiliate went and filmed it when they heard about it, then the national team said "Oh, look what we can do with this!"



And I totally disagree, matt. For large media organizations, it is in their best interest to be pro-war. For some news organizations, it is because they have become little more than mouthpieces for the Bush administration and for others it is simply because a good controversial war makes for good newsbytes and headlines. The mass media is not in the business of showing us sunshine and roses, and in the end, it is just that: a business.

Matt
02-19-2008, 02:26 PM
Well, we'll have to disagree there. If it was good for business there would be more pictures of US soldiers handing out candy to kids and stuff like that...because it happens all the time.

You would think there isn't any kindness going on but the reality is you can't swing a dead cat there without running into some if you don't simply ignore it.

jayson
02-19-2008, 02:27 PM
And I totally disagree, matt. For large media organizations, it is in their best interest to be pro-war. For some news organizations, it is because they have become little more than mouthpieces for the Bush administration and for others it is simply because a good controversial war makes for good newsbytes and headlines. The mass media is not in the business of showing us sunshine and roses, and in the end, it is just that: a business.

Again Chris, I couldn't agree more. I think the American media showed its true colors in the buildup to the war. instead of investigating the claims made by the administration, they put on their flag lapel pins, made some patriotic graphics, and repeated ad nauseum the claims that Iraq was an imminent threat. the job of the media in a democracy is not to be a megaphone for the authorities, but to provide information so there is an informed population. they knew from the first gulf war that war equals big ratings and they were in from day one. Bill Moyers [one of the only real journalists in America] did a great PBS special on the role of the media in facilitating the Bush Admin's push to invade Iraq.

ZoNeSeeK
02-19-2008, 02:48 PM
I realise that many US troops are being recalled for 2nd and 3rd tours, due to contract clauses etc, and this is not what they intended when they exercised the choice to join. I can understand the mentality of "I want to fight for what I believe in and help in some way, but once I've served, I've done my piece." Yes, they signed a contract and yes, they did agree that the Govt is able to recall them once they have already served their country and put their lives on the line due to a technicality, but personally I think its grossly unfair for these guys (and the guy in the vid could be one of these guys).

The US military is the current Administration's whore at the moment, because who else do you shove money at so you can fuck them royally up the ass? I hope republican voters consider this and really think about "who supports the troops" - do you mean who shifts funds from already underfunded areas like health and education or who actually gives a fuck about where the men and women serving the US are sent?

Canada has a very large military committment to Afghanistan (when you consider population percentages) - personally I believe this is where the focus should have stayed. There's still militant terrorist operations engaged with allied forces there that were involved with Al-Qaida's attacks on the US - but the Canadians are taking care of that while the US has been on a goose chase in Iraq for 3 years. Bush's argument "But they're only 3.5 inches away from eachother!" *map point* is losing support, i reckon :)

Matt
02-19-2008, 02:54 PM
Actually, I just had one sign up and the paperwork is clear as a bell about the length of commitment. 4 years active, 4 years guard. They can call the guard anytime and its pretty specifically mentioned in there (was when I joined 15 years ago too)

And...I can say for sure that my daughters little family doesn't feel fucked in anyway even if Jimmy is deployed. That is what he signed up for and they are sure as hell enjoying the benefits.

ZoNeSeeK
02-19-2008, 03:19 PM
And...I can say for sure that my daughters little family doesn't feel fucked in anyway even if Jimmy is deployed. That is what he signed up for and they are sure as hell enjoying the benefits.

Its the where and why of deployment which is indicative of your Administration's regard for the lives of the people serving her, not how much they pay their families. But if its assumed that the Administration doesn't really have much regard for the lives of her troops then the money is important. Like with mercenaries.

Matt
02-19-2008, 03:21 PM
That may be true but it doesn't make someone stupid or "duped" for sign up for a deal that is very clearly written on the paper they sign.

Its also not bad to want to defend your country and enjoy the benefits being a solider brings.

Oops--you added to that.

I can only speak from experience Josh, but the US Military does have a very deep regard for its military families. I am seeing examples of that right now as my kids are being in processed onto post.

ZoNeSeeK
02-19-2008, 03:36 PM
I agree with you - I don't have an issue with people joining the military, I don't think they're stupid and I don't think they're bad whatsoever - I think they have alot of guts.

My issues are with how the current govt. has used its troops and I wish more people would hold them accountable for the thousands of people who have died in Iraq for what are laughable, unsubstantiated motives. Yes its what people signed up for but Jesus, you've got to assume that your own government is going to try approaches that don't involve you dying or involve minimal casualities as possible. Signing away the lives of your troops should be the last resort, but for the Bush adminstration it was the first and preferred choice.

Matt
02-19-2008, 03:41 PM
The soliders can't do anything about the administration. They signed up and they have to go where they are sent. Plain and simple.

They know full well what they are in for when they take the oath and have the option to say "no".

Your opinion may be that it was pointless but not everyone shares that. Some think it was important, others think it was necessary but handled wrong. We have lost more people this year in LA than we have in Iraq but that doesn't matter either.

Our government is responsible for not only making sure our solders are protected but also this country and sometimes the two aren't possible at once.

ZoNeSeeK
02-19-2008, 04:16 PM
How many troops are still committed to Iraq, does anyone know?

OchrisO
02-19-2008, 04:17 PM
What we are doing in Iraq now has nothing to do with making our country safe.

In fact, being in the Middle East at all, in and of itself, makes our country considerably LESS safe by riling up militant Muslims who see the white devil in their lands and want to retaliate, not against the soldiers who are there, but against their families at home. It is like seeing a hornet's nest on a tree in your yard and thinking that whacking it with a stick will make your house safer when just leaving the nest alone would have made for a much safer enviroment.


It is fine to support the troops, alot of people do. However, it is not alright to use the support of the troops to justify all of the hideous mistakes that our current administration has made and continues to make. It makes me jaded with the "support the troops" concept when I see it being used so often to justify letting the adminstration do whatever they want, because I assure you, their intentions have never been noble.

Matt
02-19-2008, 04:48 PM
In fact, being in the Middle East at all, in and of itself, makes our country considerably LESS safe by riling up militant Muslims who see the white devil in their lands and want to retaliate, not against the soldiers who are there, but against their families at home. It is like seeing a hornet's nest on a tree in your yard and thinking that whacking it with a stick will make your house safer when just leaving the nest alone would have made for a much safer enviroment.

Oh man, I could not disagree with that more.

The nest in the tree...its gotta go. Painful now but much safer for your family in the future.

OchrisO
02-19-2008, 04:58 PM
But, the point is, it won't get rid of the nest, so to speak. It is the equivalent of hit the nest over and over with a stick without ever being able to remove it. There will always be militant muslims in the Middle East. Being there increases the problem rather than solving it. In fact, we went in going after Al Qaeda, and have ended in facilitating a regime change through killing a ruler who had no Al Qaeda ties. In fact, we probably did Osama Bin Laden a favor in killing him, since he hated Sadam Hussein for refusing Al Qeda aid in the 90s. He was certainly an asshole, but he would have never made it out of the Middle East and was never a threat to our country. What is a threat to our country are the terrorists taht we keep pissing off by remaining in the Middle East.

ATG
02-19-2008, 06:40 PM
jeezly crow. It has nothing to do with any of that.

It's about a boys love for his dad. ya'll are over thinking this my friends.

Erin
02-19-2008, 09:28 PM
If it was only about a boy's love for his dad, why was it on camera and on the news? That's the point some people in here are trying to make.

John Blaze
02-19-2008, 10:35 PM
Well, we'll have to disagree there. If it was good for business there would be more pictures of US soldiers handing out candy to kids and stuff like that...because it happens all the time.

You would think there isn't any kindness going on but the reality is you can't swing a dead cat there without running into some if you don't simply ignore it.

I agree. I think the majority of the media is anti-war, and uses disinformation to make everyone more anti-war.

The reality is that most media outlets, at least here in New Mexico and El Paso, Texas, send someone to every flight that lands with soldiers for just this type of opportunity. It makes good tv. I have not seent he video yet, they blocked all that stuff from work.

Daghain
02-19-2008, 10:39 PM
If it was only about a boy's love for his dad, why was it on camera and on the news? That's the point some people in here are trying to make.

Amen, sister. :)

And, IMHO, if you go to war, you take the fucking country as yours. This political BS is a waste of time. Just sayin'.

John Blaze
02-19-2008, 10:55 PM
And, IMHO, if you go to war, you take the fucking country as yours. This political BS is a waste of time. Just sayin'.

I always thought we should go in, fuck up the bad guys, and get out. Let them figure out the mess.

But in reality, we'd be making it harder on all the good people that live there, because it'd be anarchy, and an extremely chaotic situation.

I don't think our government is perfect, but I believe our government is doing the best it can with this can of worms we opened.

Mattrick
02-20-2008, 12:00 AM
Yeah, I stopped watching when it started displaying text about how american soldiers fight for home and freedom etc. I've got friends in Afghanistan right now. Why? Because they chose to go, to join the army, to fight. I'm not going to cry for some soldier who dies on the battlefield. Soldier is a career and part of that career involves extreme hazard. No different than a fire fighter or a police officer.

Now in WWII when conscription was involved, that was a tragedy. Young men getting shipped off to die. They aren't getting an education, pay or a pension out of it. They not only fought for their lives but they really did fight for freedom and a greater good. I do not consider this work in the middle east to be for a greater good as motives are perpetually unclear and there is no vile dictator committing genocide.

Not being an American I'm not sure how the overseas conflict is treated in your media or society but here I'm sick of hearing 'two soldiers killed in Afghanistan' because it trivializes the entire war. In a time when two soldiers dying is front page news, what would the slaughter of Dieppe have been in WWII? Compared to the wars of the past; American Civil War and American Revolution, WWI and II, Korea and Vietnam were on such grander scales and more deserving of sympathies.

Any human dying is a bad thing but just because someone chose to go into the army and they died at work doesn't make it front page news. It just doesn't.

http://www.libraryspot.com/lists/listwars.htm

This link says it all, in my opinion. 9,000 deaths in 8 years vs. 406,000 in 7 years. The ratios alone!

WW1 - 1 death per 40 soldiers
WW2 - 1 death per 41 soldiers
Korea - 1 death per 123 soldiers
Vietnam - 1 death per 84 soldiers
Gulf Conflict - 1 death per 422 soldiers

http://icasualties.org/oif/US_chart.aspx

This shows the American casualties of the new war and isn't even on pace to surpass the previous conflict.


Compared to the wars our ancestors fought this is a shin kicking contest. I'm more worried about people dying from Cancer, something that isn't an occupational hazard.

John Blaze
02-20-2008, 12:14 AM
I was going to make that point earlier, Mattrick. Thanks for looking up those facts.

I agree that it's an occupational hazard. However, I too have friends who are fighting now because they chose to go, and would cry for them if they were to die.

Not sure you're very factual on the ww2 conscription though. Even if you were drafted you still got paid. Maybe not as much as they get now, and there wasn't any "20k sign on bonus" then, but they got paid.

Mattrick
02-20-2008, 01:03 AM
I'm sure the conscription was different in many places. I can't recall if how well Canadian soldiers were paid but I'm sure it just wasn't enough considering what the cost was. I too would be said if my friend Rob, who mans a gun convoys in Afghanistan, were too be killed. It's a private pain yet it's national news.

The American Government had better stop stepping on people's toes or Brittain/Canada will have to burn down the white house again. Oh yeah, America could fight off the British, The Confederacy and Terrorism but not some pissed off Canadians! :cool:

John Blaze
02-20-2008, 01:37 AM
Oh yeah, America could fight off the British, The Confederacy and Terrorism but not some pissed off Canadians! :cool:

Haven't you seen the South Park movie? We'd so whip your ass. :pirate:

Mattrick
02-20-2008, 01:44 AM
Weapons and Military prowess make a soldier not :thumbsup:

OchrisO
02-20-2008, 01:48 AM
Aren't all canadians sasquatches? Those seem like they would be hard to take. I mean, I've never seen one, but that is what I heard.*




*Just kidding, I know a few Canadians(1)








(1) and they are all sasquatches.

John Blaze
02-20-2008, 01:53 AM
:lol:

Mattrick
02-20-2008, 03:17 AM
Aren't all canadians sasquatches? Those seem like they would be hard to take. I mean, I've never seen one, but that is what I heard.*




*Just kidding, I know a few Canadians(1)








(1) and they are all sasquatches.

My friend Kalin is a Wookie.

All the same, if there are two countries that have on upped america it's Canada and Vietnam.

John Blaze
02-20-2008, 03:24 AM
how you figure?

Odetta
02-20-2008, 09:17 PM
Aren't all canadians sasquatches? Those seem like they would be hard to take. I mean, I've never seen one, but that is what I heard.*




*Just kidding, I know a few Canadians(1)








(1) and they are all sasquatches.


I'm a sexy sasquatch, tho!

John Blaze
02-20-2008, 10:32 PM
I'm a sexy sasquatch, tho!

I need a picture for proof. :orely:

Jean
02-21-2008, 12:03 AM
::muses::

sasquatches...

::a very interested bear::

LadyHitchhiker
05-07-2008, 04:23 PM
I love yetii!!

Nerak
05-07-2008, 04:58 PM
I bawled my eyes out over that video!

How happy was that kid seeing his dad again??

And maybe the person filming it sent it to the news??? Just a happy note in an otherwise dreary newscast!

Ka-tet
05-09-2008, 02:07 PM
To be honest im more disgusted than anything, like other people have said that moment should have been private and personal, itsead the media turned it into an attraction.

MrsSmeej
05-16-2008, 10:51 AM
I did feel a little voyeuristic watching the video, but I wept like a baby. The poor child.

We in the U.S. so desperately need a Commander in Chief who is worthy of the sacrifices we demand of our military families. Although it may be true that parents sign up, my guess is that no-one asked that little boy how he'd feel about Daddy being "stop-lossed".