Combat troops are losing their hearing...
By John Amato Sunday Mar 09, 2008 9:01amAs if they don't have enough problems fighting Bush and McCain's war....
Soldiers and Marines caught in roadside bombings and firefights in Iraq and Afghanistan are coming home in epidemic numbers with permanent hearing loss and ringing in their ears, prompting the military to redouble its efforts to protect the troops from noise.
Hearing damage is the No. 1 disability in the war on terror, according to the Department of Veterans Affairs, and some experts say the true toll could take decades to become clear. Nearly 70,000 of the more than 1.3 million troops who have served in the two war zones are collecting disability for tinnitus, a potentially debilitating ringing in the ears, and more than 58,000 are on disability for hearing loss, the VA said.
"The numbers are staggering," said Theresa Schulz, a former audiologist with the Air Force, past president of the National Hearing Conservation Association and author of a 2004 report titled "Troops Return With Alarming Rates of Hearing Loss."
And as a memo to Fred Barnes---Americans are concerned with the welfare of our soldiers--Iraq isn't a college football game...
Login or Register to post comments.
March 13th-16th: Support THESE Troops!
They gotta stop listening to all that heavy metal while blowing s**t up.
I read about this a few days ago. Jesus, like we don't ask enough of our service members! They come back to an indifferent society, get inadequate treatment, suffer severe brain injuires and what do we do? Send them right back. I wish there is some kind of cosmic justice. I'm tired of just hoping for the best.
Another example of the failed Bush-McCain-Hillary War. At least they won't have to hear those awful pro-war slogans.
Iron Maiden on the Seventh Son tour wrecked my hearing.
Damn, that was 20 years ago! Where has the time gone?
The Philadelphia Inquirer is doing a series on returning Guard members. Its heart wrenching. And now we are learning these wars are going to cost $1.2 trillion minimum by 2017. How are we going to pay for it? By bankrupting our childrens future.
What?
Barack the Magic CoIntelPro @ 24:
CoIntelPro of the Madrassa @ 25:
Those numbers were as of YESTERDAY
Veterans' Rehabilitation will have to include Lip Reading.
Major General Smedley Butler (1935): War Is A Racket
There is only one presidential candidate who had the common sense and
intelligence to oppose the war from the start:
OBAMA
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/semr?source=SEM-register-google-o...
GEORGE W. BUSH, RICHARD B. CHENEY AND INTER-CONNECTED THINK TANKS, LOBBYISTS, PACS AND ALIGNED SPONSORS, PUNDITS & PROPAGANDISTS WITHIN THE US NEWS, RADIO AND CABLE MEDIA ARE DIRECTLY PARTICIPATING IN THE COVER-UP OF CRIMES, PAST AND PRESENT. THEY HAVE NO CREDIBILITY LEFT.
ysbaddaden @ 2:
that and staying away from those goddamned IEDs and suicide bombers.
Its bad enough our troops are going deaf. But now they are drinking tainted water supplied by, guess who? KBR! Dick Cheney's so-called former company.
Clinton Secretary of Navy, Air Force to tout Obama's credentials
According to a press release from the Obama campaign Monday morning, the candidate's staff will appear with top military brass today "to discuss why Obama has demonstrated the judgment and has the experience to be Commander In Chief."
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Clinton_military_brass_join_ranks_with_031...
LOL, Tony. For me it was Van Halen on the "Diver Down" tour. Trillions spent, thousands of American soldies dead, who knows how many wounded and disabled, hundreds-of-thousands civilians dead. And to to think Bush and Cheney will retire with lifetime financial and health benefits and Secret Service protection. I see that idiot dancing a jig in front of the Whitehouse for the cameras while people are dying and it makes me physically ill.
Well, at least they won't be able to hear Ted Nugent anymore.
Send Bush's, McCain's, Cheney's and Romney's kids to the front lines to "support the troops". What is that, like 11 more soldiers? That's almost a platoon.
Dumbya and the Cardiac Kid hate the troops and support their murders.
We also remember that some soldiers LOST their votes
to a republican CAGING scheme. never reported in the Main Stream Media...
http://www.gregpalast.com/conyers-slams-gonzales-deputy-over-voter-caging/
"Myth" of Voter Fraud Focus of Senate Hearing;
--> Iglesias is one of the witnesses who will testify about the issue.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_jason_le_080309__22myth_22_of_vo...
Call it like it is...
HILLARY might as well drop out OR switch parties and join the republicons...
The Australian: "Clinton attacks on Obama may boost McCain....
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23346131-26397,00.html
5 more killed today. 4+ injured.
P.D. @ 16:
Wait til the revelations about the effects of Anti-Malarials start coming out (especially on female slodiers)
or perhaps soldiers
Viet Nam vet here who sustained a hearing loss. Went to VA and applied for disability and was awarded a non-compensable disability. Applied for a civil service job only to be disqualified for my disability. Only in america.
Today I am deaf in one ear and losing hearing in the other.
Make a game of how many times Fred Barnes says "..uh.." when making an irrelevant point. He'll never win an oratory prize.
More shit for BillO to deny!
Hussein mode off
earl hussein mccain @ 24:
I read the news today oh boy
24 urban areas have traces of pharmaceuticals in their drinking water.
Hearing loss is among the top disabilities in every war. I know it was in Vietnam and it was for my dad in WWII and grandfather in WWI. But do we learn from those experiences? Of course not.
Hey, I guess Americans can stop medicating themselves. The billion dollar Pharma's are doing it for them. Hey, maybe we can save ourselves some money by just drinking the water supply.
Acting Patriotic @ 1:
Aaron Glantz: Winter Soldier Hearings
ysbaddaden @ 30:
Hallucinations linked to drug given to troops
Malaria medication can cause paranoia, other mental side effects:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6947472/
I don't get the Fred Barnes dig - what did he say?
I dont want to see anyone hurt, including professional soldiers. I am getting so tired of this notion that they are our 'team' however.
They are killers.
They enlisted to become killers for money. That is bad. Dont tell me they enlisted to go to college. They are killing for college. That is bad. But it is typical of this country. If the women decided to give pleasure to people they didnt know for money for college, this country would put them in prison. But training to kill people they dont know for money for college is considered high honor and even noble.
Its KILLING John.
And you are concerned that a mafia hitman will lose his hearing - wait, silly me, not a mafia hitman, a noble soldier. Its different when a soldier kills. A soldier kills his victim for their own good.
What wouldnt you support? People defending themselves against professional US killers' attempts to kill them by using explosives with the unfortunate side effect of hearing loss?
... you dont support that. You seem more concerned about the soldiers hearing than the lives of their victims.
I would support the soldiers if and when they decided to STOP killing people for all the wrong reasons.
ysbaddaden @ 2:
I agree with you there. I limit my kids use of I-Pods since they will start going deaf. Cranking them up all day IMO is worse than a roadside bomb unless they're going off constantly right beside you all day long.
anon @ 35:
I have a son on the front lines. You obviously have no idea of what our military is about. The problem is with leadership, not with the kids who are dodging the bullets.
If you have ever been around a firearm going off let alone a machine gun or a tank main gun without hearing protection, then you can appreciate what these Soldiers are going through. It’s not just IEDs. Easy to say they should wear hearing protection, but then you are muffling the sense that could mean your life and death in combat and shit goes out the window. The young kids fighting this war get training, but you don’t think too much about your hearing before it’s too late. The VA should be paying for hearing aids and such for these Soldiers until the day they die. It’s the Countries obligation, but we see the Soldier end up on the bottom of the priority list almost every time. It’s more important for the rich to profit then bother their beautiful minds over such concerns.
anon @ 36:
Bombs are worse.
Sources: 5 U.S. soldiers killed in Baghdad blast
U.S. military officials in Iraq told CNN that five U.S. soldiers on foot patrol in Baghdad were killed in a suicide attack today. The officials said four soldiers were killed in the initial blast and one died later of wounds. Also, three U.S. soldiers and an Iraqi interpreter were wounded, they said.
FUCK YOU, BUSHOLINI!
anon @ 37:
I sorry you may lose your son - honest.
But I do understand. They knew they were joining the military to become killers. That is their job - killing. Whatever their ulterior motives might be.
I wish him well and a gun that doesnt work. I see those he is there to kill as much a member of my family as he is.
By the way, anon is not the default nick. I chose this nick last summer. What would you have me do, allow you to thug me out of a nick that I chose 9 months ago? Did you teach that to your kid also?
Bush lost his hearing a long time ago but he can do the Lame Duck tap dance. Jerk.
I was actually shooting out at the ranch this weekend and forgot to bring hearing protection. After emptying several magazines I actually told my buddy that my ears were hurting and mentioned I can't imagine what our troops have to put up with. It's not hard to imagine are troops coming back deaf or nearly deaf.
anon @ 35:
As a vet who still has many, many friends in the enlisted and officer ranks, I can unequivocally state you have no idea what you are talking about.
What Gloria Steinem was trying to say in Austin, TX last week while stumping for Hillary was that the media and the political powers that be are too strong on militarism. I think she's right.
As awful as war is, we get something positive out of it. The trick is to find out what that is and get it some way other than war. If the human race survives, that is.
Dr. Matt @ 45:
Defend your assertion. I assert that the primary function of a soldier is to kill. I reject the notion that killing is needed. I further assert that the thing that is rarely tried - establishing healthy long term relationships with other cultures - is needed.
Did you know that to a large degree, the places on earth that tend to produce people inclined to violence have sub-highschool level education and nearly no economic future? (Including regions in the US) Do any non-violent solutions come to mind?
Sorry, but you chose to be a killer. I'm certain you consider your choice to be noble. I dont. Sending an army of teachers overseas would do more than sending you.
anon @ 41:
Pal, I've heard this song before. This is the same "blame the troops" bullshit that I experienced in Vietnam. Whether or not they volunteered or were drafted, it's still a case of the troops following their orders. And those orders are issued by chain of command, and guess who is at the top of that chain? The alleged President of the US, and a Congress that continues to give him everything he wants. So, knock off the "member of the family" crap, someone shooting at you is NOT a member of MY family.
The real crime here is the Main Stream Media that continues to ignore these stories of pain and loss by the troops. They abrogated their responsibility of oversight and are just as complicit as those who order the troops into these hell holes like Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan.
anon @ 42:
Thanks for showing just what a jackass you are.
anon @ 47:
Could you just go away now? You don't even have the balls to choose a moniker. You're here just to insult people.
anon @ 35:
It's a rather simplistic opinion that can be misinterpreted to a belief that soldiers WANT to kill.
A comparable analogy is that we are put on earth to die. Well, that's not exactly true, either. We're not specifically put on earth just so we can die, even though we all, eventually, die.
Or a person becomes a police officer to kill bad guys. True, cops are given guns and lessons on how to use them, but that doesn't mean "killing people" is number one on their job description
You'll find some soldiers who have a touch o' the bloodlust in 'em, and it's to be expected that to keep morale up and military casualties low, the high up muckety mucks might appeal to a baser nature and make them WANT to kill the enemy. But most people who enlist in the armed forces do so because they want to protect this country, its citizens and its assets. And yeah, that also includes learning how to kill as well as developing the unblinking "will" to kill. But it's also about saving lives, protecting lives, preventing the loss of life during an attack or a natural disaster, rebuilding infrastructure, restoring stability (or at least maintaining civility) amidst chaos or civil unrest.
Of course, the military is no better or worse, no more or less disciplined, than the Administration that controls it. Which is why, if you hate the troops, by all means, vote for John "we've got to torture to preserve peace" "why not a hundred more years of war? 1,000? 10,000?" McCain.
If you've got it in your head that all soldiers are, by definition, nothing more than hired killers, then I feel sorry for you. To be fair, I feel more sorry for the people who might be influenced by your drivel, but still, I feel sorry for you, too. The shades of grey prove you wrong, no matter how bad you want to be right in your own private li'l black-and-white world. That kind of mentality might get you attention & a couple of phone numbers at the college quad, but it's unfair to anyone whoever put on the uniform, prepared to go to any lengths to protect this country or it's people - their spouses or parents, their children or friends - complete strangers like you - while also hoping that they'd never actually have to go to those lengths. It's also insulting to anyone who currently has a loved one in the military, or ever had a loved one in the military. Which is just about everyone. Way to go, Sparky.
anon @ 49:
I see, you DO intend to thug me out of a nick that I chose ... chose .... last summer. And you consider my assuming your kid is also a thug - like his dad - to be what ... rude?
Why not chose a nick like ... john amato ... you only have to enter it once? Thug him out of his nick.
But, I'm the jackass. I see, I made you do it just as I made your kid chose to be a killer. I didnt chose your nick, you chose mine. Thugs tend to blame their victims. You are true to form.
Strawberrybitch @ 50:
I have used this nick since last summer. It is and has been as descriptive as your nick.
anon @ 52:
Wow, ya kno, you really need to stop drinking tap water. AP reported that it's full of mind altering drugs.
anon @ 53:
You can say THAT again!
slappy magoo @ 51:
Rhetoric, not reason.
Soldiers ... the ones that I have known ... generally have a different opinion of what they are doing after they join than before.
Its still killing. They are still killers - ribbons and awards not withstanding. And killing is wrong. Killing is entropic - and comes naturally. Building civil societies isnt - it is difficult. It appears we arent up to that yet as a nation.
But I'm pleased that you feel morally superior and pity me.
Strawberrybitch @ 54:
Strawberry - I have been posting every day with this nick since last summer. Yesterday, this guy shows up out of nowhere and uses a nick that I chose. He is probably a rightwing troll here to stir things up.
You have it backwards.
anon @ 57:
Sorry about that anon or is it anon....? Don't feel bad I still get my ten year old twins mixed up sometimes, especially when there's something broken and they stand there pointing at each other.
Strawberrybitch @ 58:
No problem.
anon @ 47:
You can assert anything you want, but it's for those of us who actually wore the uniform know that it's largely not true. Attempting to paint any group with one broad brush is childish and simply far off-base. And attempting to paint our US troops as "killers" just makes you look like a complete knee-jerk reactionary fool.
war is a racket.... at least those vets wont be able to listen to the racket....
heard of herring? sure i've heard of herring.... its a fish....
150,000 TROOPS COMING HOME TO A SHOPPING MARKET PARKING LOT, OR FREEWAY OFFRAMP NEAR YOU...
FOR YEARS WE HAVE WONDERED WHAT TO DO WHEN ALL OF THE OLD VIET NAM VETS WITH POST-TOASTED SYNDROM FADE AWAY..... PRESIDENT GEORGE DUBYA BUSH HAS RISEN TO THE OCCASION TO SUPPLY US WITH AN ENTIRE NEW POPULATION OF THE SOCIALLY BROKEN
----- HECK OF A JOB GEORGE
I guess I'm lucky that I got out of Vietnam with "only" tinnitus, and all my limbs, eyes, etc., but no clap or other stuff impossible to get rid of.
anon @ 47:
As Reverend Lovejoy said to Ned Flanders, "Once the government's makes something legal, it's no longer immoral."
One thing that people are forgetting in this debate is regardless of what you think of the regular armed forces, too many of those fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan are in various reserve groups.
In other words, they were originally weekend warriors who main duty was to help protect their local citizenry from natural disasters like earthquakes floods etc.
I think one of the reason boosh sent so many of them to the ME was because one: he's trying to fight the war on the cheap and easy, and two: it makes his own service in the Air National Guard look more impressive even though he was often AWOL before his desertion.
And even, for argument sake, if their main job was to injure others, wouldn't we be just as bad if we refused them basic treatment?
anon @ 35:
WTF?
What about us who enlisted to SAVE lives?
I am a flight medic that has seen the horrors of the war firsthand. You can't generalize and paint all of the troops with the same brush.Not all of them are killers. I just got back from my second tour last month and I am in the queue to ship out again in May. There are a lot of us that are against the illegal occupation in Iraq. some of us actually passed on the kool-aid that they tried to get us to drink.
Please tell me that you have worn the uniform and walked/flown a mile in my shoes. Most of us enlisted because we love our country.
[Deleted]
Don't want to sound like I'm defending BushCo, but really -- so what? This is the best the MSM can do by way of critique of the war?
Old, old news -- ask anyone from WWII, Korea, Vietnam. My stepfather fought in Korea in 1953 and his hearing has been bad for as long as I've known him.
Just one of those occupational hazards, I'm afraid. Even I got some hearing loss from peacetime service because I was "too cool" to wear ear plugs on the firing range.
Hemlock for Gadflies @ 67:
Spending too much time in front of a Marshall stack on "11" is similarly hazardous. ;)
Van140 @ 65:
I love humanity more. I respect that you are medically helping. You are also facilitating the assault. You arent a specific trigger puller, but you do enable. I admire the international redcross and other aid organizations. (None of whom are perfect)
The US military defends 'the american way of life'. I will call that material consumption to avoid angering people. A number of countries are involved, not just the US.
Material consumption (in the US) involves 5% of the worlds population consuming 25% of the worlds available resources.
Simple math question - if 5% of the worlds population consumes 25% of the worlds available resources and this defines a life style, what percentage of the worlds population can attain that life style? The answer is 20%. Simple math.
More simple math - studies indicate that of the six billion people on the planet (all members of my larger family, just like you), one billion live a life of material consumption. Here is the math - 16% live a life of material consumption, the rest (84%) live lives of poverty.
Do you see the similarity between those numbers? 16% and 20%? Do you see the disparity between the high end and low end - 16% and 84%? In these numbers you will find war ... and lots of it. This is the reason the US has military bases in nearly every nation on earth. They are defending material consumption. Oil - read as energy - drives material consumption, which is why we are currently 'annexing' south west asia. That is what you are doing. In the long run, I suspect the fools believe they can counter China by playing the oil/energy gambit. They cannot. But that is another issue.
Killing is a bad thing, even when a crazed lunatic crashes into your home to do you harm. In that case, it may be unavoidable while still wrong.
No one crashed into our home ... we crashed into theirs.
(unedited)
ysbaddaden @ 63:
Aint it the truth.
I was in a generals den - Ledford - on base - Davis Monthan AFB - and it had no walls. That is, I saw no evidence of walls - because every square inch of space was literally occupied by honors, awards, photo's with every politician and/or head of state from every corner of the planet. For all I know the roof was supported by military citations stacked vertically.
This all amounts to volumes of insistence that what he did really was ok - not wrong at all. I have never heard an honorable man claim honor. I hear scoundrels claiming it endlessly.
Dr. Matt @ 60:
You pulled a trigger (metaphor) because someone told you to. Now that is childish.
You would do better to teach them to read and give them a job. The war will cost 3 trillion dollars ... you could teach lots of people to read and a trade for that money - bu that isnt the military way.
I wont defend my right to have a pink plastic lawn flamingo stuck in my front yard by killing anyone.
anon @ 72:
By your perverse "logic", you are a "killer" because you pay taxes and those taxes support the military. You are clueless obtuse dolt. Thanks for proving that to everyone.
Dr. Matt @ 73:
Ad hominem humina humina.
I AM enabling the killing ... and I DONT like it. Not everyone sees virtue in killing.
anon,
I just reviewed you "killers" comment above,
So let me ask you, what would you fight for and what ould you be willing to sacrifice?
Call it an inquiry in to your situational ethics,
As for hearing loss
High intenstity sound over about 120 decibels causes a loss of high notes "High Frequency sound" and low frequency sound.
The military does issue hearing protection, but when you have those things in your ears you can't hear anything that feel could save your life, so some folks will only put one in, and leave the other one free. (Rock star musicians like pete townsend do that now, but I think its a little late for pete.)
Mefliquine is no longer the primary anti malarial of choice, soldiers are issued Doxycycline, not sure if Doxy has any unknown effects on non male soldiers, but we'll wait and see.
what?
wait, just caught up with anon situation ethics argument of tis wrong to kill,
which suggests he is making the argument that pacifism is more moral than war.
which then begs the question that pacifism makes no disitinction between combatants and non combatants, all deaths, and injuries are "Wrong"
War on the other hand, in the traditions and concepts passed down thru human civilization, makes an attempt to deliniate the difference in the death of combatants, and the death of non combatants, while establishing a system of compensation for unjust injuries recieved.
So in essence we have one line of thought , that makes no attempt of distinction, claiming moral authority over one line of thought (call it Just War theory), that attempts to implement distinctions.
absence of action is not more moral, nor less moral, but it is still absent.
As for the consumption of resources, yeah you are correct, so are you willing to spread your wealth by moving somewhere else that could use it???
Engage the resdistribution of consumption? Kosovo could use some help right now...
duncanidho @ 75:
I accept the use of force rules adopted by most law enforcement agencies. Deadly force in response to deadly force etc. No parsing or childish speculations. (Today police commonly over use force for convenience) No preemption.
Fight is a loaded word. I would like to see as much emphasis on prevention through examination of both our behavior (which may be provocative) and conditions/circumstances that may influence those who may - in the future - become known to us as 'enemies'.
My description of material consumption above is - in my opinion - provacative and has/will provoke violence. I would rather 'fight' to bring levels of prosperity to the rest of the world than attempt to guarantee mine. That would require new types of energy, sources and uses of materials and new and more constructive social,economic and political relationships with every nation on earth. Where we are at the moment is a continuation of classic European Colonialism - which was married to war.
'Fight' strikes me as a 19th century notion of defending us against them - whoever them are. It occurs to me that a 21st century notion would be to fight to normalize relationships with the people of the world with the purpose of universal prosperity. This would not be easy or cheap. In many cases, new weapon systems (like the recently deployed anti-satellite system) are both easier and cheaper. (That is as long as you have no moral objection to killing)
If you chose killing, then you will of necessity find yourself dealing with 'others' who may or may not mean you harm. It would be better, if not more difficult, to deal with a world of nations that couldnt imagine why they would want to cause you harm. Prior to Bush, much of the world was in that camp - today, much of it is not.
It is possible to reduce the threat of violence to the behavior of the psychologically disturbed rather than the behavior of the poor, hungry, angry or philosophically differing.
I work with a guy who was in the Army. He has since retired and he receives a pension from the military. If a soldier suffered any disabilities during his/her service they are entitled to a percentage of their original pension more. So if you have a loss of hearing it would qualify you for 10% disability pay (just a guess). So the more disabilities you claim the higher your disability pay is which is added on to your pension. You can see why it would be beneficial for soldiers to claim hearing problems. I am not saying they are lying I am just saying wouldn't you say you had hearing problems on your disability form? The guy I work with is in great shape and he receives 90% disability pay. He put down everything he could think of on the form including loss of hearing.
maybe drill sergents have been yelling too loud?
duncanidho @ 77:
I'm with you brother. I dont need a pink plastic lawn flamingo in my front yard. I value the eleviation of human suffering more.
I do believe killing is wrong. I also believe that at times we find ourselves, as a consequence of having no alternatives, doing that thing that is wrong. I used the example above of a lunatic breaking into your home and attempting to kill you. While in this case, no one broke into our home, we broke into theirs.
If killing is understood to be wrong - really understood - it would be the last thing done and as little as possible. Neither of those things are true. It is the first with a false and postured attempt at a 'diplomatic' solution.
Killing is wrong. Once it is considered to be not wrong, we will get it by the train car load. I dont want to triangulate this. My moral position is that it is wrong. From there, it is difficult - although possible - to contrive a situation in which is can/should be done, and only then after everything else has been exhausted. (distribution of resources, education etc etc).
Anon,
I'm afraid we are going of topic of more un accounted pre planned expenses used to compensate those participating in something called "politics by other means" (see Clausewitz)
anyway I am going off topic due to your understanding of why should we compensate those who volunteered to participate in this war authorized by your elected representatives.
There is a unwritten contract of obligation this institution of the united states has between it citizens, and its government. When one participates in the political process, they have an obligation to live within the constitutional restraints of the results.
So the constitution establishes an infrastructure of service, support, and defense mechanisms intended to promote the common welfare of the national and local governments.
Part of that infrastructure is a standing military, operating under a war powers act, that you as a participating citizen obligated to support.
Which brings me to the conundrum of explaining concepts of Just war theory. you submit deadly force by local law enforcement as the gold standard example soldiers must adhere to prior to shooting anyone.
This suggests you may be knowledgeable about the concept of reciprocity in the application of violence, (call it Hamurrabis law, and Eye for an eye), to provide for the safety of the officer, and those that he is protecting.
However your lack of acknowledgement that the soldier uses a similiar standard in war suggest you do not know what "Rules of Egagement " are.
Rules of engagement are those commanders guidelines based on the recomendations of Military lawyers specializing in what is called "Operational Law of War"
(Non John Yoo, or that disgraced Attorney General, real SME's that know the subject)
So if you are willing to recognize LAw enforcement officers as non-killers, why would you say U.S. Soldiers are??
and also a clarification of what they volunteer for..
The Volunteer to "protect and defend the constitution", by any means neccessary,
To suggest its "just to kill" implies one knows how to use only on tool in the whole tool box, and never heard of Civil Affairs, Foriegn internal development and defense, nor military responses to natural disasters foriegn and domestic.
oh yeah, as far as just and un just killing, we have to go review St Augustine, the concept of Double affect, and the definition of evil, where evil is the absence of good,
(and the road to hell is paved with good intentions)
its a Catholic doctrine, but they worked it out pretty good for a Islamo-christo-judeo based society
duncanidho @ 82:
I said they were killers. (Those who are trained to kill) I said nothing about abrogating any existing agreements with them - nothing. I have no idea where you got the 'just to kill' quote - you did use it as a quote. Seems dishonest of you some how. The history of civilization is the history of violence to far too large an extent. I see that in need of change. Survival isnt possible otherwise. (To say nothing of the moral issues involved)
My original comment was to John Amato really. He seemed concerned about the hearing of killers doing their job of ... wait for it ... killing. I was more focused on (or meant to be) the larger issue. In the best of all possible worlds - my worlds that is - the profession of soldier would be one of the more questionable professions rather than the opposite.
I have an idea that will help their hearing, bring them home and discharge them. A person with a gun wont do much talking, we need much more talking.
The Smiths @ 14:
The sum total of string pullers and puppeteers in the groups you mention number in the several hundred at most, nearly all of them multi-millionaires who are profting greatly merely from the compounded return gleaned from Bush's tax cuts that they earn from profits on the wars.
This will be revisited as one of history's greatest crimes.
anon @ 58:
Just to get the fliyng fuck away from possibly being associated with you in viewing your stupid posts, you can keep anon even though I've been using it for a few years.
Thanks you
85 anon
Sounds like the Knights who way Neek arguing among themself(ves?)
ysbaddaden @ 88:
Don't really care about the knights who say "neek." My concern is my young knight on the battlefield and people saying stupid things about them. Nuff said.
War. What's it really all about?
It's about sending your children off to be mutilated so your stock portfolio remains intact. The truth few dare to utter.
And if the Americans have this much of a problem with war-induced hearing loss, we can assume that the fraction of the Iraqi population remaining alive has it even worse.
Here is a remedy for the hearing loss being suffered by our troops. Don't enlist, don't re-enlist, don't report for duty, don't don't don't. Problem solved.
anon @ 84:
Trained to Kill=Killers, which by the nature of the label implies it is their full time profession, which means they just kill as a profession, (hows that for honesty..."cry havoc and release the weasels of redefining the debate") so though you state you did not say "the quote" it's not a defense .
Objective close reading shows you believe "Soldiers" are just killers, and therefore not entitled to any support from the commonealth that required their profession...
your concept of "Trained to kill"=killers must then apply to law enforcement officers, for they are trained to kill as a form of defense/enforcement,
IF you negate the similarity in the application of force to resolve a lethal threat, then the premise of your logic is faulty.
a Person with a gun can spend more time with talking provided he has been trained when and where to use it...
As for the profession of soldiers, as Sun Tzu demonstrated to a ruler, its much to dangerous to leave to amateurs who know nether what they speak of, nor the tools they can use to obtain those political goals they are trying to achieve.
Combat troops are loosing their hearing (not by choice)
while.....
A number of our ELECTED officials are intent on falling on deaf ears.
when barack obama says he will have every swinging dick out of iraq! and bygod afganistan in one year and puts it in writeing i,ll vote for him!!!!!!!!!!!!!untill then fuck him and the goat he rode in on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hey, Anon. Just give it up. You are right. I for one don't mind what you are saying at all, of course I also consider the hoodie wearing bomb planting guy in Times Square a REAL patriot (Robin Hoodie!). All this flag waving, nation serving crap is just a lot of baloney we make up to gloss over the fact that our loved ones are trained killers and are busy doing work better fitted for Tony Soprano. Lets you and me get us a little yellow ribbon sticker with a big red circle with a line through it that says "I don't support lies" and put it on our cars. You put it on yours first.
Hearing loss is probably the most common injury suffered by military people. Forty years ago when I took my discharge physical I was told that both hearing test machines were broken and that I would have to sign a waiver that denied any claim to hearing loss in the future. The alternative was to stay in until the machines were fixed. When I looked around the room I noticed that everyone there was a member of the artillery branch. I should have not signed the waiver and waited until they plugged the machines back in for the next group. I could be wrong in my assessment. For all I know the machines were eternally broken.
I can live with tinnitus as it is mostly only a nuisance. What I can't take is the dishonesty and disregard for the people who were "one of them." I can understand if this had been done by our wonderful civilian leaders or bean counters but they were military doctors and that is a betrayal of the code. Things don't seem to have changed much.
Login or Register to post comments.