We are about a year away from the first child born after September 11, 2001 being deployed to Afghanistan. The first child born after the second Gulf War began will be deployed to Iraq shortly after the next Presidential inauguration.
We are also less than three years away from the war in Afghanistan becoming longer than the Vietnam War.
Bush and Cheney promised war that would not end in our lifetime, or our children's lifetime, and I and many others took that to mean it's intended to be eternal. With varying intensity, but no moment of no war or potential external threat. Bush also said we're either cool with that, or we're with the terrorists. So while 1984 will not be built in one day, but it was pretty much completely outlined in one day, and we're on track.
Nostradamus predicted it would last 27 years, with the “Union of the great Trumpet” eventually emerging victorious, followed by “1000 years of peace”.
As a child I tried to decipher what the “Union of the great Trumpet” is, since it corresponds to no alliance I know of, and hypothesised that it would be the alliance of U.S.A., Europe and Russia. Since it’s known that Nostradamus misspelled Hitler as “Hister”, now I’m wondering if “Trumpet” isn’t a misreading of Trump. Nostradamus was French, so Trump might easily be transposed to “Trumpet”.
(I’m not in any way affiliated with the president of the United States.)
> Since it’s known that Nostradamus misspelled Hitler as “Hister”,
Is it known? Because that's a pretty big leap. Hister refers to a river in Germany. In fact in his actual passage it refers to 'Hister' as a place, not a person.
Most are vague enough to be completely useless, I agree, but this is pretty clear. I guess your documentary wanted to have some sensationalist content, a-la 'ancient aliens', but no, it is not 'known' that Nostradamus predicted anything let alone WW2 after misspelling Hitler. In fact he references 'Hister' a few times in his writings, referencing a pretty large river in Germany.
'Winston could not definitely remember a time when his country had not been at war, but it was evident that there had been a fairly long interval of peace during his childhood, because one of his early memories was of an air raid, which appeared to take everyone by surprise. Perhaps it was the time when the atomic bomb had fallen on Colchester. He did not remember the raid itself […]. '
'Since about that time, war had been literally continuous, though strictly speaking it had not always been the same war. For several months during his childhood there had been confused street fighting in London itself, some of which he remembered vividly. But to trace out the history of the whole period, to say who was fighting whom at any given moment, would have been utterly impossible, since no written record, and no spoken word, ever made mention of any other alignment than the existing one. At this moment, for example, in 1984 (if it was 1984), Oceania was at war with Eurasia and in alliance with Eastasia. In no public or private utterance was it ever admitted that the three powers had at any time been grouped along different lines. Actually, as Winston well knew, it was only four years since Oceania had been at war with Eastasia and in alliance with Eurasia. But that was merely a piece of furtive knowledge, which he happened to possess because his memory was not satisfactorily under control. Officially the change of partners had never happened. Oceania was at war with Eurasia: therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia. The enemy of the moment always represented absolute evil, and it followed that any past or future agreement with him was impossible.'
You can enlist at 17 and US Army BCT is only 8 weeks long so we may just be a few months from that mark.
The only way I can reconcile the ongoing nightmare of The War on Terror is that most civilians in USA don't even think about it and there's so much money being made by the MIC.
Sad story. As a side note: After years trying to catch my thoughts on a computer, I’ve came to realize that handwriting is much more effective tool for me. My thoughts start flowing once I have a pen in my hand. Now I have a series of diaries that I use with several people, my wife, myself, my late mum.
When you say "with", do you mean you write a letter & other person writes an answer letter in that same diary? E.g. with wife; does that means letters between you both in that diary?
Yes, that's what we do, but not on a daily basis. Usually, when I'm on a business trip, I either take the booklet with me or I leave it with her and she writes her down thoughts.
Thinking of it, we had something like that in high school, where (usually girls) would use a single book with her best friend back and forth. We called it "Briefbuch" (letter book) in German.
When I completed School & later College, our girl classmates had something called ScrapBook, where everybody will write in messages & good wishes for the owner of that book.
Years ago, I bought a cheap starter fountain pen, a journal, stamps, envelopes, and paper. Writing letters and journaling is definitely different than typing (the pace is different), and a fountain pen means I can write pages without the fatigue that comes from ballpoint pens.
I'm sitting here with that same pen and a tiny notebook for my thoughts in my pocket.
It's nice to look back and see what I was randomly thinking of on a given day, and go back and expand/elaborate or reflect on it.
For me it is the speed difference that makes handwriting so satisfying and good. I type faster then I think, writing however is slower. Handwriting gives me more time to consider the content and often leads to higher quality content.
Whether it be love letters or an important business message, handwriting it helps.
I sometimes wonder about the hell my grandfather must have went through when his only child joined the Army Air Corps in WW2. (The airmen at the time had a terribly high death rate.)
This is so surreal to somebody from Europe - how can you justify to be on the moral, just side (or even look at yourself in the mirror and call yourself a good christian or just a good person), when you go to place half around the world which did no aggression towards your home country, invade it, rape it, kill civilians left and right and utterly destroy it for generations to come. Without any proper reason whatsoever. "I was told to" can't be possibly enough.
He might have been a gentle loving person back home, but when deployed, he had to follow orders. He had to kill people in foreign land, people that were home there, defending their home country from foreign invasion. If foreign power invaded your home country/town, wouldn't you stand up to it? (I would probably just leave till all calms down which seems never for Iraq/Afghanistan, but not everybody wants to lose their only home or actually can leave)
No possible moral high ground there. Soldiers are hired guns who kill for the money (or the thrill of it), trying to add some higher meaning there is just unrealistic wishful thinking from army PR campaigns.
Yet another life with possibly great potential wasted on... nothing (actually worse than that - adding more 'evil' to this already messed up world). Serve your country by improving lives of your fellow citizens, however that might be, not by joining some amoral war machinery
This was about Iraq though. Apart from the UK, NATO pretty much stayed out of that. And despite having less to justify it, the consequences (direct and indirect) of invading Iraq were worse than invading Afghanistan.
As other poster mentioned I meant mainly Iraq where situation is different, sorry for not being more clear.
In most European countries if not all, if politicians tried to sell some remote unjust war they want to start by striking patriotic tunes (so people would make similar ridiculous claims), they would get laughed at/outright rejected. Politicians would have to put in place mandatory drafts and even then a lot of people would run away/go rather to jail.
It just feels so surreal to be so much out of touch with reality in a modern western world in 21st century to believe in such lies and very much risk their lives for them.
Now if somebody couldn't care less about shooting kids, mums and old people and of course patriots and other random folks on the other side and wants to have adrenaline ride, that's another story. But lets be honest about this.
Fair enough. Even so, NATO countries still participate in other military operations such as the bombings in Syria and Libya - is the difference that those had the force of UN resolutions behind them, involved only air attacks and were not sold on the back of patriotism?
Even at peak my country deployed only a little over 5000 soldiers into Afghanistan, a majority of those for supportive and police roles, not for active combat. Even that is being opposed.
America has not been invaded. The closest you get is 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. Their cultural memory does not respect the horrors of a foreign invasion. The only people who experience war are young men who go halfway across the world then come back hailed as heroes. Their old WW2 veterans still haven't experienced their hometown being firebombed to ash and dust.
In most of the world you can point to the rubble a city was built on and the older generations will tell you about it.
There were two more invasions by foreign armies in 1915 and 1916, but I'm not sure they count, since they weren't sovereign powers and were quickly dealt with.
But you're right, there is no living American who remembers an invasion of our territory.
This man is a hero. Not only because he served his country so honorably, but for the time, care, and consideration he took to codify his values and morals in his diary. This one hit me hard, especially now that I have a son. To think, there are so many children out there who will never see or get to meet their fathers again. I know it's not the same as a father, but I hope these kids find mentors or guides to try and make sense of the hand they've been dealt.
No, but volunteering to go with your guys because you know they have a better chance with you there counts for a lot more than making snide comments about a dead man on the internet.
Without judgment of this particular loving human; Why is it considered heroic to go to war without questioning the men sending you there? The war in Iraq was pointless and based on dubious logic which turned out to be a lie. Men considering going to another country far away to kill other men should think deeply about dedicating their bodies and family's futures to the fortunes of cowards.
I obviously do not know this man's mind, but it is just so painful to read about such pointless waste and consider it as heroic. He was brave, courageous, loving, compassionate, but ultimately his death was a huge pointless tragedy in yet another war fought for assholes.
Show me more heroes who stand up against this nonsense. Heroes who save lives by objecting to taking them. That's where our mindset needs to be to stop the horrors we constantly project to far shores to prop up our corrupt insidious military industry and line the pockets of dire schmucks.
I agree. The societal view that joining the military and dying is a just and selfless act worthy of our thanks and praise has to end. More so when justification is to protect "our interests" and "our way of life" - when said way of life is to better ourselves due to the exploitation of others.
Until the military is seen for what it is, war will be continual and cyclical until we destroy this planet and make it all but inhabitable.
The US has a million troops, only around ~40,000 are deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kuwait, and Syria[0]. The majority of the military are deployed elsewhere, serving either as a deterrent (such as those in South Korea) or help with nation building, foreign aid, and peacekeeping (ex. anti-piracy, protecting trade routes). There are those who are unfortunate enough to be sent by politicians to the war zone at one point of their career. And when that happens, you may not agree with the politics but it is still part of your duty to follow. There is no room in the military for going against commands, else it would render the organization ineffective.
Every country needs a military and whether you think that they are heroes or not, these are still people making a necessary sacrifice. Someone has to do it.
Oftentimes, the media likes to only show the wartime aspect of the military, making people think that those who join the military are there because they want to kill. Nothing could be any further from the truth.
> Why is it considered heroic to go to war without questioning the men sending you there?
In the military, it is not your position to question the government. It is your duty to follow orders.
> The war in Iraq was pointless and based on dubious logic which turned out to be a lie.
It was certainly not "pointless". It was based on the following:
- Saddam was a bad actor who hated the US, and would readily provide materiel for use against the US
- Iraq was known to have stockpiles of WMD
- It was thought possible to transform Iraq from a dictatorship to a democracy that appreciated the US
None of those points is in doubt. Aside from a possible nuclear program, Iraq was known to have weaponized anthrax and various chemical agents. Our allies including Britain endorsed the same intelligence.
You might remember the celebrations in Baghdad when the US forces arrive and Saddam fled. Or the jubilation Iraqis showed after voting the first time. Time will tell how things work out in the long run, but it's hard to argue that Iraq is worse off today than it was under Saddam Hussein.
Has everything worked out perfectly? No, but there have been many sub-optimal moves since the war started, including BO pulling out prematurely and on an announced schedule.
Just remember, it's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback...
Where to start here. Well, let me preface by saying much of everything we are discussing is hugely influenced by what and individual's principles and beliefs are, I don't expect to change minds, and I accept other people have other opinions, I just want to defend mine.
First - it's well known that no WMDs were found in Iraq[1], and with the publication of the Downing Street Memo[2] there is evidence that Bush's presidency went in likely knowing that. Bush just wanted war, with whatever justification he could find.
Saddam and his hatred of the US is no justification of war. Plenty of nations rather dislike the US, but you can't just go in and 'make' them like you with guns. As bad as Saddam was, the death toll and utter hell brought upon Iraq's citizens by the invasion to 'bring democracy' is at best as bad as Saddam's regime. Some studies suggest half a million civilian deaths as a result of the war[3].
And let's be honest, Iraq was a huge catalyst for complete chaos in the middle east, which to this day is ongoing. ISIS grew out of the vacuum left by US forces 'liberation' of Iraqi's people.
Jesus, what a fucking mess. Seriously, why am I even having to spell this out?
Possible nuclear program??!!?! Give me a break. They found corroded, unusable chemical weapons which the UN mostly already knew about. And all that crap was probably best left rotting in Iraq than burning, and harming US forces as they tried to move it.
Celebrations in Baghdad? I want to puke. Those poor people sold another lie, they were destined to suffer more.
Now, down to following orders. I get that the military only works if everyone follows orders, I really do. However I will not be ordered to murder children for 'the greater cause', be that my country or god. There is a line any man/woman should refuse to cross, in my opinion, and as long as men do not question those who give the orders you cannot claim to have principles.
I think it wasn't so much serving his country that made him go back and volunteering tbh; nobody should be going to Iraq or even joining the military for that, given how the US has no business in those countries. I do think he's a hero for looking after his other soldiers though, for helping those that took the propaganda and nationalist bait and joined the military - perhaps also because they had no other (career) opportunities.
The military very much conditions minds into believing the bullshit that is 'glory for your country'. It is just as much bullshit as religious crap like 'glory for Allah' and we need to point this out when we see it.
Dedicating yourself to fight for your country is just as fucked up as fighting for your god. Both ideals are a sham propagated by people who sit comfortably and take much relish in the ego boost that is commanding cannon fodder. Make no mistake, many of these people are legitimate borderline psychopaths who want nothing more than their name in history books.
The same people legislate for the sake of getting their names on a successful bill. They care not for anyone but their crony group and themselves. They bray in parliament like demented asses, and bark and howl in Congress like the pack of wolves they pretend to protect you and I from.
The whole show is a shameful fraud, and it's shame on us for not identifying the lot of them for who they clearly are. We are all heading toward calamity once again, lead by the same psychopathy that has polluted the human condition for thousands and thousands of years. We can all see it coming day by day and yet we think the water isn't yet hot enough to do something about it before we become soup.
He may be a hero to us, but he is also a coward to a lot of iraqis. For all the sympathy we conjure up for our own, we too easily forget the suffering of others.
To put things into perspective, about 4000 americans died as a result of the iraq war. Over a million iraqis died.
Hundreds of thousands of children died in the iraq war. And hundreds of thousands of iraqi children grew up without a father because of the iraq war. I guess it's all perspective. But I doubt most of the world would consider him a hero.
Man, fuck war. I really wonder how much longer the majority of humans are going to keep swallowing the lines of bullshit from the few that somehow, war is a necessity. War is not all that hard to avoid, but I guess warfare is both financially and politically profitable.
Fuck everything about this. It is - literally - insane.
> Strikingly, no concern was voiced over the glaringly obvious fact that no official reason was ever offered for going to war -- no reason, that is, that could not be instantly refuted by a literate teenager.
Seemingly, with the national debt soaring through the roof, the US still is able to get people to buy more bonds and get others to lend them more money, even if there's no realistic way the debt would be repaid. Maybe this has something to do with their ability to launch an airstrike on virtually any place on earth in no more than an hour.
The same washingtonpost that recently got caught lying to the american people about syrian gas attacks and tried to dupe us into invading another country.
Next war that the lying media and politicians push, they and/or their sons should be on the frontlines and then the poor and downtrodden should be behind them.
> One day a couple of years ago, I pulled out a list of the traits I wanted in a husband and realized that Charles had almost all of them. He rose early to begin each day with prayers and a list of goals that he ticked off as he accomplished them.
Sorry, I didn't intend to start any flame war, I didn't respond in any comments by the way.
It's just always so surprising to find that someone could have such rigid requirements for a relationship, and one of them being daily prayers (which sounds rather outdated for most younger westerners).
I've never encountered that in my european life (more so by magazines editorialists that are usually not very conservative here, although I'm not sure how the nytimes rates on the spectrum), and it's always surprising to me to see that such criterias are enforced and seem normal to everyone, even in upper strates of society, with good access to culture and education (which would be here the most adverse to religion). And yes, I think this whole phenomenon is rather specific to the USA. Even in Greece where many people are pious for example, daily prayers are very specific and active part of one's spiritual life, and I don't meet many people with that level of dedication to faith. It just seems oddly ... scholarly ? Like ticking boxes, as if daily prayer was of any spiritual worth in itself.
I didn't emit any judgment though, everyone is free to believe whatever they want.
Is it alright if expressed that way ? Can you unban my comment ?
Obviously it's not my native language that's why I rather don't engage in long explanations, so sorry if I offended anyone.
I think the sentimentality of family needs to be removed from discussions of war. I’m sure there were plenty of devout family men taking part in every mass genocide in history. Violence sucks — full stop, especially controversial violence that half the nation was against from the beginning.
Sad that this woman lost her husband, and son lost his father. She clearly loves him too much to question his judgement, but maybe she could speak from the podium of loss against unnecessary war. I’m not a fan of sentimental personal anecdotes being shared to a mass audience like this, but alas emotions rule the world. Hopefully we can fight the politics that led to this tragedy rather than lionizing his martyrdom.
67 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 142 ms ] threadWe are also less than three years away from the war in Afghanistan becoming longer than the Vietnam War.
As a child I tried to decipher what the “Union of the great Trumpet” is, since it corresponds to no alliance I know of, and hypothesised that it would be the alliance of U.S.A., Europe and Russia. Since it’s known that Nostradamus misspelled Hitler as “Hister”, now I’m wondering if “Trumpet” isn’t a misreading of Trump. Nostradamus was French, so Trump might easily be transposed to “Trumpet”.
(I’m not in any way affiliated with the president of the United States.)
Is it known? Because that's a pretty big leap. Hister refers to a river in Germany. In fact in his actual passage it refers to 'Hister' as a place, not a person.
'Winston could not definitely remember a time when his country had not been at war, but it was evident that there had been a fairly long interval of peace during his childhood, because one of his early memories was of an air raid, which appeared to take everyone by surprise. Perhaps it was the time when the atomic bomb had fallen on Colchester. He did not remember the raid itself […]. '
'Since about that time, war had been literally continuous, though strictly speaking it had not always been the same war. For several months during his childhood there had been confused street fighting in London itself, some of which he remembered vividly. But to trace out the history of the whole period, to say who was fighting whom at any given moment, would have been utterly impossible, since no written record, and no spoken word, ever made mention of any other alignment than the existing one. At this moment, for example, in 1984 (if it was 1984), Oceania was at war with Eurasia and in alliance with Eastasia. In no public or private utterance was it ever admitted that the three powers had at any time been grouped along different lines. Actually, as Winston well knew, it was only four years since Oceania had been at war with Eastasia and in alliance with Eurasia. But that was merely a piece of furtive knowledge, which he happened to possess because his memory was not satisfactorily under control. Officially the change of partners had never happened. Oceania was at war with Eurasia: therefore Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia. The enemy of the moment always represented absolute evil, and it followed that any past or future agreement with him was impossible.'
The only way I can reconcile the ongoing nightmare of The War on Terror is that most civilians in USA don't even think about it and there's so much money being made by the MIC.
Thinking of it, we had something like that in high school, where (usually girls) would use a single book with her best friend back and forth. We called it "Briefbuch" (letter book) in German.
When I completed School & later College, our girl classmates had something called ScrapBook, where everybody will write in messages & good wishes for the owner of that book.
I'm sitting here with that same pen and a tiny notebook for my thoughts in my pocket.
It's nice to look back and see what I was randomly thinking of on a given day, and go back and expand/elaborate or reflect on it.
Whether it be love letters or an important business message, handwriting it helps.
This is so surreal to somebody from Europe - how can you justify to be on the moral, just side (or even look at yourself in the mirror and call yourself a good christian or just a good person), when you go to place half around the world which did no aggression towards your home country, invade it, rape it, kill civilians left and right and utterly destroy it for generations to come. Without any proper reason whatsoever. "I was told to" can't be possibly enough.
He might have been a gentle loving person back home, but when deployed, he had to follow orders. He had to kill people in foreign land, people that were home there, defending their home country from foreign invasion. If foreign power invaded your home country/town, wouldn't you stand up to it? (I would probably just leave till all calms down which seems never for Iraq/Afghanistan, but not everybody wants to lose their only home or actually can leave)
No possible moral high ground there. Soldiers are hired guns who kill for the money (or the thrill of it), trying to add some higher meaning there is just unrealistic wishful thinking from army PR campaigns.
Yet another life with possibly great potential wasted on... nothing (actually worse than that - adding more 'evil' to this already messed up world). Serve your country by improving lives of your fellow citizens, however that might be, not by joining some amoral war machinery
In most European countries if not all, if politicians tried to sell some remote unjust war they want to start by striking patriotic tunes (so people would make similar ridiculous claims), they would get laughed at/outright rejected. Politicians would have to put in place mandatory drafts and even then a lot of people would run away/go rather to jail.
It just feels so surreal to be so much out of touch with reality in a modern western world in 21st century to believe in such lies and very much risk their lives for them.
Now if somebody couldn't care less about shooting kids, mums and old people and of course patriots and other random folks on the other side and wants to have adrenaline ride, that's another story. But lets be honest about this.
In most of the world you can point to the rubble a city was built on and the older generations will tell you about it.
First in 1812, by the British.
There were two more invasions by foreign armies in 1915 and 1916, but I'm not sure they count, since they weren't sovereign powers and were quickly dealt with.
But you're right, there is no living American who remembers an invasion of our territory.
I obviously do not know this man's mind, but it is just so painful to read about such pointless waste and consider it as heroic. He was brave, courageous, loving, compassionate, but ultimately his death was a huge pointless tragedy in yet another war fought for assholes.
Show me more heroes who stand up against this nonsense. Heroes who save lives by objecting to taking them. That's where our mindset needs to be to stop the horrors we constantly project to far shores to prop up our corrupt insidious military industry and line the pockets of dire schmucks.
</rant>
RIP, sorry for hijacking a sad story to vent.
Until the military is seen for what it is, war will be continual and cyclical until we destroy this planet and make it all but inhabitable.
Every country needs a military and whether you think that they are heroes or not, these are still people making a necessary sacrifice. Someone has to do it.
Oftentimes, the media likes to only show the wartime aspect of the military, making people think that those who join the military are there because they want to kill. Nothing could be any further from the truth.
[0] https://www.businessinsider.com/us-military-deployments-may-...
In the military, it is not your position to question the government. It is your duty to follow orders.
> The war in Iraq was pointless and based on dubious logic which turned out to be a lie.
It was certainly not "pointless". It was based on the following:
- Saddam was a bad actor who hated the US, and would readily provide materiel for use against the US
- Iraq was known to have stockpiles of WMD
- It was thought possible to transform Iraq from a dictatorship to a democracy that appreciated the US
None of those points is in doubt. Aside from a possible nuclear program, Iraq was known to have weaponized anthrax and various chemical agents. Our allies including Britain endorsed the same intelligence.
You might remember the celebrations in Baghdad when the US forces arrive and Saddam fled. Or the jubilation Iraqis showed after voting the first time. Time will tell how things work out in the long run, but it's hard to argue that Iraq is worse off today than it was under Saddam Hussein.
Has everything worked out perfectly? No, but there have been many sub-optimal moves since the war started, including BO pulling out prematurely and on an announced schedule.
Just remember, it's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback...
First - it's well known that no WMDs were found in Iraq[1], and with the publication of the Downing Street Memo[2] there is evidence that Bush's presidency went in likely knowing that. Bush just wanted war, with whatever justification he could find.
Saddam and his hatred of the US is no justification of war. Plenty of nations rather dislike the US, but you can't just go in and 'make' them like you with guns. As bad as Saddam was, the death toll and utter hell brought upon Iraq's citizens by the invasion to 'bring democracy' is at best as bad as Saddam's regime. Some studies suggest half a million civilian deaths as a result of the war[3].
And let's be honest, Iraq was a huge catalyst for complete chaos in the middle east, which to this day is ongoing. ISIS grew out of the vacuum left by US forces 'liberation' of Iraqi's people.
Jesus, what a fucking mess. Seriously, why am I even having to spell this out?
Possible nuclear program??!!?! Give me a break. They found corroded, unusable chemical weapons which the UN mostly already knew about. And all that crap was probably best left rotting in Iraq than burning, and harming US forces as they tried to move it.
Celebrations in Baghdad? I want to puke. Those poor people sold another lie, they were destined to suffer more.
Now, down to following orders. I get that the military only works if everyone follows orders, I really do. However I will not be ordered to murder children for 'the greater cause', be that my country or god. There is a line any man/woman should refuse to cross, in my opinion, and as long as men do not question those who give the orders you cannot claim to have principles.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WMD_conjecture_in_the_aftermat... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo [3] https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/15/iraq-death-toll_n_...
The military does something weird to people.
Dedicating yourself to fight for your country is just as fucked up as fighting for your god. Both ideals are a sham propagated by people who sit comfortably and take much relish in the ego boost that is commanding cannon fodder. Make no mistake, many of these people are legitimate borderline psychopaths who want nothing more than their name in history books.
The same people legislate for the sake of getting their names on a successful bill. They care not for anyone but their crony group and themselves. They bray in parliament like demented asses, and bark and howl in Congress like the pack of wolves they pretend to protect you and I from.
The whole show is a shameful fraud, and it's shame on us for not identifying the lot of them for who they clearly are. We are all heading toward calamity once again, lead by the same psychopathy that has polluted the human condition for thousands and thousands of years. We can all see it coming day by day and yet we think the water isn't yet hot enough to do something about it before we become soup.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Syrv6eygmNY
To put things into perspective, about 4000 americans died as a result of the iraq war. Over a million iraqis died.
Hundreds of thousands of children died in the iraq war. And hundreds of thousands of iraqi children grew up without a father because of the iraq war. I guess it's all perspective. But I doubt most of the world would consider him a hero.
Fuck everything about this. It is - literally - insane.
-- Noam Chomsky
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2003/02/06/i...
The same washingtonpost that recently got caught lying to the american people about syrian gas attacks and tried to dupe us into invading another country.
Next war that the lying media and politicians push, they and/or their sons should be on the frontlines and then the poor and downtrodden should be behind them.
Only in the US...
a) She actually had a list of the desired / required traits of romantic partners on hand.
b) Desired traits include morning prayer.
c) Said traits also seemingly included the romantic partner having a daily to-do list.
Taken together you do get an interesting cultural phenomenon being displayed here.
So in my reading of the original post I found it more interesting than just "hating on religion".
Which part? The traits desired in a husband? The morning prayers? The list of goals? Some of it? All of it?
Those all seem like things that could describe a lot of people in a lot of countries.
No more posts like this, please.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
It's just always so surprising to find that someone could have such rigid requirements for a relationship, and one of them being daily prayers (which sounds rather outdated for most younger westerners).
I've never encountered that in my european life (more so by magazines editorialists that are usually not very conservative here, although I'm not sure how the nytimes rates on the spectrum), and it's always surprising to me to see that such criterias are enforced and seem normal to everyone, even in upper strates of society, with good access to culture and education (which would be here the most adverse to religion). And yes, I think this whole phenomenon is rather specific to the USA. Even in Greece where many people are pious for example, daily prayers are very specific and active part of one's spiritual life, and I don't meet many people with that level of dedication to faith. It just seems oddly ... scholarly ? Like ticking boxes, as if daily prayer was of any spiritual worth in itself.
I didn't emit any judgment though, everyone is free to believe whatever they want.
Is it alright if expressed that way ? Can you unban my comment ?
Obviously it's not my native language that's why I rather don't engage in long explanations, so sorry if I offended anyone.
Sad that this woman lost her husband, and son lost his father. She clearly loves him too much to question his judgement, but maybe she could speak from the podium of loss against unnecessary war. I’m not a fan of sentimental personal anecdotes being shared to a mass audience like this, but alas emotions rule the world. Hopefully we can fight the politics that led to this tragedy rather than lionizing his martyrdom.