(February 6, 2016 at 1:17 pm)Divinity Wrote: Australia still hasn't approved Gay Marriage.  

The US is as religious as fuck, but we still have legal gay marriage.  And we call it marriage.

All you have to do is say in court to allow gay marriage there isn't anything in the bible not saying gay's  cannot marry.
Also add this in as well there is more passages against divorce than a relationship between 2 men and 2 woman. Add in the 
fact marriage is not biblical and marriage is also older than most religions including the abrahamic ones.

(February 6, 2016 at 1:32 pm)abaris Wrote:

(February 6, 2016 at 1:24 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: And veterans from Korea and Vietnam got bullied and crapped on right when they got back home from war. There's no reason I should expect ya'll not to continue to throw crap their way now. Figured you would perhaps have more respect for WWII vets, but I guess not.

You're really that dense? Oh, I see, you have to defend military interventions at all costs, since your living in a military environment. War is peace, am I right?

Nevermind that Korea and Vietnam weren't exactly undisputed. Nevermind that a great many being drafted to either war turned pacifist or damaged goods. Nevermind all the protests going on at the same time. No, it has to be the John Wayne approach of war being something like riding into the sunset. Which is, by the way, exactly what I mean. The John Wayne types of being all for picking up arms without ever having seen a frontline or held a real weapon.

Thankfully, as I said, a dying out breed.

If you think I defend military intervention, "at all costs" or even most of the time, you are EXTREMELY wrong. I am against war and military intervention for the majority of the time. I am not sure why you chose to throw that straw at me. 

But being in the Air Force has allowed me to meet and get to know many "old white Republican men" who are war veterans. And I don't appreciate the way you generalize them and pass them off as monsters and talk about them as though they are the root of all evil... all in the same box. For someone who is quick to condemn anyone for generalizations when the word "Islam" is brought up, you sure do throw that virtue right out the window when people are old, white, republican, and veteran.

(February 6, 2016 at 1:42 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: But being in the Air Force has allowed me to meet and get to know many "old white Republican men" who are war veterans. And I don't appreciate the way you generalize them and pass them off as monsters and talk about them as though they are the root of all evil... all in the same box. For someone who is quick to condemn anyone for generalizations when the word "Islam" is brought up, you sure do throw that virtue right out the window when people are old, white, republican, and veteran.

For you, rightwing and republican may be the same. Fine, if the shoe fits, try it on. I'm used to type very carefully and what I type is usually what I mean. I didn't write conservative, I didn't write republican, I wrote rightwing. Because I meant rightwing. That often times coincides with the right side of the republicans, but - to repeat myself - I mean what I write. And I didn't write republican. So, I'm not the one generalising. Better look in a mirror.

Oh, ok. 

(February 6, 2016 at 1:15 pm)abaris Wrote:

(February 6, 2016 at 1:08 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I know a couple here in our Air Force town. Yes, they are just monsters...

And nevermind it's not the generation I meant. As I said, so thanks for your dishonesty. Noted and appreciated.

There's a reason, you know, why they always invoke WWII. It doesn't look good to invoke Korea, Vietnam or all the later wars. And they (you?) know it.

I'm fairly certain the South Koreans, who are among the most productive peoples per capita, are quite happy that the US got involved in their fight against the Kims.

(February 6, 2016 at 1:23 pm)abaris Wrote:

(February 6, 2016 at 1:18 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: Honestly I don't know why WWII gets invoked other then our enemy. The US committed far more war crimes in WWII then in Vietnam.

I wouldn't think so. Apart from shooting POWs, which every side did, the only thing coming to mind would be the bomb. Their bombing raids, as opposed to the british, were at least aimed at the industry. The outspoken british strategy was to bomb the workers.

So, no, I wouldn't think the US did worse than in Vietnam.

Oh man, I don't even know where to start.

We indiscriminately firebombed Tokyo and many other Japanese cities with the intention of causing as many civilian deaths as possible according to Robert McNamara who said in the documentary about him 'Fog of War' that he would have been charged as a war criminal had we lost the war. The US airfleet was almost half the planes that participated in the mass carpet bombing of Dresden in Germany, which was clearly aimed at civilians. The US engaged in well documented mutilation of Japanese corpses, shot prisoners, engaged in large scale rape after the battle of Okinawa. I mean it goes on and on and on. I've seen some historians claim we committed more war crimes during WWII then all other wars we've been in put together and I tend to agree.


The very incomplete wikipedia list of US war crimes in WWII
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Sta...rld_War_II

Myth of a good war:
http://www.ihr.org/news/weber_ww2_may08.html

(February 6, 2016 at 2:11 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: The US airfleet was almost half the planes that participated in the mass carpet bombing of Dresden in Germany, which was clearly aimed at civilians.

I don't know as much about the Japanese war as I do about Europe. In Europe, the US airforce was less indiscriminate as the British. Harris' outspoken goal was to unleash terror on civilians. The American goal was precision bombing, whatever that meant with the equipment they had back then. Yes, the participated in the bombing of Dresden, but they weren't the ones working on the firestorm, which killed most of the civilians. That again was a british recipe.

jesus fucking christ people. Really? We're devolving into debate/argument about which country is better or worse and why? Come on! Let's all just get really childish.

Na-ne, na-ne, boo-boo. My country is better than you-oo. Your's just stinks of doo-doo. So there (inset raspberry here)

[Edit] Thanks to Aractus for taking us down this road.

(February 6, 2016 at 2:03 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: I'm fairly certain the South Koreans, who are among the most productive peoples per capita, are quite happy that the US got involved in their fight against the Kims.

You think so? Maybe in hindsight and with most of the ones having suffered through these years dead. But, I'm not sure, if they were happy over the American puppet (a christian) being installed as their president back then. And over him instantly installing a police state, brutally crashing down onn every kind of opposition. I'm also not sure, if they were happy over the millions of casualties, after their country had been overrun from border to border twice in a row with neither side paying much attention to civilians.

(February 6, 2016 at 1:23 pm)abaris Wrote:

(February 6, 2016 at 1:18 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: Honestly I don't know why WWII gets invoked other then our enemy. The US committed far more war crimes in WWII then in Vietnam.

I wouldn't think so. Apart from shooting POWs, which every side did, the only thing coming to mind would be the bomb. Their bombing raids, as opposed to the british, were at least aimed at the industry. The outspoken british strategy was to bomb the workers.

So, no, I wouldn't think the US did worse than in Vietnam.

And do you know why we bombed the german people? They hit our people first.

And anyways, you guys followed us up with some quite frankly disgusting attacks, such as after we bombed the hell out of dresden, you guys decided that gunning down groups of civillians (It's disputed whether they were children or not, however, but eyewitness accounts say that fighters did strafe civillians in the streets.) in the streets, was all fine and allowed.