posted
But Koner, these are the "best America has to offer". Singing cadence is not the same as releasing songs to the public. It actually hurts the war effort.
posted
But Koner, these are the "best America has to offer". Singing cadence is not the same as releasing songs to the public. It actually hurts the war effort. Hard to win hearts and minds with songs like that being sung by our soldiers.
posted
While I personally wouldn't have sung such a song I don't know why it anyone would expect a soldier to be politically correct. They are over there risking their lives on a regular basis... I am not going to pass judgment on this guys intentions.
I seem to remember some insensitive things coming out of the mouths of some of our leaders during the funerals of some of their colleagues.
Humans sometimes say and do inappropriate things. What is new?
Posts: 865 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Does free speech apply to everyone or not?
Posts: 7 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
KnightEnder
unregistered
posted
No. It has already been stated that soldiers give up their right to freedom of speech upon joining the military. And if we hope to prevail in Iraq and win back the respect of the world our leaders military and civil should condemn and forbid such hateful songs.
Hahahaha... that is so funny. What does it matter if we want the world to respects us? Do you think that they are going to change their beliefs because we stop singing songs?
Respect is not a quality that everyone has and they are not going to attain it by anything we do or do not do.
Posts: 865 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:No. It has already been stated that soldiers give up their right to freedom of speech upon joining the military. And if we hope to prevail in Iraq and win back the respect of the world our leaders military and civil should condemn and forbid such hateful songs.
KE
Bull****!
Where has it been stated that soldiers give up their right to freedom of speech upon joining the military? I was in the military for six years, in fact I did exactly the same job as the Marine who wrote and performed "Hadji Girl", and I never gave up any of my rights as an American citizen. Try again.
Posts: 1928 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't have a problem with people wanting the soldiers disciplined or fired or whatever for publicizing that song. But for people to actually attach significance to it, beyond its political ramifications... it's just moronic.
Posts: 7629 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
KnightEnder
unregistered
posted
You were blind if you didn't perceive that you did. Did you not swear to follow your superiors orders? And if ordered so wouldn't it have been your duty to remain speechless? Who can order an American citizen to do such things? No one. That is how you gave up your right to free speech. Not only that you gave away your freedom, and free will. But curse at me again and I shall withdraw the truth.
quote:Originally posted by KnightEnder: You were blind if you didn't perceive that you did. Did you not swear to follow your superiors orders? And if ordered so wouldn't it have been your duty to remain speechless? Who can order an American citizen to do such things? No one. That is how you gave up your right to free speech. Not only that you gave away your freedom, and free will. But curse at me again and I shall withdraw the truth.
KE
That is not an unconditional surrender of free speech.
Posts: 7 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:While I personally wouldn't have sung such a song I don't know why it anyone would expect a soldier to be politically correct.
I don't. That's why I don't think they should play at being police.
quote: Where has it been stated that soldiers give up their right to freedom of speech upon joining the military?
You ever try insulting the president? Or even criticizing your nation's policies in writing while still serving? Those two, just as an example, are expressly forbidden.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: Then unless he was ordered to he had every right to sing that song?
It depends on how you classify a "right." You can put a fairly wide interpretation on "conduct unbecoming," for example. Soldiers have very few "rights" for which they can not be dismissed for exercising at the discretion of their commanders.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by KnightEnder: Yes. But he should be ordered not to sing such songs in the future.
KE
K Thanks Buh-Bye
What's the problem? While serving in the military, representing and fighting for the ideals of the nation, is it too much to ask that soldiers comport themselves with a little dignity and pride in the uniform they wear?
Those who can't do it out of good common sense should definitely be ordered to do so.
Does anyone really have a problem with that?
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What's the problem? While serving in the --------, (please feel free to fill in the blank with... clergy, government, education field, media etc.) representing and fighting for the ideals of the organizations they represent, is it too much to ask that they comport themselves with a little dignity and pride in the position they hold?
Those who can't do it out of good common sense should definitely be ordered to do so.
Does anyone really have a problem with that? ------------------------------------------------- Do you want to start policing every church, school and television station or are you just anti-military?
Posts: 865 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
KnightEnder
unregistered
posted
Who is anti-military? I for one just ask that they represent our country with honor and dignity. Now what I'd have done with churches...
quote:Originally posted by KnightEnder: Who is anti-military? I for one just ask that they represent our country with honor and dignity. Now what I'd have done with churches...
KE
How is writing a song about being led into an ambush by a little girl hateful??
Posts: 7 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
KnightEnder
unregistered
posted
I had to go back, Canadian, and reread your post to make sure I didn't misread it the first time. Clergy and media do not represent our country.
They're not playing at being police. They're playing at being an occupying force in a time of war. If anything, ordinary police would be less effective in these instances.
With regard to political correctness - I agree that 'hearts and minds' should be a task here. I do not, however, think that this song will have any major effect on anything.
posted
Even if she was leading them into ambush it is an irreverent song and hardly the acts of an honorable man to grab a little girl and use her as a shield while glorying in the little girls death and killing a family in their own home. Plus it paints a picture of Iraqis hating Americans. It also belittles Iraqis and is irreverant of them, their culture, and language. The...song...is altogether childish and unbecoming of an American soldier.
Winkie, since you are new I must inform you that it is considered bad form to put words in another members mouths. The same can be said about arguing against an argument not put forth in order to ignore or obscure the argument made.
quote:Originally posted by KnightEnder: I had to go back, Canadian, and reread your post to make sure I didn't misread it the first time. Clergy and media do not represent our country.
KE
yeah...you know I was being sarcastic, right?
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
KnightEnder
unregistered
posted
An "occupying force"? Is that what they are? I've never heard that, but then I only watch Fox News.
If this soldiers superiors feel that it's appropriate to discipline him for making a public statement of this nature, which is what he did once he posted it on-line, I don't see where they're stepping on any of his rights.
Active Duty personel can't go to anti-war rallies, or make public statements that insult the President, or overtly undermine morale. They can be disciplined for doing any of these things.
I think it's pretty horrific to joke about plugging an un-armed little girl between the eyes. I also think it's pretty horrific to joke about a severed hand sitting in a bucket of KFC, something I've seen some rather fine Americans do (EMTs).
The difference is, those guys didn't record that and post it on a myspace profile to try to show people how cool they were. It was the black humor of survival.
What's funny to me is, as bad as those rap songs were, none of them called anyone a "hadji", or implied that they were bah-bah-arians.
Those rap songs would still be innapropriate for men currently serving to release. You don't get to moonlight at will when you sign your indenture contract.
Some Iraqis probably do not like US troops. It's not glorifying 'killing a family in their own home', it is glorifying a Marine adapting to unexpected circumstances. The song was amusing. The song glorified the corps, and mocked the enemy - Iraqis that attack US Marines are the enemy.
It is childish. Even though it is slightly humorous, it is still moderately stupid. As I noted on the first page, one reaction to stress is dark humor. Most of it is childish, or at least irreverent - the key is to not let the victims (or in this case anyone beyond the Marines) hear you making 'humorous' statements.
I was talking about "ordering" people not to sing songs that may or may not be offensive..
So how could someone implement that order? By policing? With a law? With a constitutional amendment?
If people are freely willing to order people not to do something because they may be harming the organization they are representing. Well... then why stop at the Military?
Lets just ban all offensive songs and while we are at it... lets ban all forms of speech that offends us.
quote:If people are freely willing to order people not to do something because they may be harming the organization they are representing. Well... then why stop at the Military?
To a point, we do not stop at the military. If you're acting as the representative of a company, and you do something that reflects badly on that company, it could result in the loss of your job and potential civil actions.
I do not believe that (brown t-shirt notwithstanding), the Marine was acting as a representative of the United States government. I've seen too few facts to make a real determination though.
posted
Even if the song is about a soldier being lured into an ambush by a girl, he glorifies grabbing her even younger sister, who may as well be a TODDLER and using her a human shield. This is despicable, and the crude mockery of Arabic that the song uses as a chorus qualifies as hate speech. This can be interpreted easily as trying to subvert the mission in Iraq. For those who think the song is harmless, why don't you buy yourself a plane ticket to Baghdad and sing it to every Iraqi you meet, and see what happens.
[ June 19, 2006, 01:07 AM: Message edited by: Liberal ]
Posts: 228 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
FiredrakeRAGE says: "I do not believe that (brown t-shirt notwithstanding), the Marine was acting as a representative of the United States government. I've seen too few facts to make a real determination though."
Nor do I... Point taken.
Posts: 865 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: Even if the song is about a soldier being lured into an ambush by a girl, he glorifies grabbing her even younger sister, who may as well be a TODDLER and using her a human shield. This is despicable, and the crude mockery of Arabic that the song uses as a chorus qualifies as hate speech. This can be interpreted easily as trying to subvert the mission in Iraq. For those who think the song is harmless, why don't you buy yourself a plane ticket to Baghdad and sing it to every Iraqi you meet, and see what happens.
Hysterical whiners like you may feel "harmed" by these words, but no one in Iraq was "harmed" in any way shape or form by the singing of these lyrics. The irony is, they're not even hateful words. They're irreverent. Big difference.
As for it being "dispicable" to use a little girl as a human shield, I can think of tons of things in Hollywood movies that were as bad, but that were played for laughs. For instance, no one started a riot about the scene in Scary Movie when the old lady was thrown down the stairs at the killer. That's because everyone knows that it is a stupid movie and a stupid joke. This song is no different. Punish the soldier for "conduct unbecoming" or whatever, but don't give us this hysterical "hate speech" garbage. It's bad enough people like you have managed to get that trash in Canada's criminal code...
As for your challenge, I don't doubt that many people would become violent at hearing this song, just as many became violent at the sight (or in most cases, just the thought of) some cartoons. In both cases, it is the violent people who seemed to be doing the harm, not the words that so easily provoked them.
Posts: 7629 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
FDR, he's an active soldier. He's talking specifically about actions taken WHILE ON DUTY, in the course of executing orders. How is this NOT a representative of the US?
If an employee at a certain restaurant publishes a song about how he pisses in the food while working in the kitchen, you don't think the restaurant has a right to say "um, that reflects very badly on us and directly damages our interests. We're gonna have to insist that you never do that again"?
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
