Where are America's Morals

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sat Mar 05, 2016 7:52 am

Just reading about Sgt. First Class Charles Martland who protected a young boy from a Afghan child molester. you would think at the very least he'd get a commendation. Instead he is going through a disciplinary hearing which will adversly affect his career. So what are your thoughts? This happened on a American base.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/02 ... =obnetwork

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sat Mar 05, 2016 11:38 am

Not a lot of details about the whole make-up of the specific incident, but given the description of the situation being described on that video I would say the morale of our entire military presence over there is at stake. You don't let things like this go on unchallenged, as a military commander, or it will destroy the morale of the men who's hands are being tied in dealing with it. I would say it was a mistake to rough the man up, and I don't say that because it wasn't understandable, but because it arguably wasn't an effective way to deal with the situation in essentially stop at fulfilling their own personal outrage. It would have been far better to absolutely take the situation up the chain of command to the Nth-degree and shame the people standing behind insane policies or failing to take local authority to task. At the opposite extreme they could have made sure that some sort of "training accident" kept it from coming back on them...

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sat Mar 05, 2016 12:41 pm

I also think that beating a man for first molesting a boy and then beating the boy's mother shouldn't be grounds for anything but a pat on the back or a firm handshake in a man's military. If the incident forces his superiors into conflict with the locals then it may be a little disruptive, but I would say that too is a good thing.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Mar 07, 2016 11:52 am

this is what happens when our foreign policy dictates that we send our men and women to wallow in a culture they are completely foreign to,
and then forcing them to treat the civilians in that culture with respect. Things like this will happen. As Thorne indicates, the details are a bit
sketchy, but likely the officers involved made the call to pacify the locals without regard for homeland moral codes. Sadly, as it should be.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Mon Mar 07, 2016 3:27 pm

Yea, we should only send our troops into cultures we understand.

And those would be?

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Mar 07, 2016 4:10 pm

Spidey wrote:Yea, we should only send our troops into cultures we understand.

And those would be?

at the present level of decline in awareness of most Americans, that wouldn't even include several US states. Therein lies the issue, when we barge in before building a knowledge base. Just the way I think and how I've thought for decades as we blunder, clueless, into one international conflict after another.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Wed Mar 09, 2016 11:03 am

I'm failing to make the connection between the need for cultural understanding and the topic of child molestation.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Mar 09, 2016 12:22 pm

because what is an affront to Western morality might not be in another culture. Or, may be treated in another fashion by another culture. Does that make sense to you, Thorne?

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Wed Mar 09, 2016 1:35 pm

"Might?" We're talking about hurting children, slick. "Might" doesn't cut it. I do understand the concept of differing cultural perspectives on behavior, and I believe it has remarkably limited impact on the right and wrong of this. In this instance, these people need to be made to understand whatever praise-worthy perspective we have on abuse of the weak, and not the other way around. I'm all for cultural understanding, but if you ★■◆● with a kid and then hurt his mom for coming to his defense you need to be smacked down or put to death, let the cultural outrage fall where it must.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Mar 09, 2016 1:45 pm

Sergeant Thorne wrote:"Might?" We're talking about hurting children, slick. "Might" doesn't cut it.

FFS, you can marry your first cousin in Indiana, and some states allow you to marry(thus have sex) with 15 year olds. That's repugnant to me, and it's my own damned country. A lot of nations are, to my mind, abusive to children, whether via sex, violence or forced labor. I don't live there, and would prefer my nation not to be there in any functional presence. However, if we are, we have to abide by THEIR moral code, when it involves THEIR public.
Period.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Mar 09, 2016 2:46 pm

Yeah slick, logic like yours keeps the moral backbone of our troops strong. Of course liberals understanding backbone would be a oxymoron. A foreign govt. that wants our troops to protect them should be taught that our moral values will supersede theirs...especially on our bases. Now lets hear how your perverted values should be the rest of the countries. No wonder Trump is winning.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Wed Mar 09, 2016 3:08 pm

You're wrong, Slick. As neat as that may sound administratively, that's not morally acceptable or logically compelling. Unless I'm very mistaken the necessity of our presence there, as well as any contributions our country makes to theirs gives us leverage which IMO should be used when it comes to wrongs that come to our door-step, so to speak. I'm not recommending that we peek our head in the front door and tell them how they're going to run their house, but touching us if they don't keep their house in order there should be consequences, and those consequences speak to who we are as a country.

It's not acceptable that the actions of leaders should compel a man to act against their orders to see justice done. If a man uses his strength to harm others weaker than himself, it is right that one who is strong come to their defense. You can be smug and sit there and say--with the caveat that you don't like it--that it must be allowed to happen. I say I would be justified to bury the man's body in the desert so that it wouldn't come back on me because of the unjust administrative complacence that you're ready to side with. Maybe just hang him on a street corner with a nice suicide note to the effect of, "the boy I love didn't love me".

Killing people is not a solution (making an exception for capital punishment), but neither is letting people do whatever they will to others while you practice amateur foreign policy.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Wed Mar 09, 2016 3:34 pm

So what exactly do you tell a serviceman in some foreign country how to react when they see something like this?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Mar 09, 2016 3:50 pm

I guess slick equates a grown man sticking his penis in a eight year olds ass with someone marrying his first cousin. Kinda shows how he will mitigate anything, no matter how perverted. I wonder if he would be saying the same thing if Bush was in office and this crap occurred.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Mar 09, 2016 6:51 pm

Spidey wrote:So what exactly do you tell a serviceman in some foreign country how to react when they see something like this?

like it is none of their business.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:43 pm

The intellectual side of me says ok, but the emotional side of me says…SAY WHAT!

No sorry, if I could walk away from a child being hurt in a foreign country, I guess I could walk away from the same thing here, thinking “none of my business”.

And, I don’t think I would ever want to be that person.

So I guess I would just have to take my lumps for butting into something that wasn't my business.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Thu Mar 10, 2016 12:41 am

no matter how well intentioned that interference may be, the results are invariably disastrous.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Fri Mar 11, 2016 6:18 pm

One shouldn't use incomplete thoughts in quote with no source and no commentary to make points.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:04 am

I thought everyone knew where that was from. It's not like it's an obscure reference to something no one's heard about.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sat Mar 12, 2016 10:02 am

Completely understandable. ...So where's it from?

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Sat Mar 12, 2016 10:37 pm

Sergeant Thorne wrote:Completely understandable. ...So where's it from?

dude, really? are you really asking me this question?

"symbiosis". obviously.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 6:19 am

I watched Star Trek quite abit but the quote never rang a bell with me. Just because you happen to remember a quote from a TV show doesn't mean everyone else will.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 12:26 pm

woodchip wrote:I watched Star Trek quite abit but the quote never rang a bell with me. Just because you happen to remember a quote from a TV show doesn't mean everyone else will.

Like I said before -- it's not obscure. And very memorable.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 2:44 pm

Only to you and a few other Trekkies.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 2:58 pm

Star Trek is far too liberal for woody to remember famous quotes from.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:04 pm

woodchip wrote:Only to you and a few other Trekkies.

yeah I know. we're too busy trying to make the world a better place and such...

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:35 pm

So walking away from a child being raped is part of making the world a better place.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:41 pm

Star Trek's "prime directive" is widely lambasted in other works of sci-fi. IIRC both Larry Niven and Howard Tayler have variants of "cultural uplift protocols" instead.

sigma · Post by **sigma** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 4:13 pm

Get out of Syria, Middle East and Europe. You’re annoying me!

vision · Post by **vision** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 4:16 pm

sigma wrote:Get out of Syria, Middle East and Europe. You’re annoying me!

No. We have friends there who like our company. Just like Russia has friends there too. We must learn to get along.

sigma · Post by **sigma** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 4:39 pm

vision wrote:
sigma wrote:Get out of Syria, Middle East and Europe. You’re annoying me!
We must learn to get along.

Russia has done everything and even more for this. But to accept the terms of the so-called American democracy, we do not want and will not.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 5:10 pm

Sigma, as near as I can tell we were actually in outer space when you came in. What's your take on the topic?

sigma · Post by **sigma** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 5:15 pm

@SGT: (?) viewtopic.php?f=20&p=363706#p363706

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 10:15 pm

Spidey wrote:So walking away from a child being raped is part of making the world a better place.

mister reading comprehension himself, ladies and gentlemen.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 2:05 pm

sigma wrote:Get out of Syria, Middle East and Europe. You’re annoying me!

Premature pullout of troops from Syria? Putin sounds like Bush. Mission accomplished, but not really.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/put ... d=37637792

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 3:08 pm

Ferno wrote:
Spidey wrote:So walking away from a child being raped is part of making the world a better place.
mister reading comprehension himself, ladies and gentlemen.

No…no, I get it…liberals are trying to make the world a better place, believe me…I get it.

Funny thing referencing the prime directive, as it ties directly into the OP. In the movie “Into Darkness” the prime directive would have let an entire race perish, if not for the fact that Kirk disobeys that directive putting his entire career on the line, to do the right thing.

Star Trek’s message is very clear…sometimes you need to break the law, and doing so could cost you dearly.

The prime directive is used as a device, to make that point.

In the end what do people root for…the prime directive, or the captain that breaks the rules to do the right thing.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 4:09 pm

thought you were ignoring me, spidey.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 4:44 pm

sigma wrote:@SGT: (?) viewtopic.php?f=20&p=363706#p363706

No, I was suggesting that we were in outer space because a Star Trek series was being referenced as a source of moral guidance or authority, and I was asking you what your personal opinion is, as someone from a unique cultural background, on this topic. (if you can put your anti-American protest on hold for a moment

)

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 5:04 pm

I've discovered it's more difficult to ignore people than I thought it would be.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 5:59 pm

Spidey wrote:I've discovered it's more difficult to ignore people than I thought it would be.

Hopefully you have a bit of a thicker skin now. Take a look at Lothar and myself. We fight a lot, because we're so similar. But even so, one of us would pull some sort of shenanigans that we'd end up laughing ten minutes later.

Anyways, the prime directive is a pretty sweet bit of kit, but I think we both can see where it draws from. Especially the part about cultures, since it draws from our own history of where a more advanced culture (conquistadors) made contact with a more indigenous culture. As we both know,the latter did not survive the encounter. And as such, if we (the more advanced culture) starts to actively interfere with the more primitive culture, it will either barely survive or perish altogether. Our history would be lose a bit of its richness.

Much as I hate to say it, the soldiers had no right getting involved in that affair. The native culture needs to make the jump themselves instead of being pushed.