|
this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; Originally Posted by burningmetal I'm not sure how being a combat vet would cause anyone to have no qualms about righteous action. If you're fighting an enemy of your country, there isn't anything unrighteous about that, no matter what snow ...
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
10000 POST CLUB
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cypress Tx.
Posts: 19,051
|
Re: Frank D'Amico files lawsuit against Goodell
Originally Posted by burningmetal
To civilians it can be just that clear. To the combatant it can be anything but... and that has absolutely nothing to do with snow flakes or anyone else's opinion. It has everything to do with the face in the mirror, the realization in the dead silence of night that comes to a 19 year old that there are mothers, wives and children that will forever have their lives changed by one action. ![]()
PTSD doesn't just come from things done to a person, it also comes from things a person has done as well. Civilization subjectively rationalizes reasons and circumstances that make killing and stealing okay to do... doesn't make it so. |
It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see. ~ Henry David Thoreau
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
1000 Posts +
|
Re: Frank D'Amico files lawsuit against Goodell
Originally Posted by TheOak
Listen, buddy, I'm on your side on this one. And this might shock you, but one doesn't necessarily have to be a combat veteran to understand the implications of taking another's life. Sometimes I think non "civilians" can be just as ignorant of other people's comprehension of battle as they assume we are of theirs.![]()
I'm not attempting, in any way, to marginalize or over simplify the fallout of war on a veterans life. What I am saying is simply that if you are fighting for the freedom of your country, that is a righteous cause. Sometimes, tragic things happen in the process. I get that. I said it was a righteous cause, not a glamorous and perfect one. Because on the flip side of those wives, mothers and children of your enemies being effected, is that if you don't eliminate the enemy, it will be your family who will suffer. I realize that criminals can rationalize things in their own minds to make themselves think it's ok. But those kinds of people aren't actually rational, are they? When someone is threatening your citizens, there is nothing to rationalize. It's very simple: You take them out. There is no fine line there. And those who say otherwise are snowflakes. They concern themselves with the ugliness of war, without bothering to think about the consequences of leaving our enemies unchecked. They live in a fantasy world, where they believe that you can just go in and neatly pluck out the bad guys, and poof, everything is fine. If a soldier takes a life of a non combatant civilian, intentionally, then that is murder. But that's not the righteous cause I'm speaking of, obviously. |
If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
10000 POST CLUB
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cypress Tx.
Posts: 19,051
|
Re: Frank D'Amico files lawsuit against Goodell
I know you are. You asked a question and I answered it. Your going on and on in an attempt to prove me wrong about a statement that started with “Maybe it is because”.... Maybe means just that, maybe. You are proving a lot but maybe it’s not what you are trying to prove.
Have a fantastic day brother! ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
1000 Posts +
|
Re: Frank D'Amico files lawsuit against Goodell
Originally Posted by TheOak
I know you enjoy insulting my comprehension skills, even though you never really prove that sentiment as being valid, but let me once again assure you that I understood what you said. The "maybe" you are referring to was only stated to qualify that "maybe" this was the reason why you had no problem pursuing justice, even if someone thought it to be the "low road". That has nothing to do with whether or not you have any qualms about taking up a righteous cause. You either have a problem with that, or you don't. I'm not an idiot, Oak. I know you're going to say that I'm telling you you're wrong again, but in fact, all I'm doing is telling you I got your point, and you ARE wrong to try to twist this into something it isn't.![]()
Your statement, itself, I was NOT trying to prove you wrong on. You believe that the definition of "righteous" is all in the eye of the beholder. I'm giving you my opinion that it is not. I'm defending you, and your status as a veteran. Whatever misgivings you might have, I'm trying to tell you that the cause is right. The outcome might not always be what we want, and the fallout is going to effect each person differently. If you take offense to that and only see it as an argumentative, "I'm right, you're wrong" type of thing, then I'm sorry you see it that way. The way I see it, I'm just trying to help you see something you might not have considered. |
If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|