Text 5312, 140 rader
Skriven 2004-11-25 11:44:00 av FRANK SCHEIDT (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av BJöRN FORSSTRöM
Ärende: Breaking News!
======================
-=> Quoting Björn Forsström to Frank Scheidt <=-

 BF>> It' good to hear that your military never does anything wrong. And if
 BF>> they are such Supermen, why haven't they found bin Laden yet?
 
 FS> I have never claimed our military are Supermen.  Furthermore they *do* a
 FS> lot of things wrong.  I spent 3-1/2 years in the U.S. Army during WWII and
 FS> saw a lot of stupid things done by the military.

 BF> OK. And this means that you must be over 80 yo. and times must have
 BF> changed since then. 

True enough, but people are still people and combat soldiers tend 
to be wary of the enemy ...

 BF> They must have much moore sophisticated weapons by
 BF> now. And why is is so hard to say that this soldier *might* have done a
 BF> mistake? 

"Might"?  That applies to *every* action I haven't been involved 
in personally, hence it's *understood* ...

 FS> I don't know who the "Muppet Chef" is,

 BF> Then you have missed something.

I have no feeling of loss ...
 
 FS> and, FYI, have never considered
 FS> Swedes to be any more stupid than any of us in general.  Jokes are jokes
 FS> and someone *always* is the "fall guy".

 BF> Sorry then, that I don't understand your jokes about Swedes.
 
OK, I'll generalize.  There are a series of jokes, each of which 
calls for the person in the joke to be unbelievably stupid.  No 
one is really offended by them because no one could *possibly* be 
that dumb.  The latest reincarnation of this type of joke 
involved Poles, and are commonly called "Polish Jokes".  Prior 
to WWII they were "Moron" jokes.  At one time they were Swedes.  
The ethnic description of the "victim" in the joke is of no 
importance.  It wouldn't surprise me if such a series of jokes 
isn't making the rounds somewhere called "American" jokes.  Is 
this clear now?

In fact I'll give you a typical example:  "How many Poles does it 
take to change a light bulb?" ... "Three -- one to hold the bulb, 
the other two to turn the ladder."  ... [sigh] ... dumb joke but 
funny the first time you hear it ...

 RC>>> How do you know that the insurgent wasnt laying in wait to spring a
 RC>>> trap, like a grenade, bomb or concealed gun?
 
 BF>>> I don't and you don't know he did.
 
 FS>> But, more importantly, that Marine *did* have strong suspicion that he
 FS>> did ...

 BF> The moore caution he should had when entering that room.
 
Haven't *you* ever done something then, later, thought to 
yourself that you shouldn't have done that?

 BF>> Then he pehaps made a mistake and have to pay for it like you pay for
 BF>> yours and I pay for mine.
 
 FS> Perhaps ... perhaps not ... it will come out as it's under investigation.
 FS> The Marine, being an Enlisted Swine is certainly not going to be given any
 FS> special breaks by the investigators.

 BF> What do you call him "Enlisted Swine"?

Another play on words:  I was an Enlisted Man during WWII.  
Officers, in general, had contempt for EM, hence we jokingly said 
they'd refer to us as "Enlisted Swine" ...
 
 BF>>> Not knowing is no excuse to open fire and asking questions afterwards.
 
 FS>> True enough -- but that doesn't apply in this case.  The Marine under
 FS>> investigation doubtless knew even more about the situation than *you* do.
 
 BF>> Then he must know even more than you and now he perhaps realize that he
 BF>> did a mistake.
 
 FS> Or, that he did what had to be done ...

 BF> I can see that you are having some doubts, as well as I.
 BF> No one knows and you see it from your point of wiew and I from mine.

I've never *claimed* to really *know*.  However I have an opinion 
based on what I saw and heard on that tape as well as what others 
have said on the TV news -- people who were able to study the 
tape carefully.  The Marine had good reason to believe his life 
was in danger.  He had only a split-second to make a decision.
 
 BF>> Sorry, my mistake and even I do them. It should have been "angle".
 
 FS> No problem ...

 BF> Thanks.
 
 FS> Can you believe that what he did *might* have been the *best* of all
 FS> alternatives?  Do try to keep an open mind on this.

 BF> I will, if you do the same.

I keep an open mind on *everything* ... even on the fact that you 
might not be from Sweden at all ... heh heh heh ...
 
 BF>> So the Vienam war was a totally "clean" war from your point of view?
 
 FS> FYI, after about the first year, or so, I opposed the Vietnam War.

 BF> Hope you do the same about this one.
 BF> I don't think you will win this either unless real effords are taken.

It's not the same situation as WRT the Vietnam war.  In *that* 
war we had no real national interest.  In subduing Saddam Hussein 
we have considerable interest.
 
 BF>> Something ring a bell here when many new-nazi says that the holocaust
 BF>> never took place either.
 
 FS> Huh?  How did the Holocaust come into this?  The Holocaust involved some
 FS> 11 *million* dead.  We were talking about one, single insurgent killed in
 FS> combat.

 BF> The meaning was that it isn't going away just because you close your
 BF> eyes. 

Poor analogy!  Anyone who lived during the WWII era cannot forget 
the newspaper and newsreel pictures of those Holocaust victims.  
That's *nothing* like the view of a Marine shooting someone he 
likely thought was going to kill him.

... Death is not the worst of things, and life is not the best.

___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)