More than 11,000 Icelanders offer to house Syrian refugees to help European crisis

First topic message reminder :

WARNING; THIS THREAD CONTAINS PICTURES WHICH SOME MAY FIND UPSETTING.


More than 11,000 families in Iceland have offered to open their homes to Syrian refugees in a bid to raise the government’s cap of just 50 asylum seekers a year.

They responded to a call by author Bryndis Bjorgvinsdottir, who set up a Facebook group with an open letter to the country’s welfare minister, Eygló Harðardóttir, asking her to allow people to help.
Ms Bjorgvinsdottir said she knew someone who could house five Syrians fleeing the country’s brutal civil war, requesting work permits, residence papers and “basic human rights” in exchange for paying for their flight and helping them integrate into national society.   Hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees have been crossing into Turkey and attempting to make their way to Europe
In the letter, she said she started the group to show the level of public support for welcoming more refugees, who Ms Bjorgvinsdottir called “human resources” with experience and skills that could help all Icelanders.
“They are our future spouses, best friends, the next soul mate, a drummer for our children’s band, the next colleague, Miss Iceland in 2022, the carpenter who finally finishes the bathroom, the cook in the cafeteria, a fireman and television host,” she wrote.
“People of whom we'll never be able to say in the future: ‘Your life is worth less than my life.’”

Referring to the thousands of migrants who have drowned in desperate attempts to cross the Mediterranean, Ms Bjorgvinsdottir urged Iceland to “open the gates”.

More than 11,000 people have so far joined the group, writing their own proposals in thousands of comments below.

“I'm a single mother with a six-year-old son...we can take a child in need. I'm a teacher and would teach the child to speak, read and write Icelandic and adjust to Icelandic society. We have clothes, a bed, toys and everything a child needs,” wrote Hekla Stefansdottir, according to a translation by AFP.
As the outpouring of support continues, the Prime Minister has announced the formation of a committee dedicated to re-assessing the number of asylum seekers Iceland will accept.   Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson said Europe's migration crisis was 'one of the greatest challenges of modern times'
The Reykjavik Grapevine reported that in a radio interview on Monday, Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson said that Iceland must take part in efforts to welcome the influx of migrants reaching Europe, which he called “one of the greatest challenges of modern times”.
Meanwhile, the welfare minister, Ms Harðardóttir, told national broadcaster RUV that authorities were reading the Facebook offers and would consider increasing the number of refugees accepted under a quota.
Iceland, which has a population of little over 330,000, welcomed 1,117 immigrants in 2014, according to government figures.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/more-than-11000-icelanders-offer-to-house-syrian-refugees-to-help-european-crisis-10480505.html

WOW, they jailed the bankers, refused austerity and now have a sound growing economy and the people want to help the refugess.   Flippin wonderful.

Eilzel wrote:That's it Sass. In war people are forced, driven or led to doing terrible things. Enjoying them or being proud of them is something altogether more dark.

Exactly.

Eilzel wrote:That's it Sass. In war people are forced, driven or led to doing terrible things. Enjoying them or being proud of them is something altogether more dark.

Subjective based on who you have killed.
For example two men today are clebrated for the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich. He was seen as evil beyond measure, but you would not begrudge those celebrating his death today.
Now you may have missed the most telling point where Nicko descibed witnessing attrocities by civillians, of which plnety did happen espcially with VC. So if you witness first hand the barbarity of an enemy no matter if the cause of the war is wrong, it would still be thought of as ridding those committing wrongs. We have no idea if those killed he witnessed had done such crimes, but having witnessed many, it creates a belief that you are glad whenever one of them is dead. That sticks though the truma of combat, which none of us can understand or are haunted by. So I can see why Nicko would feel proud if he saw the enemy this way after witnessing wrongs done by them. So to say its dark is inherantly wrong, when you fail to factor in how people witnessed such events.

sassy wrote:

Nems wrote:

That's out of order. Didn't you say your dad was a bomber pilot? Or least ways "high up" in the airforce. Don't many view the bombing of Dresden as an atrocity?
The boys on the ground don't decide where they go and only those actually  in combat know what it's like. It was and is their lives on the line and they have my gratitude and admiration

Yes, and that's why he still has nightmares  and would never rejoice about it.   If you read, I did not condemn Nicko for what he did at the time, but the fact with all the things we now know, he was still obviously proud of it.  All the forces do things they have to at the time, they don't rejoice about it years later.

Unless you knew each and every person involved you don't know what they did or didn't do. I disagree with you Nicko is not in a position to be proud of what that helicopter crew did. He wasn't one of them. Is he right to be proud of serving? Yes he is. Let's catch a cab to reality shall we? War is not pretty or pleasant. You don't send fucking girl guides but battle ready troops or in the case of Vietnam, bloody kids, I don't get the outrage at Nickos post. I really don't. Unless you have walked in his shoes you have no right to criticise him.

Cuchulain wrote:

sassy wrote:Never said you weren't Nicko, but still cheering about gunning down people in the water?  And being so proud of it you posted it twice?

Well there is a simple explanation as to why Nicko would feel the way he does. That is because he has seen close friends die and be injured. Their role first and foremost was the protection of each other and thus to lose people who are so close they are family is worse to see those closet to you die in graphic detail. They are continually punished with such memories. Not only this to have watched the many horrors played out to civilians. I may not agree with how Nicko feels on the war itself, but I certainly understand why he feels as he does. Wars play havoc on those serving in combat. Hate and resentment can easily build up when you witness your brothers die around you. So Nicko was rightly angry to lose friends and he vents that in the way that makes the most sense. Hating those who took his friends lives. To me in my opinion, this is how he deals with the past. Where none of us here are in a position to tell him how he should deal with the past, when none of us have faced such unimaginable horrors. Thus we would have no idea what he has gone through. 

So before you pull him up in the future over his views, try to understand for a minute why they might have formed.

What an utterly brilliant post

Leave the poor guy alone, Nicko has served his country and deserves the gratitude and respect of each and every one of us.  Where would we be now without brave soldiers like Nicko?

Of course soldiers are going to be proud if they do their job and achieve their purpose. What would be the point of going into the forces if you didn't want to succeed and do what is considered your duty?

I have no doubt Nicko has seen some terrible things, been involved in some very dangerous operations.  You have to have a certain kind of mindset to be able to do that kind of job, you are trained to be able to cope with all kinds of situations.

Unfortunately so many of our military are forgotten when the job is considered done or they are injured and retire.  Many are homeless and don't receive the help they need to be able to deal with their experiences.  Some things no training can prepare you for   they deserve our support not judgement.

With respect Nicko has asked that we not talk about this anymore so perhaps we should do as he asks.

I didn't say he shouldn't be proud of doing his job, he should be very proud of that. I'm talking about enjoying or being proud of murder in cold blood or committing other atrocities (I wasn't talking about nicko but soldiers in general). That is what is dark.

One of the reasons so many in the Forces have mental health problems when they return from doing their jobs, and end up with PTS, is that they know what they did was horrible, even though they were under orders to do it at the time.  Many suffer, like my Dad, from nightmares for the rest of their lives.  They did it, it was their duty at the time, but they don't crow about it later, they come to terms with it.

Eilzel wrote:I didn't say he shouldn't be proud of doing his job, he should be very proud of that. I'm talking about enjoying or being proud of murder in cold blood or committing other atrocities (I wasn't talking about nicko but soldiers in general). That is what is dark.

But again you failed to grasp how those who have been in combat deal with these events daily. For Nicko today dealing with reliving these nightmares is plagued with guilt he feels deeply. Sometimes people have to dehumanize the people they have killed to justify killing people in war. It helps deal with this burden many of them feel. He witnessed many wrongs and thus came to see the VC as evil. People cope in different ways, but again nobody is in a position here to judge if they have not experinced the effects of combat, killing and losing friends. Until people experince that and then have to live with the memories of these horrors they were a part of, you cannot possible hope to judge how he feels today. That is his coping mechanism Eilzel. To someone very proud like Nicko, this is how he copes with painful memmories.

Eilzel wrote:I didn't say he shouldn't be proud of doing his job, he should be very proud of that. I'm talking about enjoying or being proud of murder in cold blood or committing other atrocities (I wasn't talking about nicko but soldiers in general). That is what is dark.

Thanks for clarifying Les.  I feel for Nicko, he has clearly been affected by what he's been through, I don't think he deserves to be treated as though he's committed an atrocity or war crime  

Agreed, he should be very proud and us in return, he deserves our respect.

I see all points tbh. It is an entirely personal and emotive topic.

I hate war. There's never anything good about it.

Cuchulain wrote:

Eilzel wrote:I didn't say he shouldn't be proud of doing his job, he should be very proud of that. I'm talking about enjoying or being proud of murder in cold blood or committing other atrocities (I wasn't talking about nicko but soldiers in general). That is what is dark.

But again you failed to grasp how those who have been in combat deal with these events daily. For Nicko today dealing with reliving these nightmares is plagued with guilt he feels deeply. Sometimes people have to dehumanize the people they have killed to justify killing people in war. It helps deal with this burden many of them feel. He witnessed many wrongs and thus came to see the VC as evil. People cope in different ways, but again nobody is in a position here to judge if they have not experinced the effects of combat, killing and losing friends. Until people experince that and then have to live with the memories of these horrors they were a part of, you cannot possible hope to judge how he feels today. That is his coping mechanism Eilzel. To someone very proud like Nicko, this is how he copes with painful memmories.

Well said Didge

sassy wrote:One of the reasons so many in the Forces have mental health problems when they return from doing their jobs, and end up with PTS, is that they know what they did was horrible, even though they were under orders to do it at the time.  Many suffer, like my Dad, from nightmares for the rest of their lives.  They did it, it was their duty at the time, but they don't crow about it later, they come to terms with it.

No one is crowing.

nicko wrote:Quill, I didn't ask to go,   I was ordered to.     Can you see the diference?

But sassy has the point: you are still cheering. I appreciate that you were under superior orders. And I understand didge's point...emotions follow experience, and seeing your buddies die and the overall mayhem of war, you are left with bad feelings for the other guy.

That is only further proof that you don't take war lightly. You should really be angry at those who sent you to war. Yet in the brutality and ugliness of battle your hatred creeps over to focus on the other side. But he's doing the same at you. Do you see what a futile exercise this is?

The real person pulling the trigger was the Prime Minister, or President, or General, who made the decision to have the war in the first place. War is a failure of talk, as Clausewitz said. If your Prime Minister had/could talk it through, as he should, you wouldn't have witnessed all of that blood and mayhem.

Today, now that the war is over, and you are cheering the ugliness and blood as you discuss it with us, remember you are now one of the cheering mob urging the Prime Minister to go to the next war. That's why I asked you about the middle east. It's as if you are saying, Naw, that was fun. Let's have another war and leave some more little girls burned and crying!!

Raggamuffin wrote:I do hope you told off your leftie luvvies who cheered when Maggie Thatcher died Sassy.

You are comparing Maggie Thacher to Napalm Girl, Phan Thị Kim Phúc? Amazing...the crass insensitivity. No wonder we have so many wars.

Original Quill wrote:

nicko wrote:Quill, I didn't ask to go,   I was ordered to.     Can you see the diference?

But sassy has the point: you are still cheering.  I appreciate that you were under superior orders.  And I understand didge's point...emotions follow experience, and seeing your buddies die and the overall mayhem of war, you are left with bad feelings for the other guy.

That is only further proof that you don't take war lightly.  You should really be angry at those who sent you to war.  Yet in the brutality and ugliness of battle your hatred creeps over to focus on the other side.  But he's doing the same at you.  Do you see what a futile exercise this is?

The real person pulling the trigger was the Prime Minister, or President, or General, who made the decision to have the war in the first place.  War is a failure of talk, as Clausewitz said.  If your Prime Minister had/could talk it through, as he should, you wouldn't have witnessed all of that blood and mayhem.

Today, now that the war is over, and you are cheering the ugliness and blood as you discuss it with us, remember you are now one of the cheering mob urging the Prime Minister to go to the next war.  That's why I asked you about the middle east.  It's as if you are saying, Naw, that was fun.  Let's have another war and leave some more little girls burned and crying!!

For once you and I agree,


However, I would also like to point out that this thread was about helping Syrian refugees after a boat capsized and two little boys drowned (two MORE little boys).  Guns being fired had not been mentioned, and quite arbitrarily Nicko posted:

Saw this for real in Vietnam, American copter fired rockets at VC boat on Mekong river,
then machine gunned survivors in the water. We all cheered.



I can only presume he thinks that is what should be happening to the Syrian refugees.  Perhaps he'll correct me if I'm wrong, which I would very much like to be.

nicko wrote:Eilzel,   all war is wrong,    I wish it had not happened,   but it did and I was part of it.

Now everyone please lets not talk about any more.

Nicko...we've gotta talk about it, or it will happen again.

Original Quill wrote:

nicko wrote:Eilzel,   all war is wrong,    I wish it had not happened,   but it did and I was part of it.

Now everyone please lets not talk about any more.

Nicko...we've gotta talk about it, or it will happen again.

The last thing he needs right now is to talk about it.
As I have already pointed out its easy for us to sit back and say what is the right way to feel, but then we have no idea how to cope from such experinces. He has his own mechanism with how to cope with the past, where even if we disagree with that mechanism, that is what helps Nicko cope. That is all that should matter. If he wants to talk about this, then he will, best not to force the issue Quill. As none of us have any comprehension what he has gone throuigh.

Thanks

Then perhaps he should not have posted the comment, which I have pointed out, had absolutely no relevance to what was being discussed.  The fact he posted on TWO threads shows he wanted it talked about.

Didge does have a point though; none of us knows how it feels or what it's like to be in the heart of a bloody war.
It's hard to know what it's like to walk in someone else's boots.

sassy wrote:Then perhaps he should not have posted the comment, which I have pointed out, had absolutely no relevance to what was being discussed.  The fact he posted on TWO threads shows he wanted it talked about.

For goodness sake, that is how he deals with the past.
Has that not sunk in yet?
You have no comprehension at all how he feels and wrongly think you do because you know some Veterans. Well sorry to burst your bubble, but you have no idea how he feels.
If he needs to make these comments, then so be it, the problem is you cannot take yourself out of your own world view and look into how someone else would feel.
Sometimes people need to vent, which has been explained here and yet still you fail to understand a single point made.

Cuchulain wrote:

Eilzel wrote:Cheering people being shot in cold blood is pretty grotesque, but I appreciate having seen atrocities committed against your friends your mentality would be badly affected- do you now think what those Americans did was wrong though nicko?

And as an aside, what is this last page to do with Icelands heroic charity offering?

Morning Eilzel

I do not think many people are being fair here to be honest to Nicko.

I think you are indulging the same confusion as others, didge. Les nailed it when he said it's a form of mental disorder. I feel sympathy for nicko...for consequential the fact that he had a mental disorder. The mental disorder was secondary to the trauma of war.

But didge, your sympathy goes out for the trauma of war, not for the consequences. The trauma of war was a bad thing, even tho it leads us to think of the glory. It shouldn't be the reason why you feel sorry for nicko; it should be the reason why you vow never to go to war again. Why? Because it's too easy to slip from the trauma of war to the glory of men who fought the war...and la, la, la, on to parades, uniforms and marching bands. You lose sight of the mayhem and blood. Instead of vowing never to go to war again, you find yourself saying--as nicko does--yes, yes, what brave men, it's so glorious, let's do it again.

That little slip of the mind is responsible for why we can cheer the marching band, yet fail to pay the taxes that pay the medical bills for all the soldiers who can't walk anymore. We forgot the misery and started cheering all over again.

We are so used to saying war is hell, but we always end up saying, yes, yes, let's do it again!

Cuchulain wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Nicko...we've gotta talk about it, or it will happen again.

The last thing he needs right now is to talk about it.
As I have already pointed out its easy for us to sit back and say what is the right way to feel, but then we have no idea how to cope from such experinces. He has his own mechanism with how to cope with the past, where even if we disagree with that mechanism, that is what helps Nicko cope. That is all that should matter. If he wants to talk about this, then he will, best not to force the issue Quill. As none of us have any comprehension what he has gone throuigh.

Thanks

What is the point?  Nicko getting better?  Or a thousand nickos coming down with the same disorder?

Original Quill wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Morning Eilzel

I do not think many people are being fair here to be honest to Nicko.

I think you are indulging the same confusion as others, didge.  Les nailed it when he said it's a form of mental disorder.  I feel sympathy for nicko...for consequential the fact that he had a mental disorder.  The mental disorder was secondary to the trauma of war.

But didge, your sympathy goes out for the trauma of war, not for the consequences.  The trauma of war was a bad thing, even tho it leads us to think of the glory.  It shouldn't be the reason why you feel sorry for nicko; it should be the reason why you vow never to go to war again.  Why?  Because it's too easy to slip from the trauma of war to the glory of men who fought the war...and la, la, la, on to parades, uniforms and marching bands.  You lose sight of the mayhem and blood.  Instead of vowing never to go to war again, you find yourself saying--as nicko does--yes, yes, what brave men, it's so glorious, let's do it again.

That little slip of the mind is responsible for why we can cheer the marching band, yet fail to pay the taxes that pay the medical bills for all the soldiers who can't walk anymore.  We forgot the misery and started cheering all over again.

We are so used to saying war is hell, but we always end up saying, yes, yes, let's do it again!

You are at cross purposes in your points, as you are making this about how you individually feel ethically about wars.
That has no relevance here in regards to coping mechanisms.
So you are going very much off tangent wanting to discuss the finer points of more wars being thought.
That is not what is being debated here but getting a first hand insight to someone who has faced the ugliness of war.
If has nothing to do with feeling sorry at all, but respect.
Respecting the fact he has to live with this living nightmare he cannot eradicate from his mind. I show respect by trying to understand how he might be feeling. Where even if I do not even come close, I begin to understand how he best deals with past horros

Original Quill wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

The last thing he needs right now is to talk about it.
As I have already pointed out its easy for us to sit back and say what is the right way to feel, but then we have no idea how to cope from such experinces. He has his own mechanism with how to cope with the past, where even if we disagree with that mechanism, that is what helps Nicko cope. That is all that should matter. If he wants to talk about this, then he will, best not to force the issue Quill. As none of us have any comprehension what he has gone throuigh.

Thanks

What is the point?  Nicko getting better?  Or a thousand nickos coming down with the same disorder?

Many are like Nicko already, they all have their own ways to deal with conflict.
Truama from conflict is not something you can easily fix nore has it ever been the case.
WE send young men into such horrors and then badly let them down when they need the most helping in adapting back to civillian life Where their life before was kill or be killed. It is not something you claim to make better, even more so when you have never faced such realities. Only other veterans can help there.

sassy wrote:However, I would also like to point out that this thread was about helping Syrian refugees after a boat capsized and two little boys drowned (two MORE little boys). Guns being fired had not been mentioned, and quite arbitrarily Nicko posted.

Well I think we've moved on to talk about wars in general. And it's a natural progression. Because, as didge said in the Zimmerman thread, it's all about causation. How did the refugees get into their position, and what is really the cause of the death of the little boys?

Original Quill wrote:

sassy wrote:However, I would also like to point out that this thread was about helping Syrian refugees after a boat capsized and two little boys drowned (two MORE little boys).  Guns being fired had not been mentioned, and quite arbitrarily Nicko posted.

Well I think we've moved on to talk about wars in general.  And it's a natural progression.  Because, as didge said in the Zimmerman thread, it's all about causation.  How did the refugees get into their position, and what is really the cause of the death of the little boys?

We hadn't at that point, that is what started it.

Cuchulain wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I think you are indulging the same confusion as others, didge.  Les nailed it when he said it's a form of mental disorder.  I feel sympathy for nicko...for consequential the fact that he had a mental disorder.  The mental disorder was secondary to the trauma of war.

But didge, your sympathy goes out for the trauma of war, not for the consequences.  The trauma of war was a bad thing, even tho it leads us to think of the glory.  It shouldn't be the reason why you feel sorry for nicko; it should be the reason why you vow never to go to war again.  Why?  Because it's too easy to slip from the trauma of war to the glory of men who fought the war...and la, la, la, on to parades, uniforms and marching bands.  You lose sight of the mayhem and blood.  Instead of vowing never to go to war again, you find yourself saying--as nicko does--yes, yes, what brave men, it's so glorious, let's do it again.

That little slip of the mind is responsible for why we can cheer the marching band, yet fail to pay the taxes that pay the medical bills for all the soldiers who can't walk anymore.  We forgot the misery and started cheering all over again.

We are so used to saying war is hell, but we always end up saying, yes, yes, let's do it again!

You are at cross purposes in your points, as you are making this about how you individually feel ethically about wars.
That has no relevance here in regards to coping mechanisms.
So you are going very much off tangent wanting to discuss the finer points of more wars being thought.
That is not what is being debated here but getting a first hand insight to someone who has faced the ugliness of war.
If has nothing to do with feeling sorry at all, but respect.
Respecting the fact he has to live with this living nightmare he cannot eradicate from his mind. I show respect by trying to understand how he might be feeling. Where even if I do not even come close, I begin to understand how he best deals with past horros

I haven't mentioned myself here at all.  In fact, you wouldn't even know how I feel about wars, were it not for recollecting other posts on different threads.  I would be the first to assert that this topic is not about me at all.

In actual fact, my message is about merging purposes: nicko's mental trauma, and the fact that war is evil.  Let's not get off on semantic nonsense like respect.  That's just another word like glory--cue the marching band and musical instruments.  I'm talking about helping nicko, really helping him and men just like him, by taking up the cause.

Nico's trauma has it's origins the the decision of some PM to go to war.  THERE!  Now: let's talk right and wrong (Bertolt Brecht).  Let's discuss causation.  That PM's decision led directly to nicko's mental trauma.  Ergo: we shouldn't make another decision to go to war needlessly.  No more Viet Nams.  No more Iraqs.  No more Afghanistans.  If ISIL has a problem with Iraq's Shi'ite government, stay out of it. If Iran and Israel want to go to war, let them. None of it is worth the collective mental and physical toll that we will suffer.

sassy wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Well I think we've moved on to talk about wars in general.  And it's a natural progression.  Because, as didge said in the Zimmerman thread, it's all about causation.  How did the refugees get into their position, and what is really the cause of the death of the little boys?

We hadn't at that point, that is what started it.

It's a good point, and a natural progression for the discussion.

Original Quill wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

You are at cross purposes in your points, as you are making this about how you individually feel ethically about wars.
That has no relevance here in regards to coping mechanisms.
So you are going very much off tangent wanting to discuss the finer points of more wars being thought.
That is not what is being debated here but getting a first hand insight to someone who has faced the ugliness of war.
If has nothing to do with feeling sorry at all, but respect.
Respecting the fact he has to live with this living nightmare he cannot eradicate from his mind. I show respect by trying to understand how he might be feeling. Where even if I do not even come close, I begin to understand how he best deals with past horros

I haven't mentioned myself here at all.  In fact, you wouldn't even know how I feel about wars, were it not for recollecting other posts on different threads.  I would be the first to assert that this topic is not about me at all.

In actual fact, my message is about merging purposes: nicko's mental trauma, and the fact that war is evil.  Let's not get off on semantic nonsense like respect.  That's just another word like glory--cue the marching band and musical instruments.  I'm talking about helping nicko, really helping him and men just like him, by taking up the cause.

Nico's trauma has it's origins the the decision of some PM to go to war.  THERE!  Now: let's talk right and wrong (Bertolt Brecht).  Let's discuss causation.  That PM's decision led directly to nicko's mental trauma.  Ergo: we shouldn't make another decision to go to war needlessly.  No more Viet Nams.  No more Iraqs.  No more Afghanistans.  None of it.

I am afraid you have made it about your ethical views by saying to Nicko to where the blame is with according to you Quill
Respect is not another word for Gloiry, that is absurd. Respect shows understanding that I amy not have the ability to picture or understand what someone has gone through but respect how they cope
You want to alk about causation, I am not interested to do so.
Like I say your inetent has been throughout to steer this debate in that direction.
Some wars will always be needed until humanity evolves.
So am not interested in having that discussion.
My points were to show some understanding of how we are in no place to really judge Nicko

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I do hope you told off your leftie luvvies who cheered when Maggie Thatcher died Sassy.

You are comparing Maggie Thacher to Napalm Girl, Phan Thị Kim Phúc?  Amazing...the crass insensitivity.  No wonder we have so many wars.    

No, I'm comparing Nicko cheering when men who would have killed him given half the chance were killed, and people cheering the death of an ex Prime Minister because they didn't like her policies.

Did your logic fly out of the window today?

Didge wrote:I am afraid you have made it about your ethical views by saying to Nicko to where the blame is with according to you Quill

As you said in the Zimmerman thread, it’s all about causation. Whether we speak of 'blame' or simply some mechanical transformation, if we don't understand causation we fail to understand anything. A pat on the back only goes so far; sometimes we have to look for change.

Didge wrote:Respect is not another word for Gloiry, that is absurd. Respect shows understanding that I amy not have the ability to picture or understand what someone has gone through but respect how they cope

Respect is close to the term ‘praise’, and that’s close enough. I am just trying to avoid the mistake I spoke of: diverting the painful experience of war into the opposite discussion, whether its respect for our valiant ones, or praise for the fallen. Orwell again….turning the point into it’s opposite. We do that so often: department of defense, when we mean Offense. We need to avoid that.

Didge wrote:You want to alk about causation, I am not interested to do so.
Like I say your inetent has been throughout to steer this debate in that direction.

No, I specifically said this wasn’t about me. My intent is to follow your instinctual lead and talk about causation.

Didge wrote:Some wars will always be needed until humanity evolves.
So am not interested in having that discussion.
My points were to show some understanding of how we are in no place to really judge Nicko

Head in the sand, didge. My purpose is to further the understanding of nicko, not to judge him. Indeed, I am focusing on the judgment of the real causes...the politicians who bring us into needless wars. We need to avoid those causes.

Even if you don’t want to have that discussion, we need to hear it. That's life.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

You are comparing Maggie Thacher to Napalm Girl, Phan Thị Kim Phúc?  Amazing...the crass insensitivity.  No wonder we have so many wars.    

No, I'm comparing Nicko cheering when men who would have killed him given half the chance were killed, and people cheering the death of an ex Prime Minister because they didn't like her policies.

Did your logic fly out of the window today?

Oh. You missed nickos point. He was cheering death of the defenseless in a battle on the Mekong Delta.

Magggie Thatche was never in a battle. She died of a stroke in London on 8 April 2013 at the age of 87.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No, I'm comparing Nicko cheering when men who would have killed him given half the chance were killed, and people cheering the death of an ex Prime Minister because they didn't like her policies.

Did your logic fly out of the window today?

Oh.  You missed nickos point.  He was cheering death of the defenseless in a battle on the Mekong Delta.

Magggie Thatche was never in a battle.  She died of a stroke in London on 8 April 2013 at the age of 87.

The defenceless? They were VC, and he explained quite clearly what the VC did to people.

So why is it OK to cheer when someone dies of a stroke Quill. Do tell me.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:I am afraid you have made it about your ethical views by saying to Nicko to where the blame is with according to you Quill

As you said in the Zimmerman thread, it’s all about causation.  Whether we speak of 'blame' or simply some mechanical transformation, if we don't understand causation we fail to understand anything.  A pat on the back only goes so far; sometimes we have to look for change.

Didge wrote:Respect is not another word for Gloiry, that is absurd. Respect shows understanding that I amy not have the ability to picture or understand what someone has gone through but respect how they cope

Respect is close to the term ‘praise’, and that’s close enough.  I am just trying to avoid the mistake I spoke of: diverting the painful experience of war into the opposite discussion, whether its respect for our valiant ones, or praise for the fallen.  Orwell again….turning the point into it’s opposite.  We do that so often: department of defense, when we mean Offense.  We need to avoid that.

Didge wrote:You want to alk about causation, I am not interested to do so.
Like I say your inetent has been throughout to steer this debate in that direction.

No, I specifically said this wasn’t about me.  My intent is to follow your instinctual lead and talk about causation.
 

Didge wrote:Some wars will always be needed until humanity evolves.
So am not interested in having that discussion.
My points were to show some understanding of how we are in no place to really judge Nicko

Head in the sand, didge.  My purpose is to further the understanding of nicko, not to judge him.  Indeed, I am focusing on the judgment of the real causes...the politicians who bring us into needless wars.  We need to avoid those causes.  

Even if you don’t want to have that discussion, we need to hear it.  That's life.

1) No you think its all about cauastion here, when its not, its about how people cope with their mechanisms.

2) You misread how I am terming the word respect. It is respecting that I do not understand how that person feels but am willing to try and listen

3) You are not going to further understand Nicko down the path you have chosen. You wish to mold him into your line of thinking which will sadly fall short because you have never been a brother in arms. He needs people who have faced similiar to talk about this, where it makes for a more comfortable surrounding. All you will do is further make Nicko more defensive and less talkative about his experinces.

Which brings me back to respect. You have to respect the fact, you have no compreheension of what he has done or seen.

Laters

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

No, I'm comparing Nicko cheering when men who would have killed him given half the chance were killed, and people cheering the death of an ex Prime Minister because they didn't like her policies.

Did your logic fly out of the window today?

Oh.  You missed nickos point.  He was cheering death of the defenseless in a battle on the Mekong Delta.

Magggie Thatche was never in a battle.  She died of a stroke in London on 8 April 2013 at the age of 87.

Irrelevant as in both cases their deaths have brought on the mood change.
How they did die is irrlevant, what is relevant in both cases is the person dies.
This brings escalation, relief, closing a chapter in your life. Its a finate position
Hence why both cases of celebration stem from death itself.

eddie wrote:Just read through this thread and boy, what a lot of bitterness.
Vera and rags call a truce eh? (Veya you mentioned rags first on a thread she wasn't posting on to be fair)
Dodge and rags, do kindly stop spamming with your stupid "fuck offs" and "poo poo mouth!" Pictures - very dumb.

And sass? Please put warnings before  your pics please?!

I feel really irrttated by this thread - not least because Nicko thinks cheering about  killing children is okay.

Nicko was not cheering about killing children, he was cheering about the death of people who killed children.

If Didge stopped following me around posting stupid images at me, and sticking his beak into every conversation I had with anyone else, I would not need to respond in the same manner.

I have nothing to say about Veya at the moment.

Raggamuffin wrote:

eddie wrote:Just read through this thread and boy, what a lot of bitterness.
Vera and rags call a truce eh? (Veya you mentioned rags first on a thread she wasn't posting on to be fair)
Dodge and rags, do kindly stop spamming with your stupid "fuck offs" and "poo poo mouth!" Pictures - very dumb.

And sass? Please put warnings before  your pics please?!

I feel really irrttated by this thread - not least because Nicko thinks cheering about  killing children is okay.

Nicko was not cheering about killing children, he was cheering about the death of people who killed children.

If Didge stopped following me around posting stupid images at me, and sticking his beak into every conversation I had with anyone else, I would not need to respond in the same manner.

I have nothing to say about Veya at the moment.

Why do you always make poor excuses?
This is a debate forum of which I can reply to any post.
There is no rules against that and if you take issue with that, then clearly you have issues over something as trivial as that.
Grow up

If eddie wants this stuff to stop, she will need to have a word with Didge because I'm not going to let him push me around on this forum, and I'll respond to his vileness and stupid pictures that he harasses me with.

Raggamuffin wrote:If eddie wants this stuff to stop, she will need to have a word with Didge because I'm not going to let him push me around on this forum, and I'll respond to his vileness and stupid pictures that he harasses me with.

So now blackmailing the mods, that if they do not do as you commands, you then wrongly thinks that justifies you being nasty and that you will be nasty. lol
Always playing the victim card, its so stupid its beyond belief. You are fine to dish it out but you really cannot take it in return.
Seriously you need to grow up

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:If eddie wants this stuff to stop, she will need to have a word with Didge because I'm not going to let him push me around on this forum, and I'll respond to his vileness and stupid pictures that he harasses me with.

So now blackmailing the mods, that if they do not do as you commands, you then wrongly thinks that justifies you being nasty and that you will be nasty. lol
Always playing the victim card, its so stupid its beyond belief. You are fine to dish it out but you really cannot take it in return.
Seriously you need to grow up

I'd be quite happy to never discuss anything with you ever again Didge. I would like you to leave me alone and stop harassing me all over the forum. However, if you refuse, then I'll reply in the way I think is best. The ball is in your court.

Nice. Lets all talk about Nicko as if he isn't a member of this forum. None of you have seen active service. How dare you presume he wants or needs your understanding?
How dare you presume to know what he has or hasn't been through or done. Or try to score cheap points putting words in his mouth.
You forget, Nicko experienced these things for real he didnt go googling for images to be outraged at.
Enough. Nick has said he doesn't want to talk about this further, can we not respect that at least?!
Fucking disgusted

Nems wrote:Nice. Lets all talk about Nicko as if he isn't a member of this forum. None of you have seen active service. How dare you presume he wants or needs your understanding?
How dare you presume to know what he has or hasn't been through or done. Or try to score cheap points putting words in his mouth.
You forget, Nicko experienced these things for real he didnt go googling for images to be outraged at.
Enough. Nick has said he doesn't want to talk about this further, can we not respect that at least?!
Fucking disgusted

I was defending Nicko and will continue to defend him if others continue to wrongly judge.
Chill out Nems, my whole point is nobody has a clue what he has gone through.
That they should respect that.

Nems wrote:Nice. Lets all talk about Nicko as if he isn't a member of this forum. None of you have seen active service. How dare you presume he wants or needs your understanding?
How dare you presume to know what he has or hasn't been through or done. Or try to score cheap points putting words in his mouth.
You forget, Nicko experienced these things for real he didnt go googling for images to be outraged at.
Enough. Nick has said he doesn't want to talk about this further, can we not respect that at least?!
Fucking disgusted

I've just been correcting misunderstandings about what he actually said.

Cuchulain wrote:

Nems wrote:Nice. Lets all talk about Nicko as if he isn't a member of this forum. None of you have seen active service. How dare you presume he wants or needs your understanding?
How dare you presume to know what he has or hasn't been through or done. Or try to score cheap points putting words in his mouth.
You forget, Nicko experienced these things for real he didnt go googling for images to be outraged at.
Enough. Nick has said he doesn't want to talk about this further, can we not respect that at least?!
Fucking disgusted

I was defending Nicko and will continue to defend him if others continue to wrongly judge.
Chill out Nems, my whole point is nobody has a clue what he has gone through.
That they should respect that.

I wasn't referring to you Didge.

Nems wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

I was defending Nicko and will continue to defend him if others continue to wrongly judge.
Chill out Nems, my whole point is nobody has a clue what he has gone through.
That they should respect that.

I wasn't referring to you Didge.

Fair enough Nems.
Sorry if I mistread your post.
Have a good evening

Cuchulain wrote:

Nems wrote:

I wasn't referring to you Didge.

Fair enough Nems.
Sorry if I mistread your post.
Have a good evening

You too Didge

Didge wrote:You are not going to further understand Nicko down the path you have chosen. You wish to mold him into your line of thinking which will sadly fall short because you have never been a brother in arms. He needs people who have faced similiar to talk about this, where it makes for a more comfortable surrounding. All you will do is further make Nicko more defensive and less talkative about his experinces.

Which brings me back to respect. You have to respect the fact, you have no compreheension of what he has done or seen.

'Only I have special knowledge, so you no one else can speak.' Where have I heard that kind of censorship before?

And yes, it is censorship. You are trying to tell someone else what to write. Conversely, you are specifying what not to write. That's no way to debate, let alone discuss.

Rationale debate requires that you listen, then respond. You are doing what is called a 'confess and avoid'. You would rather it was not talk about it. Well, when would you like to talk about it? Hopefully it gets a fair hearing before the next war.

Going back to the subject of this thread, what we are discussing are the consequences of war. Rather than try to 'police' another's points, why not respond? It furthers the discussion along, rather than burying it along with nicko's trauma.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:You are not going to further understand Nicko down the path you have chosen. You wish to mold him into your line of thinking which will sadly fall short because you have never been a brother in arms. He needs people who have faced similiar to talk about this, where it makes for a more comfortable surrounding. All you will do is further make Nicko more defensive and less talkative about his experinces.

Which brings me back to respect. You have to respect the fact, you have no compreheension of what he has done or seen.

'Only I have special knowledge, so you no one else can speak.'  Where have I heard that kind of censorship before?

And yes, it is censorship.  You are trying to tell someone else what to write.  Conversely, you are specifying what not to write.  That's no way to debate, let alone discuss.

Rationale debate requires that you listen, then respond.  You are doing what is called a 'confess and avoid'.  You would rather it was not talk about it.  Well, when would you like to talk about it?  Hopefully it gets a fair hearing before the next war.

Going back to the subject of this thread, what we are discussing are the consequences of war.  Rather than try to 'police' another's points, why not respond?  It furthers the discussion along, rather than burying it along with nicko's trauma.

Stop being absurd.
I was asking out of respect to you.
If you wish to continue that is your choice but it shows you have little respect for others.
I am happy to talk about this, but you expect Nicko to as if on demand by you and he does not have to.
So its you trying to force the hand of people here.
So I asked kindly out of resoect to stop and you come back with poor reasoning.
You have to respect when someone feels ready to talk about something fully, they will. You do not respect that and allow them to feel ready.
Its that simple

Could care less about discussing the cuasations of war tonight
And I will not be swayed to do so.

Have a good evening

Didge wrote:Stop being absurd.
I was asking out of respect to you.
If you wish to continue that is your choice but it shows you have little respect for others.
I am happy to talk about this, but you expect Nicko to as if on demand by you and he does not have to.

Well, actually nicko hasn’t been on. It’s been you and I who have been discussing it. If you are tired, get some rest and we’ll pick up in the morning.

If nicko wants to add anything, he is welcome to.

Didge wrote:So its you trying to force the hand of people here.
So I asked kindly out of resoect to stop and you come back with poor reasoning.
You have to respect when someone feels ready to talk about something fully, they will. You do not respect that and allow them to feel ready.
Its that simple

Could care less about discussing the cuasations of war tonight
And I will not be swayed to do so.

Fine. I’ll post my ideas, and you can respond when you are ready. So can nicko. That’s the inherent format of the board—any board—anyway. Leave it and come back when you are ready.

G'nite.

I appreciate nicko asked us not to talk about this, but he brought it up- twice. And it is an interesting subject. Although none of us can understand what it is like to fight at war, as I inferred and Quill has explained further, it is entirely a psychological condition brought about by the situation that allows people to revel in horrific acts. No I cannot understand how any soldier feels when they do, and in thr same situation I may do the same and who knows how long I'd feel that way, but that would be a mental change brought about by awful experience of war.