Puppy-throwing Marine is removed from Corps

[RealRockingham]

Quote by: Sonart . 1)The hell they're not. Honor among beasts. 2)Because dogs were specifically domesticated and bred to be symbiotic companions and helpmates.to humans. This was a sadistic and brutal betrayal of that relationship. You said it yourself... 3)...you called it sadistic. It's inflicting terror and pain for the pleasure of it. That's exactly what our military is supposed to be avoiding. 4)What matters is why and how you kill them. 5)Obviously. 6)You're one. Sort of. 7)The word that comes to my mind isn't apathetic. It's sociopathic. .

1) Your point being? Self-aware on some dim level, perhaps. But why does it matter, really? Its only a chemical reaction resulting in the illusion of self. Granted its the same with us as human beings, which is why I see human beings in the same way. Including myself. My feelings and sense of self are merely an illusion, and thus irrelevant, as our every other sentinet things.

2) Now your being sappy and empathetic and applying inherent meaning where it isn't.

3) The miltaries purpose is to serve the state, by terror and pain if neccesary. They don't SAY that, granted, for the Public Relations.

The military doesn't care about the puppy-throwing, mind, only about the fact it was publicized. Which supports my claim in regards to the PR.

4) Why? I get the feeling some of you have never critically questioned the beliefs your stating, but just accept it on blind faith. Thats called religion, people.

5) Yes. And I am the one who is right, or at least I presume so.

6) Seeing as I see little difference between "living" and "dead" matter, no, not really. The chemical reaction that is the human mind PERCIEVES me as a living being.

7) Well, your assuming I live by these standards in day to day life aren't you? Rather then just accepting them as logically true, but living according to social norms regardless.

Quote by: another day 1)What's so wrong with living beings that they should be destroyed? 2)Living creatures exist because our nature has created them, has it not?. 3)Do you not understand how in that sense, all living things matter? To say that it's "all a bunch of atoms" is like saying a gorgeous painting is "nothing but a bunch of brushstrokes"... True, but they form a large and beautiful picture. 4) Atoms make up our entire world, all the things in it, the wind, the tides, the vast array of creatures and landscapes, the space the stars, the oceans, and us ourselves with all our experiences and dreams? What about the reason for the atoms to exist in the first place? And why they form the things they do? Why do you have such a "nothing matters" attitude, just because we have been able to get close enough to see that it's all "made of little dots"? (gasp!) 5) You don't need religion to understand or appreciate it. 6)You only need a wonderous and curious perspective on the entire nature of our being, and you most certainly need only the slightest amount of positivity to see that no matter what, life matters and must be cherished, and looked upon in awe. 7) Either that or off yourself right now, because for a man who does not appreciate life, there are only two options; seek to destroy as much of it as he can, or destroy himself.

1) Nothing, but theirs nothing so right with them that they shouldn't. Its irrelevant either way.

2) So do rocks. Difference being, rocks haven't developed a sense of self, which went on to delude itself that their was anything like inherent meaning.

3) Thats only an opinion though. What makes it beautiful? It registers in the mind as such, but how does that matter, really? How does opinion matter? Tell me that, right now.

4) Why does it matter though? Honestly, you blind yourself with faith because your scared of reality.

5) No, just faith. Their is a big difference between the two, but their both aribtrary concepts but people indulge in to make themselves feel better.

6) That is almost exactly the same argument that Christian fundamentalists use to support the existence of their God.

7) No actually, as the genetic traits I have acquired do not predispose me to violence or depression, for what it matters. And why should I off myself? Its irrelevant whether I do or not.

And, as previously mentioned, I don't actually live by these principle, presumably because of ingrained survival instincts.

[another day]

Yeah, I know, it's called nihilism. It's nothing new, and there's nothing intellectually impressive about the philosophy either. I'm just trying to get you to realize how worthless it is. (Let me guess, everything is worthless! blah blah blah)

[RealRockingham]

Quote by: another day Yeah, I know, it's called nihilism. It's nothing new, and there's nothing intellectually impressive about the philosophy either. I'm just trying to get you to realize how worthless it is. (Let me guess, everything is worthless! blah blah blah)

How and why is it worthless?

And no, that wouldn't be my argument. It would be "worthless" is SUBJECTIVE.

Objectively everything is not worthless. Nothing is worth anything either. In other words the very concept of something being worth a specified amount, whether nothing or something, is flawed.

[Matt W]

Let's not get off-topic, please.

DO NOT RESPOND IN THIS THREAD TO THE PRECEDING MESSAGE. Please contact a member of the staff privately if you have any questions.

[another day]

Quote by: RealRockingham How and why is it worthless? And no, that wouldn't be my argument. It would be "worthless" is SUBJECTIVE. Objectively everything is not worthless. Nothing is worth anything either. In other words the very concept of something being worth a specified amount, whether nothing or something, is flawed.

Yeah look, these kinds of thought processes are nothing foreign to me. I understand it and once thought somewhat the same way in high school.. I just think it's a flawed way of seeing things that stems from a neurotic detachment from nature.

[Thanatos]

Quote by: RealRockingham How and why is it worthless? And no, that wouldn't be my argument. It would be "worthless" is SUBJECTIVE. Objectively everything is not worthless. Nothing is worth anything either. In other words the very concept of something being worth a specified amount, whether nothing or something, is flawed.

One dead puppy is worth a specific amount of propaganda value.

As long as you have a goal, any goal, things will be worth something to you. If one of your sub-goals was, say, winning a propaganda war then a dead puppy has a value to you. Even a suicidal man or woman has cause to values things; usually bullets or strong rope. Being alive necessitates the designation of worths and to move through life we have no choice but to compare those worths. You might not value puppies specifically if you feel no empathy for them and don't care about the context they are in, but even the most hardened nihilist has no choice but to value SOMETHING. Air for example. Or internet connectivity.

[Muckraker]

From a logical standpoint, I don't see what the problem is.

If the man was a doctor would he have his medical license revoked? If he was a lawyer would he be disbarred?

A lot of this issue is tied up in the concepts of "puppy" and "torture." Would it be better for an unwanted puppy to be holed up in a pound for a month or so and then "euthanized?" Death by impact is not what I would classify as torture, nor is it particularly sadistic. It is a few seconds of terror followed by pretty instantaneous death.

If that is sadistic torture then what is buying a puppy at a store, miscaring for the animal, and mistreating the animal for years classified as?

Also, a lot of human entertainment comes at the expense of animals. How are the cattle supplying the goods for the hotdog eating contest playing in to this concept of the humane human? What's up with catch and release fishing?

Would it be more acceptable to catch a fish and let it suffocate for a few minutes before throwing it off a cliff or would that be less acceptable than a puppy? At least the puppy could breath on the way down.

Can't it be considered a bit sadistic that certain humans spend small fortunes on gem-encrusted tooth jewelry while other humans starve to death simply because they were born into bad situations?

Why is it that Youtube videos of a puppy dying spark so much outrage but entire villages of our own species STARVING to DEATH is just a fact of life?

I was pissed off the other day because, when I went to order my wife's burrito at QDoba, they didn't have any mild salsa because of the salmonella scare. I was pissed about god damned SALSA - an f'ing food condiment to slather on other food - when there are people just like me DYING right NOW due to not having ANYTHING EDIBLE at all.

Our own species starving to death is merely an unfortunate fact of life and yet people trained to kill other people finding entertainment in tossing an animal off a cliff is tragic and sadistic torture. It's like being outraged over salsa. I think we need to get our priorities straight.

[Gods_Mercenary]

I'd agree to that to a point, if he had shot some bird there wouldn't be much of a controversy. It's reasonable to kick him out for bad publicity, but he could easily argue that lots of marines have done far worse, they just didn't end up on you tube, if charges for puppy trowing were taken up.

[Rainbow]

The statement said Motari received the punishment for his role in the "episode which generated international attention." The incident appeared on the Internet web site YouTube in March, sparking outrage from animal rights groups around the world. In the video, Motari is seen throwing the dog off a cliff as it yelps.

A sadistic ass***.

[ShadowFox]

For those of you who haven't seen the video, here's a link.

marine throws puppy off cliff

[Gods_Mercenary]

Kind of describes itself, no?

[ShadowFox]

Gives an idea on just how sick these guys were, laughing and smiling as they needlessly and horribly kill a creature that did them no harm.

[RealRockingham]

Firstly, apologies to Matt if this is going off-topic.

Quote by: another day Yeah look, these kinds of thought processes are nothing foreign to me. I understand it and once thought somewhat the same way in high school.. I just think it's a flawed way of seeing things that stems from a neurotic detachment from nature.

Huh? No... it comes from the realization of just how small and unimportant human perceptions are compared to nature. And just how foolish it is to believe that our opinion has any relevance to nature or the world. I accept myself as a part of nature, just a bunch of atoms....

What I am detached from his the concept of human importance, and thus their being any objective value to our opinions.

Quote by: Thanatos One dead puppy is worth a specific amount of propaganda value. As long as you have a goal, any goal, things will be worth something to you. If one of your sub-goals was, say, winning a propaganda war then a dead puppy has a value to you. Even a suicidal man or woman has cause to values things; usually bullets or strong rope. Being alive necessitates the designation of worths and to move through life we have no choice but to compare those worths. You might not value puppies specifically if you feel no empathy for them and don't care about the context they are in, but even the most hardened nihilist has no choice but to value SOMETHING. Air for example. Or internet connectivity.

As I have said, I don't live my life according to these principles. Your right, its not logically possible not PLACE value on something.

But just because I place value on it(which is subjective) doesn't mean it actually has (objective)value.

[Matt W]

Quote by: Rules No disrupting threads Comply with moderating team requests and intentions

Last time. Stay on-topic, or this thread gets closed.

DO NOT RESPOND IN THIS THREAD TO THE PRECEDING MESSAGE. Please contact a member of the staff privately if you have any questions.

[Lickyfingerbum]

Quote by: another day What's so wrong with living beings that they should be destroyed? Living creatures exist because our nature has created them, has it not?. Do you not understand how in that sense, all living things matter? To say that it's "all a bunch of atoms" is like saying a gorgeous painting is "nothing but a bunch of brushstrokes"... True, but they form a large and beautiful picture. Your argument is like when people say "how can these thoughts and feelings come out of some grey blobs of matter, referring to the brain. But why label it "grey blobs of matter", when in reality it is a complex and incredibly complicated organ that has made possible our current experiences? Why do you say it's just a bunch of atoms, as if they mean nothing, when atoms make up our entire world, all the things in it, the wind, the tides, the vast array of creatures and landscapes, the space the stars, the oceans, and us ourselves with all our experiences and dreams? What about the reason for the atoms to exist in the first place? And why they form the things they do? Why do you have such a "nothing matters" attitude, just because we have been able to get close enough to see that it's all "made of little dots"? (gasp!) This is what always gets me about the hardcore science atheists today. They are like little men looking through magnifying glasses so large and clear to the point where they're looking at a pixel in a pattern, and they've neglected to view life through the larger sense from time to time. Science explains nothing but the mechanics of life and how it works. Beyond that there is the bigger question, why? You don't need religion to understand or appreciate it. You only need a wonderous and curious perspective on the entire nature of our being, and you most certainly need only the slightest amount of positivity to see that no matter what, life matters and must be cherished, and looked upon in awe. Either that or off yourself right now, because for a man who does not appreciate life, there are only two options; seek to destroy as much of it as he can, or destroy himself.

well said mate

[Lickyfingerbum]

why dont we just keep this simple.......Guy throws a puppy of a cliff....he gets fired.....he deserves it.sounds like karma to me.

Just because he was unlucky enough to get caught on video does not change anything. Treat a jerk like a jerk!!

And realrockingham if i threw you off a cliff would you have a problem with that since you are just a pile of atoms with no "objective value"????

[Muckraker]

The guy was trained by our government to kill other people - often very innocent and helpless people - on command and without question. Is it really that unusual that this may manifest in some other ways as well?

Ever hear of debriefing? It is often the government making an attempt to undo some of the psychological damage their creations have received.

Again I will state that before we humans even consider getting "outraged" or forming charitable groups aimed at things as...subjective...as mistreatment of animals we need to address and FIX the horrible injustices that are occuring to our own species every single day.

Until the problem of world hunger is 100% SOLVED, every single fricking organization - PETA, ASPCA, AIDS research, Cancer research, Catholic Church, every single one of them - should immediately convert to the Umbrella End World Hunger Organization. Once the problem of world hunger is 100% SOLVED, they can then all convert to the next most egregious problem on the list and solve that.

Organizations fighting to have soldiers - trained killers - lose their jobs because they killed an animal need to seriously re-examine their priorities.

If I could press a button that would throw every single dog on this planet - my two included - off a cliff to save a single person from starving to death I would. I would wipe out the human concept of "dog" to save a human from one of the most disgusting and reprehensible acts of torture possible - starvation.

[Marconius]

Killing animals for fun is one of the warning signs of a developing sociopath. It can develop into the desire to kill humans for fun and shows a lack of empathy so whether or not you care about animals this is not someone that should be given a weapon and told to use their own judgement on when to use it.

I found it disturbing that he seems to have been let go because it was a PR nightmare instead of because he was mentally ill.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: RealRockingham The military doesn't care about the puppy-throwing, mind, only about the fact it was publicized. Which supports my claim in regards to the PR.

It may suggest that U.S. military services accept any activity as long as it is not being released to public. That is not quite correct.

U.S. military services collect and/or gather All the data (available) on Any individual. They have free access to Any data, (including conditional cases), if necessary and/or required.

In this thread's main subject, a soldier appears to be a sadistic f***er.
Public opinion helped to expedite the whole case. The point is not whether publicity is a factor, but decisions made by officer(s) in charge.
Since bureaucracy lashes any office, U.S. military services are not the exception.

[Jack]

The guy was trained by our government to kill other people - often very innocent and helpless people - on command and without question. Is it really that unusual that this may manifest in some other ways as well?

In defense of those of us who have served in the military, I feel a need to object to this bit of hyperbole.

Yer, soldiers are trained to kill. They are also taught how to injure without killing and how to disengage from a situation without injury to anyone. They're also taught first aid skills so they can tend to those who are injured, even if they're the enemy.

Soldiers are taught how to recognize the enemy and to only direct fire at them, but when insurgents disguise themselves as citizens and use children and other innocent civilians as defensive shields, they increase the risk that our soldiers will kill innocents. Is that the soldiers fault or are the insurgents to blame? Soldiers in the field are never taught or lead to think that killing civilians is approved. It happens all too frequently in this current conflict, but in the vast majority of cases where it does I have no doubt that it was both accidental and deeply regretted by the soldiers responsible. Collateral damage is to be avoided whenever possible, and minimized when it isn't. Anyone who enjoys killing others is an anomaly, whether civilian or military. They are malformed humans. They contribute nothing to the advancement of our species.

Now this guy sounds like one of those guys. And those guys are a threat to their own species. It's not uncommon among animals for a small percentage to "loose it", to turn on their pack mates without apparent regard. It's perhaps the ultimate betrayal of trust in a group, the greatest threat another can face, the threat of death.

It's the pleasure taken in the killing of anything that offends me. It also offends me that the military appears more upset over the publicity than the actual offense.