It's official. The US military fined Maj. Harry 'Psycho' Schmidt 2 half
months pay.. (just over $ 5K) for killin' 4 Canadian soldiers. What's that
.....just over $ 1250.00 per body. This of course doesn't count the
additional 8 injured...one of which lost an eye.

Killer Kowboy Schmidt thinks that's too much and is appealing the ruling.
There are some intelligent men in the military though. Lt.-General Bruce
Carlson, presiding officer at the trial, called Schmidt "arrogant" & "rash"
citing lack of flight discipline and blatant disobeying direction to hold
fire.
His "willful misconduct directly caused the most egregious consequences
imaginable". The general also cited Schmidt's "lack of integrity in not
taking responsibility for his actions" and blaming others.

I realize that different cultures hold the value of human life differently,
but I will certainly be contacting my elected representative anytime there
are rumors of Canadian military joining Bush's adventures.

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:20:16 GMT, "Don White"
wrote:

It's official. The US military fined Maj. Harry 'Psycho' Schmidt 2 half
months pay.. (just over $ 5K) for killin' 4 Canadian soldiers. What's that
....just over $ 1250.00 per body. This of course doesn't count the
additional 8 injured...one of which lost an eye.

Killer Kowboy Schmidt thinks that's too much and is appealing the ruling.
There are some intelligent men in the military though. Lt.-General Bruce
Carlson, presiding officer at the trial, called Schmidt "arrogant" & "rash"
citing lack of flight discipline and blatant disobeying direction to hold
fire.
His "willful misconduct directly caused the most egregious consequences
imaginable". The general also cited Schmidt's "lack of integrity in not
taking responsibility for his actions" and blaming others.

That's the new liberal mindset. Never take responsibility. It's always
the fault of someone else, or some societal problem.


I realize that different cultures hold the value of human life differently,
but I will certainly be contacting my elected representative anytime there
are rumors of Canadian military joining Bush's adventures.

How are the flaws in judgement of one irresponsible soildier, a
reflection on Bush? How could Bush have prevented this soldier's
actions?

Dave

Don White wrote:

It's official. The US military fined Maj. Harry 'Psycho' Schmidt 2 half
months pay.. (just over $ 5K) for killin' 4 Canadian soldiers. What's that
....just over $ 1250.00 per body. This of course doesn't count the
additional 8 injured...one of which lost an eye.

Killer Kowboy Schmidt thinks that's too much and is appealing the ruling.
There are some intelligent men in the military though. Lt.-General Bruce
Carlson, presiding officer at the trial, called Schmidt "arrogant" & "rash"
citing lack of flight discipline and blatant disobeying direction to hold
fire.
His "willful misconduct directly caused the most egregious consequences
imaginable". The general also cited Schmidt's "lack of integrity in not
taking responsibility for his actions" and blaming others.

I realize that different cultures hold the value of human life differently,
but I will certainly be contacting my elected representative anytime there
are rumors of Canadian military joining Bush's adventures.




We don't value life much in the United States, not, of course, unless it
is a fetus. Then we'll kill to protect it.

WaIIy wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 11:58:18 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

We don't value life much in the United States, not, of course, unless it
is a fetus. Then we'll kill to protect it.

No, you would just elect to kill the baby.

No judge, no jury, no conscience.


It's not a baby, it's a fetus. And the decision over whether to stay
pregnant or not is a decision that rightfully belongs to the mother and
her medical specialist.

You righties, but not necessarily you, Wally, are absolute hypocrites on
the false "right-to-life" issue. Most righties don't give a tinker's
dam about the problems millions of children already here facr in terms
of medical care, shelter, food, clothing and enjoying a modest lifestyle.

Sometimes I think righties are anti-choice because prevention of
abortions provides plenty of fodder for military expansionism.

Abortion is a very tough moral question for me. I generally agree with
the "woman's right to choose", but am at odds since I believe life
begins at conception.



Be careful, Wally. Not seeing issues as strictly "black or white" or
"right or wrong is the surest way to be labeled as a reasonable person :^)

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:20:16 GMT, "Don White"
wrote:


How are the flaws in judgement of one irresponsible soildier, a
reflection on Bush? How could Bush have prevented this soldier's
actions?

George W probably couldn't prevent it. I just think anyone disobeying orders
and causing unnecessary death should be punished to fit the crime.
example: Reckless speeding that might take a life. Bet the driver might
lose more than a months pay.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
WaIIy wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 11:58:18 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

We don't value life much in the United States, not, of course, unless it
is a fetus. Then we'll kill to protect it.

No, you would just elect to kill the baby.

No judge, no jury, no conscience.


It's not a baby, it's a fetus. And the decision over whether to stay
pregnant or not is a decision that rightfully belongs to the mother and
her medical specialist.

Depends upon what you believe. You obviously take the convienent view to
your goal of promoting behavior where responsibility is not wanted.

As I said before, if you had a child of yours that was born in the second
tri-mester and is thriving your view would be different.

You righties, but not necessarily you, Wally, are absolute hypocrites on
the false "right-to-life" issue. Most righties don't give a tinker's
dam about the problems millions of children already here facr in terms
of medical care, shelter, food, clothing and enjoying a modest lifestyle.

This gets back to responsibility. Why should I be held monitarily and
socially responsible for your lack of judgement in having wanton sex.

Sometimes I think righties are anti-choice because prevention of
abortions provides plenty of fodder for military expansionism.

You already have the choice to have sex or not have sex. If you have sex and
a pregnancy results you have the responsibility to stand up and take
responsibility and raise the child.

Bert Robbins wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
WaIIy wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 11:58:18 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

We don't value life much in the United States, not, of course, unless it
is a fetus. Then we'll kill to protect it.

No, you would just elect to kill the baby.

No judge, no jury, no conscience.


It's not a baby, it's a fetus. And the decision over whether to stay
pregnant or not is a decision that rightfully belongs to the mother and
her medical specialist.

Depends upon what you believe. You obviously take the convienent view to
your goal of promoting behavior where responsibility is not wanted.

What I believe is the promotion of privacy and the ability of citizens
to make medical decisions in conjunction with their medical professionals.


You righties, but not necessarily you, Wally, are absolute hypocrites on
the false "right-to-life" issue. Most righties don't give a tinker's
dam about the problems millions of children already here facr in terms
of medical care, shelter, food, clothing and enjoying a modest lifestyle.

This gets back to responsibility. Why should I be held monitarily and
socially responsible for your lack of judgement in having wanton sex.


We're talking about the children here, dummy, not their parents.
OF course, as a conservative GOP'er, you really don't give a damn about
the children or the problems they face. After all, they've been
born...and don't need championing, eh?

"Don White" wrote in message
...
It's official. The US military fined Maj. Harry 'Psycho' Schmidt 2 half
months pay.. (just over $ 5K) for killin' 4 Canadian soldiers. What's that
....just over $ 1250.00 per body. This of course doesn't count the
additional 8 injured...one of which lost an eye.

Killer Kowboy Schmidt thinks that's too much and is appealing the ruling.
There are some intelligent men in the military though. Lt.-General Bruce
Carlson, presiding officer at the trial, called Schmidt "arrogant" &
"rash"
citing lack of flight discipline and blatant disobeying direction to hold
fire.
His "willful misconduct directly caused the most egregious consequences
imaginable". The general also cited Schmidt's "lack of integrity in not
taking responsibility for his actions" and blaming others.

I realize that different cultures hold the value of human life
differently,
but I will certainly be contacting my elected representative anytime there
are rumors of Canadian military joining Bush's adventures.

Find something else to whine about!

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
WaIIy wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 11:58:18 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

We don't value life much in the United States, not, of course, unless
it
is a fetus. Then we'll kill to protect it.

No, you would just elect to kill the baby.

No judge, no jury, no conscience.


It's not a baby, it's a fetus. And the decision over whether to stay
pregnant or not is a decision that rightfully belongs to the mother and
her medical specialist.

Depends upon what you believe. You obviously take the convienent view to
your goal of promoting behavior where responsibility is not wanted.

What I believe is the promotion of privacy and the ability of citizens
to make medical decisions in conjunction with their medical professionals.

Nobody is saying that you can't do just that. But, when a man and a woman
have sex and the woman gets pregnant then the decision has to be made by the
two of them.

Why if the woman wants to abort and the man wants to keep the baby the
womans desire is important. If the man wants to abort and the woman wants to
keep the baby the man is made to pay for raising the child. If decisions are
important then all parties involved need to be part of the decision making
process.

You righties, but not necessarily you, Wally, are absolute hypocrites
on
the false "right-to-life" issue. Most righties don't give a tinker's
dam about the problems millions of children already here facr in terms
of medical care, shelter, food, clothing and enjoying a modest
lifestyle.

This gets back to responsibility. Why should I be held monitarily and
socially responsible for your lack of judgement in having wanton sex.


We're talking about the children here, dummy, not their parents.
OF course, as a conservative GOP'er, you really don't give a damn about
the children or the problems they face. After all, they've been
born...and don't need championing, eh?

I am worried about the child that is sucked out and thrown away due to the
parents selfishness. The selfless act is raising the child once it is
concieved.