Mentally ill troops forced into combat

Sorry, don't see it. His many posts make it clear that he is not suited for military service. I was just pointing out the obvious as vehicle to bring the thread back around to the point: not everyone is suited for military duty.

And, as stated, that's fine. Others will protect his freedom to not join and yet disparage the system. We and others got his back.
 
Sorry, don't see it. His many posts make it clear that he is not suited for military service. I was just pointing out the obvious as vehicle to bring the thread back around to the point: not everyone is suited for military duty.

And, as stated, that's fine. Others will protect his freedom to not join and yet disparage the system. We and others got his back.

More ad hominem!
 
I'm not disparaging him in any manner what so ever. Clearly you think I am. Do you think his not being suited for something he despises is an ad hom?
 
I'm not disparaging him in any manner what so ever. Clearly you think I am. Do you think his not being suited for something he despises is an ad hom?

Either you are trying to discredit him as a debate tactic, which is deplorable, or you are issuing a non-sequitor insult, which is deplorable. Making speculative disparaging remarks about other posters when they are trying to engage in a legitimate debate with you is deplorable and shows the world what you cannot comport yourself in a reasonable manner.
 
I'm rendering an opinion. I think the opinion is more than supported by his own posts. He despises the military and all it stands for...clearly. Clearly, he is not suited for it. That's okay, I and others are willing to fight for him when called.

He can consider us his slaves if he wishes. I don't care.
 
It's an ad hominem. You're dismissing the argument entirely because you don't think the person is military material. It's a classic logical fallacy. It contributes nothing to the conversation.
1 - I didn't make the post

2 - I frankly find it curious that you IMO exaggerate on the "ad hominem" aspect of that post but ignore the one that prompted it.

whatever -
 
Chill bigred. ID's intent is likely to rag on me, not you.

But...like you, I don't mind. It makes the point I was making better than I could have do so myself.
 
I couldn't care less about his intent, frankly (although you're right about the replies speaking for themselves).

Can we get back to the topic now, or is this a sign no one has anything else to say about it?
 
Sure, the point is, IMO, that this is much ado about nothing.

Look, like you, I've been there, done that. If this guy was unstable it would have shown up before getting out of bootcamp.

Bootcamp is ALL about making you break and then building you up again. A truly autistic person going through bootcamp? I donno. Doesn't sound realistic to me. Bootcamp is all about stress...no, STRESS...no, S.T.R.E.S.S.

This is a tempest in a teapot <-- and I've been wanting to use that phrase all day.
 
I couldn't care less about his intent, frankly (although you're right about the replies speaking for themselves).

Can we get back to the topic now, or is this a sign no one has anything else to say about it?

It's abotu Rob Lister callously dismissing another poster's response with an irrelevant personal attack. "You disagree? Then you must not be miltiary material" is a pathetic arguement.
 
You have yet to explain why what I said was a personal attack.

Perhaps you could let tbk tell you if he is cut out to be in the military before you rag on me for pointing out the obvious.
 
You have yet to explain why what I said was a personal attack.

Perhaps you could let tbk tell you if he is cut out to be in the military before you rag on me for pointing out the obvious.

I'm going to use small words, so you understand.

When you dismiss another person during a debate by making speculative comments about them personnaly, that is an "ad hominem" logical fallacy. Look it up.
 
To add soothing oil to the fire, let me just say that this hargy-bargy about the military and having what it takes all sounds like the conversation of men who are trying to compensate for something Freudian.
 
I'm going to use small words, so you understand.

When you dismiss another person during a debate by making speculative comments about them personnaly, that is an "ad hominem" logical fallacy. Look it up.

I don't recall dismissing any of his arguments; his own bias and overt hatred does that for him. I was just pointing out the obvious.
 
Thai box, you pay your dime and you take your chances. Odds are you wouldn't be suited for military life. Don't join. Others will, have, and do fight for you. Sleep well.

This is true, to an extent. I don't think many people understand that enlisting in the military is giving up your rights as a citizen for an indefinite period of time.
 
This is true, to an extent. I don't think many people understand that enlisting in the military is giving up your rights as a citizen for an indefinite period of time.

I think if they don't understand that, they have no idea what a right is in the first place. Nevertheless, it is what it is and it's always been that way. If you don't know ahead of time what you're in for, it certainly isn't from a lack of publicly available information. Failure to do due diligence is not something I can feel too sorry about.
 
I think if they don't understand that, they have no idea what a right is in the first place. Nevertheless, it is what it is and it's always been that way. If you don't know ahead of time what you're in for, it certainly isn't from a lack of publicly available information. Failure to do due diligence is not something I can feel too sorry about.

The same can be said to victims of psychics, mediums and other con-artists. I'm simply voicing the fact that enlisting in the military is volunteering for slavery for an indefinite period of time.
 

Back
Top Bottom