Blissa-ninnies, the cowering fear of any violence, and wussification of America

[Crazed Rabbit]

Let me first state some things:
Violence is without morality, and the morality of using violence depends on the situation. Simply, killing terrorists in Afghanistan = good, whilst criminals attacking a person = bad.

There's a large portion of people in this country who can't seem to understand that, and view all violence as inherently evil. It seems that this ignorance has led to a a situation in Colorado where some local idjits are protesting a planned statue of a soldier who died in Afghanistan - because the soldier is holding a gun and the statue is going to be near a school.

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_5595985


A group of Littleton parents is opposing the design and location of a memorial to a fallen local Navy SEAL, Danny Dietz, who died in combat in Afghanistan two years ago.

They say the statue, depicting Dietz clutching an automatic rifle, glorifies violence. In Berry Park, it would be within blocks of three schools and two playgrounds.

"I don't think young children should be exposed to that in that way - unsupervised by their parents or any adults," said Emily Cassidy, one of the mothers.

The parents have circulated fliers opposing the design and location of the statue at the southeast corner of South Lowell Boulevard and West Berry Avenue, in a triangle formed by Goddard Middle School, Community School for the Gifted and Centennial Elementary School.

...

"It broke our hearts," said Dan Dietz, who still lives in the area. "My son was fighting for her freedom to do exactly what she is doing. She put my son in the same category as Columbine. How does she have the audacity to do that?"

On June 28, 2005, Dietz and three other Navy SEALs were ambushed by al-Qaeda guerrillas. Dietz, 25, severely wounded, fought off attackers for more than 45 minutes, allowing one of his team members to escape.

Dietz received the Navy Cross, the Navy's second-highest medal.

"The people who have never served in the armed forces are always the ones who speak the loudest against what the armed forces have done," said Allan Stone of the Pat Hannon VFW Post No. 4666 in Littleton, which helped raise nearly $42,000 for the sculpture.

Cassidy said the opposition is in no way meant to offend the family or denigrate Dietz's service.

"We have absolutely no issue with the family, and we have only good feelings for the soldier and what he did for this country," Cassidy said.

Kelli Narde, spokeswoman for the city of Littleton, said complaints about the statue are arriving "at the eleventh hour," too late to change the statue, which has already been cast.

"We're proceeding with the plan," she said.

"This opposition has come as a complete surprise; it's been such a public process."

Narde said Cuesta is the only person to formally approach the council about relocating the statue. It will be unveiled in Berry Park on July 4, the second anniversary of the recovery of Dietz's body on a mountainside in Afghanistan.

Cassidy and Cuesta said the memorial was no secret, but the parents opposing it had no idea the rifle would be a focal point.

And while war memorials nationwide include rifles, swords, cannons and battleships, "trends are changing," said Cuesta, who has advocated on behalf of stronger gun laws.

Why am I not surprised the fools are also anti-gun?

Another article, with some good common sense quotes:


Reached at home Thursday in Virginia Beach, Va., Patsy Dietz, Dietz's widow, said she sympathizes with the message that guns and schools shouldn't mix, especially in the community where the Columbine shootings took place.

But to use her husband to forge such a political statement about guns is irresponsible, she said.

"It's a parent's job, including these parents who are protesting, to teach their children the difference between two thugs who murder their classmates and a soldier who died fighting for their freedom," she said. "Danny represents every soldier and sailor who has fallen, and for them to take this stand, well, that's offensive to me."

Patsy Dietz found out about the opposition via an e-mail forwarded by Janice Caulfield, the parent-teacher association president at Centennial Academy of Fine Arts Education.

Caulfield had received the e-mail, which solicited opposition the statue.

"They were barking up the wrong tree," said Caulfield, the daughter of a 24-year Navy man and the cousin of a Navy SEAL who served with Danny Dietz.

Caulfield said she could not speak for the PTA, but in her opinion admiring a local war hero is good for children.

"I'll be proud to take my children there, and I'll be glad to show them a hero who died fighting for them and how we live our lives in freedom," she said.

...

The opposition to a war memorial is unprecedented in Jim Carrier's experience He is a national board member for both the Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund and the Navy SEAL Warrior Fund, foundations that help the families of those who die in service to the country.

"They are missing the point," Carrier said. "It takes guns to defend our freedoms against terrorists when they are trying to kill you and your children."

But those who side with Cassidy see a different depiction.

"A statue of a soldier holding a child would send a better message," said Calvin Freehling, a Vietnam veteran from Indianola,
Cañon City sculptor Robert Henderson based his clay form of Navy SEAL Danny Dietz on the last photo taken of him. (Courtesy Tracy Harmon)
Neb., who e-mailed The Denver Post. "An automatic weapon doesn't signify protection. It signifies violence. I'm 64 years old now, and I'm tired of violence."

Ann Levy of Denver, who calls herself a "peacenik," would like to see Dietz's sacrifice honored in a different way.

"They should be putting up a peace dove instead," she said. "The question is do we stand for peace or do we stand for war?"


A peace dove? Peace doves don't sacrifice their lives for your freedoms.

At least some sane people live in Colorado.

These people represent a shallow kind of kindergarten thought - unable to distinguish between good and bad outcomes, labeling the means as evil, passing their ignorance on to their children, along with their illogical fear of inanimate objects. Unfortunately, this ignorance is increasing, fostered by leftists.

Crazed Rabbit

[Blodrast]

While by your criteria I'm probably very much "anti-gun", I tend to agree that this is bordering on ridiculous. People (including kids) should make the distinction between a soldier fallen for his country, and, well, whatever else.

In their defense, though, I assume that an increased sensitivity to guns is perfectly understandable, given their proximity to Columbine.

However, Rabbit, I fail to see how this has anything to do with the wussification of the US, or evil weakling traitorous leftists or all that stuff.
It's just (probably silly) parents having exaggerated reactions, is all. They are also out of touch with reality - getting worked up over a statue with a gun, when violence is glorified and shown everywhere in the media, papers, TV, movies, music... :shrug: Ridiculous.
That doesn't make it (and them) less annoying, of course. :yes:

[HoreTore]

Why not make a statue of an afghan killed by a US soldier?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Because of, in part, the efforts of U.S. soldiers, the Afghanis will be free to do so if they wish.

[KukriKhan]

"A statue of a soldier holding a child would send a better message," said Calvin Freehling, a Vietnam veteran from Indianola

Heh. Bassinets, instead of bayonets. :laugh4:


...Dan Dietz, who still lives in the area. "My son was fighting for her freedom to do exactly what she is doing...

Kinda says it all, IMO. Let 'em be silly and wussified. It really is what Dietz was fighting for.

Someday, when Littleton burns from a terrorist attack, maybe they'll think differently. If I were his Dad, I'd rescind permission to erect the statue, saying the town doesn't deserve it. I'd pay for the statue, and put it in my front yard.

In fact, I'm gonna write to the guy and suggest that. Thanks for the story, Crazed Rabbit.

[Ice]

Why not make a statue of an afghan killed by a US soldier?

Why do you think?

[Banquo's Ghost]

Whilst I agree with you, CR, that the protestors are misguided and over-reacting, I think I should take a small issue with your apparent characterisation of pacifists as cowards or fools. To abhor violence is not to have a "cowering fear".

To my mind, violence is always evil. Sometimes however, it is a necessary evil. The use of violence should be the absolute last resort - the resort to evil to prevent a greater evil, treated with the proper remorse and reflection once the deed is done. It should never be just another tool.

Some of the bravest men and women of history have chosen to oppose evil through non-violence, because they would not take that final moral step that I outlined above - that sometimes evil must be used to combat evil. I have been unable to go that last step myself, but I admire those who have, just as I admire those who have sacrificed peace of mind and dear friends to fight.

[doc_bean]

Maybe they are Quakers ?

[PanzerJaeger]

EDIT: Inappropriate comment. BG

[Fragony]

awwwwwwwwwwww nevermind that

[Banquo's Ghost]

Why not get back to discussing the topic before the warning button gets pushed?

:beadyeyes2:

[Fragony]

The warning button huh, seems like we are right on track ~;)

[KukriKhan]

Photo of the clay (pre-cast) version of the statue:

https://jimcee.homestead.com/Danny_Dietz_op_411x600.jpg

being sculpted by Robert Henderson (http://www.warbirdcentral.com/the_sculptor.htm).

[Slyspy]

To be honest I would disagree with CR's very first paragraph.

Let them have their statue, although from a design point of view it does seem that the weaponry is the focus of the piece rather than the man. But there is no need to get all moral about a bad design.

[Mikeus Caesar]

Photo of the clay (pre-cast) version of the statue:

[insert photo here]

being sculpted by Robert Henderson (http://www.warbirdcentral.com/the_sculptor.htm).


Oh noes, a rememberance statue of a soldier who probably died heroically fighting in some place he probably couldn't care less about! And he's holding a gun! Since i'm under 16, i'm instantly inspired to go crazy and kill my friends, rather than be inspired to think of just how terrible war is and how it affects people's lives.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Whilst I agree with you, CR, that the protestors are misguided and over-reacting, I think I should take a small issue with your apparent characterisation of pacifists as cowards or fools. To abhor violence is not to have a "cowering fear".

Ah, but I do not really think of these people as pacifists - I think they do not think of themselves as violent either.

They are people who live in a bubble where crime, war, and other things that might break up their blissful ignorance do not exist, or at least do not exist near them in a way that effects them. They view guns and other tools as evil, because they don't distinguish between the gun and he who uses it. Guns cause violence directly, to them. Their opposition to violence is opposition to violence near them. As such, they don't want to see guns or think about them, and from this springs their inane idea that children will be harmed or become violent if they see a gun.

Crazed Rabbit

[Tribesman]

They are people who live in a bubble where crime, war, and other things that might break up their blissful ignorance do not exist, or at least do not exist near them in a way that effects them.
I am in total agreement with the Rabbit here , we really must burst their bubble and expel their ignorance .
I suggest the statue be modified , perhaps put a big hole and the shattered remains of a jaw in the head section , sever one of the legs but leave it hanging by a sinew for ease of sculpting , then possibly have one hand desperately trying to cram the intestines back into the open abdominal cavity while the other hand fires the gun valiantly for freedom and manages to wave a flag at the same time .
That'll teach 'em :yes:

Then again I see nothing wrong with the statue as it is .
Though come to think of it I was in two pubs today with war memorial statues outside , the contention over such statues is slightly different over here , as it is with other war memorials in town or throughout Ireland for that matter .
Then again if you think of the statues and memorial across the water in London there have always been problems , be they the herioc warrior charging to valiant deeds , the shattered bodies on the floor or the dishevelled soldier with arms reversed and head bowed .
Struggles of life and death can be a bit of a bugger to convey in a piece of stone if you want to please everyone don't ya think :shrug:

[HoreTore]

Why do you think?

Well, it sounds like a good idea to me. War is about killing people, why shouldn't a statue representing the war show an enemy being killed?

[Banquo's Ghost]

Well, it sounds like a good idea to me. War is about killing people, why shouldn't a statue representing the war show an enemy being killed?

Because, while you are right to characterise war as killing people, the prosecution of war can produce great acts of heroism which inform our noblest aspirations.

The brutality of war is nothing to revere, neither the death of any individual. But the acts of self-sacrifice, comradeship or compassion that occur amidst the dreary evil may be celebrated by memorial.

As long as by doing so, we don't glorify the killing but reflect upon the sacrifice.

[doc_bean]

I think Tribesman has got a point here, we always build statues for the people who have died (and rightly so) but what about the people who get maimed in battle and survive only to receive limited healtthcare from the govenrment and no chance at a decent job in civilian life (or military life for that matter) don't they deserve a statue ? perhaps their sacrifice was even greater.

But perhaps that would pierce some people's bubble about the 'glory' of war...

[Tribesman]

Would something like this be OK....
http://www.artandarchitecture.org.uk/images/conway/d38ba07a.html?

[KukriKhan]

Oy. That'd send 'em into a tizzy. :thumbsup:

[Adrian II]

Photo of the clay (pre-cast) version of the statue:

https://jimcee.homestead.com/Danny_Dietz_op_411x600.jpg

being sculpted by Robert Henderson (http://www.warbirdcentral.com/the_sculptor.htm).Good heavens, no wonder they don't want that .. thing anywhere near a school, or any other place in town for that matter. It is so ugly, it almost has curiosity value.

[KukriKhan]

Point taken. If real, that rifle could launch a 2- or 3-inch bullet; not to mention the M203 underneath pushing out a fist-sized round.

[doc_bean]

Part of what i meant by bursting people's bubble about the 'glory' of war. This is more a statue of GI Joe than of a real soldier. I doubt the average soldier can recognize himself in that statue :shrug:

[KukriKhan]

For reference, the statue was to be based on this photo of GM2 Dietz:

https://jimcee.homestead.com/dietz002.jpg

note: according to usually reliable sources.

[doc_bean]

That's nearly character assassination...

[HoreTore]

Because, while you are right to characterise war as killing people, the prosecution of war can produce great acts of heroism which inform our noblest aspirations.

The brutality of war is nothing to revere, neither the death of any individual. But the acts of self-sacrifice, comradeship or compassion that occur amidst the dreary evil may be celebrated by memorial.

As long as by doing so, we don't glorify the killing but reflect upon the sacrifice.

What you choose to do, is to focus so much on other aspects, that the brutal and senseless killings of it is forgotten, and that makes some people think that "hey, war is fun!". The heroism part of war is an extremely small part of it, war is and has always been about senseless murders.

Perhaps if we focused more on the murders of war instead of heroism, people would view war as a bad thing today...

[KukriKhan]

So you suggest a monument of heaped corpses to commemorate war-dead, to counter the glorification of war that you perceive?

Where, in your town, would you place such a statue?

[Tribesman]

Where, in your town, would you place such a statue?

Well if you really wantedto make public statement and make the artwork really impact ....what better place could there be then apart from outside a recriting office:yes:
Though of course for balance perhaps there should be a stand (sorry Gregosi) next to the monument , perhaps with "these feet are made for walking(TM)next to it , or "the road to comfort is paved with liners"
For those who got lost on those last two statements , perhaps a PM to Prole will put you on the right.....errrr....better call that ummmmm...... direction eh

[HoreTore]

So you suggest a monument of heaped corpses to commemorate war-dead, to counter the glorification of war that you perceive?

Where, in your town, would you place such a statue?

I can't really see why it should be more problematic than the current statues we have...

Put them at the same places.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Hows about, instead of directing most people reading your post to PM an uninvolved moderator, you simply explain it yourself, or link to the relevant post?


What you choose to do, is to focus so much on other aspects, that the brutal and senseless killings of it is forgotten, and that makes some people think that "hey, war is fun!". The heroism part of war is an extremely small part of it, war is and has always been about senseless murders.

Perhaps if we focused more on the murders of war instead of heroism, people would view war as a bad thing today...

One might think that, since this is a statue of a dead man, the point of war not being fun and games would get across.

I'm interested in how war has always been about 'senseless murders'. Do you have a different definition of murder from everybody else?


what better place could there be then apart from outside a recriting office

Perhaps a plaque or monument to the constitution and freedoms we hold because of soldiers would be better. But then, that wouldn't be insulting to the military, would it?

Crazed Rabbit

[Tribesman]

But then, that wouldn't be insulting to the military, would it?
Did you find this insulting to the military?.....

http://www.artandarchitecture.org.uk/images/conway/d38ba07a.html
how about this....http://www.artandarchitecture.org.uk/images/conway/4aa50c8a.html
Both were at the time considered contraversial , as were many others .

As it happens there is a new statue being commisioned over here, some Galway fella from down the Claddagh .
A little heroic military enterprise in some place called the Somme .
Since the statue is being based on a photograph frame taken from a film it should be fairly accurate , after all the still is used in just about every book about the western Front and the film itself is in just about every documentary about the battle .
It is not a very happy picture , what with the depiction of futility death and suffering , is it insulting to the military ?
If so why is the picture a feature in the old British regiments museum down at the local Irish battalions barracks ?

[Tribesman]

For anyone interested the still that is being used for the statue is here....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4HWnQ2OpyM&mode=related&search= from 2:00-2:08 .
And for further interest view the UVF Somme memorial on the same page , not a bad rendition of "the green fields of France" .Although some people might take issue with the terrorist trappings on the war memorials depicted .

[Crazed Rabbit]

Did you find this insulting to the military?.....

http://www.artandarchitecture.org.uk/images/conway/d38ba07a.html
how about this....http://www.artandarchitecture.org.uk/images/conway/4aa50c8a.html
Both were at the time considered contraversial , as were many others .


We're not talking about those statues, are we?

To the topic ... I thought this was the photo they were using for the statue:
http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site36/2007/0404/20070404__20070405_A1_CD05DIETZ~p1_200.JPG

CR

[Adrian II]

We're not talking about those statues, are we?Indeed. Those are totally different, thematically and stylistically.

I think you are jumping to conclusions as to the motifs of the protesting parents. They say they object to the 'design' as well as the 'location'. I would object to the design as well, without holding any grudge against the deceased young man. And I would object to its location in a public space.

After seeing the precast, I think this sculpture is utterly tasteless. It is impersonal, larger than life, stonier than stone, and most important of all: it is in no way reflective of the young man's sacrifice. It would be a cheap glorification of soldiery to install this overblown plastic toy soldier in a public place, not a symbol of recognition to an armed citizen of a free nation doing his duty.

I share your disdain for 'wussification' and I think that one guy's suggestion of putting up a sculpted peace dove is profoundly stupid. But this sculpture is horrible. Frankly, even the 'heroic' sculptors of the Soviet era infused their works with more humanity than this guy Henderson.

[Tribesman]

We're not talking about those statues, are we?

Hey its you who raised the issue of statues being insulting to the military .
Perhaps a plaque or monument to the constitution and freedoms we hold because of soldiers would be better. But then, that wouldn't be insulting to the military, would it?

Would you be having one of those tilting at windmills episodes ? or could you explain how a realistic depiction could be viewed as an insult to the military .


Indeed. Those are totally different, thematically and stylistically.

Certainly , since they were done after it was all over and people were thinking "what the hell was that all about" , whereas this is being done while it is still going on and people are thinking "what the hell is this all about" .

[KukriKhan]

We're not talking about those statues, are we?

To the topic ... I thought this was the photo they were using for the statue:
http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site36/2007/0404/20070404__20070405_A1_CD05DIETZ~p1_200.JPG

CR

That DOES look more like the statue. Hmmm, must confront my source (an ex-S.E.A.L.).

[Crazed Rabbit]

I think you are jumping to conclusions as to the motifs of the protesting parents. They say they object to the 'design' as well as the 'location'. I would object to the design as well, without holding any grudge against the deceased young man. And I would object to its location in a public space.

The tastefulness of lack thereof is not what they're protesting - they would protest the best statue in the world if it had a man carrying a gun. It's the gun they object to.

Frankly, I am disappointed with the sculpture also.

Crazed Rabbit

[doc_bean]

The tastefulness of lack thereof is not what they're protesting - they would protest the best statue in the world if it had a man carrying a gun. It's the gun they object to.

Frankly, I am disappointed with the sculpture also.

Crazed Rabbit

I think you're making some possibly wrong consclusions here. Of course some people will object to any statue featuring a gun, you'll find those kind of people everywhere, and they might be quite vocal here, but are they the majority ? Me thinks a lot of people don't like the statue for the reasons AdrianII has mentioned: it is utterly tasteless and nearly an insult to real soldiers. They're probably the 'more silent' majority of the protestors, and have aligned themselves with the extreme anti-gun people, because in the end they just don't want the statue there, who cares why ?

On a little side note: am I the only one who thinks the statues face seems to have a strange resemblance to the sculpture ?

BTW after seeing Lemur's thread about Afghanistan (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=82988) and the Time covers he's posted I'll have to agree that the US has indeed become rather pussified. If even major media companies 'sugercoat' the truth of the wars you're fighting in, it's time to start worrying. But like said before, it often seems like another kind of bubble exist in the US: those who see war as nothing but heroic. Don't kid yourself, they're still people you are killing, still kids you're turning into orphans, still villages you're destroying. And your own people aren't all going to come back, and those that due might have some serious injuries. That's not to say there can't be heroism in war, but going to war for heroism sake is like throwing kids into a river so people can 'heroically' save them, if they do they are indeed heroes, but what about the rest ? Not that war isn't necessary, or even just the best option at times, I just have to wonder what has happened to the US that they seem to consider it the best option so easily, especially considering the abysmal results of the last few decades of wars/police actions/whatevers.
At the start of WWI a lot of young people went to war seeking glory, blissfully unaware of what horrors awaited them. Now I'm just an outside spectator and might be wrong of course, but it seems to me that in today's America a similar kind of blissful ignorance is being cultivated, making sure a new generation of cannon fodder is always available.

</rant>

[HoreTore]

Reading doc_bean's post reminded me of an interview with a US soldier I saw a long time ago. He said he was outraged when Al Jazeera showed footage of dead US soldiers. A week later, he saw dead and mangled Iraqis on tv, and was rather horrified that he wasn't outraged at that as well...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Reading doc_bean's post reminded me of an interview with a US soldier I saw a long time ago. He said he was outraged when Al Jazeera showed footage of dead US soldiers. A week later, he saw dead and mangled Iraqis on tv, and was rather horrified that he wasn't outraged at that as well...

A sad bit of truth in that for all of us probably.

[Ja'chyra]

That DOES look more like the statue. Hmmm, must confront my source (an ex-S.E.A.L.).


Good luck with that. :skull: