WHy I unsubscribed from the DIS newsletter

[Synonymous]

I did have that concern, Miss Jasmine. I thought about it for quite awhile, and decided that since this directly concerned DIS, it was the right thing to do. I certainly wouldn't have posted it on the Cruise or Restaurant board, however.

Mickey, the only answer I have for you is "it depends." If I were Vulcan, my responses might be more uniformly guided by logic. Alas, I am a mere human.




Geez, Star Trek AND Disney, the depths of my geekiness know no bounds.

 

[MAC3]

Originally posted by CarolA
Well here is my theory. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs. The thing that I find most disappointing about our society today is the lack of tolerance for those who don't agree with us on EVERYTHING. Diversity and freedom are the foundations of our country. Your failure to agree or disagree with Pete or anyone else does not make either of you "bad". What is "bad" is intolerance of people who think differently then you do.

I fully support American soliders no matter where they serve and no matter what I may think of the actual engagement. To my mind one of the most shameful periods of American history should be the way the Vietnam Vets were treated when they returned. I don't ever want to see that again!

I think CarolA said it best!

 

[7thdwarf/dopey]

Synonymous..thats a typical response from a lawyer. AND I'D BET YOUR NOT A VETERAN!

 

[Synonymous]

I need to learn to type faster

Sgt, I do not believe I made any disparaging remarks about our armed forces. About their mission, yes, certainly. But, as I said, our soldiers are doing their duty as they must. I offer a hearty "hear hear" to Carol A's sentiments.

Neither did I expect no rebuttal, even to the sentiments I actually expressed. This is, after all, a discussion forum.

Whether any soldiers in Iraq are currently fighting for my freedom of speech is, I suppose, a different topic.

 

[MICKEY88]

I hope you are less critical of your friends and family, if you were to disown each person who said something you didn't like,,you would be a very lonely person

 

[Synonymous]

All I can say, Mickey, is that you are extrapolating my comments far beyond what is reasonable.

 

[Pat_Elliott]

Originally posted by SynonymousMaybe it's also inevitable that such a discussion turns personal, but I was disappointed to see the comment about "true Americans."

I avoid such threads like the plague, but.....

I look at the following sections of your OP:

Glib statements about smiling Iraqi children give everyone a warm, rosy feeling about how the United States has "selflessly" sacrificed for supposedly humanitarian reasons.


you have helped to spread the Bush administration's propoganda

I support them by hoping that we promise them that we will never again throw away their lives on a useless and immoral military adventure.

I don't think you can expect to not receive somewhat personal responses. The above statements, to a person that supports the cause in Iraq, are highly personal, perhaps highly offensive.

Personally, I found no harm in the inclusion of the piece in the newsletter, my feelings on Iraq be damned. I can understand why some would. One cannot support the troops, who are protecting certain principles, among them the right to free speech we hold so important, without supporting folks right to disagree with the Iraq action, or specifically in this case the highlighting of a pro-view in a Disney newsletter. But IMO only, you shouldn't be shocked by the comments you've received. I agree with you 100% when you say "The essence of our democracy is the right to disagree." But I think CarolA nailed it:

What is "bad" is intolerance of people who think differently then you do.

Ths includes people who agreed with the action in Iraq.

Respectfully,

Pat

 

[sgtdisney]

Originally posted by Synonymous
Sgt, I do not believe I made any disparaging remarks about our armed forces. About their mission, yes, certainly.

You said and I quote..

"But the reality is that for every smiling child there are about 5 dead or maimed ones, little faces and limbs torn, bloodied and burned by bombs and bullets made in the good 'ol US of A and lovingly delivered without any thought or care about what innocents might be affected."

and

"I support them by hoping that we promise them that we will never again throw away their lives on a useless and immoral military adventure."

Maybe I am interpretting these things wrong, but both of those comments are both hurtful and false in my opinion. You may not agree with the military movement. That is your opinion. But you are cheapening the jobs that our military are doing by implying that they are killing people (particularly children) without care or concern and also by claiming that ones who gave up their lives were for naught. Those comments, to me, are hurtful, not mention disrepectful to people who serve and their families. But as you have said this is an open discussion forum and you are entitled to express yourself here.

 

[Synonymous]

Those comments, Sgt, were (and are; I stand by them) directed at the people who sent our troops to Iraq and decided how this action would be conducted.

As to the sacrifices of our troops and their families not being made for good reasons, I would think it would be more offensive that such a decision was made, than to hear it pointed out. I know many military families are beginning to express that sentiment themselves. If we cannot criticize the motives behind a military mission for fear of offending those involved, we don't have much of a democracy.

Several people repeatedly accuse me of intolerance of those who disagree with me. If you review my posts, I have not said that any such people are not true Americans. I have not criticized them for expressing their opinions, nor suggested that they not do so. My only criticism was of an editorial choice by the author of a Disney newsletter.

If people disagree with me about the merits of the war, that's fine, I'm willing to have a civil discussion with anyone about it. But I'd like to defend things I've actually said, rather than things people may be assuming about me personally.

 

[sgtdisney]

Originally posted by Synonymous
Those comments, Sgt, were (and are; I stand by them) directed at the people who sent our troops to Iraq and decided how this action would be conducted.

You may have meant to direct them at Bush, or whomever you think is responsible for maiming and killing "5 children" for every happy child, but in the end it comes off as an insult to the people in our armed services as much as a comment on the management of them in my opinion. We can agree to disagree here.

Originally posted by Synonymous
If people disagree with me about the merits of the war, that's fine, I'm willing to have a civil discussion with anyone about it.

I am sure you would find a number of people who would be happy to discuss the merits of the war with you on the Debate board, which is where I think this thread is heading too..

I have not accused you of intolerance, personally. If others have, I suppose that is their opinion and they are equally as entitled to it as you are to yours. Cheers!

 

[Pat_Elliott]

Originally posted by Synonymous
Several people repeatedly accuse me of intolerance of those who disagree with me. If you review my posts, I have not said that any such people are not true Americans. I have not criticized them for expressing their opinions, nor suggested that they not do so. My only criticism was of an editorial choice by the author of a Disney newsletter.

If people disagree with me about the merits of the war, that's fine, I'm willing to have a civil discussion with anyone about it. But I'd like to defend things I've actually said, rather than things people may be assuming about me personally.

Tom,

As a premise, I actually have no desire to discuss the merits of the war with you. And I don't mean that offensively. I applaud you for taking your feelings public. I've always enjoyed a good debate, but my lack of desire for a fight keeps me from doing so, and from the DIS, to the local bar, to my family Thanksgiving table, I've seen no "debate" on this subject yet that doesn't turn into a fight.

That said, I personally have not told you whether or not I disagree with you on the merits of the war. And I won't In my opinion, I am responding to the things you've said, and am assuming nothing about you personally, and most of commentary has been focused on your statements. You did, in fact, say something of a hyperbolic nature by your own admission (the 5 child to 1 ratio); you did come down hard on Pete, which is your right; you made several comments that were harsh towards those who would disagree with you, which is also your right; but you took the comments public. That opens you up to responses. And you seem to be taken back by the responses. Sarcasm towards a perceived cause will spark response, especially one as polarized as this. I continue to have no problem with any portion of your comments, except your apparent belief that your public statements are above refute/.

Carry on. Support any government action as you see fit, but long live the first amendment.

 

[MICKEY88]

Originally posted by Synonymous
All I can say, Mickey, is that you are extrapolating my comments far beyond what is reasonable.

too the contrary, I think it is much more reasonable to point out the fact that you cancelled your subscrition to a very good newsletter, which to me seems equal to the scenarios I mentioned.. over one article that you disagree with,,than it is to cancel a subscription , based on your reason..

 

[jfulcer]

Originally posted by Synonymous
I am still uncomfortable posting these links on a Disney-themed board. If the webmasters think it's inappropriate, I apologize.

Thank you for posting the links. They are very revealing. It's heartbreaking to hear about civilians and more over children hurt in the war. One would have to assume some(most?) of the accounts are going to be close the accurate total.

But then I look at articles like this:

Saddam's Cruelty

Cruel to even his daughters

Accounts from refugees

Saddam attacks in Karbala

Unfortunately, Civilian casualties are going to happen in a War. But assuming the recent children dying stories are accurate, at least 6 of the children were in or next to a compound that contained large amounts of munitions. I certainly wouldn't let my children play around an ammunition dump.

Please understand I'm not trying to make light of the civilian casualties. It's a part of war that is dirty and bad. I just compare those account of deaths to the deaths by Saddam for not following his orders and such and I know that the right thing is being done.

Hopefully the civilian casualties can be lessened once the resitance stops and control is handed back to the Iraqis.

 

[Synonymous]

Pat, I'm not taken aback at all. I have long experience with the reactions any expression of opposition to the war engenders. Some of those reactions are thoughtful and reasonable, some are not. Defending my position entails pointing out those that I believe are not. I have attempted to do even that in a respectful manner.

As to whether my positions are above refute, I will simply say that they are the product of long thought and much reading. I believe strongly in them and willingly defend them. I don't consider that to be a weakness.

I often struggle with the same position you express on the advisibility of engaging in discussions about the war. It may, at this point, be the wisest one. But it is an important topic, probably the most important we face as a nation. So I still give it a try periodically.

 

[Phrebert]

I am proud to say that I support our troops. Also when you first log on this Website it says "Unofficial Guide to WDW." It shouldn't change your "Official" view of WDW.

 

[Synonymous]

Jeff, you raise a very valid point. I don't think anyone, certainly not I, would argue Saddam Hussein was a good guy.

But do you really believe that the American people would have supported going to war, spending the lives of our own soldiers and drowning our nation in debt, based solely on the argument that Saddam was cruel to his own people? That was little, if any, part of how the invasion was sold to the public. We were told that the invasion was necessary because Hussein possessed both WMD and ties to al-Quaeda. Both assertions have proven untrue.

I found this quote earlier today and think it addresses this issue very well, in the context of a discussion about the sacrifices made by our soldiers and their families:

“Yes, they were soldiers pledged to defending their country, and they went about their tasks the best way they could. But they did not pledge to protect the civilian Iraqi population from the despot Saddam Hussein. They did not pledge to prevent more mass graves in Iraq. They were not asked to do those things. They were asked to help eliminate a threat to the United States posed by Saddam's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs.” Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune

 

[Alex]

Hey everyone.. this thread is rapidly turning into a debate. I am going to close it here and if anyone wants to start it back up as a debate on the debate board they can feel free.