But you have to ask yourself, would she be doing and saying this stuff had her son not die over in Iraq? Would she base her views on the war, which she has every right to do so, if her son were still alive and fighting in Iraq?

 

Well, most if not all opinions are made based on some kind of experience, so... I don't get where you're coming from. Of course some aren't going to be against the war until it negatively affects them, that's just human nature.

 

I mean, you only even have any kind of opinion based on experience. There's a cause and effect working here. Her son's death caused her view to change. That seems natural.

 

Again, we can say what ever we want in this county, which makes this country so great. But there comes a point when we all know when not to say s***. There's that line that we just don't cross.

 

This statement seems contradictory, too. So, this country is so great because we can say what we want because we have that right... Until we get to some certain point? What is that point where we "can't cross this line"? When it makes people mad? When it's controversial? I don't get it.

 

We should have the right to say what we want no matter how crazy or how many people it ticks off. That's the purpose of free speech is to get the minority opinion in there and to get a discussion rolling. It's only with free speech that all options, no matter how much we disagree, can be explored.

 

***

 

Weird thing is... I haven't watched national coverage in awhile and tend to get my news from the BBC and other sources and haven't heard about this woman in a long while. In some respect I admire what the woman is doing and in others it ticks me off she's soooo vocal because she makes a lot of claims without backing them up. But, she's also coming from an extreme emotional point of view, so that has to be taken into account. So, of course anytime she gets depressed and flies off the handle and makes an empty emotionally charged statement that's going to be news.

 

I think part of the problem is our media, for the most part, sucks. There's numerous cases on this board along of complaints about how we grab onto this story we're told is important, but is really insignifigant when you consider how many other like stories go unreported.

Buckeye, by your logic, if her son had gone to war and returned safely, then her opinions of the war should be favorable? Thats the converse of saying that b/c he died she changed her mind about the war.

Buckeye, by your logic, if her son had gone to war and returned safely, then her opinions of the war should be favorable? Thats the converse of saying that b/c he died she changed her mind about the war.

918227[/snapback]

 

Well, yeah! If he'd have come back alive would she not still support the war? My guess would be yes. She didn't have this change of heart until her son died.

 

I wouldn't say should so much as probably would.

Buckeye, by your logic, if her son had gone to war and returned safely, then her opinions? of the war should be favorable? Thats the converse of saying that b/c he died she changed her mind about the war.

918227[/snapback]

 

Well, yeah! If he'd have come back alive would she not still support the war? My guess would be yes. She didn't have this change of heart until her son died.

 

I wouldn't say should so much as probably would.

918254[/snapback]

 

I'm not sure I agree with you. I understand if she went from neutrality to be totally against it, but how cna you be in favor of something like a war, and have a complete mind change. When her son was sent over the possiblity of his detah existed, so that he died should not create a complete 360 in her thoughts. Again theres no way to be sure either way, but these quesitons are what lead me to question her personal motives.

Buckeye, by your logic, if her son had gone to war and returned safely, then her opinions? of the war should be favorable? Thats the converse of saying that b/c he died she changed her mind about the war.

918227[/snapback]

 

Well, yeah! If he'd have come back alive would she not still support the war? My guess would be yes. She didn't have this change of heart until her son died.

 

I wouldn't say should so much as probably would.

918254[/snapback]

 

I'm not sure I agree with you. I understand if she went from neutrality to be totally against it, but how cna you be in favor of something like a war, and have a complete mind change. When her son was sent over the possiblity of his detah existed, so that he died should not create a complete 360 in her thoughts. Again theres no way to be sure either way, but these quesitons are what lead me to question her personal motives.

918504[/snapback]

 

Well... It's real easy. In Michael Moore's F-911 they characterized a woman doing exactly this. YES, they know their kids can die, but it's not until it actually happens that they start questioning/being angry about it. It's not like most Americans have a set of values and live by those. People are relative as hell.

 

I mean, a lot of people don't think of consequences of something until AFTER the fact. Why would anyone take heroin or cocaine, then?

Buckeye, by your logic, if her son had gone to war and returned safely, then her opinions? of the war should be favorable? Thats the converse of saying that b/c he died she changed her mind about the war.

918227[/snapback]

 

Well, yeah! If he'd have come back alive would she not still support the war? My guess would be yes. She didn't have this change of heart until her son died.

 

I wouldn't say should so much as probably would.

918254[/snapback]

 

I'm not sure I agree with you. I understand if she went from neutrality to be totally against it, but how cna you be in favor of something like a war, and have a complete mind change. When her son was sent over the possiblity of his detah existed, so that he died should not create a complete 360 in her thoughts. Again theres no way to be sure either way, but these quesitons are what lead me to question her personal motives.

918504[/snapback]

 

Well... It's real easy. In Michael Moore's F-911 they characterized a woman doing exactly this. YES, they know their kids can die, but it's not until it actually happens that they start questioning/being angry about it. It's not like most Americans have a set of values and live by those. People are relative as hell.

 

I mean, a lot of people don't think of consequences of something until AFTER the fact. Why would anyone take heroin or cocaine, then?

918509[/snapback]

 

I understand your point, even though you used a bad analogy. People assess risk before going into any venture. If they see more positive thna negative they go into it. For example someone chooses to smoke marijuana b/c (by the way im making this up) although it may cause lung cancer, getting high right now is worth that risk. But on to the original point. This woman claims to have been a supporter of the war before her son died, correct? But after he dies she has strong anti-iraq war sentiments. That shows she's full of hot air, because her son's death causing her to speak up against somehting she never felt strongly about but now does makes logical sense. A complete 360 of thought isnt logically supported, unless she never thought her son had a possibility of dying in war, go figure. This is why to me it seems shes using her son's death to advance an agenda she always felt strongly about, even though now she feels stronger about it. It isnt news, anti war mom loses son and is more anti war. Yawn.

Clearly I'm not going to change your opinion. And that's cool.

 

I just think people don't assess risk in any and every venture. Like the fat guy who eats McDondalds, does no excercise and sits in front of the tv and has a heart attack and has the nerve to ask "WHY ME!"

Clearly I'm not going to change your opinion. And that's cool.

 

I just think people don't assess risk in any and every venture. Like the fat guy who eats McDondalds, does no excercise and sits in front of the tv and has a heart attack and has the nerve to ask "WHY ME!"

918606[/snapback]

 

You cant compare the longterm potential effects of eating fast food to the obvious potential for death or injury in war