Remove this Banner Ad

Flag Burning

  • Thread starter Thread starter M29
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Originally posted by Dave
So you can understand people being upset about it?
Click to expand...
I understand that there are people upset about it, but I think they're carrying on about nothing. Calls to make such an act illegal I think border on pathetic.
 
Originally posted by Dave
Jars: You may say it's only a piece of cloth. Others would say it's a peice of cloth that many have fought and died for. Can you understand how they may view flag burning as just a tad disrespectful?
Click to expand...

Absolutely Dave.

I never for a minute have said I support flag burning

I think its stupid and ignorant and shows that they can't think of a creative way to make a point.

However, I support their RIGHT to do it and think that there is far too much vitriol against these poeple by those who don't.

I think it is far more un-Australian IMO not to give people a fiar go -eg refugees - than to burn a flag.

As for dying for the flag, I can't quite get my head around that - as I would have thought it is the Australian way of life and insttituions such as democracy and freedom of speech people were fighting for

However, as I know those that did fight in the war, regard the flag as sacrosant, and out of total respect for these people, I would never burn a flag or condone anyone else that did.

In my view though, to protect the freedoms we all love and treasure, we have to put up with people doing things we don't agree with. Its the essence of freedom.

This is why I support David Lindsay (revisionist historian - I think that's his name) being allowed into the country. He should be allowed to say what he wants to and then all those who disagree can say what they want to.

Freedom can't be curtailed because we find what some people say and do distateful.

Sure there is a limit, but we must set that limit as wide as possible, unless the values of freedom and democracy mean nothing IMO.
 
Originally posted by Adrian Shelton
Methinks a few people are getting privleges and rights a little confused, hope a few names have gone into the'never to be given a job' book which i'm sure exists somewhere! hopefully a few handy pictures for when face-recognition technology becomes commonplace too.
Click to expand...

Can you explore that further

what are rights in your opinion and what are privileges?
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Originally posted by Squeak
If you burn the flg you should be deported. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

Deported to where you idiot


People who are born in Australia and have lived here their whole lives do it?

Where will they go? Afhanistan perhaps, to a detention centre in a desert.

People who think such issues are simple are generally simple themselves.
 
I know people take it as being symbolic but hanging people or making it illegal to burn a flag is in my opinion a tad extreme. The world is becoming far too sensitive and taking ourselves too seriously like the US isnt the way to go.

So the ignorant idiots burned a flag? Big deal, they're idiots, if it was done to get a reaction then its worked. There are worse things they could have done.
 
Originally posted by knuckles
The Bible is just a book. Stop sign just a piece of tin.
Click to expand...

Yes. But you won't get into trouble for burning either of those unless you do it while the book is still on an altar in a church, or while the sign is still hanging beside a road.

The legality and morality of the burning of either of those two items stems from ownership. If you bought your own bible or had your own stop sign made, who could stop you burning them?

Flag burning gets a mention solely BECAUSE people are aghast at it, not because it is an inherently spectacular or poignant method of protest.

It's all in your minds, people!
 
Originally posted by Mr Eagle
As opposed to the same innocent Iraqi civilians who will die if they speak out against that leader, or who starve to death because that leader funds his war machine and his luxury palaces before trying to relieve the country's widespread poverty?

I may consider Bush a ****wit, and I may find the attitudes of some Americans at this time downright pathetic, but Saddam's regime is on another level of 'deplorable' entirely...
Click to expand...

From the words of a "Donovan" song:

It was about the Vietnam war, but is just as relevant if war is declared on Iraq.

They're just there, to try & make the people free,
But the way they're doing it, doesn't seem like that to me,
Just more blood & killing, misery & tears,
That this poor countries known, for the last 20 years.

Cheers
 
Originally posted by mantis
Well I don't care if it is about oil. what upsets me is the fact that a lot of innocent Iraqi civilians are going to die, doesn't seem fair especially since they didn't vote Saddam in, yet they are going to die anyway.
All because other countries want to get rid of their leader. :(
Click to expand...

These innocent Iraqis are already dying under Saddam's dictatorship. Saddam's dictatorship is ruthless and callous, and what upsets me is the fact that people don't realise this.

Unfortunately, war has casualties, however, these casualties would pale into signaficance the amount of people that have died under the Saddam regime.

These people will die because Saddam won't fight in the desert, where there would be minimal civillian casualties. He wants to fight in the cities because he knows there will be higher civillian casualties and that will test the resolve of the people.

Just who did Saddam test his chemical weapons again? Oh thats right, the Kurds. He wiped out thousands of people in one go. Who know what else he has done since.

Unfortunately, proganda is a part of war and it is hard to know who to believe. Remember WW2? The propaganda used by both sides is infamous. There is more to this than just oil, that is too easy to say and it is just plain obvious. I mean, imagine the outcry after the war if American oil companies start moving into Iraq (or along those lines), no one would ever back the Americans again. Or even if the US bought oil at drastically low prices from whoever ends up refining the oil.

To the people who are saying this is just about oil and telling others that is not a black and white issue, perhaps you should listen to your own words.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Originally posted by mantis
From the words of a "Donovan" song:

It was about the Vietnam war, but is just as relevant if war is declared on Iraq.

They're just there, to try & make the people free,
But the way they're doing it, doesn't seem like that to me,
Just more blood & killing, misery & tears,
That this poor countries known, for the last 20 years.

Cheers
Click to expand...


So, how much longer do you want it to go on for? How about doing something about it. Vietnam was a vastly different situation.
 
Originally posted by Joel
So, how much longer do you want it to go on for? How about doing something about it. Vietnam was a vastly different situation.
Click to expand...

So you think killing them to make them free, is a good idea. :confused:
 
No, but killing them isn't the way, as you said this has been happening for years, so how come it is only now people are suddenly interested in "freeing" them, couldn't be the oil could it?
 
Originally posted by mantis
No, but killing them isn't the way, as you said this has been happening for years, so how come it is only now people are suddenly interested in "freeing" them, couldn't be the oil could it?
Click to expand...

You say it might be the oil, however, like I said, imagine if America was to force its own oil companies into Iraq after the war, or even if they were to buy oil at a very low price. Can you imagine the outcry? No one would support American for a very long time, they can't afford that. Trade relations would then start to come into it and in the end it would be a no win situation for the US.

Its not only about 'freeing' these people, its about stopping a dangerous man from having dangerous weapons. If Saddam is alright on testing his weapons on his own people, who else will he 'test' them on? This is not a 'sudden interest', as you put it, this conflict with Iraq has continued since the truce at the end of the Gulf War. Iraq's continued reluctance is forcing these problems.

Iraq said they had no weapons, they do and they continue to hide them. Iraq weren't supposed to have long range missles and they did.
 
Originally posted by mantis
They're just there, to try & make the people free,
But the way they're doing it, doesn't seem like that to me,
Just more blood & killing, misery & tears,
That this poor countries known, for the last 20 years.
Click to expand...

And that for me is the magic question: at what point will a war do more harm than good? I believe a war at this stage can possibly do so. Question is just when.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Originally posted by Docker_Brat

Fighting and dying for freedom and way of live would make a bit more sense.
Click to expand...

What do these rather vague concepts "freedom" and "way of life" entail?

Bush has been using these very terms to justify his military's invasion of Iraq. What is he referring to? Not democracy and better living standards for the Iraqi masses but giving the freedom for the American oil, energy and telecommunications corporations to exploit the region for their own gain.

When Howard talks about "the national interest", he is referring to the interests of the Australian ruling class and how by being Bush's lackey it will help Australia become a more dominant economic presence (or to use Howard's phrase, "deputy sheriff") in the Asia/Oceania region, for various incursions such as East Timor.

That's who the Australian flag truly represents, it's the job of the govt and the media to imply that the flag and the nation represents their interests as well.

And by the trend of this discussion, it seems to be doing its job quite well.
 
Originally posted by wagstaff
What do these rather vague concepts "freedom" and "way of life" entail?

Bush has been using these very terms to justify his military's invasion of Iraq. What is he referring to? Not democracy and better living standards for the Iraqi masses but giving the freedom for the American oil, energy and telecommunications corporations to exploit the region for their own gain.

When Howard talks about "the national interest", he is referring to the interests of the Australian ruling class and how by being Bush's lackey it will help Australia become a more dominant economic presence (or to use Howard's phrase, "deputy sheriff") in the Asia/Oceania region, for various incursions such as East Timor.

That's who the Australian flag truly represents, it's the job of the govt and the media to imply that the flag and the nation represents their interests as well.

And by the trend of this discussion, it seems to be doing its job quite well.
Click to expand...

Typical idealist. We don't live in an ideal world, deal with it.
 
Originally posted by Joel
Typical idealist. We don't live in an ideal world, deal with it.
Click to expand...

Eh? Yes the world is hardly ideal faced with innumerable problems at the moment.

And flag burning is of such insignificance that it doesn't even register.
 
Anyone caught burning our flag, our allies flags (eg usa,nz etc) or even enemies flags should be roughed up a bit by the police and then thrown in jail for at least a month and if it kept happening (especially our aussie flag) they should be shipped away to another country and never allowed back. But as usual some leaders are too gutless to bring that in.
 
Originally posted by wagstaff
What do these rather vague concepts "freedom" and "way of life" entail?

Bush has been using these very terms to justify his military's invasion of Iraq. What is he referring to? Not democracy and better living standards for the Iraqi masses but giving the freedom for the American oil, energy and telecommunications corporations to exploit the region for their own gain.

When Howard talks about "the national interest", he is referring to the interests of the Australian ruling class and how by being Bush's lackey it will help Australia become a more dominant economic presence (or to use Howard's phrase, "deputy sheriff") in the Asia/Oceania region, for various incursions such as East Timor.

That's who the Australian flag truly represents, it's the job of the govt and the media to imply that the flag and the nation represents their interests as well.

And by the trend of this discussion, it seems to be doing its job quite well.
Click to expand...

In the last major war, yes it was about fighting and dying for freedom. However, you are right, these concepts have been bastardised by Dubya et al to jusify their coming invasion of Iraq.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom