U.S. Military Cemetery Runs Out Of Space For Dead Soldiers

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by solvs, Sep 21, 2007.

  1. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #1
  2. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
  3. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #3
    That was the headline they used.
     
  4. dswoodley macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    #4
    This has been happening at military cemetaries for some time - space shortage. The war has exacerbated the problem and intensified immediate need, but it has been a problem for some years now.
     
  5. MACDRIVE macrumors 68000

    MACDRIVE

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Location:
    Clovis, California
    #5
    The could've substituted dead for fallen, but that would've been too discrete. :cool:
     
  6. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #6
    No, dead was the correct word.

    I'm so sick of the media shuffling around the issue trying to be gentle to everyone's feelings. They are dead soldiers. Not fallen. They got shot, and died, thanks to a misguided crusade.
     
  7. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #7
    You're damn right.
     
  8. Macky-Mac macrumors 68030

    Macky-Mac

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    #8
    I know that the report makes it sound like this is something sudden and new, but as dswoodley points out, this has been a problem for over a decade now. It isn't just the dead from current military action that end up in these cemetaries, but veterns from all of our previous wars. The generation that fought WW2 are well into old age now and that alone has dramatically increased the demand for burial space.
     
  9. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #9
    Discrete maybe, but they're still dead.
     
  10. skinnylegs macrumors 65816

    skinnylegs

    Joined:
    May 8, 2006
    Location:
    San Diego
    #10
    Is it possible that civilian cemeteries would have been overflowing had these soldiers not fallen/died?
     
  11. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #11
    How so?

    None of the countries we attacked posed a direct threat to us.

    You should explain what you mean.
     
  12. skinnylegs macrumors 65816

    skinnylegs

    Joined:
    May 8, 2006
    Location:
    San Diego
    #12
    I will agree that our strike on Iraq was rather preemptive but I stand by my assertion. is it purely coincidental that there have been no further attacks on the continental United States since 'neutralizing" Iraq?
     
  13. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #13
    Uh, yes, it is purely coincidental.

    A terrorist attack in the US is a rare thing to begin with. Just because one hasn't happened in the last few years doesn't mean anything.

    Iraq was not a threat to the United States at all. Never was. In fact, our invasion and destruction has made the entire more hostile than it ever was before we ****ed it up.
     
  14. skinnylegs macrumors 65816

    skinnylegs

    Joined:
    May 8, 2006
    Location:
    San Diego
    #14
    Your statement is purely speculative and there are many others who would disagree.
    The Middle East had a long-standing history of hostility and aggression well before our attack and things in the Middle East have been *far* worse than they are today.
     
  15. skinnylegs macrumors 65816

    skinnylegs

    Joined:
    May 8, 2006
    Location:
    San Diego
    #15
    BTW...nobody is forcing you to stay. :rolleyes:
     
  16. skinnylegs macrumors 65816

    skinnylegs

    Joined:
    May 8, 2006
    Location:
    San Diego
    #16
    Actually, Iraq's attack on Iran in 1980 and invasion of Kuwait in 1990 created far more global instability.
     
  17. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #17
    How have our policies made us safer? The US had allies and support throughout most of the world before the invasion. Now almost the entire world is united against us and our foreign policy. The "war on terror" had bred more terrorists to fight the US that there were before the invasion.

    Immigrating to another country isn't as easy as packing bags and crossing the border. Canada, my first choice, requires people seeking permanent resident status (that aren't refugees) to have a Bachelor's degree. I am in the process of getting that. Once I am able to leave, believe me, I'm out of here. Every country in Europe has tighter immigration standards than Canada, making it even harder to move to Europe.

    So yes, I am forced to live in this country for the time being.
     
  18. skinnylegs macrumors 65816

    skinnylegs

    Joined:
    May 8, 2006
    Location:
    San Diego
    #18
    ....by making it quite clear that we will use any and *all* means to retaliate if we are attacked again.
    I defy you to name a single nation which was an ally prior to the attack on Iraq and became an enemy after the attack.
    Don't let the door hit 'ya on the way out. :D
     
  19. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #19
    Firstly, I never said that our former allies are now enemies. What I had said is that they are no longer allies, and strongly oppose our foreign policy. Example: All of Europe.

    Secondly, it is that very same "macho" attitude that you just tried to use that lost us allies around the world. People like you would go for the guns first before trying to use diplomacy at all. I don't know how you've been ignoring the news the past few years, but if you hadn't been, you'd know that an aggressive foreign policy does not work. You'd know that the image of the United States has been greatly hurt because we have a self-described "war president" running the show.
     
  20. skinnylegs macrumors 65816

    skinnylegs

    Joined:
    May 8, 2006
    Location:
    San Diego
    #20
    I'm tired and I'm going to bed. I'll pick this up tomorrow.....
     
  21. Dybbuk macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #21
    We will be happy to have you once you're ready. :)
     
  22. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #22
    Uh, so are yours.

    They were our friends in the 80's, and in the 90's, we knew enough to keep at arms length.

    Er, we pulled resources from those who actually did attack us to invade Iraq. Which, again, had nothing to do with 9/11 and was no threat to anyone. You do know we never stopped bombing them and kept them under constant sanction and surveillance right? We preemptively attacked them, for reasons that later turned out to be untrue. Which has made us considerably less safe. Plus, those people we didn't go after are still out there, ready to plan another attack.

    BTW, we've long since surpassed the number of citizens killed on 9/11 in Iraq.

    And when you quote, it's preferred that you don't delete the names and use the multiquote feature.
     
  23. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #23
    I always wonder what we're going to do once we've buried so many people that there is nowhere left to live. And it's always sad to see such beautiful real estate given over to those who cannot enjoy it.

    Why must we bury people and expect their resting place to remain undisturbed for centuries if not millenia?
     
  24. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #24
    After the 1993 WTC attack, we didn't go start pre-emptive wars, and we didn't have any terrorist attacks. Well, until Oklahoma City, but hey, guess what? An American was behind that one (and I'm thoroughly convinced that if Bush would've been president during that time, he would've bombed Oklahoma :D). but we didn't have anything until 8 years later.

    So wait at least 8 years and then come back and say that. Of course, I think that it would be fair to include any country that's participating in the war, and not just the US, in this little statistic, and in that case, you have the London tube bombings and the recent "attack" at the Glasgow airport. Because Blair entered into the damn thing with the intention of fighting terrorism too.....

    And any suicide attacker who would carry out such a thing probably couldn't give a **** if their country is attacked by us because they're dead. These guys aren't attacking us to further the agenda of they're country. They're not a part of a government entity ordered to carry out the attack. They just want to kill as many Americans as possible and probably don't care what happens after that.
     
  25. j26 macrumors 65832

    j26

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Location:
    Paddyland
    #25
    That sounds like the "Bear Tax" episode of the Simpsons.
     

Share This Page