Understatement of the year!

[KillahBee]

See bold:

(CNN) -- After being informed that his 20-year-old son was killed while serving in Iraq, a Florida man doused a U.S. government van with gasoline and set it on fire while sitting inside.

Carlos Arredondo, 44, was severely burned and rushed to Hollywood Regional Hospital in Florida after learning that Pfc. Alexander Arredondo had died, police said.

"He suffered serious burns," said Detective Carlos Negron.

Negron said the young man was killed in Iraq Tuesday.

Melida Arredondo told CNN-affiliate WFOR, "My husband did not take the news well."

The events started around 2:15 p.m. when three Marine casualty officers arrived at the home to inform the Arredondo family of the death.

Arredondo went to his garage and came out carrying a propane tank, a gallon of gasoline and a welder's torch, police spokesman Tony Rode said.

The Marines tried to calm him, Rode said, but Arredondo smashed the window of their van, got inside and doused it with the gasoline.

Then he set it on fire.

"Unfortunately, the man was caught in the fire," a police statement said.

Video showed the van engulfed in flames.

The three Marines pulled the father from the burning van and had him "drop and roll," police said.

Arredondo was taken to a hospital and then to a burn center in Miami, Florida, with serious burns over much of his body.

"A bad situation turned ugly is what happened," Rode said.

"He's actually inside and, at one point, comes out of the vehicle pretty much on fire," Rode said. "He was burning on his arms, legs and hands."

The U.S. Marines had no immediate comment.

A call to the family's home was not immediately returned.






http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/South/08/25/father.ablaze/index.html

 

[MAX 300]

The pain of loosing your child in a war is very hard to take.

I wonder how the commander in chief would feel if one of his children was killed while serving in this war. If there was any chance of that happening maybe he wouldn't have committed the country to war?

 

[digger]

The pain of loosing your child in a war is very hard to take.

I wonder how the commander in chief would feel if one of his children was killed while serving in this war. If there was any chance of that happening maybe he wouldn't have committed the country to war?

Max, if you cannot think of a single thing in the world worth dying for, then what is there in the world worth living for?

Are you thinking only about the current President and the current war? Would you say the same thing about Lincoln? Roosevelt? Should we have sat back and let Hitler eat the world?

I see what you're driving at... but that phrasing is contemptible, and unworthy of any American, let alone a President.

A country that follows that way of thinking is a nation of cowards, unworthy of freedom and doomed to the trashbin of history. Mothers in ancient Greece would tell their sons "Come back with your shield or on it" -- which meant "Don't come home a live coward." Notice that you don't hear much about what the mothers in ancient Persia told their sons.

(Their shields were huge, large enough to serve as a litter -- throwing yours away was always the first step in deserting the army.)

I have a nephew in the Marines. Do I want his life thrown away? Hell no. I want him to have weapons that work and the skill to use them appropriately in a just cause, because there are people out there who are not nice and will not go away just because we tell them to leave us alone.

 

[MAX 300]

Max, if you cannot think of a single thing in the world worth dying for, then what is there in the world worth living for?

Are you thinking only about the current President and the current war? Would you say the same thing about Lincoln? Roosevelt? Should we have sat back and let Hitler eat the world?

I see what you're driving at... but that phrasing is contemptible, and unworthy of any American, let alone a President.

A country that follows that way of thinking is a nation of cowards, unworthy of freedom and doomed to the trashbin of history. Mothers in ancient Greece would tell their sons "Come back with your shield or on it" -- which meant "Don't come home a live coward." Notice that you don't hear much about what the mothers in ancient Persia told their sons.

(Their shields were huge, large enough to serve as a litter -- throwing yours away was always the first step in deserting the army.)

I have a nephew in the Marines. Do I want his life thrown away? Hell no. I want him to have weapons that work and the skill to use them appropriately in a just cause, because there are people out there who are not nice and will not go away just because we tell them to leave us alone.

You read a lot into my statement. I'll try to respond to all of this.

Don't compare Bush to Roosevelt and the sacrifices that were made in WWII with the war in Iraq.

Of course liberty and justice are causes worth dying for. But men like Bush and Cheney, who were to privileged to be sent to war themselves, sending young men and women to their deaths for a war that was based on lies, ideology and economic gain and then to compare that to the heroic struggle that the greatest generation made during WWII is insulting.

Right now the lives of Americans are being wasted, not to protect your country, or the freedom of the world, but for the economic gains of Halliburton and the blind ideology of neo-cons.

Spare me the trite of the nobility of war and dying for a cause or country. This war is neither noble nor does it have a just cause.

 

[coverguy]

The pain of loosing your child in a war is very hard to take.

I wonder how the commander in chief would feel if one of his children was killed while serving in this war. If there was any chance of that happening maybe he wouldn't have committed the country to war?

Yeah the father took it bad, and yeah it's a tragedy, but your statement is BS. As a Commander in Chief you need to look at what is being accomplished. This gets applied to a risk matrix and an acceptable number of casualties is figured out. If you can accomplish this within that given parameter.

Any good leader would not look upon his own child's involvement when making this decision; and i'm confident that Bush would fall into this category.

 

[MAX 300]

Yeah the father took it bad, and yeah it's a tragedy, but your statement is BS. As a Commander in Chief you need to look at what is being accomplished.

And what is being accomplished?

So you got Saddam Hussein, that still doesn't justify lying about WMD's.

Defence contractors are getting richer, oil companies are making a killing and neo-cons are enjoying the mutual masturbation. All at the cost of America being more hated than ever before, American men and women dying not to protect their country or freedom and security of the world, but to feed the greed of the wealthy elite who are profiting from this war.

 

[Moderate_THIS]

Notice that you don't hear much about what the mothers in ancient Persia told their sons.

maybe Nature Boy can help us out with this one

 

[coverguy]

And what is being accomplished?

So you got Saddam Hussein, that still doesn't justify lying about WMD's.

Defence contractors are getting richer, oil companies are making a killing and neo-cons are enjoying the mutual masturbation. All at the cost of America being more hated than ever before, American men and women dying not to protect their country or freedom and security of the world, but to feed the greed of the wealthy elite who are profiting from this war.

Do you formulate your own ideas, or take them from the news? Hussein's link to terrorism throughout is unquestioned. (Even your liberal buddies in the media will agree to this!) Hussein committed atrocities upon his own people. (Using WMD's on the Kurds, which we have proof of and nobody disputes; torturing athletic teams for not winning olympic medals or tournaments; and, ruling his own people with an iron fist.) Why didn't the UN do something about this? Even though Iraq continually defied UN sanctions?? Maybe it's because they were a Muslim nation and the UN has a large number of Muslim constituents? Just maybe? The UN, an organization that had Libya as the chair country of the human rights board. Having been there, and feel free to share your own FIRST HAND experiences from post-war Iraq; a) the people for the most part are glad we did what we did, b) the people have 10x as many liberties as they did before, and c) we have effectively taken out an enemy with the audacity to put a price on our former President's head. You sit there and complain about our actions as being completely driven by money, but maybe you're right. Maybe one of the monetary factors behind it was the multi-billion dollars lost as a result of Sept. 11, 2004. Terrorism is a serious threat, and Saddam's link to terror is undeniable. Just ask the hundreds of families of suicide bombers he has supported over the last decade.

 

[Razorguns]

Me personally -- my life is SOO much better from the $134 billion and 1,000 lives we spent in Iraq. Thank you Mr Bush. God Bless Ya.

I wonder how horrible my life would've been if Bush hadn't gone to war. Oh my!

 

[The Shadow]

I thought it was gonna be:

"SSMe is queerer than a three dollar bill."

 

[Robert Jan]

I get tired of the sigh sigh bla bla bullshit of people who think that if you are against Bush in Iraq you are against the idea of fighting to protect your freedom and people.

two different things. what is in question is the legitimacy of the threat posed by Iraq and Saddam, not the justification of a war, which is indeed possible.

 

[ChefWide]

Do you formulate your own ideas, or take them from the news?

Hmmm... are you asking that question of the face you see in the mirror?

Hussein's link to terrorism throughout is unquestioned. (Even your liberal buddies in the media will agree to this!)

umm... Horseshit! Does '9/11 Comission' ring a bell? There weren't and aren't any substantive links between Sadaam and Al Queda. None.

You sit there and complain about our actions as being completely driven by money, but maybe you're right. Maybe one of the monetary factors behind it was the multi-billion dollars lost as a result of Sept. 11, 2004. Terrorism is a serious threat, and Saddam's link to terror is undeniable.

Except by the bipartisan task force that actually knows what the hell they are talking about.




We are in Iraq for the purpose of gaining a foothold geographically in the region and Iraq just happened to have a ready supply of the excuses necessary to accomplish this goal. No serious conservatives around here or elsewhere, even the real nut jobs, even consider 9/11 as a discussion point on this topic.

Forget 'right' or 'wrong' for the moment if you must, and just be sure that only a fool thinks that 9/11 was any more than a sound bite in reference to our invasion of Iraq.


We are not there for WMD, we are not there in ANY WAY for the horrors of 9/11 and we are not there to 'free' the Iraqi people. That is just repetition of plain ignorance that you are above.

 

[coverguy]

Me personally -- my life is SOO much better from the $134 billion and 1,000 lives we spent in Iraq. Thank you Mr Bush. God Bless Ya.

I wonder how horrible my life would've been if Bush hadn't gone to war. Oh my!

You're right, it probably means nothing to you. However if your ass was under those building as they fell (which mine was) you might have a better appreciation for actions intended to keep our country safer. And may i note, that we haven't had a terrorist attack in NYC since. So, my life is better.

 

[digger]

I get tired of the sigh sigh bla bla bullshit of people who think that if you are against Bush in Iraq you are against the idea of fighting to protect your freedom and people.

I'm not equating Bush with Roosevelt -- I'm equating Max with Chamberlain.

As I said, I see what he was driving at; hey, "I hope the Russians love their children, too." There's a time and a place for that. But this emotional "you wouldn't send YOUR son!" argument is also bullshit.

 

[bran987]

LMAO! Karma to you! And sorry your thread went downhill!