| User | Comment |
|---|
Matty     | | posted 21-Jul-2008 7:58am |
I have seen more than my share of dead bodies. |
gambler  | | posted 21-Jul-2008 8:17am |
Though to be fair........ its not like the ones you see in US TV police shows ...stainless steel everywhere, this was when my mother passed away and it was more in a chilled viewing room? |
| gambler | | (reply to Matty) posted 21-Jul-2008 8:18am |
> I have seen more than my share of dead bodies.......... Must be bad Matty, I dont even want to know
|
| Matty | | (reply to gambler) posted 21-Jul-2008 8:30am |
I saw the soccer field in Sbernicza in 1995. In case you forgot, this is where the Serbs executed/slaughtered about 3-4000 Muslims who refused to leave their homes. It was horrific; no one could even take the smell, let alone the sight. We had to wear gas masks to keep from passing out. All the officers were initially punished because the CG flipped out and vowed to stop this. Again, remember, our official position was neutral. But the castigation just eventually went away once that butt-hole, President Clinton, actually saw the pictures and understood how noone could keep their composure. I'll never forget that; we took an oath to protect the weak and innocent, and our butt-hole of a commander-in-chief was ready to Article-15 us...Anyway,
I have also done my duty in Afghanistan and the Philippines; the worst is seeing children's mangled bodies. You don't ever really forget it, nor does the imagery ever leave your mind. Every now and then my daughter will get a scrape or a bruise and for a brief second, I see the affected area as if it had exploded.
Ok, enough. |
| gambler | | (reply to Matty) posted 21-Jul-2008 8:40am |
I remember, his neutrality on Rwanda, I do not know how accurate the movie was?...... and I do not know enough about world politics to speak with any authority, but it seemed that Clinton did kind of look after his own first and had blinders on as to what was going in the rest of the world, but to be fair, the economy from what I remember was very good under Clinton? and there is something I guess for looking after your own country 1st.
Matty, I am sure you will correct me if I am totally wrong on my assumptions.. 
Regards David |
Irene007  | | posted 21-Jul-2008 8:50am |
No but my husband did when his stupid brother went missing. It wasn't a very nice experience as he had to look at many bodies for identification and some were... well, gross. |
| Matty | | (reply to gambler) posted 21-Jul-2008 8:50am |
This wasn't meant so much as a critique about the entirety of Clinton's presidency as it was about his simple inability to be the commander-in-chief. He just plain sucked at being our CIC. The Clinton years at the Pentagon were like having a bunch of kids running the show. I remember when Bush first took over that the running joke was we were finally going to have some adults in charge.
But in many ways, Bush was worse; and that moron Rumsfeld should have been hung by his ankles and beaten publicly.
Overall, I guess at least Clinton eventually figured out that when it was time to fight, he needed to back off and let soldiers soldier. Maybe our next president will figure out that soldiers are what make an Army great, not the CIC. |
they  | | posted 21-Jul-2008 9:02am |
"visited" just doesn't seem like quite the right word. You visit your grandmother, you visit the zoo.... |
| bill | | (reply to gambler) posted 21-Jul-2008 10:28am |
From what I've heard/read, the delay/neutrality in Rwanda was in part due to the recent (at that time) trouble the US had in Somalia (i.e. the movie "Black Hawk Down") where we tried to help, but got attacked and US soldier's dead bodies got paraded around the streets. That stung and made us hesitant to help in Rwanda. Really, you have to blame the UN, in general, not just the US. Clearly, the Rwandan people should take most of the blame, regardless. It sucks that the US gets blamed if we go in (Iraq) or if we don't go in (Rwanda). BS like that certainly makes isolationism more attractive. |
Galomorro  | | posted 21-Jul-2008 11:30am |
No. Fortunately. |
| romkey | | posted 21-Jul-2008 11:31am |
Before what? I've never been to a morgue. |
| Enheduanna | | posted 21-Jul-2008 11:33am |
No. |
| Matty | | (reply to bill) posted 21-Jul-2008 1:54pm |
While this may seem the most logical and perhaps even the DeFacto reason for declared neutrality in Rwanda, the stated policy for our involvement in civil conflicts was redefined by Bush 1 (Daddy), probably as a reaction to the Sandanistas debacle in Nicaragua. Our official position on internal conflicts is neutrality unless the recognized government in that country specifically asks the UN to intervene. Or, in other words, we are not going to do anything.
Huh? What about Somalia? In Somalia, we had a standing request from the government to assist in the capture of various warlords. The Ranger operation was intended to capture Fadid/Hadid/Schmadid/somethingdid; I can't remember now.
We did not get such a request from Bosnia-Herzegovina until...late 1998, and only then did we start to go after Slobodon Milosevich.
Oh, and BTW, the US Army has never forgotten Randy Shugart and Gary Gordon. The JRTC's (in Fort Polk, Louisiana) main training objective is called Shugart-Gordon. |
| bill | | (reply to Matty) posted 21-Jul-2008 2:28pm |
Clearly, that policy gets strained in certain situations. You seem to blame Clinton for the delayed reaction in Bosnia, but apparently he was following policy. I suppose this same policy is causing delays in Darfur. I think that ultimately it is political pressure that causes the decision to be made. If the leader of the Sudan is being accused of genocide, does that policy make sense.
I still think one of the biggest factors is US public opinion. Rwanda didn't get much news coverage. Most Americans had never heard of it until it was pretty late and most of the killing was done. The situation in Bosnia got more coverage and eventually political pressure built up to a point where Clinton had to do something. Didn't he go against the UN initially? It has been a while, so I may be mixing up the details.
It seems like there are tons of things the US could stick its nose into, but doesn't. And, now, we're spread pretty thin with Iraq. The whole idea that that US is the police force of the world doesn't really make sense. Are we responsible for what goes on in other countries? At what point? It's a very tricky thing. |
| Matty | | (reply to bill) posted 21-Jul-2008 3:05pm |
> Clearly, that policy gets strained in certain situations. You seem
> to blame Clinton for the delayed reaction in Bosnia, but apparently
> he was following policy.
I can see how you might think that based on my post, but I am really more mad at how Clinton reacted to Gen Clarke's wanting to do something. After all, Clinton was the pres; all he had to do was write his own doctrine, and the policy changes. But then again, Muslims in Macedonia had slaughtered Christian Serbs with the same avarice. Maybe Clinton was right. I guess what made me mad was how inhumane Clinton seemed. I just didn't (nor do I to this day) understand how he could have been so ready to punish soldiers for wanting to stop the slaughter. Because let me tell you, after going to the soccer filed, I wanted to do some Serbian hunting.
> I suppose this same policy is causing delays
> in Darfur. I think that ultimately it is political pressure that
> causes the decision to be made. If the leader of the Sudan is being
> accused of genocide, does that policy make sense.
Yes and no, part of the doctrine is to act where it is the interests of the US. I. E. we can't right every wrong of the world, only where we get something, too. As horrible as that may sound, I don't necessarily disagree.
> I still think one of the biggest factors is US public opinion. Rwanda
> didn't get much news coverage. Most Americans had never heard of
> it until it was pretty late and most of the killing was done. The
> situation in Bosnia got more coverage and eventually political pressure
> built up to a point where Clinton had to do something. Didn't he
> go against the UN initially? It has been a while, so I may be mixing
> up the details.
>
> It seems like there are tons of things the US could stick its nose
> into, but doesn't. And, now, we're spread pretty thin with Iraq.
> The whole idea that that US is the police force of the world doesn't
> really make sense. Are we responsible for what goes on in other countries?
> At what point? It's a very tricky thing.
As I understand the Bush (1) doctrine, all of this is really driven by economic benefit to the US. But of course, you're also right by pointing how publicc opinion factors into the equation
|
| Cain | | posted 21-Jul-2008 3:07pm |
Nope. It's not on my list of things to do. |
| jettles | | posted 21-Jul-2008 5:05pm |
yes, numerous times and have helped with autopsies. have gone with investigators from the medical examiner's office to pick up a body. not for any PERSONAL reasons though! |
| gambler | | (reply to bill) posted 21-Jul-2008 7:19pm |
Thanks Bill., that makes sense
Regards David |
cloudhugger  | | posted 21-Jul-2008 10:31pm |
No, I have not. |
| JessicaWoman99 | | posted 22-Jul-2008 12:03am |
Yes when I am dead i will get to visit the morgue |
| Danger | | posted 22-Jul-2008 3:03pm |
Nope. |
| Bilateralkitty | | posted 23-Jul-2008 8:43am |
My cousin is a funeral director. He can handle the deceased - that's not for me! I'll help arrange the flowers in the viewing room or drive the limo to the cemetary. That's all. |
| LJD | | (reply to Matty) posted 23-Jul-2008 2:16pm |
Matty, I'm so sorry you had to witness what you did.
God bless you! |
| LJD | | posted 23-Jul-2008 2:22pm |
I have taken care of dead bodies while working in an acute hospital, also a convalescent home. I have prepared bodies for the morgue. I have taken dead bodies to the "ice room" in the hospital. |
| Matty | | (reply to LJD) posted 23-Jul-2008 2:26pm |
Thank you. |
| llamamama | | posted 23-Jul-2008 11:20pm |
Only when watching Dr. G.. |
| kcthedog | | posted 24-Jul-2008 12:39am |
Nope, I am sure I will someday..............
|
| JohnCD | | posted 31-Jul-2008 9:47pm |
Yes, I have a friend that works in a morgue and he gave me a complete tour of the entire facility. |
