If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
zombie dogs
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15739502-13762,00.html
well not quite but very erm dodgy as theyre in a state of clinical death whilst being fixed up for their severe injuries, then being resucitated
well not quite but very erm dodgy as theyre in a state of clinical death whilst being fixed up for their severe injuries, then being resucitated
0
Comments
surely though it gets a bit silly at a point grasping onto life as we know it, surely theres a time and a place for new generations new idea, redevelopment
its a mighty selfish thing to expand human life spans beyond their real working lifespan, we are designed to die at ages less than 90 on average due irreversible genetic damage, we have to leave at one point accept it and make the most of it i say to those people
ps - i know the article isnt about that, its about improving how they do heart and brain surgery
no most peopel died at 40 cause of disease and or poor diet
with a decent diet and whatnot you can live up to about 80-90 until bodily conditions from old age set in and get to you, die of a heart attack and what not
this thing itself i think is a good idea it helps do heart surgery etc
people have their time, make the msot of it, and then leave it to another generation to screw up and alter
well im sure the great aunt wont mind missing a leg when she is revived, especially if you want ice in your coke
Couple that with a PNAC intent to secure mid-asian resource control, the manpower needed to maintain that control over the long-haul (a war which will not end in our lifetimes, to quote Cheney), and the increasing obstacles being faced by my own country's military recruitment aparatus and you have a technological solution that will truly give the "meat grinder" a whole new meaning.
Lots of technology has military applications or has grown from its original use from the military. Should we stop using them all or give them up? In which case you should get off the internet...
Perhaps you like the idea of repeated medical voodoo operations to patch em up and ship em back to the lines, only far more effectively. How much trauma from being blown up, shot down or otherwise taken out combat for a time do you think the human psyche could take before snapping utterly? Would want to live next door to a repeat resuscite who was repeatedly denied the excuse of severe injury to free him/herself from the ravages of war, simply because the military machine had new methods of repeatedly rebuilding them fit for combat?
Frankly, any nation which perpetrates war of unprovoked aggression should endure the attrition which that horrible intent brings with it, for the sake of the planet and for the hope of eventual cessation of its disregard for those countless more who are trampled under its boot heels.
I like the idea of medical treatment.
And your vision of soldiers wounded and wounded again be turned in blood-crazed savages seems to be based on some cheap sci-fi novel rather than any knowledge of how war affects the human mind. The casualties being suffered currently by the US are that most soldiers (even amongst the infantry) will go through there entire tour with no more injury than a few bumps and scrapes. Medical intervention will save more lives. I think thats a good thing - whereas you seem to think its bad.
Sad to say for other claim, that the largely unreported fact of the matter on theatre of battle injuries in our present zones of engagement have well exceeded the "official" Pentagon figures by a significant margin. The fact that your admin idols choose to disgrace themselves by burying that truth only adds to the shame of the matter and leads us to crackpots like yourself continuing to cheer from the sidelines without a clue or any real interest to inform yourself.
Nothing surprising there though knowing all too well how sanitised and censored domestic US mainstream media has become under the watchful eye of the OSP.
As for your other snide and presumptuous claim about my knowledge of the effects of conflict on the human psyche, let's just say that I known far too many veterans with deep seated psychological damage for my liking.
Before hand I was thinking of the benefits to life saving surgery which is carried out every day.
Try reading what is written instead of whatever strawman argument you wish to invent to reinforce your delusional notions. Some in depth investigation into the very same under-reporting and deflation of figures in Vietnam will give you some insight into the nature of Pentagon wartime propaganda and public information management.
No, I did not "break into the Pentagon", I happen to have friends and associates throughout Brussels including at NATO HQ and figures from medical staff at our German staging facilities paint a far different picture than what the public back home is being told.
Not that any amount of casualties would suffice to dissuade an obvious armchair war supporter like yourself.
Is this actually a case of grasping onto life, or is it a case of giving doctors a few hours extra in which to try to prevent a death?
Is that actually so bad...?
But heart and brain surgery may actually be extending the life of someone who would otherwise die. So much surgery is, including emergency appendix cases.
The argument you are putting forward, about the "natural order" of things is such a huge one that you haven't even scratched the surface...anytime medics intervene they are altering the "natural order" of things. Or you could argue that the fact that the medics can do something is an example of how the natural order has allowed us to learn how...
I too have friends in the military and they do not paint a picture of horrendous casualties, losses - yes. But no evidence that the losses are so severe that the armed forces cannot cope.
And thanks - but I know about casualty reporting and no serious evidence has come to light that the US lied about their casualties overall (though I admit they lied about other things and for individual incidents gave the wrong figures). If you are talking about the inflated enemy body count that is well known, not relevant to the discussion at hand and false body counts happen in all wars (ie 1 million Iraqi deaths in GW1 now probably thought to be around 10,000).
And how do your 'friends' in NATO and the US medical services feel about views such as and your obvious disregard for the lives of their colleagues.
I AM speaking about intentioned false reporting of batelfield casualties and the false methodology employed to arrive at the current fatality of 1900-2000. These figures are only referenced to those killed or found dead in the field, they purposely exclude those who die of injuries either in transit or post-evacuation to Europe or other staging facilities.
Only highlighting further the improved control mecahnisms on theatre of war information flows and censorship of the press by the masters thereof in the Pentagon.
Again, its clear at any rate that you have no concern whatsoever, given that even those official numbers make little impact on your sensibilities. Even twice or three times the number would undoubtedly dissuade you none from your sycophantic support for the continuation of the war.
As for how my friends feel, well there are quite a few personnel I know who have been disgusted with this neocon war crime for quite some time. Unfortunately being in the system restricts their freedom of expression.
Er you mean they cover up deaths like this http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/2004/nr20040930-1338.html
And it could be argued that the deaths reported over-represent the seriousness of the Iraq War as they often include people who've died due to negligent discharges, crashes and other accidents which would happen in peacetime, but would not be included in any statistics.
So absence of evidence means that the US just got better at covering things up??
Actually you're right - whilst I'd like the casualty figures to be lower it doesn't change my mind about the war. As I see it wars fall into two types. If they are uneccessary they're not worth the lives of one 'British Grenadier'. However, if a war is neccessary it is neccessary whether it causes us a dozen deaths or ten thousand.
Oh I know a lot of British soldiers who are against the war (go onto various sites frequented by British soldiers and you'll get a mixture of views), but I know of not one soldier - whatever his views who thinks that his colleagues deserve to die because of the failures of politicians.
Love how you broaden the suggestion when you know you cannot argue, based on clear and repeated historic practice of misinformation, fabricated press (aka misinformation or "psyops") and flagrant censorship from the field orchestrated by the Pentagon, not the "US" (as some broad undefinable mass entity). Are you that intellectually dishonest, or dare say ignorant, as to think that those overseeing information management strategy havent spent years refining their craft and ever mindful of ways to tighten their control even further for future expeditionary endeavours?
Or are you simply naive?
Then clearly youll be signing up and doing your part to bolster the ranks of those whose efforts you so ardently support from the comfort of your home.
The meat grinder needs willing fodder like you, sign up today!
edited - decided to remove some personal information.