i totally agree that wars are waged by the rich and have nothing at all to do with our rights and freedoms, but i wouldn't call soldiers murders because they are essentially tricked into thinking they are fighting to preserve our freedoms.

Carlos Hathcock killed 93 VIETNAMESE COMMUNIST SOLDIERS! Guess what?

They would have killed Hathcocks guys if he didnt kill the Vietnamese troops first.

I'd kill you if you tried to endanger one of my people.

Luckily, the Vietnamese managed to drive the Americans out of Vietnam.

That's a huge bias. Those Vietnamese would just as gladly kill you to save their buddies.

Holy crap. I'm gone for 4 hours and this thread happens?

Honestly, that parody is completely stupid. Are they trying to compare gay rights to a world war? Are they putting gay rights on the same level of importance and impact as those four men who died to raise that flag on Iwo Jima? That original image became the staple image to represent the US's role in WWII; we print the image out to put in the sleeve of our history binders; it's on the front of our post-WWI history books; it's been painted on the wall of a building in my city.

To compare the legalization of gay marriage to this image seems a bit over the top. Here's an idea: If gay marriage is such an important milestone that I must be missing something, why not create your own iconic display? You don't have to copy four US marines who soon died.

Weird ass slavic letters dude who left the Wolves.

Yeah, you know why?

We werent willing to lose anymore of our Young Men to Stalinist and Maoism Communist trash.

and 93 kills included a Vietnamese General. Hoorah bitch.

Cram your shit back up your ass.

Edited 7/9/2015 06:17:35

You act like we're damn heroes for killing people defending their nation. So we invade a country, bomb them continuously, fight not to capture territory but to kill people and we're the good guys? MY ASS

We werent willing to lose anymore of our Young Men to Stalinist and Maoism Communist trash.

and 93 kills included a Vietnamese General. Hoorah bitch.

Let me switch the words around for you, but keeping the same meaning -

we lost too many of our psycopath soldiers who wanted to kill some jungle men to the Vietnamese who were fighting to save their villages, families and comrades.

No, I'm sorry, cram your shit up into the ass, nose and mouth.

Edited 7/9/2015 06:30:48

And some others who have served and you better fucking know?
-Chris Kyle: US Navy Seals, Iraq, 160+ confirmed Sniper Kills
-Carlos Hathcock: US Marines, Vietnam. 93 Confirmed Sniper Kills, 1 silver star for pulling men out of a burning Amtrak that HIT A FUCKING MINE WITH HIM IN IT!

Did not know, ha.

But here are some folk that served that you better fucking know.

Simo Häyhä - around 700 kills, often called the greatest sniper in history
Yogendra Singh Yadav - killed all in two enemy bunkers single-handedly at a very disadvantageous position.

Ah, Vietnam. Vietnam is a very much failed attempt at trying to contain what US officials thought to be a "domino effect." We didn't want Vietnam to fall into big bad communism, what with the whole Cold War thing going on.

*We shouldn't be pointing fingers at the soldiers, though. They had been brainwashed to despise communism. They signed up, or in Vietnam's case, drafted, to stop the spread of communism, what they thought was right. They were not "psycopath soldiers who wanted to kill some jungle men, but tools used by the US government to stop the Red from spreading.

*The usual assholes found in every army who rape people and stuff like that are not being defended by this statement.

@Shyb
"I totally agree that wars are waged by the rich and have nothing at all to do with our rights and freedoms, but i wouldn't call soldiers murders because they are essentially tricked into thinking they are fighting to preserve our freedoms."

- Lets keep out the part of "wars are waged by the rich". There is some truth in there, but it is more of an expression. The rich wage those wars, so poor can buy some goods that they otherwise won´t is an same equal cause the first one. Yes, as was pointed before killing in war is not exactly murder (depending on case etc). But what I want to emphasise, even if the soldier (or civilian) "is tricked into thinking..." it does not make in necessary right or free of guilt! I would imagine most of them see it as job, as any other job, just it pays good, offers adrenaline, pride, but requires killing. And not all of them believe they "fight for the greater good" - its just a phrase to cover the truth - how many of admit, they do it for money - more than a few!

@Martin
"Are they trying to compare gay rights to a world war?[...]To compare the legalization of gay marriage to this image seems a bit over the top."

- I am not american and not aware of this image in depth. But I understand it hold great significance is historical memory. Nor I am not aware of the source of the re-made gay image. But, to me it seems, that they are not trying to compare it to WW - it would be absurd! They try to show their struggle of Gay Rights through images in history, that hold value to society.

Just to paint a picture or add oil into the fire! If someone would set on fire Qur´an on middle-east publicly, spit, pee etc - they probably her/his lifespan would shorten tremendously. People would be mad as hell. Or think before the Arab spring (actually still the same) - if someone would publicly taint countries symbols - flag, picturs of authoritarian leaders: probably same faith would send him. Western people see it as childish, stupidity. Something of a lower activity that those symbols must be held at so high value. (Although by most countries law it is not allowed to alter, taint presentative symbols). Or think of the pictures of Mohammemed (I mean the funny ones) - you´d be killed!

We laught at it! But this case is no different. People rage, because some social group, tainted meaningful historical figure! If you think reasonably, why on earth should anyone care? Does bible will be less meaningful for believer if somoene burns it, will my country be less deemed if someone makes fun over represetantive symbols, no! And again no! People are sensitive, therefore easily manipulated. It just shows they do not have anything else to do with their time than nonsensically rage over other actions, that are meaningless. If I truly would believe in Mohammed, why on earth would I care about someone who made cartoon about him in Denmark? - Logic?

These are just figurative symbols. They matter, because rich and smart are protected, while knowing there are out there so many Patriots willing to give their life, so one could have another cheap oil tanker coming our way! As long as people can´t overcome their modern superstition and prejudice and lack of self-expression through creative activity rather nonsensical hollering, nothing won´t change!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Iwo_Jima

The picture is from Iwo Jima, a battle in the Pacific front in WW2



(just a little background for people who don't know the background of these images)

Edited 7/9/2015 16:31:32

crap

@Mr.Tranquilizer

1) My name is MartiAn, with an A. I understand autocorrect may have a part in this.

2) They ARE comparing their struggle to that of the difficulty of WWII. They are saying, "We did it. We lost many men on our way here, but at last we can marry." Look, I could burn anything to ashes and people WOULD get pissed off. But if you burn a photo of those guys in Iwo Jima, I would print out another. To parody the image and equate your struggle to theirs is sort of stuck up and self-glorifying.

Perhaps parodying an image of MLK at one of his speeches would be better.

Really? why are you throwing a fit about this. The picture is obviously just a joke. The guys thought it would be cool to recreate the Iwo Jima image with a pride flag. The are not mocking the military, nor are they saying they're just as brave. My friends and I have done the same thing with just a plain blue flag cause we wanted the picture. You're all freaking out over nothing.

This is really disrespectful to the military. I don't appreciate the rant either. But freedom of speech (unless Fizzer says no).

The picture is obviously just a joke.

You're all freaking out over nothing.

A joke should be funny, this isn't. This is using a very lame and bad comparison to try and equate the struggles of World War 2 to the "struggle" of LGBTs in the U.S.

It might also just be that people are tired of gay pride being shoved in their face everywhere.

-Great-Great Grandpa: US Marines, IWO-FUCKING-JIMA! Lost 2-3 fingers to Japanese weapons that day, and for what? This SHIT!
-Great Grandpa: US Army, Korea.
-Great Uncle: I dunno, Army or Marines. Vietnam.
-Grandpa: US Army, Vietnam
-Cousin: US MArines, I-FUCKING-RAQ!
-Cousin: US army, No where cause he's in boot camp

Ever wondered why so many people of your family fought in-FUCKING-foreign countries?

You are a silly nationalist, that cares more about symbols, than human lifes. Gtfo.

Myhand is going to get a mouthful pretty soon.

Iraq didn't need to happen, it was a waste of time,resources,and lives.I'll admit that part. I'll also admit it's possible to say that Vietnam and Korean wars were unjustified. (Although South Korea might not exist today if it weren't for the latter).

But then we have people implying that the U.S shouldn't of invaded anybody in WW2. I guess we should of just surrendered after Pearl Harbor. I'm sure Imperial Japan would of been merciful.

A joke should be funny, this isn't. This is using a very lame and bad comparison to try and equate the struggles of World War 2 to the "struggle" of LGBTs in the U.S.

It might also just be that people are tired of gay pride being shoved in their face everywhere.

I didn't mean as a literal joke, I just meant as a fun thing to do. They aren't "equating" anything, it's just a good and famous picture, and they imitated it. I've seen this same thing done with all kinds of stuff.

The second bit I can understand, I'm pro-LGBT rights, and even I'm tired of it.