How to define heroism? It's the development of immeasurable love, (the fervent wish that all beings have happiness and its causes), compassion (the fervent wish that all beings be free of suffering and its causes), limitless joy (the enjoyment of other beings freedom from suffering and good fortune) and equanimity (the equal kind regard for all beings--friend, enemy or stranger)

I know some human beings who have these qualities, and they are my personal heroes.


I think heroism depends on the motivation. A jihadist or suicide bomber with motivation for his own personal happiness in heaven (with all those virgins) is not a hero.

The Buddhist monk who self-immolated during the Vietnam war was a hero. His motivation was to benefit others--not himself.

Ridiculous. Do you think it's because I flunked Fanatical Flag Waving 101 when I was in school?

I don't categorize jobs that way. I'm not an elitist.

Almost certainly.

__________________
I'll get nicer when you get smarter.

Well, you would, if you were a good person who had his priorities straight.

__________________
I'll get nicer when you get smarter.

You mean like Corporate CEOs and politicians who align themselves with these corporations.




You must be a Nader supporter then.

__________________
America's Enemies Are Not Mine

All wars represent a failure of diplomacy

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” - Stephen Roberts.

So you don't respect the baker that works twelve hour days, is a single parent, has three kids and still manages to go to all of their school activities (sports and school plays)?

That's a hero to me because it is a miracle of will to support a family.

His job isn't a risk. But it is still admirable.

__________________
The woman in my avatar is Cristina Scabbia and the woman in my profile picture is Tarja Turunen
Sun flames and moons glow, timeless the tides will flow, what will I face, what will be mine, fortune and fate the other side...

Public thanks to Catzmeow for enabling me to make my goal of half a million credits by Xmas.

__________________
The woman in my avatar is Cristina Scabbia and the woman in my profile picture is Tarja Turunen
Sun flames and moons glow, timeless the tides will flow, what will I face, what will be mine, fortune and fate the other side...

Public thanks to Catzmeow for enabling me to make my goal of half a million credits by Xmas.

If there attacking your country there an enemy. The invading side is usually considered the 'bad guys' but both sides usually see who there fighting as the enemy.

We did see them as foreigners but that wasn't why we labelled them an enemy it just made it easier to do so. The germans and their allies weren't fighting for their countries they were fighting for someone elses. They were trying to invade the countries around them to gain more land while the other countries were fighting to survive.

It's better to look past the soldiers and to the people who were leading them. It's never the soldiers that decide who we go to war with and who we have to kill to protect ourselfs its there leaders. Soldiers are built for war and death is there job. To kill the enemy is there purpose. When countries go to war there will always be casualties and soldiers will always end up having to kill people and in turn protect the innocent from harm.

There a hero.. in sports but not the real world. Theres a big difference between the guy that scores a point and the guy who saves lives. The term isn't important outside of the games they play.

__________________
Collective? I'm sure thats easy when your not surrounded by a bunch of (*)(*)(*)(*)ing retards!!!

If both sides see the other side as the enemy, there is eithor no real enemy, or both sides are actually the enemy - right? We can't say that eithor side was the 'good guys' because there is no good side. There can't be.

Did labelling them the enemy make it easier to go to war and kill them? If we went to war thinking these people were our friends, would that have made it harder to kill them?

Were the soldiers themselves fighting to gain more land, or were they simply defending their countries against a people they deemed to be the enemy? Were they fighting for their Government, who wanted more land? If they faught for a Government, it makes them just as innocent as we were back then, doesn't it?

In the first world wars, children as young as 14 chose to go to war, even though it was illegal for them to do so, being too young. The soliders of today join the Army, knowing there is a chance they will be sent to war, so in a way, they choose to go to war. Back during the first two world wars, they were not sent to war, they often chose to go to war, so therefore they chose to kill, because they knew that war involves violence and death.
Not sure if I managed to explain that well.

But who is really innocent? The people who invade a country, or the people who reside in that country, and attempt to defend it? How do we decide who is innocent, and who is guilty?

__________________
The woman in my avatar is Cristina Scabbia and the woman in my profile picture is Tarja Turunen
Sun flames and moons glow, timeless the tides will flow, what will I face, what will be mine, fortune and fate the other side...

Public thanks to Catzmeow for enabling me to make my goal of half a million credits by Xmas.