# Video of US soldiers throwing a puppy



## romeosmom (Mar 27, 2008)

This is really disturbing!
I don't know if you have seen this- 
I saw it on petfinder-and I am sick after seeing it.

http://forums.petfinder.com/viewtopic.php?t=150636

Warning- 2 American soldiers throw a puppy over a cliff. 























Please read the petition and email:
*Major General Robert E. Milstead, Jr.
Director, Public Affairs
[email protected]*

Let him know that this action must not be tolerated by soldiers who represent our country!


----------



## romeosmom (Mar 27, 2008)

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=4384322


----------



## romeosmom (Mar 27, 2008)

http://www.golivewire.com/forums/peer-pteiso-support-a.html

totally sickening!


----------



## kelso (Jan 22, 2007)

I think this is the same as this?

http://www.germanshepherds.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=609698&page=4&fpart=1


----------



## romeosmom (Mar 27, 2008)

I didn't see that one. He has commented on it, so I guess it was real.


----------



## romeosmom (Mar 27, 2008)

You can sign the petition, email his superiors, and let your local senators know that abuse of animals by anyone, including US Soldiers, should not be tolerated!


----------



## Guest (Apr 12, 2008)

One more time....


These are NOT US soldiers. Not US Army and so not soldiers.

They are marines. And so US Marine Corps is involved and well knows about it. Last I heard action was being taken. Your address above clearly states usmc.mil.


----------



## EastGSD (Jul 8, 2001)

While I am of course disturbed by the video like everyone..and feel terrible for that puppy I must admit I also felt terrible about knowing that many of our fine young men and women can become that indifferent to the suffering of any living thing....is this something due to their experiences? An isolated event? Or a product of where they are and what they are expected to be and do?









Overall, very sad...

Cherri


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2008)

Or could it just be that there are sick individuals everywhere? There are many, many more stories of animal abuse perpetrated by people who have nothing whatsoever to do with the US military.


----------



## arycrest (Feb 28, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: GSDadOne more time....
> 
> These are NOT US soldiers. Not US Army and so not soldiers.
> 
> They are marines. And so US Marine Corps is involved and well knows about it. Last I heard action was being taken. Your address above clearly states usmc.mil.


Maybe to those serving in the Army there's a distinction, but I just looked soldier up in the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, and the definition is not inclusive to the U S Army only. I wrote down the first definition, there are 3 others and also a listing for the intransitive verb.
1
a: one engaged in military service and especially in the army
b: an enlisted man or woman
c: a skilled warrior


----------



## JanH (Jan 21, 2007)

I'd think if this happened in the backroads of the US with ordinary people it wouldn't get attention. It probably does.








One part was probably right - doing it a favor. Dogs are not seen the same way in some other countries as here. They're dirty pests and may be mistreated on a regular basis. But still could have been done a better way.









There's individuals all the time committing abuses here in the US. I mean how humane is it to tease two dogs with one bowl of food or throw one dog on top of another so they fight...but it happens and officials know it happens and apparently it's not illegal enough to do anything.


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: Arycrest
> 
> 
> > Originally Posted By: GSDadOne more time....
> ...


There is indeed a distinction. If you say "soldier" that will always be associated with the US Army (note the _first_ definition listed). Likewise a marine is going to be associated with the US Marine Corps. If you want to use a label use it correctly. If you intend the generic then use US servicemember. That terms applies to everyone in uniform.

Oh, and if you really want to tick off a marine, just call him a "soldier".


----------



## CWhite (Dec 8, 2004)

HEy guys,

We should also maybe ask them to increase the mental health services for these men and women. Many of them will be very different from what they were like before. 

I believe they said the suicide rate in the US increased. A disproportionate amount of the suicides were current or former member of the armed forces.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/01/military.suicides/index.html

I have heard more than one soldier/member of the armed forces state they become desensitized to killing and death et cetera.

Watch this in its entirety. I became stressed out after watching it. I can't imaging having to live life this way.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/badvoodoo/


----------



## CWhite (Dec 8, 2004)

Tom,

With all dues respect, having grown up around all branches of the armed forces, I understand why many who served IN the armed forces like the distinction. 

However, to the general public anyone in the armed forces is a soldier. It is not meant as a putdown or to be disrespectful. 

I know Air Men (Flight Jocks), Sea Men [swabys (sp?)], Marines (Jarheads), Soldiers are highly proud of the branch o f service they are in. 

The point I am trying to make is you just need to cut civilians a little slack.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._Army_acronyms_and_expressions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._Marine_Corps_acronyms_and_expressions


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: CarolynHEy guys,
> 
> We should also maybe ask them to increase the mental health services for these men and women. Many of them will be very different from what they were like before.
> 
> ...


Much is indeed being done. Far more than has ever been done in the past. I've had excellent counseling since my return from Iraq. My healthcare for my injury is also top notch and I have returned to duty. For a detailed look at this process here's an example: http://www.military.com/news/article/army-news/wtu-soldier-listed-fit-for-duty.html?ESRC=army-a.nl

As for the "Bad Voodoo" platoon, well you should read the blogs of the platoon members themselves before forming an opinion. I lived life this way. Of course it it incredibly high stress, but also just as obviously the average person is not a combat troop either. We are trained and selected for such missions. Those who can't handle it usually don't apply and the few that do are separated quickly in training. It's the rare individual indeed who gets all the way through the process and can't cope. Even the most mentally secure individuals do feel the affects of prolonged combat of course. That's why they are rotated from the field and treated properly afterwards. Sherman said it best, "War is ****", and nobody says otherwise. Even if we did leave Iraq and Afghanistan it wouldn't make war go away though. There will always be somebody who wants to take something from somebody. When that happens on a national scale war is the result. Likewise there will always be a need for those willing to take a stand for those who can't.


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: CarolynTom,
> 
> With all dues respect, having grown up around all branches of the armed forces, I understand why many who served IN the armed forces like the distinction.
> 
> ...


Carolyn, if it were just civilians in conversation I would certainly cut them slack, but as this is being reported as news I will hold them to a higher standard and to report the news accurately.


----------



## arycrest (Feb 28, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: GSDad
> There is indeed a distinction. If you say "soldier" that will always be associated with the US Army (note the _first_ definition listed). Likewise a marine is going to be associated with the US Marine Corps. If you want to use a label use it correctly. If you intend the generic then use US servicemember. That terms applies to everyone in uniform.
> 
> Oh, and if you really want to tick off a marine, just call him a "soldier".


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2008)

Okay, obviously some folks don't get the need for clarification in the news. Here's an analogy: suppose an article had been posted about a pound and it was called a "rescue"? Hey, dogs get rescued from the street there right? Must be the same thing. Different roles different labels. I'm not going to argue this further. If you want to say "soldiers" about marines then go ahead. You'll be incorrect but you can think you're right all you want. If you report news about people who are marines as being soldiers then expect somebody to correct you. Far better to just report accurately to begin with. When you can't get the terminology correct it calls into question the rest of what you say as well. That's why the news must _always_ be held to the highest standards of correct use of terms.


----------



## towtrip (Dec 12, 2003)

> Originally Posted By: GSDadOkay, obviously some folks don't get the need for clarification in the news. Here's an analogy: suppose an article had been posted about a pound and it was called a "rescue"?


Tom, 

As much as we would like to THINK that the news reporters are careful in their use of labels, quite the opposite is true. Dog pounds are referred to as shelters and rescues all the time. To the media, they are interchangeable terms and there is no distinction. 

Similarly, every dog that bites a person is labeled a "pit bull." The headlines are blaring, "CHILD ATTACKED BY PIT BULL." They never follow up to find out that the dog was really a labrador mix, a German shepherd mix or some other breed of dog. 

Media does not seek to report for clarity; they seek to report for viewership/readership. "Soldier" has more marketability than "serviceman;" "shelter" sounds better than "pound;" "pit bull" is more sensational than "mutt."


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2008)

And that's exactly my point, Susan. Don't you and everyone else involved in rescue make a point of correcting such inaccuracies? That's all I'm doing. I doubt anybody here would give you flack for doing so. I wish I could be understood similarly.


----------



## towtrip (Dec 12, 2003)

OH ... and the one that gets my goat is "HSUS" is almost always referred to a "The Humane Society" as though they operate a shelter and adopt out dogs, when they are really only a radical political lobbying organization. The media doesn't care.


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2008)

I could see how that _would_, Susan. What I can't quite fathom is people who are quite comfortable with pointing out to others that their GSD is, in fact, a GSD despite it being solid black, white, small, large, etc. yet somehow have a problem with _me_ pointing out that a marine is not properly termed a soldier and the reverse also being true. The argument that "most people think so" just doesn't wash for either situation.


----------



## romeosmom (Mar 27, 2008)

My apologies to those who were offended by the term soldier. I didn't know it was offensive to a Marine to be called one ( in this specific case however I could care if that Marine in the disturbing video was offended.)


----------



## romeosmom (Mar 27, 2008)

My point in bringing it up is there is a clear connection between violence towards animals and violence towards humans. 

Whether or not he was "doing the puppy a favor" and "being creative" by tossing its innocent little crying body over a cliff and laughing about it after it hit the ground doesn't concern me. This monster wears the colors of our country and is paid to do so. Videotaping such a hideous act somehow makes it even worse.


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2008)

Not offended by incorrect terminology, just making a point of clarification. In all honesty it doesn't matter _what_ uniform the people who did this wear. It has no bearing on the act. A sick person is a sick person whether they are in the military or work at McDonalds, or for Dean Witter. Millions of people serve their nation honorably and without such cruelty.


----------



## Cooper&me (Dec 18, 2007)

It floors me in the face of such inhumane treatment of another living thing that the most some get out of the story is the inaccuracy in the branch of service.

The sicko needs help. In his apoligy he is just irratated in the flak he is getting, especially when this is common practice.

DISTURBING to say the least.


----------



## romeosmom (Mar 27, 2008)

I agree that he is sick GSDad. It just disgusts me that he is a Marine or any member of our nation's military.


----------



## romeosmom (Mar 27, 2008)

They will "investigate" him, and then it 'll all go away. And a poor dog will have died for his sick amusement.


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: mjb03It floors me in the face of such inhumane treatment of another living thing that the *most* some get out of the story is the inaccuracy in the branch of service.


A complete and utter falsehood. Weeks ago when this story first broke and was reported here I very much deplored it _then_ as I have now. I made a correction. it was certainly _not_ the "most" I got out of this story. For the life of me I can't understand why there is such hostility to my making a reasonable correction. Would you not do the same if for example the story was "Cat killed by German Shepherd" when, in fact, the cat had been killed by a Rottweiler?


----------



## Cooper&me (Dec 18, 2007)

I guess I see making the correction but as I read the replies to the story the correction took center stage.

If a cat was killed in a horrific way then no I would not care if it was a Rotwieller and not the breed reported. Cat still gone. Dog still needs help. The rest is irrelevent. THAT THE DOG LOVED KILLING. would be more disturbing.


----------



## Guest (Apr 13, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: mjb03I guess I see making the correction but as I read the replies to the story the correction took center stage.


Other people's issue - not mine. Some didn't like being corrected I guess and continued to "make their case".



> Originally Posted By: mjb03If a cat was killed in a horrific way then no I would not care if it was a Rotwieller and not the breed reported. Cat still gone. Dog still needs help. The rest is irrelevent. THAT THE DOG LOVED KILLING. would be more disturbing.


You'd probably be in a minority here then. Most of us would be sure to correct the error in letters to the editor. As for your phrase "loved killing" well, again that falls back on a couple sick people out of millions who serve honorably. I was in combat. Not once but many times and for protracted amounts of time. Those I served with were as well of course. I never met any that joyed in killing and I assure you if any had they wouldn't have been out there with us after we became aware of it. While this act of cruelty is indeed extremely disturbing so too is the inference that those involved in combat are sick people who love killing.


----------



## EastGSD (Jul 8, 2001)

OMG....what is this thread about?? A puppy that was treated horribly or correct terminology usage?

Get a grip!

Sorry, each succeeding post about soldier/marine just served to irritate me even more.

What about the human being that committed this act? Anyone have input on what I posted?

Cherri


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

I think everyone's beating a dead horse with this thread.

This story was posted and discussed on the board previously. It was posted whom to contact to make your voices heard and the Marines have stated that they are investigating it. Incidentally, the senseless killing of an animal is indeed a punishable offense under the UCMJ, and those who think this is just "going away" for this Marine are quite mistaken. 

The argument whether Marines should or should not be referred to as soldiers was also beaten to death in the old thread. There are no Soldiers in the Marines, and no Marines in the Army. Simple as that. 

And even though I'm sure it's been answered before, this act of idiocy has nothing to do with a soldier's (or a Marine's) job. Some people just like torturing the helpless. Some of those people are in the armed forces. Let's not turn this into a pseudo-psychological argument about how we're all to blame for this happenings by sending troops to Iraq.


----------



## Guest (Apr 14, 2008)

I believe I _did_ reply to you. I feel sorry for you really if you choose to see an isolated incident and cast blame on the many. Where's your proof of your allegation that "many of our fine young men and women can become that indifferent to the suffering of any living thing....is this something due to their experiences? An isolated event? Or a product of where they are and what they are expected to be and do?"

A couple guys is "many"? Where they are and expected to do? Really? Just not possible that it could be a couple sick individuals out of a given population huh? No such sick people among chocolate factory workers (Jeffrey Dahmer), or dormitory managers (Ted Bundy), or Democratic Party precinct captains (John Wayne Gacy)?


----------



## EastGSD (Jul 8, 2001)

GSDdad you are twisted, I was NOT blaming them...I was thinking compassionately. You totally misconstrued my post.

War is not easy on anyone, that was my point. I wanted to know the potential effect on emotional state that tours of war can have on a normal human being. How else besides indifference does someone deal with killing other human beings? Does this indifference only exist in that time and place or is it carried and need to be recovered from?

I think I am asking appropriate questions. I was not blaming anyone.


----------



## Guest (Apr 14, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: EastGSDHow else besides indifference does someone deal with killing other human beings?


I won't respond to the name calling.

So you think people who kill other people in war are "indifferent" do you? What do you know about it? I am far from "indifferent" to the lives I've taken doing my duty. I think about such things often. I also think about the the friends I've lost to death in battle. You have no facts - only insults. How "compassionate" is that?


----------



## lemans (Jun 18, 2005)

http://www.letsgettight.com/blog/2008/3/...by-marines.html


----------



## EastGSD (Jul 8, 2001)

Name calling?


----------



## towtrip (Dec 12, 2003)

I think the objection has less to do with the fact that you corrected than it does with the tone in which you corrected.

You started your initial post assuming that everyone has already read everything that you have ever posted and is somehow entitled to be dressed down because they've ignored you previously. I think a more simple, less hostile approach would have been accepted more graciously by the readers on this forum. 

Quite frankly, an e-mail address ending in usmc.mil means nothing to me -- it's just an e-mail address, so I think it's fair to cut people a little slack for not picking up on the meaning. 

To use your analogy, I think someone is quite comfortable with me saying, "No, this is a German shepherd. He's not an albino or a mix. This is just a different coat color." On the other hand, I think the response would be different if I corrected them by saying, "One more time! This is NOT a mix. This is a German shepherd. Don't you see his ears? His muzzle? It's really insulting to call him a husky when he's clearly not."


----------



## Guest (Apr 14, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: Susan FI think the objection has less to do with the fact that you corrected than it does with the tone in which you corrected.
> 
> You started your initial post assuming that everyone has already read everything that you have ever posted and is somehow entitled to be dressed down because they've ignored you previously. I think a more simple, less hostile approach would have been accepted more graciously by the readers on this forum.
> 
> ...


You're putting words in my mouth. I only said "one more time" not "it's really insulting"

Personally, I think that if "one more time" gets you all riled up you need to grow some thicker skin.

So USMC means nothing to you, huh?









This story is constantly being repeated over the net and this is what? The third or fourth time it's shown up on this forum? Sorry if I'm more than sick of it now. People want to use a couple sickos to try and prove some pet theory that war in Iraq is turning our servicemembers into psychos. THAT's what I object to when it comes right down to it. My pointing out the terminology was meant simply for what it is. However, if people can't even get the simplest facts right then this "theory" can't be given much credence right from the start - let alone what the facts really are. A couple _twisted_ individuals do not a military make.

This has gone far more off topic than I ever imagined it could go. If people want to see the US military as serial killers in the making then I guess I can't stop them. I'm done with this thread.


----------



## EastGSD (Jul 8, 2001)

Who said that military personnel are psychos in the making? You better not think that it was me as I used the term "indifferent" and maybe you need to look the word up before going on your tirades.

Cherri


----------



## chruby (Sep 21, 2005)

> Originally Posted By: GSDadOr could it just be that there are sick individuals everywhere? There are many, many more stories of animal abuse perpetrated by people who have nothing whatsoever to do with the US military.


Yes, in every venue there are sick people. So let's not make mass assumptions about the military. They have enough to deal with.


----------



## romeosmom (Mar 27, 2008)

I only wanted to bring this to others attention. I didn't know it was already posted. I am not questioning the military, only one man.


----------



## towtrip (Dec 12, 2003)

hmmmm ... now who's putting words in somebody's mouth? I never said USMC means nothing to me, I said an *e-mail* address ending in usmc.mil ... I wouldn't even have picked up on that as a salient fact for the story.

If you don't like re-reading the story, you always have the option to not read it and not respond. By choosing to read it, and choosing to respond in the manner in which you did, you are choosing to be upset by it.

It's like today, I have chosen not to read any more posts by Lou Castle. They make me mad and there's never any end to the diatribe, so I am going to choose to withdraw from any topic on which he posts. Life's too short; I choose not to engage in topics that offend or upset me. You could make the same choice.


----------



## nysirk (Apr 15, 2008)

I wish someone would throw those guys off a big cliff and leave them to die, that is so disturbing


----------

