@nicetomeetyou25 You need to shut the fuck up. If you're a myopic homophobe, that is your problem - and yes IT IS a problem. Leave Nick alone for being intelligent enough to accept others.
Makes me laugh, all you hear about today, is how the USA is the most powerful country in the world, when in fact, there are a lot of countries far more powerful. For example, Britain still technically owns america - that whole war of independence was bullshit, and everyone fell for it. Oh, we won our freedom from those evil royal worshipping britons, and now we'll fly over there, get down on our knees and get a knighthood from the same bloodline that enslaved us. Pathetic.
Ya know, I wonder why I don't get free rounds of beer, discounts all over the place, worthless thanks on the streets and bumper stickers in my honor.
Not only was I smart enough not to join up and bleed shit-tons of tax dollars from my countrymen, go off and commit atrocities against innocent foreigners, and support evil elitists in further reducing our freedoms, but I'm not an asshole to those who aren't in my special little fraternity.
I salute you fellow civvies who work hard for no glory!
In Greco-Roman times, they actually encouraged homosexuality in the military to increase the bonds between troops. It's funny how perceptions change over time.
Because the second you say military you are talking about the entire structure, your not talking about the fighting force individually. What he is saying amounts to a massive over-generalisation based on a typical stereotype, one of which I have not met a soldier who meets it, not even the ones in the combat arm.
@MrMyers758 You're completely missing my point, your looking into a comedy routine way too deeply, comedy is not to be taken personally. He is speaking in a general sence to get his point across to the audience in an accesible way. Stop hating on what hes said like you know that its his absolute view.
@MrMyers758 His point is the joke itself. It's all a joke and you seem to be offended by it. Comedy is something that you should be open minded about, don't pick up on little things and expand on them, whats the point?
There have been a few men making a lot of money out of every single war the U.S has ever been in. That fact, in itself, already puts in doubt any reasons the government gives you to justify soldiers being out there. Add to that the fact that the U.S has armed many of these countries considered a threat and you start seeing why Bill didn't think it was a good idea to join the military.
First of all, I have stated before that I do not support the reasons why we are at war in Afghanistan. Besides which I was not criticising him saying that it is not a good idea to join the military, as I can see plenty of reasons why someone should not. I was criticising his accusation that all people in the military are hired killers.
In the end, he goes a bit far once in a while, maybe cause he's just too pissed (and he should be, everyone should) but ultimately the basis of his idea is completely correct: Why would you join the army? Why would you help this entity, putting your life in danger so that some old fuckers can profit?
Good pay is one reason, a disciplinary environment is appealing to some who cannot keep a steady life, and of course the thrill seeking. After all, you never feel more alive then when your life is on a knife edge.
"Why would you help this entity, putting your life in danger so that some old fuckers can profit?"
First of all, we once again hit the massive oversight of the military, and that is a massive part of it is non-combat. Ask an intelligence officer whether his life is on the line, or a chef.
Second of all, there are a multitude of things which the military does (not just for profit), for the individuals and for communities (like protecting African villagers from warlord food raids).
Protecting African villagers? Between 1997 and 2000, the US made more money selling weapons to third world countries than they gave in aid. I really don't believe a country like that, the biggest supplier of DEATH in the planet worries much about protecting African villagers. Even if there are humanitarian actions undertaken by the military, it's not like they compensate for the fake conflicts they've been involved in.
@NickNorie15 Ah, my apologies. If I'd known that he was talking exclusively about the US military and not military's in general then I would have kept my nose out (since most of my references are to the British Army). However if it is meant to be a criticism of the military institutions then we still have problems.
Also, just because there are men who are not in the line of duty, it doesn't mean they're not responsible for atrocities being promoted out in the field. You can't argue against the fact that billions are spent in war, actual war (not the military as a whole). Even soldiers themselves said they were ashamed of taking part in this: watch?v=b3ZjsC3BOBE Watch this and tell me what you think.
@NickNorie15 From the same vein I could say that tax payers are just as responsible. As without that, the soldiers actually doing the killing would not have a pay package. And of course there would be people being ashamed of helping out the military, that's just inevitable.
Not really as tax payers shouldn't be paying their taxes to get in return education, a good health system and so on... It really comes down to this: No matter how you look at it, the primary role the military plays today (and played when Bill was around during the 80's and 90's and even before that) is far from moral.
I mean, really, it doesn't make sense. The main reason politicians in the U.S (and U.K, France and every other country in the UN security council) give you for invading a country like Afghanistan is to maintain world peace. How can these countries (the members of the SECURITY COUNCIL) be worried about maintaining peace and also be the biggest weapon suppliers in the world, selling to human rights violators? It just doesn't fit...
@NickNorie15 Oh trust me, I'm not defending politicians, big business or even the current wars we are fighting. I'm merely defending the soldiers who go into it, quite a lot of which are under the delusion that their purpose out there as seen by their governments is good.
After all there are many personal reasons why some people join the military. Its the same issue as buying cloths from companies that exploit children in 3rd world countries.
I completely agree which is why I really do my best to avoid buying from companies which are well known to be 3rd world exploiters. And, in the end, I have to agree with you. I honestly don't believe the majority of soldiers are evil, otherwise most of them wouldn't even be out in the war. There are no sons of senators out in the war. Lately there's been a tendency to seek soldiers in lower class families who don't really have many options in life.
@NickNorie15 Because you could easily say "why would you choose to give money to an organisation which abuses and exploits child labour?" which can apply to almost anyone. When the soldiers fight they do not thing that they are fighting for the corporations, because thats not the only thing that is being acheived out there in their eyes.
For example "so long as we are fighting them close to their home the fighting isn't in my country, close to home and family."
But yeah, I see your point and I have to agree with it. Ignorance is not the same as being evil but evil can only be promoted while there is ignorance. I guess that's really where Bill was trying to get at: People need to wake up and start asking their governments why they're really in the middle east.
@NickNorie15 And I fully support that message, however I was only criticising his poor wording and his concentration on the soldiers themselves, my main contention was with him saying "Arnt you all just hired killers?" which some people believe to be an accurate statement of the whole military. But I'm glad we could find some common ground :)
@NickNorie15 He doesn't go too far at all. He is spot on, the reason people think its a little too far is because you NEVER hear this kind of thing on TV. Fuck the army. Mind controlled drones. I dont care what anyone says, there is nothing heroic about throwing your life away, putting on a uniform, picking up a gun and killing people simply because you're told they're the enemy. Such a primitive thing, and if you want to sum up the species, take a look at the military.
@NickNorie15 Because war is a part of human existence, a powerful part of being human that changes they way you look at the world, life and death. Those perspectives give you a sense of the world that those that have not been to war just don't have, they could not understand.
every gay i know, openly one anyway, can solve ANY conflict with a light hearted humorous chat and a few cocktails... if that fails a dance off??? LETS HAVE MORE IN THE MILITARY! lets have the the military run by gays! Wars would hell more fun... with better haircuts and more interesting uniforms!!! Im ex military and straight... im all for it!
I don't know... Everything he says here is the fucking truth and I guess he does get some humor out of an otherwise depressing situation but did anyone hear some of these people laughing? What idiotic pricks laugh like that at jokes like this one? I mean seriously, did anyone listening to this video laughed as hard and as ridiculously as some of the animals you can hear in the background?
I'm ex-military, and I still support Bill Hicks' opinion. It turns out our current enemies were armed by us and now after over a decade since 9/11, a lot of military are starting to ask questions and no one has any good answers. This war is no longer worth fighting and I have to agree that anyone who wants to join, might need to listen to some Bill Hicks and then decide.
Does anyone know if video footage of this segment exists ? I would really like to see if his body language is as brilliant as his timing in this bit, because it is nothing less than dead on !
@janisakironmaiden besides the fact that most of the army is not actually combat oriented (although they are trained to fight as a BACK UP incase their location is attacked), maybe his stereotype that people who join the military only do it to kill, and that they are all thugs and on top of that want to kill children.
Its as much a stereotype as the Frenchman wearing a Beret. And although it does attract the alpha male types it is by no means exclusive.
@janisakironmaiden which is apparently that anyone stupid enough to join the military are welcome to, despite the fact that the majority of jobs require the passing of many complex tests (most notably for officers, engineers and practically every specialist profession). Unless I missed the point, in which case I'd appreciate being enlightened.
@MrMyers758 sure, u have to pass a lot of tests to join, u have to be able to read a book, study, follow orders. what u don't have to be able to is to think for ur self, not be a conformist, question the cases ur fighting for and ur orders. the army is about giving up indivudiality and follow orders blindly without any thought to right and wrong.
@janisakironmaiden giving up individuality? The process which is used in my country anyway is not to destroy individuality as it is well recognised that individuals have certain traits which can be used and yet cant be bred into someone. The only ones that are overtaken and given up are the ones which pose a threat to the soldier and therefore the effectiveness of the military itself.
@janisakironmaiden The fact that every officer I know totally agrees that the most important thing a soldier can have is character, shows to me at least that the institution does not drown out all personality.
Great leaders and warriors were great for the very fact that they where not like everyone else and maintained individuality, don't you think the military sees this? Like I said the only things which are dumbed down are the instincts which places everyone involved in danger in combat.
@janisakironmaiden Also thinking for yourself is a necessary skill which is actually taught to the soldier incase the situation arises that they are separated from their unit. Officers are taught to be broad minded and to think for themselves aswell as normal soldiers so that they can come up with plans, tactics and ideas dependant on an un-foreseen situation.
@janisakironmaiden I understand that the American military is a little lax on its restrictions and its training half as short as that of mine and most other 1st world countries, but to judge everything under the word "military" as this gross stereotype is shameful and personally I expected more from Bill Hicks. But as many people have demonstrated, even the smartest men have their blind spots which they are arrogant of, as no-one can know everything about everything.
@MrMyers758 i should have realized i was talking to a soldier. annother one of bill's points u miss is that the us army is the most un ethical oranisations in the world. anyone who ignore their hypocasy is dumb. anyone who think that we can bomb our way to democracy is dumb, and anyone who think the goal of the us army really is democracy is dumb.
@janisakironmaiden Thank you! You showed something about yourself which only you could prove! And that is that you make wrong judgements based on incomplete data. I am in fact a civilian, one who does not support the current war we are in, and I do not think that the goal of any military is democracy but rather security and control. Also I have never been a soldier by the way, however I do know alot.
@janisakironmaiden Also the hypocrisy of shouting "arnt you all hired killers? SHUT UP!" when said by a tax payer (who in a real sense is one of the people hiring them) should not be ignored. Also if these remarks you made are aimed at me specifically, I'd like to remind you that I have shown several times that I am not from the US, and so am not defending the US army specifically, infact I mentioned the fact that the US army has some of the worse training in the 1st world.
@janisakironmaiden Also in terms of ethical organisations, I think there are many different terrorist groups who are far more un-ethical, as neither the US or the British army actually officially plan the slaughter of civilians PURPOSELY, just for shock tactics (and yes the US army has used shock and awe, which I think is disgusting, which has killed civilians, however civilians were not the actual targets in such actions)
@MrMyers758 here is the thing, terrorists have never killed nearly as many people as the US army. no jihadist have removed more than 50 govemnents since 1945. and no other organisation is responsible for nearly as many deaths, civilian or othervise. as the us army. when it comes the cruel terrorist groups, many of them are or were funded by the us goverment
@MrMyers758 did i just see a smart and purpesfull utube debate? i'm not to big on getting online ironi so i don't know, but anyway. marry christmass :)
@MrMyers758 Yea, the US never plans to slaughter civilians PURPOSEFULLY. They just drop an atomic bomb on an entire city and if civilians HAPPEN to die, well....AMERICA!! YEA!!
@Khayman8888 I'm talking about the modern military numb nuts, as in the war we are fighting now. If your going to judge an entire institution by its history then I guess its fair to say that the British army is an institute set on colonisation and the subjugation of the entire world, and also that in both Britain and America it is legal to own a slave and blacks cannot drink from the same water fountains as whites.
@MrMyers758 because we need to drag our public into the war with us, but we DO kill civilians, and we kill THOUSANDS if not MILLIONS of them. It's BECAUSE it isn't our express goal to kill civilians that people like you are defending the moral integrity of foreign policy even when it results in the deaths of thousands of civilians, but look, man...
If you wanna believe American policy makers are the "good guys", then go right ahead, but you'll be living in blissful delusion.
@Khayman8888 Please point out one comment in which I defended the policy makers or defending morality. My original criticism was just a response to this generalisation of the military as a whole as expressed by Hicks itself, I never meant for this to be dragged into politics.
@MrMyers758 I didn't read your whole discourse, I just saw you making a statement that looked like you were saying that our army doesn't go out and kill civilians (which is what Bill Hicks is saying).
About 70 years ago, we wiped two cities off the face of the earth and not so much as a, "Well, maybe that was a bit strong" from our government. And we've been doing basically the same thing since.
I'm not attacking you though. But no government says, 'Let's kill civilians.'
@MrMyers758 Instead, they turn the civilians into "terrorists" and "insurgents" so that it's okay to drop bombs on them.
Terrorism is just the new Communism, which is just what the Nazis called Judaism. Check out Hermann Goering's quote about propaganda and war and tell me you don't see any similarities to the media in our country.
@Khayman8888 would you also claim that the German army is one who's ideas are to bomb the shit out of homes just to scare a populace of non-combatants over and over again? No you wouldnt! Because things change, we are not living in the 1940s!
Give me one example of an operation or battle within the current war which the express objective of the mission was to kill civilians.
@MrMyers758 The difference is that we have the exact same foreign policies that we did back then. After WWII, it was Vietnam, then it was Korea, then it was genocide in Nicaragua and other Southern American counties, then we were bombing Iraq after funding and arming them, then we're in Kosovo, then we're in Afghanistan fighting terrorist organizations that we funded and armed, then we're back in Iraq looking for WMDs that don't exist, and we have never been out to EXPRESSLY kill civilians
@MrMyers758 This is comedy, if you get offended by absolutely anything at all in comedy then theres no point in listening/watching it. What Bill says may conflict with your views, but this isn't about your views, this is about bill's views, even though its comedy so you shouldnt take this as his 100% view anyway which you seem to be doing.
@ElliotBrookshaw1 So pointing out the FACT that the majority of the army is not actually combat based is my "view"? Saying "arnt you all hired killers?" to a chef in the military, or an intelligence analyst, or someone in the finance sector, or an engineer, or a logistics specialist, or someone in the ceremonial sector, or the communications sector is valid or even justified? And what about the medics and surgeons who help wounded civilians as well as soldiers? Is that fair?
@MrMyers758 Yes, let's criticize the dead comedian's choice of words in defense of the trillion dollar industry predicated on the deaths of civilians overseas. I feel like we might finally start making some social progress if we re-prioritize our concerns, you know?
@MrMyers758 A major contributing factor, if not the sole largest, for investing as much into the military as we do -- non-combative or otherwise -- is the possibility of war. The end result of every war the U.S. has ever been involved in results in a significantly higher amount of civilian casualties than anything else.
That does not display that the military is predicated on civilian casualties, that just shows the expected results of any conflict which happens in an urban environment (as I'm sure you will agree a massive proportion of civilian causalities occur during urban battles, particularly battles in which there is no easy way to identify combatant from non-combatant (i.e. uniforms)).
Although not excusable, killing civilians is inevitable in any conflict, no matter what the cause.
@MrMyers758 Firstly, it is not only inevitable, but it makes up the vast majority of the death toll in all U.S. wars by far. Secondly, the murder of non-combative civilians en masse would be more aptly described as a massacre, rather than conflict, because it doesn't involve two opposing combatants. Thus the human cost of war is more rooted in murder than the conflict it claims to be addressing.
Give me one example where a high ranking US or British officer orders the massacre of civilians, in an area where there are absolutely no enemies in the area or even thought to be in the area, just one from lets say Iraq or Afghanistan. In terms of financial profit which is more desirable, the killing of armed opponents or the massacre of a civilian populace, and please explain exactly why your answer is correct.
@MrMyers758 Stated intent has never served to validate murdering of civilians in any other aspect of civilization, so why should it apply here? Especially when you take into account the sheer vastness in the difference of outcome from the stated intent, which I have illustrated. Murder is the most serious crime in the world, so it's odd that actions which demand it as their chief consequence can be validated by anyone claiming to have a conscience. Only through delusion could this be possible.
@treehousewizkid Once again too pose my question. In terms of financial profit which is more desirable, the killing of armed opponents or the massacre of a civilian populace, and please explain exactly why your answer is correct in as much detail as possible.
@MrMyers758 I don't think I see how my view on that isn't already implicit. As far as I can tell, I've already addressed where you're going with it. In any case, I'd prefer if you'd just make points in reference to what I've said instead of trying to make me drop what I'm doing and indulge your train of thought.
@treehousewizkid Excuse me but you did not answer a pretty sensible question relating to the overall claim you are making. The fact that you have failed to answer it directly twice in a row seems to suggest that you are trying to make me drop the question just to indulge your own train of thought.
@MrMyers758 You're going to argue that no-one in their right mind would pursue war from the standpoint of murdering civilians, and you're going to try to draw that conclusion from a financial basis in order to (erroneously) make a moral point. However, I've already addressed the question of intent, which you're trying to answer with a question that does nothing to debunk what I've said. Go in detail? Why waste time? Just get on with it if you have something to say.
@treehousewizkid Your assumptions are to your detriment. At no point during this discussion have I even tried to make the military seem like a moral institution or even attempt to justify killing anyone. If you could tell me how killing civilians is profitable, I would change my mind and conceed that the military is predicated on killing civilians (as a financial basis is the only sound model, as it is obviously not for a tactical reason).
@treehousewizkid However if you are unable to show how civilian casualties are an advantage to military operations, then your whole argument which is based upon the military being predicated on civilian deaths would be senseless. So please, make me change my mind. If I'm wrong, I want to know about it.
@MrMyers758 All industry performs functions for profit. Not all aspects of these functions are inherently profitable, but they're nonetheless an integral part of the overall function. Killing civilians is just as essential to war as the notion of profit, because the latter typically necessitates the former -- hence it being war, rather than something else. I never said that the military only exists to kill civilians, but the military only exists because it does kill civilians.
@treehousewizkid So your saying if it was possible for a military to operate without civilian casualties (i.e. in a technologically advanced war where detection and sensors makes it near impossible to kill a civilian by accident) then the military would break down and cease to exist?
@MrMyers758 I think the main difference in our discourse is that you're evaluating the military from a conceptual point of view and thus are assuming that I am also. If McDonald's actually started making good food then it would continue to exist, too, still under the concept of a restaurant geared towards profit. It doesn't change the fact that they presently make shitty food and their business model is based around that fact.
@treehousewizkid But you still haven't managed to explain WHY the military is based around civilian deaths. I could say for McDonalds that their business is based on shitty food because shitty food is cheap to make, therefore it is profitable for them to do so. Just because masses of civilians die during war does not mean that military operations are based on how many civilians they can kill.
@MrMyers758 I absolutely do not believe that military operations are based on civilian deaths, not in any shape or form. I'd lose my mind if I believed that. I'm not even inherently anti-war. My belief is that the basis for military action, as it stands, requires in most cases the deaths of civilians in exorbitant number and that the system functions on this knowledge. It's well understood in every credible pre-war estimate and is generally exceeded.
@treehousewizkid I have no issue with anything you just said except the usage of the word "requires", which insinuates that in most cases military operation NEED civilian casualties, and I cannot understand why you would think that.
Civilian casualties are estimated simply because they are almost always inevitable, and the only purpose this estimation serves is to inform strategists and to be used in decision making so the estimated number could be lowered (though hardly ever successful).
@treehousewizkid Now if you were to say that weapons manufacturers are predicated on civilian deaths you would have a point. In fact weapons manufacturers are predicated on weapons being fired, no matter who they are fired at or whether it hits the target, because the more the gun is fired, the more rounds the military has to buy and the sooner weapons need replacing, all profit for them. But the military itself?
In fact heres some food for thought, a conflict which is considered a major one in my country is the Falklands war, it happened in 1982 and you might be interested in the casualty report! 649 Argentinians killed, 255 British killed and 19 civilian deaths. Is that a massive percentage? Its horrible that any civilians had to die but can your claim still hold up when looking at this war? Was is a bad victory for the British because they didn't kill enough civilians?
@treehousewizkid Heres another interesting fact, 76% of civilian casualties in 2009 in Afghanistan were inflicted by the Taliban. Was that to the detriment of the actual militarys involved because they were only responsible for less than a quarter of them?
The difference between the current war and the Falklands and other such conflicts is that in one you have an easily identifiable foe, but in the other, the civilians and the enemy are totally inseparable upon initial appearance.
@MrMyers758 More comments isn't a problem; I have no issue with someone going in-depth. Allow me to say in reference to Afghanistan: our own estimate on civilian casualties prior to the U.S. involvement in the region (which at this point was either inarguably modest or just plain inaccurate) was calculated as a necessary consequence contingent on our entry there.
Vote for a candidate that stands for liberty, freedom, and fighting against increasing state tyranny! A candidate that has been consistent in their beliefs for dozens of years. A candidate standing for small government and an end to the war on drugs and America's bloated and unsustainable empire.
Vote up, spread the message, and inform family and friends; support real change. This upcoming election really matters, and liberty can win.
What is the difference between hitmen and the military? They both get paid to kill people for secret agendas, so why is the military so "moral" and why do we have to pay them to kill people so even more people will hate us and try to kill us because we killed their families? If no country had a military there would be no wars, so why do we escalate military spending instead of decreasing it? Because by having a strong military we can impose our imperialism on the rest of the world. No morality.
Why do we respect the military so much? They are just psychopathic murders. They don't even care who they kill, you just have to say the word and they will kill anybody. Iraqis, Panamanians, British, Germans, US protesters, Japanese, Italians, Koreans, Vietnamese, "communists" (socialists by literal definition), Afghanis, Pakistanis, Native Americans, Mexicans, Spanish, Pacific Islanders, Canadians, Chinese, Somalians, Cubans, Yugoslavians, etc. have all been killed by the US military.
@DomzWaffles i like how you put a disclaimer before saying you support gays. Lol "100% sure that Im straight" hahaha, you sure you haven't had any gay thoughts lately.
I am so very sorry this man died way before his time, He Was Total Genius and it's to fucking bad we've not had a President with a 1000th of a Percent of his Intellect in America.
This is the bit I hate from Bill. I agree there is no such thing as a good war but it's not right to call all of the soldiers baby killers and disgusting hired killers or thugs, they're kids most of them at least and they're fighting so Bill can say all of this shit, if it weren't for those kids wanting to fight we'd have a draft and people like Bill would be pissing themselves in foxholes as bullets fly by.
@MrCaptainGingersnap "kids wanting to fight". Who are they wanting to fight? A bogus enemy? It also sounds like Bill is questioning who our enemies (if any) are.
@MrCaptainGingersnap That's the whle point of his dialogue. He knows that they don't fight for our freedoms, because no-one is a threat. Use your brain.
Bill Hicks is an idiot, our nations military is our defense against terriorists.We just help the ones who need it.You should look into something before you run your stupid mouth about it .You take a trip to Iraq and see if your retarted point-of-view changes.Without a military your just a man without an army.good luck with hat
@AFKairsoft wow i never knew someone could be as ignorant and idiotic as you. Nation defense today is not nation defense anymore because the money gos over seas to fight for a war based on lies, the reason Iraq was invaded was a lie, And there is allot of argument if the "terrorist" even took down the twin towers considering there has been papers like operation north-woods leaked, that was pretty much the same idea(to blow up planes and scare the public) but to start a war with cuba.
@AFKairsoft hahaha that's the best argument you can make lol, I absolutely hate emos I am not a communist(i doubt you even know what communism is) I don't hate either of my parents because I have mildly intelligent ones unlike most parents I have meet. You try to attack me because you truly are fucked mentally.
@AFKairsoft... And who started the Iraq war. The U.S. government. Also before we invaded Iraq, were there any terrorists there? No
So what is your point? A deployment to Iraq if one was over there with a brain would just teach you the incredible tragedy at how Americas simple minded politics lead to so many pointless deaths.
If we weren't keeping the Palestinians down and oppressed, as well as supporting murder, torture, and genocide in the middle east do you think we would have terrorists?
@GhostInTheShell29 Not counting American terrorism, terrorism almost entirely funded by our allies Saudi Arabia. Most terrorists are just mercenaries, Uneducated, unemployed, illiterates with no prospects. Some are easily whipped up by religious propaganda.. its not hard cuz its not like they can even read the Q'uran. But most are just in it for the money.
Want to really stop terrorism, education and jobs would do a lot more then randomly invading countries.
@AFKairsoft your nations military murders innocent and rapes there culture and there resources you really need to get a education. your defense isn't defense at all it gos around the world to support militarism in fact you had the resources and knowledge to stop the "plane" from crashing into the pentagon and your country decided to look the other way. Please do some research, and communism can work with democracy you brain-washed sheep, tho I do not support the ideology and I think it's flawed.
@kenfo0 From what are gays deviating? The biblical standard: King Soloman fucking 6 chicks a day in his harem? King David fucking another guy's wife while the guy's in combat? God knocking up a 12 year old virgin with his illegitimate son? Jesus great great grandmother Tamar turning tricks at the village shrine? 50% hetero divorce rate? 1/3rd of all women murdered in the US are killed by a heterosexual lover. Its about fucking time the MEN in the world DEVIATED from this gold standard.
@foxfingers there is no such thing as "homophobia". You have been brainwashed. You think that is some hokey, 1950's sci-fi nonsense. It is easy, if one controls the means to income and/or media. I dare you to not watch tv...at all....for 1 month. When you turn it back on, you will be shocked at how stupid, empty, selfish and mean it is. They talk down to you as if you are a stupid loser, and you can't WAIT to tune in. Why? You've been brainwashed into accepting bad things as good...
@foxfingers that's great, if true. It makes little difference to the extent that for at least 20 yrs, homosexuality has been taught in public schools as a "valid, alternative 'lifestyle'". It is pushed in movies. The term homophobe is CLEARLY nonsensical. I've yet to meet someone who has a panic attack when they approach a homo. Not approving of a degenerate behavior does NOT meet ANY psychological criterion of mental illness. The REASON the term was invented relates to leftist propoganda.
@Bloodfang23 He believes it. Bill used his comedy routine & stage time to express his views. Most of his material has a point to it, & I personally agree with his views on most things- especially this one. Anybody willing to kill someone does not understand what life in the physical world is supposed to be about.
these are the people who want u to all think the same, walk around with the same clothes and be controlled by the happy faced fascists who want u to be "obediant Workers"
shut the fuck up with ur nonsense, light up a doobie, eat some good shit, and realize we gatta start living together if we wanna make this shit right, so stop hating people that where born different than you!
and we gatta start providing for one another instead of bombing each other
@tan The majority of your post is "to" me but you didn't post to me....what a coward. Not surprising, for you degenerates. You accept necrophilia and bestiality? Yes, you do. but you whine "how DARE you say that!". It is from YOUR THOUGHTS. "Aw, what's the big deal? smoke dope and have sex with chickens, you have no right to judge! You are just a hater". Uh, no, dumbass. Homosexuality has nothing to do with "bombing" anyone. So you have no point at all? Think before you speak, boy.
:45 the wicked witch of the west was in the crowd that night apparently
ckyisyourfuture 1 day ago
@nicetomeetyou25 You need to shut the fuck up. If you're a myopic homophobe, that is your problem - and yes IT IS a problem. Leave Nick alone for being intelligent enough to accept others.
MagicalyStacy 2 days ago
fuck this guy if he said this to anyone in the military hed get his faggot ass BEAT DOWN
nicetomeetyou25 2 days ago
@nicetomeetyou25
Hmm... You sound like a homophobic ignorant twat.
NickNorie15 2 days ago
@NickNorie15 you sound like a faggot
nicetomeetyou25 2 days ago
@nicetomeetyou25
thanks for proving my point.
NickNorie15 2 days ago
@NickNorie15 choke on a sausage and die from AIDS faggot
nicetomeetyou25 2 days ago
Makes me laugh, all you hear about today, is how the USA is the most powerful country in the world, when in fact, there are a lot of countries far more powerful. For example, Britain still technically owns america - that whole war of independence was bullshit, and everyone fell for it. Oh, we won our freedom from those evil royal worshipping britons, and now we'll fly over there, get down on our knees and get a knighthood from the same bloodline that enslaved us. Pathetic.
motley0crue12 2 days ago
Bill Hicks, enough said. :)
Munstallstodes 1 week ago
Ya know, I wonder why I don't get free rounds of beer, discounts all over the place, worthless thanks on the streets and bumper stickers in my honor.
Not only was I smart enough not to join up and bleed shit-tons of tax dollars from my countrymen, go off and commit atrocities against innocent foreigners, and support evil elitists in further reducing our freedoms, but I'm not an asshole to those who aren't in my special little fraternity.
I salute you fellow civvies who work hard for no glory!
benskin79 1 week ago
I love the smell of napalm in the morning.
joesimmons90 1 week ago
In Greco-Roman times, they actually encouraged homosexuality in the military to increase the bonds between troops. It's funny how perceptions change over time.
psyoptica 1 week ago
Comment removed
46spoony 1 week ago
Those soldiers pissing on dead Afghanis are obviously gay, and they're necrophiliacs.
JasonMarshMusic 1 week ago
Because the second you say military you are talking about the entire structure, your not talking about the fighting force individually. What he is saying amounts to a massive over-generalisation based on a typical stereotype, one of which I have not met a soldier who meets it, not even the ones in the combat arm.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 You're completely missing my point, your looking into a comedy routine way too deeply, comedy is not to be taken personally. He is speaking in a general sence to get his point across to the audience in an accesible way. Stop hating on what hes said like you know that its his absolute view.
ElliotBrookshaw1 1 week ago
@ElliotBrookshaw1 To get what point across may I ask?
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 His point is the joke itself. It's all a joke and you seem to be offended by it. Comedy is something that you should be open minded about, don't pick up on little things and expand on them, whats the point?
ElliotBrookshaw1 1 week ago
@ElliotBrookshaw1 His point was the joke itself? That is vague. Perhaps you could tell me the actual point he was trying to make.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758
There have been a few men making a lot of money out of every single war the U.S has ever been in. That fact, in itself, already puts in doubt any reasons the government gives you to justify soldiers being out there. Add to that the fact that the U.S has armed many of these countries considered a threat and you start seeing why Bill didn't think it was a good idea to join the military.
NickNorie15 1 week ago 5
@NickNorie15
First of all, I have stated before that I do not support the reasons why we are at war in Afghanistan. Besides which I was not criticising him saying that it is not a good idea to join the military, as I can see plenty of reasons why someone should not. I was criticising his accusation that all people in the military are hired killers.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758
In the end, he goes a bit far once in a while, maybe cause he's just too pissed (and he should be, everyone should) but ultimately the basis of his idea is completely correct: Why would you join the army? Why would you help this entity, putting your life in danger so that some old fuckers can profit?
NickNorie15 1 week ago 18
@NickNorie15
" Why would you join the army?"
Good pay is one reason, a disciplinary environment is appealing to some who cannot keep a steady life, and of course the thrill seeking. After all, you never feel more alive then when your life is on a knife edge.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@NickNorie15
"Why would you help this entity, putting your life in danger so that some old fuckers can profit?"
First of all, we once again hit the massive oversight of the military, and that is a massive part of it is non-combat. Ask an intelligence officer whether his life is on the line, or a chef.
Second of all, there are a multitude of things which the military does (not just for profit), for the individuals and for communities (like protecting African villagers from warlord food raids).
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758
Protecting African villagers? Between 1997 and 2000, the US made more money selling weapons to third world countries than they gave in aid. I really don't believe a country like that, the biggest supplier of DEATH in the planet worries much about protecting African villagers. Even if there are humanitarian actions undertaken by the military, it's not like they compensate for the fake conflicts they've been involved in.
NickNorie15 1 week ago
@NickNorie15 Ah, my apologies. If I'd known that he was talking exclusively about the US military and not military's in general then I would have kept my nose out (since most of my references are to the British Army). However if it is meant to be a criticism of the military institutions then we still have problems.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758
Also, just because there are men who are not in the line of duty, it doesn't mean they're not responsible for atrocities being promoted out in the field. You can't argue against the fact that billions are spent in war, actual war (not the military as a whole). Even soldiers themselves said they were ashamed of taking part in this: watch?v=b3ZjsC3BOBE Watch this and tell me what you think.
NickNorie15 1 week ago
@NickNorie15 From the same vein I could say that tax payers are just as responsible. As without that, the soldiers actually doing the killing would not have a pay package. And of course there would be people being ashamed of helping out the military, that's just inevitable.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758
Not really as tax payers shouldn't be paying their taxes to get in return education, a good health system and so on... It really comes down to this: No matter how you look at it, the primary role the military plays today (and played when Bill was around during the 80's and 90's and even before that) is far from moral.
NickNorie15 1 week ago
@MrMyers758
I mean, really, it doesn't make sense. The main reason politicians in the U.S (and U.K, France and every other country in the UN security council) give you for invading a country like Afghanistan is to maintain world peace. How can these countries (the members of the SECURITY COUNCIL) be worried about maintaining peace and also be the biggest weapon suppliers in the world, selling to human rights violators? It just doesn't fit...
NickNorie15 1 week ago
@NickNorie15 Oh trust me, I'm not defending politicians, big business or even the current wars we are fighting. I'm merely defending the soldiers who go into it, quite a lot of which are under the delusion that their purpose out there as seen by their governments is good.
After all there are many personal reasons why some people join the military. Its the same issue as buying cloths from companies that exploit children in 3rd world countries.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758
I completely agree which is why I really do my best to avoid buying from companies which are well known to be 3rd world exploiters. And, in the end, I have to agree with you. I honestly don't believe the majority of soldiers are evil, otherwise most of them wouldn't even be out in the war. There are no sons of senators out in the war. Lately there's been a tendency to seek soldiers in lower class families who don't really have many options in life.
NickNorie15 1 week ago
@NickNorie15 Because you could easily say "why would you choose to give money to an organisation which abuses and exploits child labour?" which can apply to almost anyone. When the soldiers fight they do not thing that they are fighting for the corporations, because thats not the only thing that is being acheived out there in their eyes.
For example "so long as we are fighting them close to their home the fighting isn't in my country, close to home and family."
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758
But yeah, I see your point and I have to agree with it. Ignorance is not the same as being evil but evil can only be promoted while there is ignorance. I guess that's really where Bill was trying to get at: People need to wake up and start asking their governments why they're really in the middle east.
NickNorie15 1 week ago
@NickNorie15 And I fully support that message, however I was only criticising his poor wording and his concentration on the soldiers themselves, my main contention was with him saying "Arnt you all just hired killers?" which some people believe to be an accurate statement of the whole military. But I'm glad we could find some common ground :)
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@NickNorie15 He doesn't go too far at all. He is spot on, the reason people think its a little too far is because you NEVER hear this kind of thing on TV. Fuck the army. Mind controlled drones. I dont care what anyone says, there is nothing heroic about throwing your life away, putting on a uniform, picking up a gun and killing people simply because you're told they're the enemy. Such a primitive thing, and if you want to sum up the species, take a look at the military.
motley0crue12 2 days ago
@NickNorie15 Because war is a part of human existence, a powerful part of being human that changes they way you look at the world, life and death. Those perspectives give you a sense of the world that those that have not been to war just don't have, they could not understand.
JonesNobodyJones 2 days ago
in fact the military is already full of gays!!! closet ones!!!
MrShirlz00 1 week ago
every gay i know, openly one anyway, can solve ANY conflict with a light hearted humorous chat and a few cocktails... if that fails a dance off??? LETS HAVE MORE IN THE MILITARY! lets have the the military run by gays! Wars would hell more fun... with better haircuts and more interesting uniforms!!! Im ex military and straight... im all for it!
MrShirlz00 1 week ago
People should copy and paste the link to this video on every army-promoting video on fucking youtube.
NickNorie15 2 weeks ago
"I don't want to see those gays when I'm out there killing children. I just don't want to see it."
Scatterbrain191 2 weeks ago
Bill failed to note the US also like to bomb the fuck out of innocent white people, remember kosovo and serbia.
irrepressiblenobody 2 weeks ago
@irrepressiblenobody Eh, they were only borderline white.
CoolerKing37 1 week ago
I don't know... Everything he says here is the fucking truth and I guess he does get some humor out of an otherwise depressing situation but did anyone hear some of these people laughing? What idiotic pricks laugh like that at jokes like this one? I mean seriously, did anyone listening to this video laughed as hard and as ridiculously as some of the animals you can hear in the background?
NickNorie15 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
check out my channel for the best of bill hicks
Rokamakafown 2 weeks ago
FUCK U U RELEGIOUS PRICKS!!!
007gumshoe 3 weeks ago
if u are sensitive to those kinds of words, fuck you........get it??? FUCK YOU!!
007gumshoe 3 weeks ago
I'm ex-military, and I still support Bill Hicks' opinion. It turns out our current enemies were armed by us and now after over a decade since 9/11, a lot of military are starting to ask questions and no one has any good answers. This war is no longer worth fighting and I have to agree that anyone who wants to join, might need to listen to some Bill Hicks and then decide.
Wrathbone13 3 weeks ago 20
@Wrathbone13 Remember the Japanese Empire during WW2?
The empire was formed during the Boshin war, during which the imperialists were armed with US weapons and technology.
The US is really good at creating its future enemies.
Squiglypig 3 weeks ago
EPIC.
Cassius327 3 weeks ago
Bill, how the fuck are we supposed to know who are enemies are going to be in the future? This man's hindsight is impeccable.
StevenMJiggalo 1 month ago
@StevenMJiggalo You're an idiot
kdavisification 2 weeks ago
@kdavisification Don't forget to add that period at the end of a sentence. You know, seeings how you're such a mental giant here.
StevenMJiggalo 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Does anyone know if video footage of this segment exists ? I would really like to see if his body language is as brilliant as his timing in this bit, because it is nothing less than dead on !
marketharry 1 month ago
Comment removed
marketharry 1 month ago
Comment removed
marketharry 1 month ago
We need more comedians like Bill. We got too many mediocre assholes that just talk about how their wives got them whipped.
whiteboynigg 1 month ago
My apologise for the essay.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
Fuck you Bill Hicks. From a liberal, bisexual atheist. Fuck you.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 why? because u love the imperealist killers in the army?
janisakironmaiden 1 month ago
@janisakironmaiden besides the fact that most of the army is not actually combat oriented (although they are trained to fight as a BACK UP incase their location is attacked), maybe his stereotype that people who join the military only do it to kill, and that they are all thugs and on top of that want to kill children.
Its as much a stereotype as the Frenchman wearing a Beret. And although it does attract the alpha male types it is by no means exclusive.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 u miss bil's point completely...
janisakironmaiden 1 month ago
@janisakironmaiden which is apparently that anyone stupid enough to join the military are welcome to, despite the fact that the majority of jobs require the passing of many complex tests (most notably for officers, engineers and practically every specialist profession). Unless I missed the point, in which case I'd appreciate being enlightened.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 sure, u have to pass a lot of tests to join, u have to be able to read a book, study, follow orders. what u don't have to be able to is to think for ur self, not be a conformist, question the cases ur fighting for and ur orders. the army is about giving up indivudiality and follow orders blindly without any thought to right and wrong.
janisakironmaiden 1 month ago
@janisakironmaiden giving up individuality? The process which is used in my country anyway is not to destroy individuality as it is well recognised that individuals have certain traits which can be used and yet cant be bred into someone. The only ones that are overtaken and given up are the ones which pose a threat to the soldier and therefore the effectiveness of the military itself.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@janisakironmaiden The fact that every officer I know totally agrees that the most important thing a soldier can have is character, shows to me at least that the institution does not drown out all personality.
Great leaders and warriors were great for the very fact that they where not like everyone else and maintained individuality, don't you think the military sees this? Like I said the only things which are dumbed down are the instincts which places everyone involved in danger in combat.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@janisakironmaiden Also thinking for yourself is a necessary skill which is actually taught to the soldier incase the situation arises that they are separated from their unit. Officers are taught to be broad minded and to think for themselves aswell as normal soldiers so that they can come up with plans, tactics and ideas dependant on an un-foreseen situation.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@janisakironmaiden I understand that the American military is a little lax on its restrictions and its training half as short as that of mine and most other 1st world countries, but to judge everything under the word "military" as this gross stereotype is shameful and personally I expected more from Bill Hicks. But as many people have demonstrated, even the smartest men have their blind spots which they are arrogant of, as no-one can know everything about everything.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 i should have realized i was talking to a soldier. annother one of bill's points u miss is that the us army is the most un ethical oranisations in the world. anyone who ignore their hypocasy is dumb. anyone who think that we can bomb our way to democracy is dumb, and anyone who think the goal of the us army really is democracy is dumb.
janisakironmaiden 1 month ago
@janisakironmaiden Thank you! You showed something about yourself which only you could prove! And that is that you make wrong judgements based on incomplete data. I am in fact a civilian, one who does not support the current war we are in, and I do not think that the goal of any military is democracy but rather security and control. Also I have never been a soldier by the way, however I do know alot.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@janisakironmaiden Also the hypocrisy of shouting "arnt you all hired killers? SHUT UP!" when said by a tax payer (who in a real sense is one of the people hiring them) should not be ignored. Also if these remarks you made are aimed at me specifically, I'd like to remind you that I have shown several times that I am not from the US, and so am not defending the US army specifically, infact I mentioned the fact that the US army has some of the worse training in the 1st world.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@janisakironmaiden Also in terms of ethical organisations, I think there are many different terrorist groups who are far more un-ethical, as neither the US or the British army actually officially plan the slaughter of civilians PURPOSELY, just for shock tactics (and yes the US army has used shock and awe, which I think is disgusting, which has killed civilians, however civilians were not the actual targets in such actions)
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 here is the thing, terrorists have never killed nearly as many people as the US army. no jihadist have removed more than 50 govemnents since 1945. and no other organisation is responsible for nearly as many deaths, civilian or othervise. as the us army. when it comes the cruel terrorist groups, many of them are or were funded by the us goverment
janisakironmaiden 1 month ago
@janisakironmaiden Ok, you have me there.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 did i just see a smart and purpesfull utube debate? i'm not to big on getting online ironi so i don't know, but anyway. marry christmass :)
janisakironmaiden 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 Yea, the US never plans to slaughter civilians PURPOSEFULLY. They just drop an atomic bomb on an entire city and if civilians HAPPEN to die, well....AMERICA!! YEA!!
Read a fucking book, son.
Khayman8888 1 month ago
@Khayman8888 I'm talking about the modern military numb nuts, as in the war we are fighting now. If your going to judge an entire institution by its history then I guess its fair to say that the British army is an institute set on colonisation and the subjugation of the entire world, and also that in both Britain and America it is legal to own a slave and blacks cannot drink from the same water fountains as whites.
Great logic.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 because we need to drag our public into the war with us, but we DO kill civilians, and we kill THOUSANDS if not MILLIONS of them. It's BECAUSE it isn't our express goal to kill civilians that people like you are defending the moral integrity of foreign policy even when it results in the deaths of thousands of civilians, but look, man...
If you wanna believe American policy makers are the "good guys", then go right ahead, but you'll be living in blissful delusion.
Khayman8888 1 month ago
@Khayman8888 Please point out one comment in which I defended the policy makers or defending morality. My original criticism was just a response to this generalisation of the military as a whole as expressed by Hicks itself, I never meant for this to be dragged into politics.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 I didn't read your whole discourse, I just saw you making a statement that looked like you were saying that our army doesn't go out and kill civilians (which is what Bill Hicks is saying).
About 70 years ago, we wiped two cities off the face of the earth and not so much as a, "Well, maybe that was a bit strong" from our government. And we've been doing basically the same thing since.
I'm not attacking you though. But no government says, 'Let's kill civilians.'
Khayman8888 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 Instead, they turn the civilians into "terrorists" and "insurgents" so that it's okay to drop bombs on them.
Terrorism is just the new Communism, which is just what the Nazis called Judaism. Check out Hermann Goering's quote about propaganda and war and tell me you don't see any similarities to the media in our country.
Khayman8888 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 And Merry Christmas to you as well.
Khayman8888 1 month ago
@Khayman8888 would you also claim that the German army is one who's ideas are to bomb the shit out of homes just to scare a populace of non-combatants over and over again? No you wouldnt! Because things change, we are not living in the 1940s!
Give me one example of an operation or battle within the current war which the express objective of the mission was to kill civilians.
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 The difference is that we have the exact same foreign policies that we did back then. After WWII, it was Vietnam, then it was Korea, then it was genocide in Nicaragua and other Southern American counties, then we were bombing Iraq after funding and arming them, then we're in Kosovo, then we're in Afghanistan fighting terrorist organizations that we funded and armed, then we're back in Iraq looking for WMDs that don't exist, and we have never been out to EXPRESSLY kill civilians
Khayman8888 1 month ago
@Khayman8888 Oh, and merry crimbo!
MrMyers758 1 month ago
@MrMyers758 This is comedy, if you get offended by absolutely anything at all in comedy then theres no point in listening/watching it. What Bill says may conflict with your views, but this isn't about your views, this is about bill's views, even though its comedy so you shouldnt take this as his 100% view anyway which you seem to be doing.
ElliotBrookshaw1 1 week ago
@ElliotBrookshaw1 So pointing out the FACT that the majority of the army is not actually combat based is my "view"? Saying "arnt you all hired killers?" to a chef in the military, or an intelligence analyst, or someone in the finance sector, or an engineer, or a logistics specialist, or someone in the ceremonial sector, or the communications sector is valid or even justified? And what about the medics and surgeons who help wounded civilians as well as soldiers? Is that fair?
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 Yes, let's criticize the dead comedian's choice of words in defense of the trillion dollar industry predicated on the deaths of civilians overseas. I feel like we might finally start making some social progress if we re-prioritize our concerns, you know?
treehousewizkid 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid
Tell me exactly how a military is PREDICATED on the deaths of civilians. Please, in detail if you can.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 A major contributing factor, if not the sole largest, for investing as much into the military as we do -- non-combative or otherwise -- is the possibility of war. The end result of every war the U.S. has ever been involved in results in a significantly higher amount of civilian casualties than anything else.
treehousewizkid 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid
That does not display that the military is predicated on civilian casualties, that just shows the expected results of any conflict which happens in an urban environment (as I'm sure you will agree a massive proportion of civilian causalities occur during urban battles, particularly battles in which there is no easy way to identify combatant from non-combatant (i.e. uniforms)).
Although not excusable, killing civilians is inevitable in any conflict, no matter what the cause.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 Firstly, it is not only inevitable, but it makes up the vast majority of the death toll in all U.S. wars by far. Secondly, the murder of non-combative civilians en masse would be more aptly described as a massacre, rather than conflict, because it doesn't involve two opposing combatants. Thus the human cost of war is more rooted in murder than the conflict it claims to be addressing.
treehousewizkid 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid
Give me one example where a high ranking US or British officer orders the massacre of civilians, in an area where there are absolutely no enemies in the area or even thought to be in the area, just one from lets say Iraq or Afghanistan. In terms of financial profit which is more desirable, the killing of armed opponents or the massacre of a civilian populace, and please explain exactly why your answer is correct.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 Stated intent has never served to validate murdering of civilians in any other aspect of civilization, so why should it apply here? Especially when you take into account the sheer vastness in the difference of outcome from the stated intent, which I have illustrated. Murder is the most serious crime in the world, so it's odd that actions which demand it as their chief consequence can be validated by anyone claiming to have a conscience. Only through delusion could this be possible.
treehousewizkid 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid Once again too pose my question. In terms of financial profit which is more desirable, the killing of armed opponents or the massacre of a civilian populace, and please explain exactly why your answer is correct in as much detail as possible.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 I don't think I see how my view on that isn't already implicit. As far as I can tell, I've already addressed where you're going with it. In any case, I'd prefer if you'd just make points in reference to what I've said instead of trying to make me drop what I'm doing and indulge your train of thought.
treehousewizkid 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid Excuse me but you did not answer a pretty sensible question relating to the overall claim you are making. The fact that you have failed to answer it directly twice in a row seems to suggest that you are trying to make me drop the question just to indulge your own train of thought.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 You're going to argue that no-one in their right mind would pursue war from the standpoint of murdering civilians, and you're going to try to draw that conclusion from a financial basis in order to (erroneously) make a moral point. However, I've already addressed the question of intent, which you're trying to answer with a question that does nothing to debunk what I've said. Go in detail? Why waste time? Just get on with it if you have something to say.
treehousewizkid 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid Your assumptions are to your detriment. At no point during this discussion have I even tried to make the military seem like a moral institution or even attempt to justify killing anyone. If you could tell me how killing civilians is profitable, I would change my mind and conceed that the military is predicated on killing civilians (as a financial basis is the only sound model, as it is obviously not for a tactical reason).
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid However if you are unable to show how civilian casualties are an advantage to military operations, then your whole argument which is based upon the military being predicated on civilian deaths would be senseless. So please, make me change my mind. If I'm wrong, I want to know about it.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 All industry performs functions for profit. Not all aspects of these functions are inherently profitable, but they're nonetheless an integral part of the overall function. Killing civilians is just as essential to war as the notion of profit, because the latter typically necessitates the former -- hence it being war, rather than something else. I never said that the military only exists to kill civilians, but the military only exists because it does kill civilians.
treehousewizkid 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid So your saying if it was possible for a military to operate without civilian casualties (i.e. in a technologically advanced war where detection and sensors makes it near impossible to kill a civilian by accident) then the military would break down and cease to exist?
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 I think the main difference in our discourse is that you're evaluating the military from a conceptual point of view and thus are assuming that I am also. If McDonald's actually started making good food then it would continue to exist, too, still under the concept of a restaurant geared towards profit. It doesn't change the fact that they presently make shitty food and their business model is based around that fact.
treehousewizkid 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid But you still haven't managed to explain WHY the military is based around civilian deaths. I could say for McDonalds that their business is based on shitty food because shitty food is cheap to make, therefore it is profitable for them to do so. Just because masses of civilians die during war does not mean that military operations are based on how many civilians they can kill.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 I absolutely do not believe that military operations are based on civilian deaths, not in any shape or form. I'd lose my mind if I believed that. I'm not even inherently anti-war. My belief is that the basis for military action, as it stands, requires in most cases the deaths of civilians in exorbitant number and that the system functions on this knowledge. It's well understood in every credible pre-war estimate and is generally exceeded.
treehousewizkid 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid I have no issue with anything you just said except the usage of the word "requires", which insinuates that in most cases military operation NEED civilian casualties, and I cannot understand why you would think that.
Civilian casualties are estimated simply because they are almost always inevitable, and the only purpose this estimation serves is to inform strategists and to be used in decision making so the estimated number could be lowered (though hardly ever successful).
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid Now if you were to say that weapons manufacturers are predicated on civilian deaths you would have a point. In fact weapons manufacturers are predicated on weapons being fired, no matter who they are fired at or whether it hits the target, because the more the gun is fired, the more rounds the military has to buy and the sooner weapons need replacing, all profit for them. But the military itself?
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid
In fact heres some food for thought, a conflict which is considered a major one in my country is the Falklands war, it happened in 1982 and you might be interested in the casualty report! 649 Argentinians killed, 255 British killed and 19 civilian deaths. Is that a massive percentage? Its horrible that any civilians had to die but can your claim still hold up when looking at this war? Was is a bad victory for the British because they didn't kill enough civilians?
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid Heres another interesting fact, 76% of civilian casualties in 2009 in Afghanistan were inflicted by the Taliban. Was that to the detriment of the actual militarys involved because they were only responsible for less than a quarter of them?
The difference between the current war and the Falklands and other such conflicts is that in one you have an easily identifiable foe, but in the other, the civilians and the enemy are totally inseparable upon initial appearance.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@treehousewizkid And dont get me started on the Gaza War! The civilian to combatant death rate is estimated to be 1 civilian per 30 combatant deaths!
My apologise if I'v made too many comments its just hard not to hold back information when you have it and it helps.
MrMyers758 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 More comments isn't a problem; I have no issue with someone going in-depth. Allow me to say in reference to Afghanistan: our own estimate on civilian casualties prior to the U.S. involvement in the region (which at this point was either inarguably modest or just plain inaccurate) was calculated as a necessary consequence contingent on our entry there.
treehousewizkid 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 And it should be noted that I'm only referring to the military as it stands in regard to its funding.
treehousewizkid 1 week ago
@MrMyers758 wtf you on about?
walmartio 1 month ago
Anyone who has a problem with what Bill Hicks said about the military, please do me and yourslef a favour
1 - Go to Google
2 - Click on Images
3 - Type in "Abu Ghraib"
4 - Turn SafeSearch Off
If you still think the military have morals, you're a fucking scumbag and I hate you
1IIOOOO 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul 2012!
Vote for a candidate that stands for liberty, freedom, and fighting against increasing state tyranny! A candidate that has been consistent in their beliefs for dozens of years. A candidate standing for small government and an end to the war on drugs and America's bloated and unsustainable empire.
Vote up, spread the message, and inform family and friends; support real change. This upcoming election really matters, and liberty can win.
RapsAlive 1 month ago
What is the difference between hitmen and the military? They both get paid to kill people for secret agendas, so why is the military so "moral" and why do we have to pay them to kill people so even more people will hate us and try to kill us because we killed their families? If no country had a military there would be no wars, so why do we escalate military spending instead of decreasing it? Because by having a strong military we can impose our imperialism on the rest of the world. No morality.
rustyschackleford100 1 month ago
Why do we respect the military so much? They are just psychopathic murders. They don't even care who they kill, you just have to say the word and they will kill anybody. Iraqis, Panamanians, British, Germans, US protesters, Japanese, Italians, Koreans, Vietnamese, "communists" (socialists by literal definition), Afghanis, Pakistanis, Native Americans, Mexicans, Spanish, Pacific Islanders, Canadians, Chinese, Somalians, Cubans, Yugoslavians, etc. have all been killed by the US military.
rustyschackleford100 1 month ago
i am 100% straight, but i support gay rights. wanna know why? two people love each other. big fucking deal.
DomzWaffles 1 month ago 47
@DomzWaffles i like how you put a disclaimer before saying you support gays. Lol "100% sure that Im straight" hahaha, you sure you haven't had any gay thoughts lately.
devil7995 3 weeks ago
I am so very sorry this man died way before his time, He Was Total Genius and it's to fucking bad we've not had a President with a 1000th of a Percent of his Intellect in America.
BabylonsKing 1 month ago
interesting... for some reason the last seconds are cut off now. seems like yet another great youtube update fucked it up...
notthere83 1 month ago
"i don't want any gay people around me while i'm killing kids." fucking classic. so true.
jsnell126 1 month ago 4
i want some fuckin musket repelant!!! i cant spell
crazy4coke 2 months ago
i FUCKING love you Bill Hicks, and i Fucking miss you! nowadays theres no one like you in the tv...
MrGnosty 2 months ago
Imagine what he would think of all the bullshit that exists today.
Huddiethegreat 2 months ago
Damn bill we need you now. You were awake.
HaLfDeAdArtist1 2 months ago
I always tell people, "I defer to Bill Hicks on this subject", knowing that 99% of them have no idea what I'm talking about.
aeternusero 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
infowars.com infowars.com infowars.com
infowars.com infowars.com infowars.com
resistance is victory
hehh666 2 months ago
I quote this all the time. lol, and I don't care what they think about it.
aeternusero 2 months ago 26
This is the bit I hate from Bill. I agree there is no such thing as a good war but it's not right to call all of the soldiers baby killers and disgusting hired killers or thugs, they're kids most of them at least and they're fighting so Bill can say all of this shit, if it weren't for those kids wanting to fight we'd have a draft and people like Bill would be pissing themselves in foxholes as bullets fly by.
MrCaptainGingersnap 2 months ago
@MrCaptainGingersnap "kids wanting to fight". Who are they wanting to fight? A bogus enemy? It also sounds like Bill is questioning who our enemies (if any) are.
kevtruth 2 months ago
@MrCaptainGingersnap I think you turned it off before the second part.
"There nobody who's a fuckin' threat to us, except the countries we arm first, and they're only threatening for about a day."
SatanicFilmHouse 2 months ago
@MrCaptainGingersnap That's the whle point of his dialogue. He knows that they don't fight for our freedoms, because no-one is a threat. Use your brain.
NWFWMbudwieser 2 months ago
@MrCaptainGingersnap ay be smart don't be a retard
biglove599 2 months ago
Sexual Preference does not determine wether or not your an arsehole or not.
Odilwerk 2 months ago
Bill Hicks is an idiot, our nations military is our defense against terriorists.We just help the ones who need it.You should look into something before you run your stupid mouth about it .You take a trip to Iraq and see if your retarted point-of-view changes.Without a military your just a man without an army.good luck with hat
AFKairsoft 3 months ago
@AFKairsoft Thanks for giving my hat good luck
kevtruth 3 months ago
@AFKairsoft
Hicks won't be going to Iraq anytime soon. He died in 1994.
antuco89 3 months ago
@AFKairsoft wow i never knew someone could be as ignorant and idiotic as you. Nation defense today is not nation defense anymore because the money gos over seas to fight for a war based on lies, the reason Iraq was invaded was a lie, And there is allot of argument if the "terrorist" even took down the twin towers considering there has been papers like operation north-woods leaked, that was pretty much the same idea(to blow up planes and scare the public) but to start a war with cuba.
cheats59 3 months ago
@cheats59 I am takin a guess that you are a stupid, emo, communist, freak who hates his parents so shut up
AFKairsoft 3 months ago
@AFKairsoft hahaha that's the best argument you can make lol, I absolutely hate emos I am not a communist(i doubt you even know what communism is) I don't hate either of my parents because I have mildly intelligent ones unlike most parents I have meet. You try to attack me because you truly are fucked mentally.
cheats59 3 months ago
@AFKairsoft So basically, "I have no proper response, so I'll make blind assumptions about you that are totally irrelevant to the subject at hand".
RhiehnD 2 months ago
@AFKairsoft... And who started the Iraq war. The U.S. government. Also before we invaded Iraq, were there any terrorists there? No
So what is your point? A deployment to Iraq if one was over there with a brain would just teach you the incredible tragedy at how Americas simple minded politics lead to so many pointless deaths.
If we weren't keeping the Palestinians down and oppressed, as well as supporting murder, torture, and genocide in the middle east do you think we would have terrorists?
GhostInTheShell29 3 months ago
@GhostInTheShell29 Not counting American terrorism, terrorism almost entirely funded by our allies Saudi Arabia. Most terrorists are just mercenaries, Uneducated, unemployed, illiterates with no prospects. Some are easily whipped up by religious propaganda.. its not hard cuz its not like they can even read the Q'uran. But most are just in it for the money.
Want to really stop terrorism, education and jobs would do a lot more then randomly invading countries.
GhostInTheShell29 3 months ago
@AFKairsoft your nations military murders innocent and rapes there culture and there resources you really need to get a education. your defense isn't defense at all it gos around the world to support militarism in fact you had the resources and knowledge to stop the "plane" from crashing into the pentagon and your country decided to look the other way. Please do some research, and communism can work with democracy you brain-washed sheep, tho I do not support the ideology and I think it's flawed.
cheats59 3 months ago
"You know all that money we spend on nuclear weapons and defense every year? Trillions of dollars.
Instead, if we spent that money feeding and clothing the poor of the world, which it would pay for many times over,
not one human being excluded, not one, we could as one race explore inner and outer space together in peace, forever."- Bill Hicks
change.org/petitions/president-barack-obama-united-states-congress-tell-the-president-to-trade-in-military-materials-for-human-necessities
floatingzodiac 3 months ago in playlist More videos from photomosaic
He's right!
JOHNINCOLUMBUS 3 months ago
This guy had fucking BALLS
patmysterio23 3 months ago 3
Gays don't demand special treatment, you tool. They just demand the same treatment, respect and privaledges that straight people get.
MissLiliferful 3 months ago
@kenfo0 From what are gays deviating? The biblical standard: King Soloman fucking 6 chicks a day in his harem? King David fucking another guy's wife while the guy's in combat? God knocking up a 12 year old virgin with his illegitimate son? Jesus great great grandmother Tamar turning tricks at the village shrine? 50% hetero divorce rate? 1/3rd of all women murdered in the US are killed by a heterosexual lover. Its about fucking time the MEN in the world DEVIATED from this gold standard.
goddess4supper 3 months ago 2
Nobody is better.
CulturedSavages 3 months ago
lol, he's funny
illuminatedgirl 3 months ago
0:44 Love that laugh in the backround
tehUBERn00blet 3 months ago
Which performance was this from?
kenoob1 3 months ago
his stance on the military is just ignorant
mrkurtzz 3 months ago
@mrkurtzz yeah the majority of people are ignorant, the homophobes are right... watch your rear flank!
foxfingers 3 months ago
@foxfingers there is no such thing as "homophobia". You have been brainwashed. You think that is some hokey, 1950's sci-fi nonsense. It is easy, if one controls the means to income and/or media. I dare you to not watch tv...at all....for 1 month. When you turn it back on, you will be shocked at how stupid, empty, selfish and mean it is. They talk down to you as if you are a stupid loser, and you can't WAIT to tune in. Why? You've been brainwashed into accepting bad things as good...
kenfo0 3 months ago
@kenfo0 - i don't watch TV.
foxfingers 3 months ago
@foxfingers that's great, if true. It makes little difference to the extent that for at least 20 yrs, homosexuality has been taught in public schools as a "valid, alternative 'lifestyle'". It is pushed in movies. The term homophobe is CLEARLY nonsensical. I've yet to meet someone who has a panic attack when they approach a homo. Not approving of a degenerate behavior does NOT meet ANY psychological criterion of mental illness. The REASON the term was invented relates to leftist propoganda.
kenfo0 3 months ago
@kenfo0 it is true and it is pretty great! Bill Hicks rules!
foxfingers 3 months ago
@mrkurtzz Its a comedy sketch... it does not mean he believes it
Bloodfang23 3 months ago
@Bloodfang23 no he believes it.... there is no justification for military.... Only ignorant people try to justify in the 21st century
TheUndertakerSaysRIP 3 months ago
@Bloodfang23 He believes it. Bill used his comedy routine & stage time to express his views. Most of his material has a point to it, & I personally agree with his views on most things- especially this one. Anybody willing to kill someone does not understand what life in the physical world is supposed to be about.
Haamurabai 3 months ago
@mrkurtzz I think it's spot on.
keithnem 3 months ago
@mrkurtzz I think its spot on.
keithnem 3 months ago
298 people are in the military. Expect this to double after this comment.
Terratr0n 3 months ago
DADT is dead. Good thing, too.
antispamdinista 4 months ago
people who think being gay is bad
these are the people who want u to all think the same, walk around with the same clothes and be controlled by the happy faced fascists who want u to be "obediant Workers"
@kenfo0
shut the fuck up with ur nonsense, light up a doobie, eat some good shit, and realize we gatta start living together if we wanna make this shit right, so stop hating people that where born different than you!
and we gatta start providing for one another instead of bombing each other
tanvo93 4 months ago
@tan The majority of your post is "to" me but you didn't post to me....what a coward. Not surprising, for you degenerates. You accept necrophilia and bestiality? Yes, you do. but you whine "how DARE you say that!". It is from YOUR THOUGHTS. "Aw, what's the big deal? smoke dope and have sex with chickens, you have no right to judge! You are just a hater". Uh, no, dumbass. Homosexuality has nothing to do with "bombing" anyone. So you have no point at all? Think before you speak, boy.
kenfo0 3 months ago
@kenfo0 i dont remember saying i was down with fucking animals and dead people
if you are comparing gay sex to fucking animals and dead people means u got some screws missing in your head
i do have a point
and u know it to
the majority of people who HATE gays like you, also are "conservatives" who are pro-war aka pro imperialism
now
u could also be one of those annoying christians..whos way of shooting up is giving his money to the lord and being a slave to the church
u sir are full of shit
tanvo93 3 months ago