Poll: Would you pay $250 to pay for a proper military burial for someone you do not know?

Anezay

New member
Apr 1, 2010
330
0
0
The damage is already done. There was no peace of mind for their families, they didn't get to come home, whether in a chair or in a box. Giving them a proper burial is not for them anymore, it's for us. We can know that we gave the proper respect and care to those who gave everything. It doesn't matter what the actual reason they were there is, they believe they were there for us, and we should respect that. $250 is four xbox/ps games, about 25 pc games, half the cost of an xbox one. You can give back that much.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
18,709
3,594
118
omega 616 said:
Come on, we have surveillance drones, war ships, copters, jets and body armour, they have the element of surprise!
Those things are becoming increasingly common, though. Modern Russian and Chinese equipment often makes its way to the third world, not to mention European and US stuff. Not cutting edge, but not too far behind.

OTOH, depends on your definition of "third world". I might say various third world nations have more impressive militaries, and you might say that those nations aren't third world anymore.
 

Owyn_Merrilin

New member
May 22, 2010
7,370
0
0
Muspelheim said:
I'd be prepared to pay a Decent Burial for Dead Soldiers Tax. Certainly. It really ought to be something that a soldier can count on, at least. If they have somehow fallen beneath the cracks and haven't been given a proper military funeral since the Great War, it is really about time now.

Within reason, though, of course. If some remains from the 1676 Battle of Lund or something were to be found, I do think it'd be satisfactory to just ensure the bones are properly handled and reburied. Perhaps with a ceremony encompassing all of them.
Mainly because Europe, and many other places, of course, must be littered with bones from killed soldiers. At some point, individual ceremonies for them all would be a bit too much.
Or... or... here's a thought, let's just hold of on buying one single war plane/tank/other useless but cool piece of equipment this year (like we need another piece of hardware like that anyway) and bury them all and have a good bit left over for body armor for our living infantry. The military (at least in the US) already gets over half the national budget. They don't need another dime. It'll be a bright day in this nation when the public schools get 50 million for a new bus, and the military needs to hold a bake sale for a new F-16.
 

Owyn_Merrilin

New member
May 22, 2010
7,370
0
0
MrDumpkins said:
omega 616 said:
I don't think I would go whole hog and pay $250 to bury a guy I don't know. If there was a dude who had done some impressive stuff, I'd certainly throw the dude a bone if I could.

I don't mean to nasty but the guys who were the first to charge off the boats on D day, didn't actually do much... They allowed other soldiers to advance but all they did was die (was like "operation meat shield" ). If a guy did something that made you go "Daym, dude is THE manly man!" then I think he should have a big ass ceremony.

Although, I think people in WW1 AND WW2 are fucking hero's but these modern day wars seem more like bullies.
This is the most unbelievable thing I have ever read. Do you understand what those soldiers gave up? Everything. They'll never get to experience what a full life is, they might not have wanted to be in that battle, or the war. But their sacrifice was real.

Think about what you have, what you're going to have. Now imagine giving it all up, never getting to experience what life has to offer. Not everyone amounts to something, but everyone has the potential. They gave that potential up so that others could have it instead.
No poor dumb bastard ever became a hero by dying for his country. He did it by making some other poor dumb bastard die for his.

Or to put it another way, they only made that sacrifice because some other soldier was willing to pull the trigger, and they in turn probably killed more than their share. There could be no wars without willing soldiers, and propaganda to the contrary, that's not an oversimplification. It's the unvarnished truth, which is just too horrifying for most people to consider. In the absolute best case scenario, a soldier's job is to commit justifiable homicide in order to defend his own borders. In a more realistic scenario, they're murderers who invade other countries to benefit a few bastards at the top. It's been over 60 years since a soldier in my country's military actually did anything to defend me. Why the hell should I support the murders committed by the modern military because my grandfather actually fought in a war of defense? His was the last generation that did.

Those poor "insurgents" in the middle east, on the other hand...

Captcha: army training, sir!

Oh fuck off with the propaganada, captcha. I'm not in the mood. Although nice going on giving an example of just how much money and effort goes into normalizing this crap.
 

The Enquirer

New member
Apr 10, 2013
1,007
0
0
Abomination said:
Sir Thomas Sean Connery said:
Absolutely not.

It isn't a matter of knowing the person, it's a matter of not believing in burials at all.

I simply feel we waste absurd amounts of time and money on corpses.

I understand that it's largely for the sake of those grieving, but they should be able to have a satisfying service without paying large quantities.
Same feelings here.

I despise burial rites and the supposed symbolisim associated with it. I'm glad knowing when I die some medical students will get to poke and prod at my corpse and it will actually have a commercial benefit to society - this is after my functioning organs have been donated, potentially saving lives.

I find the disposal of bodies in this day and age to be unethical.
Keep in mind that these bodies are already cremated. Even if they weren't they would be beyond most if any medical uses. But yea, I'm with you there. If you can make use of my organs to save someone else, go with it.
 

BarbaricGoose

New member
May 25, 2010
796
0
0
In theory, I like the idea, I guess. I mean, they're dead, what do they care? That said, I still like the idea. THAT said, my YEARLY budget for games is about $200. So, if I gave up gaming for a year, I'd still come up short.

Not to sound selfish, but I got myself to think about. And when I do give money to charity, I give it to charities that benefit the living. Dead is dead, but people are still in the process of dying from cancer, starvation, AIDS, being gay in Russia or the Middle East, etc.
 

MrDumpkins

New member
Sep 20, 2010
172
0
0
Owyn_Merrilin said:
MrDumpkins said:
omega 616 said:
I don't think I would go whole hog and pay $250 to bury a guy I don't know. If there was a dude who had done some impressive stuff, I'd certainly throw the dude a bone if I could.

I don't mean to nasty but the guys who were the first to charge off the boats on D day, didn't actually do much... They allowed other soldiers to advance but all they did was die (was like "operation meat shield" ). If a guy did something that made you go "Daym, dude is THE manly man!" then I think he should have a big ass ceremony.

Although, I think people in WW1 AND WW2 are fucking hero's but these modern day wars seem more like bullies.
This is the most unbelievable thing I have ever read. Do you understand what those soldiers gave up? Everything. They'll never get to experience what a full life is, they might not have wanted to be in that battle, or the war. But their sacrifice was real.

Think about what you have, what you're going to have. Now imagine giving it all up, never getting to experience what life has to offer. Not everyone amounts to something, but everyone has the potential. They gave that potential up so that others could have it instead.
No poor dumb bastard ever became a hero by dying for his country. He did it by making some other poor dumb bastard die for his.

Or to put it another way, they only made that sacrifice because some other soldier was willing to pull the trigger, and they in turn probably killed more than their share. There could be no wars without willing soldiers, and propaganda to the contrary, that's not an oversimplification. It's the unvarnished truth, which is just too horrifying for most people to consider. In the absolute best case scenario, a soldier's job is to commit justifiable homicide in order to defend his own borders. In a more realistic scenario, they're murderers who invade other countries to benefit a few bastards at the top. It's been over 60 years since a soldier in my country's military actually did anything to defend me. Why the hell should I support the murders committed by the modern military because my grandfather actually fought in a war of defense? His was the last generation that did.

Those poor "insurgents" in the middle east, on the other hand...

Captcha: army training, sir!

Oh fuck off with the propaganada, captcha. I'm not in the mood. Although nice going on giving an example of just how much money and effort goes into normalizing this crap.
It's just like you said, respect the individual soldier, he is doing his job. Everyone has to make a living. If you have problems with the army in general, then it's the high command you want to go after. Their the ones who sit in their chair in safe room moving around peoples lives (friendly and enemy) like their chess pieces. I am in full agreement that we haven't been in a needed war since WW2.
 

Owyn_Merrilin

New member
May 22, 2010
7,370
0
0
MrDumpkins said:
Owyn_Merrilin said:
MrDumpkins said:
omega 616 said:
I don't think I would go whole hog and pay $250 to bury a guy I don't know. If there was a dude who had done some impressive stuff, I'd certainly throw the dude a bone if I could.

I don't mean to nasty but the guys who were the first to charge off the boats on D day, didn't actually do much... They allowed other soldiers to advance but all they did was die (was like "operation meat shield" ). If a guy did something that made you go "Daym, dude is THE manly man!" then I think he should have a big ass ceremony.

Although, I think people in WW1 AND WW2 are fucking hero's but these modern day wars seem more like bullies.
This is the most unbelievable thing I have ever read. Do you understand what those soldiers gave up? Everything. They'll never get to experience what a full life is, they might not have wanted to be in that battle, or the war. But their sacrifice was real.

Think about what you have, what you're going to have. Now imagine giving it all up, never getting to experience what life has to offer. Not everyone amounts to something, but everyone has the potential. They gave that potential up so that others could have it instead.
No poor dumb bastard ever became a hero by dying for his country. He did it by making some other poor dumb bastard die for his.

Or to put it another way, they only made that sacrifice because some other soldier was willing to pull the trigger, and they in turn probably killed more than their share. There could be no wars without willing soldiers, and propaganda to the contrary, that's not an oversimplification. It's the unvarnished truth, which is just too horrifying for most people to consider. In the absolute best case scenario, a soldier's job is to commit justifiable homicide in order to defend his own borders. In a more realistic scenario, they're murderers who invade other countries to benefit a few bastards at the top. It's been over 60 years since a soldier in my country's military actually did anything to defend me. Why the hell should I support the murders committed by the modern military because my grandfather actually fought in a war of defense? His was the last generation that did.

Those poor "insurgents" in the middle east, on the other hand...

Captcha: army training, sir!

Oh fuck off with the propaganada, captcha. I'm not in the mood. Although nice going on giving an example of just how much money and effort goes into normalizing this crap.
It's just like you said, respect the individual soldier, he is doing his job. Everyone has to make a living. If you have problems with the army in general, then it's the high command you want to go after. Their the ones who sit in their chair in safe room moving around peoples lives (friendly and enemy) like their chess pieces. I am in full agreement that we haven't been in a needed war since WW2.
So then you're in full agreement that the modern military is nothing but a bunch of hired thugs who, if they had a shred of decency, would lay down their arms and refuse to follow orders? Because right now the job they're doing is not at all worthy of respect, and respecting the individual soldier in this day and age is nothing but accepting the nuremberg defense, in a society where we don't kill soldiers for not following orders, no less. The Nazi's didn't give their soldiers that cushy chance of just sitting in a jail cell, and it was still ruled that "just following orders" was no excuse. That makes it even worse that we don't hold that standard to our own troops.

You can't blame the military without blaming the troops. It just doesn't work that way. It may be a big blame that each person holds a tiny part of, but they still have that tiny part. We have altogether too much respect for the soldier in this country, and not enough of that healthy fear of him that was so common prior to World War II.

Edit: Maybe this will make my stance a bit clearer:

Universal Soldier

He's five foot-two, and he's six feet-four,
He fights with missiles and with spears.
He's all of thirty-one, and he's only seventeen,
Been a soldier for a thousand years.

He'a a Catholic, a Hindu, an Atheist, a Jain,
A Buddhist and a Baptist and a Jew.
And he knows he shouldn't kill,
And he knows he always will,
Kill you for me my friend and me for you.

And he's fighting for Canada,
He's fighting for France,
He's fighting for the USA,
And he's fighting for the Russians,
And he's fighting for Japan,
And he thinks we'll put an end to war this way.

And he's fighting for Democracy,
He's fighting for the Reds,
He says it's for the peace of all.
He's the one who must decide,
Who's to live and who's to die,
And he never sees the writing on the wall.

But without him,
How would Hitler have condemned him at Dachau?
Without him Caesar would have stood alone,
He's the one who gives his body
As a weapon of the war,
And without him all this killing can't go on.

He's the Universal Soldier and he really is to blame,
His orders come from far away no more,
They come from here and there and you and me,
And brothers can't you see,
This is not the way we put the end to war.
 

Quantum Glass

New member
Mar 19, 2013
109
0
0
Not really.

It'd be the right thing to do, of course--I think it's a tragedy that they've been neglected for so long--but they're kind of already long dead, and I'm far too pragmatic to spend that much money on cadavers instead of, well, preventing them in the first place.

I'd say that using the money for charity is what they would have wanted, but I genuinely have no idea, what with them being dead and all. So I'm just going to go ahead regardless.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
18,709
3,594
118
Owyn_Merrilin said:
Because right now the job they're doing is not at all worthy of respect,
Which job are they doing?

Fighting in Iraq, or peacekeeping in the Solomons? Because different soldiers might do either or neither or both of those, and they are very different tasks.
 

Imperioratorex Caprae

Henchgoat Emperor
May 15, 2010
5,499
0
0
Everyone deserves a burial, no matter who they are. And in the US we do already pay for the burial of unclaimed bodies in taxes anyway... why the military doesn't do this, I'm not sure. But we sure as hell bury criminals who die in prison and have no one to claim the body.
 

loc978

New member
Sep 18, 2010
4,900
0
0
Owyn_Merrilin said:
MrDumpkins said:
Owyn_Merrilin said:
MrDumpkins said:
omega 616 said:
I don't think I would go whole hog and pay $250 to bury a guy I don't know. If there was a dude who had done some impressive stuff, I'd certainly throw the dude a bone if I could.

I don't mean to nasty but the guys who were the first to charge off the boats on D day, didn't actually do much... They allowed other soldiers to advance but all they did was die (was like "operation meat shield" ). If a guy did something that made you go "Daym, dude is THE manly man!" then I think he should have a big ass ceremony.

Although, I think people in WW1 AND WW2 are fucking hero's but these modern day wars seem more like bullies.
This is the most unbelievable thing I have ever read. Do you understand what those soldiers gave up? Everything. They'll never get to experience what a full life is, they might not have wanted to be in that battle, or the war. But their sacrifice was real.

Think about what you have, what you're going to have. Now imagine giving it all up, never getting to experience what life has to offer. Not everyone amounts to something, but everyone has the potential. They gave that potential up so that others could have it instead.
No poor dumb bastard ever became a hero by dying for his country. He did it by making some other poor dumb bastard die for his.

Or to put it another way, they only made that sacrifice because some other soldier was willing to pull the trigger, and they in turn probably killed more than their share. There could be no wars without willing soldiers, and propaganda to the contrary, that's not an oversimplification. It's the unvarnished truth, which is just too horrifying for most people to consider. In the absolute best case scenario, a soldier's job is to commit justifiable homicide in order to defend his own borders. In a more realistic scenario, they're murderers who invade other countries to benefit a few bastards at the top. It's been over 60 years since a soldier in my country's military actually did anything to defend me. Why the hell should I support the murders committed by the modern military because my grandfather actually fought in a war of defense? His was the last generation that did.

Those poor "insurgents" in the middle east, on the other hand...

Captcha: army training, sir!

Oh fuck off with the propaganada, captcha. I'm not in the mood. Although nice going on giving an example of just how much money and effort goes into normalizing this crap.
It's just like you said, respect the individual soldier, he is doing his job. Everyone has to make a living. If you have problems with the army in general, then it's the high command you want to go after. Their the ones who sit in their chair in safe room moving around peoples lives (friendly and enemy) like their chess pieces. I am in full agreement that we haven't been in a needed war since WW2.
So then you're in full agreement that the modern military is nothing but a bunch of hired thugs who, if they had a shred of decency, would lay down their arms and refuse to follow orders? Because right now the job they're doing is not at all worthy of respect, and respecting the individual soldier in this day and age is nothing but accepting the nuremberg defense, in a society where we don't kill soldiers for not following orders, no less. The Nazi's didn't give their soldiers that cushy chance of just sitting in a jail cell, and it was still ruled that "just following orders" was no excuse. That makes it even worse that we don't hold that standard to our own troops.

You can't blame the military without blaming the troops. It just doesn't work that way. It may be a big blame that each person holds a tiny part of, but they still have that tiny part. We have altogether too much respect for the soldier in this country, and not enough of that healthy fear of him that was so common prior to World War II.

Edit: Maybe this will make my stance a bit clearer:

Universal Soldier

He's five foot-two, and he's six feet-four,
He fights with missiles and with spears.
He's all of thirty-one, and he's only seventeen,
Been a soldier for a thousand years.

He'a a Catholic, a Hindu, an Atheist, a Jain,
A Buddhist and a Baptist and a Jew.
And he knows he shouldn't kill,
And he knows he always will,
Kill you for me my friend and me for you.

And he's fighting for Canada,
He's fighting for France,
He's fighting for the USA,
And he's fighting for the Russians,
And he's fighting for Japan,
And he thinks we'll put an end to war this way.

And he's fighting for Democracy,
He's fighting for the Reds,
He says it's for the peace of all.
He's the one who must decide,
Who's to live and who's to die,
And he never sees the writing on the wall.

But without him,
How would Hitler have condemned him at Dachau?
Without him Caesar would have stood alone,
He's the one who gives his body
As a weapon of the war,
And without him all this killing can't go on.

He's the Universal Soldier and he really is to blame,
His orders come from far away no more,
They come from here and there and you and me,
And brothers can't you see,
This is not the way we put the end to war.
...that's like blaming prostitutes for the spread of STDs, man (as opposed to our horrifically insufficient healthcare system). People do what they have to to survive. Mind you, I don't think people like myself are automatically deserving of more praise than a prostitute... but neither are we (or the prostitutes) deserving of your scorn. Many soldiers do see the writing on the wall, but that doesn't give us any more options than we had before... and the option you would have us take is tantamount to suicide.

You work with the society you have, not the society you want. Don't like it? Start a revolution... for which you need soldiers. Power concedes nothing, and only the dead have seen the end of war.
 

oversoon

New member
Oct 12, 2013
51
0
0
I would think the organization that owned their life should cover it. It shouldn't even be possible for a stranger to pay for it, because it should absolutely already be covered by the branch of the military the served in. That said, I absolutely wouldn't pay for pay, regardless. I have sympathy for those in the military (even for those that find my sympathy offensive) but I don't support what is being accomplished with soldiers today.
 

Phrozenflame500

New member
Dec 26, 2012
1,080
0
0
...Look, I'm not against soldiers getting burials, and all the respect to them, but I'd honestly prefer if the money would go to the expenses of the living, rather then the dead.

Although, perhaps the US could expend some of its unnecessarily large military budget to cover the costs? That money's not going anywhere useful anyways.
 

The Enquirer

New member
Apr 10, 2013
1,007
0
0
Phrozenflame500 said:
...Look, I'm not against soldiers getting burials, and all the respect to them, but I'd honestly prefer if the money would go to the expenses of the living, rather then the dead.

Although, perhaps the US could expend some of its unnecessarily large military budget to cover the costs? That money's not going anywhere useful anyways.
That's sort of what I was hoping would happen. Considering now we are essentially just glorified bullies it'd be nice to see some of the people who gave it all up to at least get a decent funeral.
 

Owyn_Merrilin

New member
May 22, 2010
7,370
0
0
loc978 said:
Owyn_Merrilin said:
MrDumpkins said:
Owyn_Merrilin said:
MrDumpkins said:
omega 616 said:
I don't think I would go whole hog and pay $250 to bury a guy I don't know. If there was a dude who had done some impressive stuff, I'd certainly throw the dude a bone if I could.

I don't mean to nasty but the guys who were the first to charge off the boats on D day, didn't actually do much... They allowed other soldiers to advance but all they did was die (was like "operation meat shield" ). If a guy did something that made you go "Daym, dude is THE manly man!" then I think he should have a big ass ceremony.

Although, I think people in WW1 AND WW2 are fucking hero's but these modern day wars seem more like bullies.
This is the most unbelievable thing I have ever read. Do you understand what those soldiers gave up? Everything. They'll never get to experience what a full life is, they might not have wanted to be in that battle, or the war. But their sacrifice was real.

Think about what you have, what you're going to have. Now imagine giving it all up, never getting to experience what life has to offer. Not everyone amounts to something, but everyone has the potential. They gave that potential up so that others could have it instead.
No poor dumb bastard ever became a hero by dying for his country. He did it by making some other poor dumb bastard die for his.

Or to put it another way, they only made that sacrifice because some other soldier was willing to pull the trigger, and they in turn probably killed more than their share. There could be no wars without willing soldiers, and propaganda to the contrary, that's not an oversimplification. It's the unvarnished truth, which is just too horrifying for most people to consider. In the absolute best case scenario, a soldier's job is to commit justifiable homicide in order to defend his own borders. In a more realistic scenario, they're murderers who invade other countries to benefit a few bastards at the top. It's been over 60 years since a soldier in my country's military actually did anything to defend me. Why the hell should I support the murders committed by the modern military because my grandfather actually fought in a war of defense? His was the last generation that did.

Those poor "insurgents" in the middle east, on the other hand...

Captcha: army training, sir!

Oh fuck off with the propaganada, captcha. I'm not in the mood. Although nice going on giving an example of just how much money and effort goes into normalizing this crap.
It's just like you said, respect the individual soldier, he is doing his job. Everyone has to make a living. If you have problems with the army in general, then it's the high command you want to go after. Their the ones who sit in their chair in safe room moving around peoples lives (friendly and enemy) like their chess pieces. I am in full agreement that we haven't been in a needed war since WW2.
So then you're in full agreement that the modern military is nothing but a bunch of hired thugs who, if they had a shred of decency, would lay down their arms and refuse to follow orders? Because right now the job they're doing is not at all worthy of respect, and respecting the individual soldier in this day and age is nothing but accepting the nuremberg defense, in a society where we don't kill soldiers for not following orders, no less. The Nazi's didn't give their soldiers that cushy chance of just sitting in a jail cell, and it was still ruled that "just following orders" was no excuse. That makes it even worse that we don't hold that standard to our own troops.

You can't blame the military without blaming the troops. It just doesn't work that way. It may be a big blame that each person holds a tiny part of, but they still have that tiny part. We have altogether too much respect for the soldier in this country, and not enough of that healthy fear of him that was so common prior to World War II.

Edit: Maybe this will make my stance a bit clearer:

Universal Soldier

He's five foot-two, and he's six feet-four,
He fights with missiles and with spears.
He's all of thirty-one, and he's only seventeen,
Been a soldier for a thousand years.

He'a a Catholic, a Hindu, an Atheist, a Jain,
A Buddhist and a Baptist and a Jew.
And he knows he shouldn't kill,
And he knows he always will,
Kill you for me my friend and me for you.

And he's fighting for Canada,
He's fighting for France,
He's fighting for the USA,
And he's fighting for the Russians,
And he's fighting for Japan,
And he thinks we'll put an end to war this way.

And he's fighting for Democracy,
He's fighting for the Reds,
He says it's for the peace of all.
He's the one who must decide,
Who's to live and who's to die,
And he never sees the writing on the wall.

But without him,
How would Hitler have condemned him at Dachau?
Without him Caesar would have stood alone,
He's the one who gives his body
As a weapon of the war,
And without him all this killing can't go on.

He's the Universal Soldier and he really is to blame,
His orders come from far away no more,
They come from here and there and you and me,
And brothers can't you see,
This is not the way we put the end to war.
...that's like blaming prostitutes for the spread of STDs, man (as opposed to our horrifically insufficient healthcare system). People do what they have to to survive. Mind you, I don't think people like myself are automatically deserving of more praise than a prostitute... but neither are we (or the prostitutes) deserving of your scorn. Many soldiers do see the writing on the wall, but that doesn't give us any more options than we had before... and the option you would have us take is tantamount to suicide.

You work with the society you have, not the society you want. Don't like it? Start a revolution... for which you need soldiers. Power concedes nothing, and only the dead have seen the end of war.
Better suicide than murder for pay, man. The military is an inherently evil organization, and the "Necessary" part of "necessary evil" has long since been exceeded. It's not at all like blaming a prostitute for spreading STDs. It's like blaming a hitman for committing a murder. Sure, someone else asked him to do it, but it was his choice to take the payment and carry it out.

Edit: Especially since the "suicide" is figurative, but the murder is literal. Again, the individual soldiers who carried out the holocaust would have been killed themselves had they spoken out (or at least, they would if they were standing alone -- even there, it wouldn't have happened if enough of them had been brave enough to take the bullet instead of firing it). Despite that, they found out the hard way that "I was just following orders" is no excuse. In the US, we don't execute people for refusing to go to war. We might throw them in jail if they're either already members of the military, or, as in Vietnam, if they've been drafted, but we don't kill them. So no, it's really not suicide. If we didn't excuse people who would have been killed themselves if they had decided not to follow their horrific orders, we shouldn't excuse those who would have merely been thrown in jail just because they're our own. Hell, we shouldn't excuse it /especially/ because they're our own.
 

MetalMagpie

New member
Jun 13, 2011
1,523
0
0
Funerals and burials are for the living, not for the dead. So if there's no family around to mourn, I don't really see the point.
 

dyre

New member
Mar 30, 2011
2,178
0
0
If someone the government was unwilling to pay for a fallen soldier and the family couldn't afford it, I suppose it's something I would be willing to do if I had some spare money (which I incidentally have a little more of than a normally do, though not enough to throw $250 around).

But no, I'm not paying for 3-rifle salutes for WW1 skeletons...
 

CriticalMiss

New member
Jan 18, 2013
2,024
0
0
No, the military should be paying for their burial. They are the ones making corpses so it should be their job to bury them too. If they don't like that then they should do a better job of not making dead people. Although I guess in a round-about way I would then be paying for burials through taxes that go to the military.