http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18274805/

4/23/2007 3:39:12 PM

Wouldn't the flags always be at half-staff then?

4/23/2007 3:50:17 PM

1) i'm not sure it was appropriate for Bush to order all flags to be flown at half-staff for this event. In fact, I think it might be setting a dangerous precedent for Bush and the federal government to be paying so much attention to this even. Even though it is the largest single shooter event ever to happen in US, where does the line get drawn now? When a student kills 30 students next year, does it get all the attention this is getting? Ok, 30 dead probably won't happen for a long time, but 10-15 will. Certainly in the next year, there will be another school shooting with up to 10 dead. Will they lower the flags for that? How many does it take? 12? 15? 20?

2) if the flags were lowered every time a service member was killed, they would stay down all the time. In fact, maybe that's not a bad idea. Leave the flags at 1/2 staff as long as we're at war to make sure people keep in mind that we're still making (mostly needless) sacrifices in these wars.

4/23/2007 3:50:57 PM

sends more of a message if you don't approve of (mostly needless) sacrifices.


not saying you, just a general "you"

4/23/2007 4:01:15 PM

I must say that it was pretty interesting to see our flag flying at half staff at NATO HQ in Brussels last week. I expected the embassy to be flying their flag half staff but i wasnt sure that NATO would.

4/23/2007 4:21:23 PM

jesus, the military is whiney

4/23/2007 11:15:27 PM

half staff is appropriate for any national tragedy.

i think the "single worst mass shooting massacre in US History" counts as a national tragedy.

the military NEVER flies colors at half mast for individual service members' deaths, even when in large numbers. Unless its on the order of magnitude of a Pearl Harbor.

This sergeant is a fucking idiot, and needs to be reprimanded under UCMJ general article 134 for being a dumbass.

4/24/2007 1:42:36 AM