Why Do You Support the War?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Greymage

Enlightened
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
406
Location
Austin, TX
Hmmm... who gave more aid to Al Queda, JayFlash or our President?

Jayflash:
- posted anti-war comments in a public forum. This is likely to encourage the Al-Qaeda members among us.

George Bush:
- started the anti-terror campaign by talking about a crusade
- went to war against an Islamic country on faulty intelligence
- endorsed Sharon's plan for unilaterally keeping part of the West Bank and explicitly denying the Palestinian right of return.
- is commander-in-chief of forces charged with abusing (and now we find out) killing Iraqi prisoners.

Who is more likely to have inspired more Al-Qaeda converts, Jayflash or GW? I'd have to go with GW on this one...
 

metalhed

Enlightened
Joined
Jan 29, 2004
Messages
671
Location
Washington State
BCO0311...

I take offense.

[ QUOTE ]
BCO0311 said:
Listening to the fanatics of the anti-war movement talk about the serious stuff of warfighting would be humorous if it weren't so deadly. The aid and comfort people like you, Rene Gonzalez, and John Kerry give to Al Qaeda and its ilk is shameful.



[/ QUOTE ]
My added emphasis in above quote.

The charge you are making is that the persons you cited are guilty of giving, in your words, " aid and comfort" to the enemy. The US Constitution defines treasonous behavior:



[ QUOTE ]
"Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are calling John Kerry, Rene Gonzales, and I (by my inference since I share many, but not all, of these men's views) traitors, then I suggest that you have crossed the line into the area of personal attack.

I would appreciate an explanation.
 

Jack_Crow

Enlightened
Joined
Feb 9, 2004
Messages
417
Location
West Palm Beach FLA (for a while anyway)
Hi,
Why do I support this war?

I was there when this phase was started.

On the morning of 9-11 I was at a job interview near the Pentagon. I saw what those *******s did to our citizens.

So what ever happens to their heads and friends causes me no heartburn.

The oil and the politics don't upset me too much. No doubt rude things happen in war, and that's why sane leaders try to avoid it. As wars go this was fairly blood less. 20k Iraqi dead is a large amount. Then again they still have cities. We diden't have to pound thier towns into the dirt like we did to Dresden, Tokyo, and the Germans did to Antwerp and Coventry.

The difference between total war and this is striking. Read some history and learn from it.

So I am here, taking the place of five troopers who have gone home after their year. Working 60 hour weeks in a war zone. Dealing with shortages, Army nonsence, Rough food and , trying to improve the troopers lives.

Outside of the scope of contract, and with the help of a bunch of radio clubs, we now have a low power FM stereo station. It plays music and old time raidio shows 24x7.

Helped the mechanics unit with data to get an armored pick up truck working for local trips.

I fix stuff for the guys here. Blown up PC power supplys (Iraq is a 220v 50hz country). Some minor TV repair, and other little fix it chores.

The UN is a useless activity. They can't find their butts with two hands and an inspection mirror. The UN leadership are not fit to be organ doners.

All I can say for those who doubt me.
Come here, meet some of the Iraqis. They will tell you about the local 'mob' who trys to lean on families and get them to do bad things to our troopers. The term the Iraqi's use is 'Ali Babbas'.

Right now what we face is a form of organized crime with the resource of a nation state. Little by little the dirt bags are being interviewed by Allah. The Armed forces are booking the meetings.

Yesterday I had dinner with some MP's who's convoy was jumped three times. At one ambush they 'took out' five of the subjects. The Up Armor Humvee is a wonderful tool for protecting our troopers from small arms fire.

As AMCITS we forgot the lessons of Social Studies class.

We use our elections settel issues, then we should close ranks and get on with the business of the nation.

As a nation we picked up a bad habbit. If we don't win our point, we keep moaning about it. That's what a lot of the above posts are, whining and trying to convince people who's minds are made up that one position or another is correct.

In a war zone issues do become 'black and white'. Bad thinking can result in deaths. Far too few AMCITS have had this experience. It will change your thinking.

Im begining to think Hineline was right. Only people who have had national service should have the right to vote on national issues. Experience is a powerful motovator.

For what it's worth a rule like that would lock me out of the voting booth. I only work here, never been part of the armed forces.

While on the rant about whining, the loosing side should be the "Loyal Opposition". That's what they gave us in High School. I had no use for President Clinton, but he was elected and properly in charge. When the man was right I said so. I kept my basic honesty. Same here, there are things our current leadership is doing that I can't support.

This war is not something I have an issue with.

Hope all is well where you are.

Jack Crow
Scania Iraq
 

BC0311

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
May 31, 2003
Messages
2,488
Graymage, I guess you have trouble following pronouns also. Now you're using one of your own as a strawman to make your argument appear stronger. That's pretty cold blooded. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yellowlaugh.gif

Metalhead, you're offended? So? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon3.gif

I doubt it would be enough to get an indictment, much less a conviction in Federal Court for treason. But saying things like America is the biggest terrorist in the world is very definitely giving aid and comfort to Al Qaeda. Afterall, they're agreeing with Al Qaeda and saying what Al Qaeda is saying.

Speaking of fanatical anti-war zealots and giving aid and comfort to Al Qaeda, how about anti-war hero Ted Rall and his cartoon ridiculing Pat Tillman?

MSNBC pulled it. But it's published in atleast 140 Newspapers. Here's a link to the story:

MSNBC Pulls Ted Rall Cartoon of Pat Tillman

Here's the cartoon by anti-war fanatic Ted Rall:

Ted Rall making fun of Pat Tillman

Now here are links to a couple of cartoons that parody Rall's cartoon (warning: anti-war fanatics probably won't like)

Parody of Rall Cartoon by L.

Parody of Rall Cartoon by B.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crackup.gif
 

Nitro

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 27, 2004
Messages
1,347
[ QUOTE ]
ikendu said:
Nitro said: ...Are you saying the US military force is not effective and the UN is?

Gee, I don't think so.
Interesting that you would think that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why's that? Did you not say, "There needs to be an effective military force there to accomplish that. IMHO, that should be a UN effort (at least as much as the Korean War was a UN effort)."

What country lost the most men and spent the most money in the Korean War?
 

metalhed

Enlightened
Joined
Jan 29, 2004
Messages
671
Location
Washington State
I'm not just offended, but I think your remarks border on being abusive.

Are you accusing me (by association) of being a traitor for criticizing this asinine, greedy, mis-managed fiasco that we call "The Iraq War"?

Or are you saying that I (and others who speak out) should be muzzled like some vicious dog? That seems to be the point you are making.

And why must everyone who opposes your point of view be described as an (fanatical) anti-war zealot?

It seems to me that the fascination with, celebration of, and rationalizations for war that you possess borders on zealotry.
And if what you are contending is that, "you're either with us or against us" (which is essentially what you are saying) then I'm sorry your limited view of the world matches the leaders who have endangered our troops in Iraq for no good reason.

One other thing. By your logic, a German citizen who opposed Hitler should have kept his mouth shut and cooperated with the Nazi war effort. By your logic, the American Patriots of our Revolution should have stayed quiet while the government of Britain waged economic war on the Colonies.

Historians conclude that a third of Americans supported the Revolution, a third didn't much care, and a third opposed it as an usurpation of the authority of the crown. I have a feeling I know what group you would have belonged to.
 

Lara

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Apr 16, 2003
Messages
136
Location
Switzerland
[ QUOTE ]
Sub_Umbra said:

I think that the UN is highly over-rated. They could not accomplish anything without their money, the vast majority of which comes from the States. They are very anti-American -- which would be OK if we didn't pay for so much of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

UN contributions:

Western Europe 37%
USA 22%
Japan 19.5%
Canada 2.8%
China 2%
Mexico 1.9%
Korea 1.8%
Australia 1.6%
Russia 1.2%
Others 10.2%
 

raggie33

*the raggedier*
Joined
Aug 11, 2003
Messages
13,674
off topic lara but i read ya profile to quick and when i read it i thought it said hobbies as eating books. i guess they would be high in fiber /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 

Nitro

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 27, 2004
Messages
1,347
[ QUOTE ]
metalhed said:
I'm not just offended, but I think your remarks border on being abusive.

Are you accusing me (by association) of being a traitor for criticizing this asinine, greedy, mis-managed fiasco that we call "The Iraq War"?

[/ QUOTE ]

There were a lot of people that said the same thing about WWII.

[ QUOTE ]
Or are you saying that I (and others who speak out) should be muzzled like some vicious dog? That seems to be the point you are making.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you should be muzzled. As a matter of fact, IMHO I think the more the anti-war folks talk, the more people of America believe we are doing the right thing in Iraq. The polls show it.

[ QUOTE ]
And why must everyone who opposes your point of view be described as an (fanatical) anti-war zealot?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe you are fanatical or a zealot, just anti-war.

[ QUOTE ]
It seems to me that the fascination with, celebration of, and rationalizations for war that you possess borders on zealotry.
And if what you are contending is that, "you're either with us or against us" (which is essentially what you are saying) then I'm sorry your limited view of the world matches the leaders who have endangered our troops in Iraq for no good reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you think our leaders are doing nothing more then endangering our troops for no good reason, why don't you talk personaly to some of our troops. See what they say.

[ QUOTE ]
One other thing. By your logic, a German citizen who opposed Hitler should have kept his mouth shut and cooperated with the Nazi war effort. By your logic, the American Patriots of our Revolution should have stayed quiet while the government of Britain waged economic war on the Colonies.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you comparing our current leader to Hitler or the historic Britain?

[ QUOTE ]
Historians conclude that a third of Americans supported the Revolution, a third didn't much care, and a third opposed it as an usurpation of the authority of the crown. I have a feeling I know what group you would have belonged to.

[/ QUOTE ]

During WWII there were a lot of Americans who believed we should not have been in a war with Hitler. They thought, "He can't hurt us. He's on the other side of the ocean". Sounds like the same crowd that's defending Saddam's right to remain in power. I have a feeling I know what group you would have belonged to.
 

Nitro

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 27, 2004
Messages
1,347
[ QUOTE ]
Lara said:
[ QUOTE ]
Sub_Umbra said:

I think that the UN is highly over-rated. They could not accomplish anything without their money, the vast majority of which comes from the States. They are very anti-American -- which would be OK if we didn't pay for so much of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

UN contributions:

Western Europe 37%
USA 22%
Japan 19.5%
Canada 2.8%
China 2%
Mexico 1.9%
Korea 1.8%
Australia 1.6%
Russia 1.2%
Others 10.2%

[/ QUOTE ]

However, what country has lost the most lives in the all the majors wars the UN was a part of?
 

ikendu

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 30, 2001
Messages
1,853
Location
Iowa
Nitro said:What country lost the most men and spent the most money in the Korean War?

The U.S.

What's your point?
 

metalhed

Enlightened
Joined
Jan 29, 2004
Messages
671
Location
Washington State
Nitro...

My remarks were intended for BCO311...sorry if I posted to your thread instead.

To answer your question though...

No I was not comparing our president to Hitler. My point was that if BCO311's rationale is correct, then German citizens should have all sucked it up for Der Fuhrer. After all, he authorized and planned his aggressive military campaign against Europe...and was supported by an elected (sort of) government. Their country was at war and (according to BCO311) they should have quietly supported Hitler's aggression. I don't think so.


Also, your assumption that I would have opposed American military action in WWII is erroneous. Once we were attacked by Japan, we had the responsibility to defend our country. Japan's alliance with a proven aggressor in Europe (Hitler), who had invaded American allies' territory, provided plenty of moral justification for our involvement in Europe during WWII.

I have said it before and I'll say it again. IMHO, wars of aggression are always wrong...wars of defense (in response to an actual attack) are regrettable but justifiable based on the inherent right of self-defense.
 

Nitro

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 27, 2004
Messages
1,347
ikendu, you don't see the point?

My point is, you seem to think the UN is some great almighty world leader policing all countries and righting all that is wrong. Sounds great in theory. However practical people know the US is the world's leader and bares most of the burden.
 

ikendu

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 30, 2001
Messages
1,853
Location
Iowa
Actually, you seem to think that is my point.

The U.S. clearly led the UN effort in Korea. If we had a "UN" effort in Iraq it would be the same. However, with Muslim troops from Pakistan and Egypt patrolling the streets of Iraqi cities while U.S. troops provided other major forces in and around Iraq, the "presence" of foreign troops would seem very different to the average Iraqi.

The difference is "occupation" vs. "peacekeeping".

Iraq clearly needs the "peacekeeping" now, while stability is built. The polls from Iraq all show that they are nervous about the idea of troops simply leaving ...and leaving behind a dangerous vacuum with unpredictable results. But...our choices don't have to be U.S. forces patrolling the streets ...or nothing.

With our U.S. forces "looking like an occupying army", it is all too easy for the people fighting us to get new recruits and support from the general population. Heck, if some other country looked like it was occupying Iowa, I can assure you, there'd be many Iowans out blowing up convoys and/or shooting up occupation troops. And...I don't think any of us would think we were terrorists. One more thing I can assure you of... we'd never stop until that "occupying army" went away.

I don't want our troops to be on the "receiving end" of that same notion in Iraq.
 

Lara

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Apr 16, 2003
Messages
136
Location
Switzerland
[ QUOTE ]
Nitro said:
My point is, you seem to think the UN is some great almighty world leader policing all countries and righting all that is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

It definitely is not, but it's the best we have. Why? Because it represents almost all countries of the world (191), AFAIK only the Vatican and Taiwan are not part of the UN.


[ QUOTE ]
Sounds great in theory. However practical people know the US is the world's leader and bares most of the burden.

[/ QUOTE ]

As much as we all love the USA, let me point out that statements like this are part of the reason some people in far away countries start hating the USA. Example: THE GDP of the USA and the EU25 are about the same, and just as the USA, the EU states have the nuclear capabilities to flatten each and every country and continent on this small world if the need arises. So shall the EU claim to be the 'world leader'?

What I am trying to say is: We all have strengths and weaknesses, and we should try to work together and stay modest and keep perspective.

Another fact to think about: The EU and the USA combined only represent about 11 percent of the world's population.
 

BC0311

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
May 31, 2003
Messages
2,488
I don't think there is a country called "Western Europe". /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thinking.gif

Metalhed, nice try but no cigar. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/yellowlaugh.gif

All anti-war zealots are anti-war, but not all those who are anti-war are anti-war zealots.

Supporting the war on terror doesn't = supporting all wars.

It is illogical and unreasonable to say that a person who supports the war on terror would also have supported Hitler.

Rene Gonzalez and Ted Rall qualify as zealots, from my perspective. You kind of sound like a zealot, but you just might be worked up and upset.

Muzzle? I haven't suggested muzzling anybody. Do you feel like you're being muzzled? Seems to me that you are free to express your feelings here.
 

Kristofg

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
355
Location
Belgium
[ QUOTE ]
Nitro said:
However, what country has lost the most lives in the all the majors wars the UN was a part of?

[/ QUOTE ]
Somalia?
 

BC0311

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
May 31, 2003
Messages
2,488
[ QUOTE ]
Kristofg said:
[ QUOTE ]
Nitro said:
However, what country has lost the most lives in the all the majors wars the UN was a part of?

[/ QUOTE ]
Somalia?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not by a long shot. Probably (after the United States of America) South Korea.
 

Kristofg

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
355
Location
Belgium
[ QUOTE ]
Nitro said:
So are you saying we should give up our power, so other nations will like us? Do you think ANY other nation would respect our rights if they were more powerful then us?


[/ QUOTE ]

Russia gave up much of its power without negative consequences from other countries.

Then again, the US doesn't really respect countries with less power either, does it? Almost nobody agreed on going to war with Irak this time and it didn't stop them. So the countries with less power who pleaded to give the UN inspectors more time were simply ignored.

And if the UN is disliked that much, then you'd better prepare to sacrifice a lot more US soldiers in other conflicts as well.
 

Kristofg

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
355
Location
Belgium
[ QUOTE ]
BC0311 said:Not by a long shot. Probably (after the United States of America) South Korea.

[/ QUOTE ]
Korean War:
Casualities included 139,272 Americans, 272,975 South Koreans, 620,264 North Koreans and 909,607 Chinese

So it seems the Chinese did.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top