FORWARD OPERATING BASE LOYALTY, Iraq (AP) -- Army Spc. Christopher D. Kube was memorialized Thursday in a packed theater at this outpost in east Baghdad. Another fallen soldier. Another reminder, far from the public spotlight, of the grief that hits not only families of this war's casualties but also their comrades in arms.
He was 18.
He was a newlywed.
He was killed on July 14, eight months after he arrived in Iraq on a deployment that made him nervous from the start, as one fellow soldier remembered. Back at his home station, Fort Carson, Colorado, he drew attention for being so young, so short, so slight and so cheerful.
"When I saw him I asked, `How old are you, 10?"' recalled his platoon sergeant, Staff Sgt. Eugenie Byron-Griffin. "`What are you doing here? You're a baby.' He looked me straight in my eye, with his chest poked out like he does, and he said, `I'm 17, and I ain't no baby. I'm a man."'
Tears flowing, she added: "Everyone in the unit used to mess with him because he was so small. And almost always he would fight hard to prove his manhood. Like when he purchased his first
vehicle and bragged about how little he paid for it." He was determined, Byron-Griffin said: "Even when he was afraid, he would face his fear straight-up. And that was what he did when he enlisted in the Army. He said he was afraid he would deploy to Iraq. But he wanted to make a better life for himself and his family."
Born on September 7, 1988, in Sterling Heights, Michigan, Kube enlisted on October 25, 2005, just making the minimum legal age of 17 for joining the military.
Last November he and his unit said their goodbyes and headed for war.
Last Saturday, as he stood in the gun turret of an armored Humvee that was ferrying a team of soldiers to a meeting to promote reconciliation among rival Iraqi religious rivals, a roadside bomb -- the leading killer of American soldiers -- struck him, killing him instantly.
Kube was with G Company, 2nd Battalion, 17th Field Artillery Regiment, 2nd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division. Originally assigned to supply duty, he volunteered to be a gunner and a driver in convoys that ferry commanders and, in some cases, visiting VIPs. He chose danger.
His memorial was, in some ways, like those held almost every evening across Baghdad and beyond. A chaplain gave an invocation. The soldier's commander gave a heartfelt tribute. Fellow soldiers recalled their time together, their sense of loss, their grief and pain.
It was commonplace and yet so extraordinary, knowing that this youngster's death was another loss for an America torn by four years of war, divided over how to end it, weary of the cost in blood and treasure.
In their remembrances, no soldiers questioned the war. Instead they honored a life. They sat in silence as a series of photos of Kube were projected on a large screen. Words of tribute flashed on the screen.
"You were like a little brother to us all," wrote one.
"I feel sorry for the rest of the world," wrote another.
Music played in the background.
At the foot of a stage a helmet with Kube's nameband around it sat atop an upright rifle, his dog tags dangling, a pair of desert combat boots neatly in front.
"To my fellow soldiers I say, Kube is gone but never forgotten," said Capt. Steve Poe, his company commander. "I ask you to pick it up and drive on. That's what I believe Kube would do. He's just that kind of guy."
Attached files
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
RedGlitter;665734 wrote:
"To my fellow soldiers I say, Kube is gone but never forgotten," said Capt. Steve Poe, his company commander. "I ask you to pick it up and drive on. That's what I believe Kube would do. He's just that kind of guy."
*Stands at attention and salutes*
Driving on. :yh_flag
"To my fellow soldiers I say, Kube is gone but never forgotten," said Capt. Steve Poe, his company commander. "I ask you to pick it up and drive on. That's what I believe Kube would do. He's just that kind of guy."
*Stands at attention and salutes*
Driving on. :yh_flag
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
Thank you Accountable.
That was nice. :yh_flower
That was nice. :yh_flower
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
I hope we can discuss this if we must without insulting the guy's honor. 
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
And that's your choice, MF, courtesy of men such as Army Spc. Christopher D. Kube.
You're welcome.
You're welcome.
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
I thought you were leaving this thread alone, Magenta? :rolleyes:
It is my opinion and probably even a fact that an 18 year old BOY who is married and enlists as a soldier is a MAN. If not, maybe you could tell me at what exact age is a boy specifically considered a man.
It is my opinion and probably even a fact that an 18 year old BOY who is married and enlists as a soldier is a MAN. If not, maybe you could tell me at what exact age is a boy specifically considered a man.
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
magenta flame;665802 wrote: OH my god! Honor? you talk about honor when sending children off to war?
Give me a break. Put a boy in a uniform and you know what he is ? A bloody boy in a uniform! That's it! Nothing else ! stops there!!!!
A boy becomes a man because he goes off to war ?
A boy becomes a man because a government says he can go to war ?
Before he's even old enough to vote?
he's a man because some dumb arse propaganda drive told him so?
Makes me sick to my stomach !!
SOme dumb arse recruiting officer couldnt' see through the smokie haze of heroism?
So this kid is a hero?
NO !!!! he's a boy playing an old mans game............have we learnt' nothing.
I cry for him RED but I hate with a total passion in my heart those who put him there and convinced him it was the right thing to do!!!!
It's wrong to push drugs onto a seventeen year old but it's ok to send them to an untimely tragic and often humiliating slow death?
bullshit he died instantly that's what they tell everyone about war!!!!
he's suffered and died mentally and psychologically before he died physically!
god this is a thread I have to leave alone It sickens me to the very core of my being!
He was old enough to vote, to get married and to choose to join the Army.
Give me a break. Put a boy in a uniform and you know what he is ? A bloody boy in a uniform! That's it! Nothing else ! stops there!!!!
A boy becomes a man because he goes off to war ?
A boy becomes a man because a government says he can go to war ?
Before he's even old enough to vote?
he's a man because some dumb arse propaganda drive told him so?
Makes me sick to my stomach !!
SOme dumb arse recruiting officer couldnt' see through the smokie haze of heroism?
So this kid is a hero?
NO !!!! he's a boy playing an old mans game............have we learnt' nothing.
I cry for him RED but I hate with a total passion in my heart those who put him there and convinced him it was the right thing to do!!!!
It's wrong to push drugs onto a seventeen year old but it's ok to send them to an untimely tragic and often humiliating slow death?
bullshit he died instantly that's what they tell everyone about war!!!!
he's suffered and died mentally and psychologically before he died physically!
god this is a thread I have to leave alone It sickens me to the very core of my being!
He was old enough to vote, to get married and to choose to join the Army.
"Girls are crazy! I'm not ever getting married, I can make my own sandwiches!"
my son
my son
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
Scrat;665836 wrote: Honor? That's a word I never hear in this society anymore.
I'm not insulting him. Is the fact that he died in a stupid war to gain access to oil wealth for a few people a dishonorable act? Not by him, his was an act of youthful hormones and ignorance.
The dishonorable people are the ones who gave him the opportunity to off himself. And I am quite sure encouraged him.
His death was a pitiful act enabled by a sick and weak society.
Scrat;665844 wrote: I agree.
War is nothing more than forfeiting your future, your hopes, and your dreams for the hopes and dreams of others to cowardly to fight themselves.
I'm not convinced it's about oil but let me get a bead on this.
If the war is stupid, the guy is young, ignorant and foolish.
If the war is "necessary" then he's a hero.
Is this correct?
Just for the sake of discussion, if America were attacked tomorrow, what should we do?
Kube didn't off himself. He was killed. While that's disgusting and awful I don't see it as pitiful. And I use the term honor because I feel it is deserved.
I'm not insulting him. Is the fact that he died in a stupid war to gain access to oil wealth for a few people a dishonorable act? Not by him, his was an act of youthful hormones and ignorance.
The dishonorable people are the ones who gave him the opportunity to off himself. And I am quite sure encouraged him.
His death was a pitiful act enabled by a sick and weak society.
Scrat;665844 wrote: I agree.
War is nothing more than forfeiting your future, your hopes, and your dreams for the hopes and dreams of others to cowardly to fight themselves.
I'm not convinced it's about oil but let me get a bead on this.
If the war is stupid, the guy is young, ignorant and foolish.
If the war is "necessary" then he's a hero.
Is this correct?
Just for the sake of discussion, if America were attacked tomorrow, what should we do?
Kube didn't off himself. He was killed. While that's disgusting and awful I don't see it as pitiful. And I use the term honor because I feel it is deserved.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
magenta flame;665822 wrote: I'm sorry ? Are you being concieted enough to tell me that your soldiers are protecting me and my right to speak?
my god man, I know who protects my right of speech and it's certainly not your government. held to ransome more like
"... men such as Army Spc. Christopher D. Kube" includes Australian men as well - brave men who willingly face death so that you can spew your bile unmolested.
my god man, I know who protects my right of speech and it's certainly not your government. held to ransome more like
"... men such as Army Spc. Christopher D. Kube" includes Australian men as well - brave men who willingly face death so that you can spew your bile unmolested.
-
SlipStream
- Posts: 17508
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 8:46 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
war stinks...:-1
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
By the very nature of the job that they are asked to do it is the youth of our nations who go to fight and die. People my age can't join up and fight we're not fit enough. It's not fair that young men such as him and all the others that won't get to my age lose their lives but thank God that they are proud and patriotic and honourable that they do this. Not just in this conflict but in all.
Rest in peace.
Rest in peace.
Originally Posted by spot
She is one fit bitch innit, that Immy
Don't worry; it only seems kinky the first time
She is one fit bitch innit, that Immy
Don't worry; it only seems kinky the first time
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
I AM AWESOME MAN
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
"To my fellow soldiers I say, Kube is gone but never forgotten," said Capt. Steve Poe, his company commander. "I ask you to pick it up and drive on. That's what I believe Kube would do. He's just that kind of guy."
-
Skyhawk691
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:24 pm
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
Rest In Peace, Warrior Spc Kube
For you who have never served...
WHAT IS A VETERAN?
Some veterans bear visible signs of their service; a missing limb, a jagged scar, a certain look in the eye. Others may carry the evidence inside them; a pin holding a bone together, a piece of shrapnel in the leg or perhaps another sort of inner steel: the soul's ally forged in the refinery of adversity. Except in the parades, however, the men and women who have kept America safe wear no badge or emblem.
You can't tell a vet just by looking. What is a vet?
He is the cop on the beat who spent six months in Saudi Arabia sweating two gallons a day making sure the armored personnel carriers didn't run out of fuel.
He is the bar room loudmouth, dumber than five wooden planks, whose overgrown frat-boy behavior is outweighed a hundred times in the cosmic scales by four hours of exquisite bravery near the 38th parallel.
She, or he, is the nurse who fought against futility and went to sleep sobbing every night for two solid years in Da Nang.
He is the POW who went away one person and came back another, or didn't come back AT ALL. He is the Quantico drill instructor that has never seen combat, but saved countless lives by turning slouchy, no account rednecks and gang members into Marines, and teaching them to watch each other's backs.
He is the parade riding Legionnaire who pins on his ribbons and medals with a prosthetic hand. He is the career quartermaster who watches the ribbons and medals pass him by.
He is the anonymous heroes in The Tomb of the Unknowns, whose presence at the Arlington National Cemetery must forever preserve the memory of all the anonymous heroes whose valor dies unrecognized with them on the battlefield or in the ocean's sunless deep.
He is the old guy bagging groceries at the supermarket, palsied now and aggravatingly slow, who helped liberate a Nazi death camp and who wishes all day long that his wife were still alive to hold him when the nightmares come.
He is an ordinary and yet an extraordinary human being, a person who offered some of his life's most vital years in the service of his country, and who sacrificed his ambitions so others would not have to sacrifice theirs.
He is a soldier and a savior and a sword against the darkness, and he is nothing more than the finest, greatest testimony on behalf of the finest, greatest nation ever known.
So remember, each time you see someone who has served our country, just lean over and say Thank You. That's all most people need, and in most cases it will mean more than any medals they could have been awarded or were awarded.
It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press.
It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate.
It is the soldier, who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag.
Author Unknown
For you who have never served...
WHAT IS A VETERAN?
Some veterans bear visible signs of their service; a missing limb, a jagged scar, a certain look in the eye. Others may carry the evidence inside them; a pin holding a bone together, a piece of shrapnel in the leg or perhaps another sort of inner steel: the soul's ally forged in the refinery of adversity. Except in the parades, however, the men and women who have kept America safe wear no badge or emblem.
You can't tell a vet just by looking. What is a vet?
He is the cop on the beat who spent six months in Saudi Arabia sweating two gallons a day making sure the armored personnel carriers didn't run out of fuel.
He is the bar room loudmouth, dumber than five wooden planks, whose overgrown frat-boy behavior is outweighed a hundred times in the cosmic scales by four hours of exquisite bravery near the 38th parallel.
She, or he, is the nurse who fought against futility and went to sleep sobbing every night for two solid years in Da Nang.
He is the POW who went away one person and came back another, or didn't come back AT ALL. He is the Quantico drill instructor that has never seen combat, but saved countless lives by turning slouchy, no account rednecks and gang members into Marines, and teaching them to watch each other's backs.
He is the parade riding Legionnaire who pins on his ribbons and medals with a prosthetic hand. He is the career quartermaster who watches the ribbons and medals pass him by.
He is the anonymous heroes in The Tomb of the Unknowns, whose presence at the Arlington National Cemetery must forever preserve the memory of all the anonymous heroes whose valor dies unrecognized with them on the battlefield or in the ocean's sunless deep.
He is the old guy bagging groceries at the supermarket, palsied now and aggravatingly slow, who helped liberate a Nazi death camp and who wishes all day long that his wife were still alive to hold him when the nightmares come.
He is an ordinary and yet an extraordinary human being, a person who offered some of his life's most vital years in the service of his country, and who sacrificed his ambitions so others would not have to sacrifice theirs.
He is a soldier and a savior and a sword against the darkness, and he is nothing more than the finest, greatest testimony on behalf of the finest, greatest nation ever known.
So remember, each time you see someone who has served our country, just lean over and say Thank You. That's all most people need, and in most cases it will mean more than any medals they could have been awarded or were awarded.
It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press.
It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate.
It is the soldier, who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag.
Author Unknown
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
Scrat;665836 wrote: Honor? That's a word I never hear in this society anymore.
I'm not insulting him. Is the fact that he died in a stupid war to gain access to oil wealth for a few people a dishonorable act? Not by him, his was an act of youthful hormones and ignorance.
The dishonorable people are the ones who gave him the opportunity to off himself. And I am quite sure encouraged him.
His death was a pitiful act enabled by a sick and weak society.
I assume you do understand the meaning of the word. All the troops out there are doing their best, whatever you think of the army most have honourable motives for being there they're doing their jobs. Denigrate that all you like you can't really detract from that.
I find a curious dichotomy amongst Americans about this subject. If someone criticises the war the response seems to be not to ask why and discuss it but simply dismiss the matter as you don't support the troops or you support terrorists.
In the UK no politician would dare respond like that for the simple reason they would be laughed at. In a pub discussion the response is unlikely to be so polite.
If you support troops who see it as their duty to serve their country then you support them best by questioning what they are asked to do-else they are just cannon fodder whose lives don't matter.
On CNN there is occasionally a eulogy for a fallen hero-much like the one in the first post. It is not something you will see on British TV as most would see it as a cynical manipulation of public sentiment by politicians trying to keep support for their policies by making it unacceptable to speak out because a) you are being unpatriotic, b) you don't support the troops, c) you support terrorists. It would cause tremendous anger that the govt would use the death of a soldier in such a manner. That is not in any way detracting from the sentiment it's anger at the cynical waste of a young life for reasons that are at best doubtful. Support your troops by asking of your politicians what the F)*K have you got them in to.
Luckily I live in a country where slagging off the government is socially acceptable and free speech still reigns. Course we have those trying to convince us that the present terrorist threat means we need to give up our freedom and accept things like giving the police powers to hold people without trial. There are even moves afoot to try and make us more patriotic and appreciate British values. Happily one of our traditions is saying F08K off to someone telling us what is or is not patriotic.
It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press.
Actually the soldier was used by the rulers to try and crush freedom of the press. Many is the time soldiers hunted down those with the presses and we owe freedom of the press to those who would not be silenced.
It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
It was the little man prepared to speak his piece and write what he liked and had the words to inspire others.
It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate.
It was those who stood up to troops on horseback and fought unarmed for their right to protest to whom we owe the right to protest. Tell me-as an American who do you think did more for the freedom to demonstrate in America today at Kent State university-the unarmed protesters or the troops that opened fire on them?
It is the soldier, who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag.
No it is those who stood up for freedom and fought for what they thought was right to whom you owe the right to burn the flag. Soldiers who follow orders without question give no one freedom. You owe your freedom to all those who when the time came were ready to fight as soldiers for what they felt was right.
I'm not insulting him. Is the fact that he died in a stupid war to gain access to oil wealth for a few people a dishonorable act? Not by him, his was an act of youthful hormones and ignorance.
The dishonorable people are the ones who gave him the opportunity to off himself. And I am quite sure encouraged him.
His death was a pitiful act enabled by a sick and weak society.
I assume you do understand the meaning of the word. All the troops out there are doing their best, whatever you think of the army most have honourable motives for being there they're doing their jobs. Denigrate that all you like you can't really detract from that.
I find a curious dichotomy amongst Americans about this subject. If someone criticises the war the response seems to be not to ask why and discuss it but simply dismiss the matter as you don't support the troops or you support terrorists.
In the UK no politician would dare respond like that for the simple reason they would be laughed at. In a pub discussion the response is unlikely to be so polite.
If you support troops who see it as their duty to serve their country then you support them best by questioning what they are asked to do-else they are just cannon fodder whose lives don't matter.
On CNN there is occasionally a eulogy for a fallen hero-much like the one in the first post. It is not something you will see on British TV as most would see it as a cynical manipulation of public sentiment by politicians trying to keep support for their policies by making it unacceptable to speak out because a) you are being unpatriotic, b) you don't support the troops, c) you support terrorists. It would cause tremendous anger that the govt would use the death of a soldier in such a manner. That is not in any way detracting from the sentiment it's anger at the cynical waste of a young life for reasons that are at best doubtful. Support your troops by asking of your politicians what the F)*K have you got them in to.
Luckily I live in a country where slagging off the government is socially acceptable and free speech still reigns. Course we have those trying to convince us that the present terrorist threat means we need to give up our freedom and accept things like giving the police powers to hold people without trial. There are even moves afoot to try and make us more patriotic and appreciate British values. Happily one of our traditions is saying F08K off to someone telling us what is or is not patriotic.
It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press.
Actually the soldier was used by the rulers to try and crush freedom of the press. Many is the time soldiers hunted down those with the presses and we owe freedom of the press to those who would not be silenced.
It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.
It was the little man prepared to speak his piece and write what he liked and had the words to inspire others.
It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate.
It was those who stood up to troops on horseback and fought unarmed for their right to protest to whom we owe the right to protest. Tell me-as an American who do you think did more for the freedom to demonstrate in America today at Kent State university-the unarmed protesters or the troops that opened fire on them?
It is the soldier, who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag.
No it is those who stood up for freedom and fought for what they thought was right to whom you owe the right to burn the flag. Soldiers who follow orders without question give no one freedom. You owe your freedom to all those who when the time came were ready to fight as soldiers for what they felt was right.
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
gmc;669121 wrote: I assume you do understand the meaning of the word. All the troops out there are doing their best, whatever you think of the army most have honourable motives for being there they're doing their jobs. Denigrate that all you like you can't really detract from that. What the recruits intend and what they achieve are not necessarily connected, even if they're as idealistic as you paint them. The excuse, that if these people didn't protect you you'd not have the freedom to express a critical opinion, hasn't held water since before any of us were born, and for the Americans among us it's a lot longer than that. This isn't protection. Armies in the Homeland protect. Armies in Iraq are the offense team, they're nothing to do with protection.
Regardless of desire or intention they are doing nothing at all to protect their Homeland, on the contrary they're adding to any eventual risk it might face. I defy anyone to explain how the Iraq War has improved Homeland Security for countries involved in the Coalition. "brave men who willingly face death so that you can spew your bile unmolested" has been trotted out every time this topic has shown itself on ForumGarden, year after year. It has no validity whatever, it is as offensive to those it's addressed to as could easily be imagined.
There is no increased safety to the Homeland produced by armed forces projecting their power in Iraq. If you think there is, you should at least try to explain why you think it. It is the Blair White House propaganda line and nothing more.
Eulogizing individual soldiers doesn't add merit to the argument in this thread any more than eulogizing Pat Tillman did in earlier ones. It's more relevant to note that for every hundred members of the armed services deployed into the Middle Eastern theater since the Coalition of the Willing attacked Iraq, one member has returned home either dead or permanently disabled.
A reasonable estimate would be that another will be lost to suicide (that's the proportion found from the Falklands War after 25 years as an example), not an insignificant figure when it's projected as ten thousand veterans.
Even if you count the additional lives of the native population to be utterly worthless - which seems to be a commonplace American reaction to the slaughter - it's still too high a cost for whatever's being bought, whatever that is. Whatever it is it's not the protection of civil rights at home. "That's your choice courtesy of such men" may give a glow to some people but it's not justified by reality.
Regardless of desire or intention they are doing nothing at all to protect their Homeland, on the contrary they're adding to any eventual risk it might face. I defy anyone to explain how the Iraq War has improved Homeland Security for countries involved in the Coalition. "brave men who willingly face death so that you can spew your bile unmolested" has been trotted out every time this topic has shown itself on ForumGarden, year after year. It has no validity whatever, it is as offensive to those it's addressed to as could easily be imagined.
There is no increased safety to the Homeland produced by armed forces projecting their power in Iraq. If you think there is, you should at least try to explain why you think it. It is the Blair White House propaganda line and nothing more.
Eulogizing individual soldiers doesn't add merit to the argument in this thread any more than eulogizing Pat Tillman did in earlier ones. It's more relevant to note that for every hundred members of the armed services deployed into the Middle Eastern theater since the Coalition of the Willing attacked Iraq, one member has returned home either dead or permanently disabled.
A reasonable estimate would be that another will be lost to suicide (that's the proportion found from the Falklands War after 25 years as an example), not an insignificant figure when it's projected as ten thousand veterans.
Even if you count the additional lives of the native population to be utterly worthless - which seems to be a commonplace American reaction to the slaughter - it's still too high a cost for whatever's being bought, whatever that is. Whatever it is it's not the protection of civil rights at home. "That's your choice courtesy of such men" may give a glow to some people but it's not justified by reality.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
[quote=gmc;669121]I assume you do understand the meaning of the word. All the troops out there are doing their best, whatever you think of the army most have honourable motives for being there they're doing their jobs. Denigrate that all you like you can't really detract from that.
I find a curious dichotomy amongst Americans about this subject. If someone criticises the war the response seems to be not to ask why and discuss it but simply dismiss the matter as you don't support the troops or you support terrorists.
In the UK no politician would dare respond like that for the simple reason they would be laughed at. In a pub discussion the response is unlikely to be so polite.
If you support troops who see it as their duty to serve their country then you support them best by questioning what they are asked to do-else they are just cannon fodder whose lives don't matter.
On CNN there is occasionally a eulogy for a fallen hero-much like the one in the first post. It is not something you will see on British TV as most would see it as a cynical manipulation of public sentiment by politicians trying to keep support for their policies by making it unacceptable to speak out because a) you are being unpatriotic, b) you don't support the troops, c) you support terrorists. It would cause tremendous anger that the govt would use the death of a soldier in such a manner. That is not in any way detracting from the sentiment it's anger at the cynical waste of a young life for reasons that are at best doubtful. Support your troops by asking of your politicians what the F)*K have you got them in to.
Luckily I live in a country where slagging off the government is socially acceptable and free speech still reigns.
We do still have free speech, Gmc. If you're asking me personally, I would say of course the government doesn't want us to question the war, and they're not to be trusted because they *are* the government. There are many, many of us both who support troops and don't, who question.
I think the reason behind the part of your comment I bolded, is twofold: one, on the gov't's behalf, they do want us citizens to be sheep and that's one of their ways of making it happen; to accuse us if being unpatriotic (a quality most of us value) or "not supportive of our troops." The other reason is because Americans are naturally defensive nowadays when non-Americans bring up a discussion, because we're tired of having to defend our motives. There is a prevailing notion among other nationalities that America got her comeuppance on 9-11 and that we are the sole reason for this war and all the contention in the world- that we just bully other countries. That makes us on guard and defensive, especially those who have loved ones either serving or having died in this war. To not honor their service, regardless of which side you're on, negates their memory, their honor and their effort. Or at least that's how a lot of us see it. That by some of the remarks we hear, our soldiers risking and forfeiting their lives are being degraded. We're not allowed to say hero anymore.
I am pretty sure I understand where you're coming from on this, at least I think I do anyway. I'm just trying to explain another side of it.
I find a curious dichotomy amongst Americans about this subject. If someone criticises the war the response seems to be not to ask why and discuss it but simply dismiss the matter as you don't support the troops or you support terrorists.
In the UK no politician would dare respond like that for the simple reason they would be laughed at. In a pub discussion the response is unlikely to be so polite.
If you support troops who see it as their duty to serve their country then you support them best by questioning what they are asked to do-else they are just cannon fodder whose lives don't matter.
On CNN there is occasionally a eulogy for a fallen hero-much like the one in the first post. It is not something you will see on British TV as most would see it as a cynical manipulation of public sentiment by politicians trying to keep support for their policies by making it unacceptable to speak out because a) you are being unpatriotic, b) you don't support the troops, c) you support terrorists. It would cause tremendous anger that the govt would use the death of a soldier in such a manner. That is not in any way detracting from the sentiment it's anger at the cynical waste of a young life for reasons that are at best doubtful. Support your troops by asking of your politicians what the F)*K have you got them in to.
Luckily I live in a country where slagging off the government is socially acceptable and free speech still reigns.
We do still have free speech, Gmc. If you're asking me personally, I would say of course the government doesn't want us to question the war, and they're not to be trusted because they *are* the government. There are many, many of us both who support troops and don't, who question.
I think the reason behind the part of your comment I bolded, is twofold: one, on the gov't's behalf, they do want us citizens to be sheep and that's one of their ways of making it happen; to accuse us if being unpatriotic (a quality most of us value) or "not supportive of our troops." The other reason is because Americans are naturally defensive nowadays when non-Americans bring up a discussion, because we're tired of having to defend our motives. There is a prevailing notion among other nationalities that America got her comeuppance on 9-11 and that we are the sole reason for this war and all the contention in the world- that we just bully other countries. That makes us on guard and defensive, especially those who have loved ones either serving or having died in this war. To not honor their service, regardless of which side you're on, negates their memory, their honor and their effort. Or at least that's how a lot of us see it. That by some of the remarks we hear, our soldiers risking and forfeiting their lives are being degraded. We're not allowed to say hero anymore.
I am pretty sure I understand where you're coming from on this, at least I think I do anyway. I'm just trying to explain another side of it.
-
Skyhawk691
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:24 pm
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
You must live in a cave or never watch the TV. We Westerners are at WAR....
Have you forgotten 911 and all the terrorists bombings so quickly??
I'll bet you won't wake up till they come in the middle of the night
like the German Gestapo Troops and commit mass murder on your
neighbors and friends. People like you are too SOFT-HEARTED and
have not seen BRUTALITY OF WAR yet. I for one, will NOT let it happen
in my State, Country, without a fight to the death. They will have to
pry my cold, dead, fingers from my weapons....FIRST..
20 Point Plan to take over America by 2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A refugee from the Muslim Middle East thinks he has discovered Islam's 20-point plan for conquering the United States by 2020 – a plan revealed in the latest issue of Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
Anis Shorrosh, author of ''Islam Revealed'' and ''The True Furqan,'' is a Christian Arab-American who emigrated from Arab-controlled Jerusalem in January 1967.
''The following is my analysis of Islamic invasion of America, the agenda of Islamists and visible methods to take over America by the year 2020,'' Shorrosh says. ''Will Americans continue to sleep through this invasion as they did when we were attacked on 9/11?''
1. Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with statewide and nationwide hate-crime bills.
2. Wage a war of words using black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, Rev. Jesse Jackson and other visible religious personalities who promote Islam as the religion of African-Americans while insisting Christianity is for whites only. What they fail to tell African-Americans is that it was Arab Muslims who captured them and sold them as slaves. In fact, the Arabic word for black and slave is the same, ''Abed.''
3. Engage the American public in dialogues, discussions, debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.
4. Nominate Muslim sympathizers to political office to bring about favorable legislation toward Islam and support potential sympathizers by block voting.
5. Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.
6. Yield to the fear of the imminent shut-off of the lifeblood of America – black gold. America’s economy depends on oil and 41 percent of it comes from the Middle East.
7. Yell ''foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un- American, inaccurate interpretation of the Quran'' anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.
8. Encourage Muslims to penetrate the White House, specifically with Islamists who can articulate a marvelous and peaceful picture of Islam. Acquire government positions and get membership in local school boards. Train Muslims as medical doctors to dominate the medical field, research and pharmaceutical companies. (Ever notice how numerous Muslim doctors in America are, when their countries need them more desperately than America?) Take over the computer industry. Establish Middle Eastern restaurants throughout the U.S. to connect planners of Islamization in a discreet way.
9. Accelerate Islamic demographic growth via:
Massive immigration (100,000 annually since 1961).
Use no birth control whatsoever – every baby of Muslim parents is automatically a Muslim and cannot choose another religion later.
Muslim men must marry American women and Islamize them (10,000 annually). Then divorce them and remarry every five years – since one can't legally marry four at one time. This is a legal solution in America.
Convert angry, alienated black inmates and turn them into militants (so far 2,000 released inmates have joined al-Qaida worldwide). Only a few ''sleeper cells'' have been captured in Afghanistan and on American soil.
10. Reading, writing, arithmetic and research through the American educational system, mosques and student centers (now 1,500) should be sprinkled with dislike of Jews, evangelical Christians and democracy. There are currently 300 exclusively Muslim schools in the U.S. which teach loyalty to the Quran, not the U.S. Constitution. In January of 2002, Saudi Arabia’s Embassy in Washington mailed 4,500 packets of the Quran and videos promoting Islam to America's high schools – free of charge. Saudi Arabia would not allow the U.S. to reciprocate.
11. Provide very sizeable monetary Muslim grants to colleges and universities in America to establish ''Centers for Islamic studies'' with Muslim directors to promote Islam in higher-education institutions.
12. Let the entire world know through propaganda, speeches, seminars, local and national media that terrorists have hijacked Islam, when in truth, Islam hijacked the terrorists.
13. Appeal to the historically compassionate and sensitive Americans for sympathy and tolerance towards Muslims in America who are portrayed as mainly immigrants from oppressed countries.
14. Nullify America's sense of security by manipulating the intelligence community with misinformation. Periodically terrorize Americans with reports of impending attacks on bridges, tunnels, water supplies, airports, apartment buildings and malls.
15. Form riots and demonstrations in the prison system demanding Islamic Sharia as the way of life, not America's justice system.
16. Open numerous charities throughout the U.S., but use the funds to support Islamic terrorism with American dollars.
17. Raise interest in Islam on America's campuses by insisting freshman take at least one course on Islam.
18. Unify the numerous Muslim lobbies in Washington, mosques, Islamic student centers, educational organizations, magazines and papers by Internet and an annual convention to coordinate plans, propagate the faith and engender news in the media.
19. Send intimidating messages and messengers to the outspoken individuals who are critical of Islam and seek to eliminate them by hook or crook.
20. Applaud Muslims as loyal citizens of the U.S. by spotlighting their voting record as the highest percentage of all minority and ethic groups in America.
--------------------------------------------------
Some of these I see already creeping into mainstream America but they can ONLY do it if WE let them..We need more Patriots who are willing to take a stand against this silent invasion..
Your Choice??
Have you forgotten 911 and all the terrorists bombings so quickly??
I'll bet you won't wake up till they come in the middle of the night
like the German Gestapo Troops and commit mass murder on your
neighbors and friends. People like you are too SOFT-HEARTED and
have not seen BRUTALITY OF WAR yet. I for one, will NOT let it happen
in my State, Country, without a fight to the death. They will have to
pry my cold, dead, fingers from my weapons....FIRST..
20 Point Plan to take over America by 2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A refugee from the Muslim Middle East thinks he has discovered Islam's 20-point plan for conquering the United States by 2020 – a plan revealed in the latest issue of Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
Anis Shorrosh, author of ''Islam Revealed'' and ''The True Furqan,'' is a Christian Arab-American who emigrated from Arab-controlled Jerusalem in January 1967.
''The following is my analysis of Islamic invasion of America, the agenda of Islamists and visible methods to take over America by the year 2020,'' Shorrosh says. ''Will Americans continue to sleep through this invasion as they did when we were attacked on 9/11?''
1. Terminate America's freedom of speech by replacing it with statewide and nationwide hate-crime bills.
2. Wage a war of words using black leaders like Louis Farrakhan, Rev. Jesse Jackson and other visible religious personalities who promote Islam as the religion of African-Americans while insisting Christianity is for whites only. What they fail to tell African-Americans is that it was Arab Muslims who captured them and sold them as slaves. In fact, the Arabic word for black and slave is the same, ''Abed.''
3. Engage the American public in dialogues, discussions, debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.
4. Nominate Muslim sympathizers to political office to bring about favorable legislation toward Islam and support potential sympathizers by block voting.
5. Take control of as much of Hollywood, the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.
6. Yield to the fear of the imminent shut-off of the lifeblood of America – black gold. America’s economy depends on oil and 41 percent of it comes from the Middle East.
7. Yell ''foul, out-of-context, personal interpretation, hate crime, Zionist, un- American, inaccurate interpretation of the Quran'' anytime Islam is criticized or the Quran is analyzed in the public arena.
8. Encourage Muslims to penetrate the White House, specifically with Islamists who can articulate a marvelous and peaceful picture of Islam. Acquire government positions and get membership in local school boards. Train Muslims as medical doctors to dominate the medical field, research and pharmaceutical companies. (Ever notice how numerous Muslim doctors in America are, when their countries need them more desperately than America?) Take over the computer industry. Establish Middle Eastern restaurants throughout the U.S. to connect planners of Islamization in a discreet way.
9. Accelerate Islamic demographic growth via:
Massive immigration (100,000 annually since 1961).
Use no birth control whatsoever – every baby of Muslim parents is automatically a Muslim and cannot choose another religion later.
Muslim men must marry American women and Islamize them (10,000 annually). Then divorce them and remarry every five years – since one can't legally marry four at one time. This is a legal solution in America.
Convert angry, alienated black inmates and turn them into militants (so far 2,000 released inmates have joined al-Qaida worldwide). Only a few ''sleeper cells'' have been captured in Afghanistan and on American soil.
10. Reading, writing, arithmetic and research through the American educational system, mosques and student centers (now 1,500) should be sprinkled with dislike of Jews, evangelical Christians and democracy. There are currently 300 exclusively Muslim schools in the U.S. which teach loyalty to the Quran, not the U.S. Constitution. In January of 2002, Saudi Arabia’s Embassy in Washington mailed 4,500 packets of the Quran and videos promoting Islam to America's high schools – free of charge. Saudi Arabia would not allow the U.S. to reciprocate.
11. Provide very sizeable monetary Muslim grants to colleges and universities in America to establish ''Centers for Islamic studies'' with Muslim directors to promote Islam in higher-education institutions.
12. Let the entire world know through propaganda, speeches, seminars, local and national media that terrorists have hijacked Islam, when in truth, Islam hijacked the terrorists.
13. Appeal to the historically compassionate and sensitive Americans for sympathy and tolerance towards Muslims in America who are portrayed as mainly immigrants from oppressed countries.
14. Nullify America's sense of security by manipulating the intelligence community with misinformation. Periodically terrorize Americans with reports of impending attacks on bridges, tunnels, water supplies, airports, apartment buildings and malls.
15. Form riots and demonstrations in the prison system demanding Islamic Sharia as the way of life, not America's justice system.
16. Open numerous charities throughout the U.S., but use the funds to support Islamic terrorism with American dollars.
17. Raise interest in Islam on America's campuses by insisting freshman take at least one course on Islam.
18. Unify the numerous Muslim lobbies in Washington, mosques, Islamic student centers, educational organizations, magazines and papers by Internet and an annual convention to coordinate plans, propagate the faith and engender news in the media.
19. Send intimidating messages and messengers to the outspoken individuals who are critical of Islam and seek to eliminate them by hook or crook.
20. Applaud Muslims as loyal citizens of the U.S. by spotlighting their voting record as the highest percentage of all minority and ethic groups in America.
--------------------------------------------------
Some of these I see already creeping into mainstream America but they can ONLY do it if WE let them..We need more Patriots who are willing to take a stand against this silent invasion..
Your Choice??
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
posted by spot
What the recruits intend and what they achieve are not necessarily connected, even if they're as idealistic as you paint them. The excuse, that if these people didn't protect you you'd not have the freedom to express a critical opinion, hasn't held water since before any of us were born, and for the Americans among us it's a lot longer than that. This isn't protection. Armies in the Homeland protect. Armies in Iraq are the offense team, they're nothing to do with protection
If you actually read what I had posted I think you would see we are broadly in agreement. I have never been in support of this war and can't understand why so many were taken in by the arguments in favour of it. I get the impression you are responding to what you think I said rather than what I actually said.
The excuse, that if these people didn't protect you you'd not have the freedom to express a critical opinion, hasn't held water since before any of us were born, and for the Americans among us it's a lot longer than that.
It's a spurious argument that also annoys me intensely, I would refer you to my post.
posted by scrat
It's a question of whether or not it is justified. He died fighting in a war that cannot be justified. To me he is not a hero, he is a victim of his own bad choice.
I was also pointing out that the eulogising of individual soldiers would actually be found offensive and seen IMO by most in the UK as a cynical attempt to manipulate public opinion. However, I don't think you do yourself much credit by characterising soldiers as a bunch of idiots that get what they deserve. It's not worthy of you and detracts from your argument.
posted by red glitter
We do still have free speech, Gmc. If you're asking me personally, I would say of course the government doesn't want us to question the war, and they're not to be trusted because they *are* the government. There are many, many of us both who support troops and don't, who question.
I was being slightly facetious. I do however get the impression that get the impression that criticising the war in iraq is viewed as being unpatriotic rather than the normal exercise of free speech you would expect in a free country.
posted by red glitter
I think the reason behind the part of your comment I bolded, is twofold: one, on the gov't's behalf, they do want us citizens to be sheep and that's one of their ways of making it happen; to accuse us if being unpatriotic (a quality most of us value) or "not supportive of our troops." The other reason is because Americans are naturally defensive nowadays when non-Americans bring up a discussion, because we're tired of having to defend our motives. There is a prevailing notion among other nationalities that America got her comeuppance on 9-11 and that we are the sole reason for this war and all the contention in the world- that we just bully other countries. That makes us on guard and defensive, especially those who have loved ones either serving or having died in this war. To not honor their service, regardless of which side you're on, negates their memory, their honor and their effort. Or at least that's how a lot of us see it. That by some of the remarks we hear, our soldiers risking and forfeiting their lives are being degraded. We're not allowed to say hero anymore.
There is a considerable difference between criticising the actions of your government and being anti-American. It seems no comment can be made without the knee jerk you are simply anti-american with no regard to the factual case being presented. Many don't seem to know what foreign policy has been pursued in your name and don't think it relevant to what is happening now which is a breathtaking disconnection that means the same mistakes will go on being made.
British activities in the middle east don't exactly stand up to close scrutiny either but I doubt you would find anyone criticising what was done in our name being accused of simply being anti British. Stop being defensive because either a valid point is being made or it is not. Just assuming the comment is anti American stops you thinking about it. If it's wrong correct it but there will also be many you just don't agree with. Then again what fun is a discussion forum if all agree?
To not honor their service, regardless of which side you're on, negates their memory, their honor and their effort. Or at least that's how a lot of us see it. That by some of the remarks we hear, our soldiers risking and forfeiting their lives are being degraded. We're not allowed to say hero anymore.
The ones that degrade their memory are the ones that take advantage of their heroism. It's not just your soldiers that are dying and being maimed.
this is how such things are reported here.
http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1170362007
There is a tremendous amount of anger over the Iraq war but it's directed at our own politicians.
Incidentally. if you highlight the parts you are quoting and them click on the yellow box on the tool bar it will put a box round it for you.
posted by skyhawk961
You must live in a cave or never watch the TV. We Westerners are at WAR....
Have you forgotten 911 and all the terrorists bombings so quickly??
I'll bet you won't wake up till they come in the middle of the night
like the German Gestapo Troops and commit mass murder on your
neighbors and friends. People like you are too SOFT-HEARTED and
have not seen BRUTALITY OF WAR yet. I for one, will NOT let it happen
in my State, Country, without a fight to the death. They will have to
pry my cold, dead, fingers from my weapons....FIRST..
Don't believe all you see on TV. For instance if those who attacked you on 911 were all from Saudi Arabia why did you invade Iraq? They are actually different countries. The idea that the USA is likely to become an Islamic fundamentalist republic would be hilarious if it were not that so many in the US seem to be actually convinced it could happen. As an outsider it seems to me Christian fundamentalism is a bigger threat to your liberties. Freedom is destroyed from within not by outside threats.
Some of these I see already creeping into mainstream America but they can ONLY do it if WE let them..We need more Patriots who are willing to take a stand against this silent invasion..
Your Choice??
My choice is not to be fooled in to a state of fear by such ludicrous publications. You seem to have little faith in your fellow Americans. Do you really think they will vote for a fundamentalist islamist? Apart from that are not the illegal immigrants flooding in from Mexico mainly catholic? Give them the vote, they don't use birth control either so maybe they can counterbalance all the Muslims.
Also not being an American I can't say I would be too worried in any case.
What the recruits intend and what they achieve are not necessarily connected, even if they're as idealistic as you paint them. The excuse, that if these people didn't protect you you'd not have the freedom to express a critical opinion, hasn't held water since before any of us were born, and for the Americans among us it's a lot longer than that. This isn't protection. Armies in the Homeland protect. Armies in Iraq are the offense team, they're nothing to do with protection
If you actually read what I had posted I think you would see we are broadly in agreement. I have never been in support of this war and can't understand why so many were taken in by the arguments in favour of it. I get the impression you are responding to what you think I said rather than what I actually said.
The excuse, that if these people didn't protect you you'd not have the freedom to express a critical opinion, hasn't held water since before any of us were born, and for the Americans among us it's a lot longer than that.
It's a spurious argument that also annoys me intensely, I would refer you to my post.
posted by scrat
It's a question of whether or not it is justified. He died fighting in a war that cannot be justified. To me he is not a hero, he is a victim of his own bad choice.
I was also pointing out that the eulogising of individual soldiers would actually be found offensive and seen IMO by most in the UK as a cynical attempt to manipulate public opinion. However, I don't think you do yourself much credit by characterising soldiers as a bunch of idiots that get what they deserve. It's not worthy of you and detracts from your argument.
posted by red glitter
We do still have free speech, Gmc. If you're asking me personally, I would say of course the government doesn't want us to question the war, and they're not to be trusted because they *are* the government. There are many, many of us both who support troops and don't, who question.
I was being slightly facetious. I do however get the impression that get the impression that criticising the war in iraq is viewed as being unpatriotic rather than the normal exercise of free speech you would expect in a free country.
posted by red glitter
I think the reason behind the part of your comment I bolded, is twofold: one, on the gov't's behalf, they do want us citizens to be sheep and that's one of their ways of making it happen; to accuse us if being unpatriotic (a quality most of us value) or "not supportive of our troops." The other reason is because Americans are naturally defensive nowadays when non-Americans bring up a discussion, because we're tired of having to defend our motives. There is a prevailing notion among other nationalities that America got her comeuppance on 9-11 and that we are the sole reason for this war and all the contention in the world- that we just bully other countries. That makes us on guard and defensive, especially those who have loved ones either serving or having died in this war. To not honor their service, regardless of which side you're on, negates their memory, their honor and their effort. Or at least that's how a lot of us see it. That by some of the remarks we hear, our soldiers risking and forfeiting their lives are being degraded. We're not allowed to say hero anymore.
There is a considerable difference between criticising the actions of your government and being anti-American. It seems no comment can be made without the knee jerk you are simply anti-american with no regard to the factual case being presented. Many don't seem to know what foreign policy has been pursued in your name and don't think it relevant to what is happening now which is a breathtaking disconnection that means the same mistakes will go on being made.
British activities in the middle east don't exactly stand up to close scrutiny either but I doubt you would find anyone criticising what was done in our name being accused of simply being anti British. Stop being defensive because either a valid point is being made or it is not. Just assuming the comment is anti American stops you thinking about it. If it's wrong correct it but there will also be many you just don't agree with. Then again what fun is a discussion forum if all agree?
To not honor their service, regardless of which side you're on, negates their memory, their honor and their effort. Or at least that's how a lot of us see it. That by some of the remarks we hear, our soldiers risking and forfeiting their lives are being degraded. We're not allowed to say hero anymore.
The ones that degrade their memory are the ones that take advantage of their heroism. It's not just your soldiers that are dying and being maimed.
this is how such things are reported here.
http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1170362007
There is a tremendous amount of anger over the Iraq war but it's directed at our own politicians.
Incidentally. if you highlight the parts you are quoting and them click on the yellow box on the tool bar it will put a box round it for you.
posted by skyhawk961
You must live in a cave or never watch the TV. We Westerners are at WAR....
Have you forgotten 911 and all the terrorists bombings so quickly??
I'll bet you won't wake up till they come in the middle of the night
like the German Gestapo Troops and commit mass murder on your
neighbors and friends. People like you are too SOFT-HEARTED and
have not seen BRUTALITY OF WAR yet. I for one, will NOT let it happen
in my State, Country, without a fight to the death. They will have to
pry my cold, dead, fingers from my weapons....FIRST..
Don't believe all you see on TV. For instance if those who attacked you on 911 were all from Saudi Arabia why did you invade Iraq? They are actually different countries. The idea that the USA is likely to become an Islamic fundamentalist republic would be hilarious if it were not that so many in the US seem to be actually convinced it could happen. As an outsider it seems to me Christian fundamentalism is a bigger threat to your liberties. Freedom is destroyed from within not by outside threats.
Some of these I see already creeping into mainstream America but they can ONLY do it if WE let them..We need more Patriots who are willing to take a stand against this silent invasion..
Your Choice??
My choice is not to be fooled in to a state of fear by such ludicrous publications. You seem to have little faith in your fellow Americans. Do you really think they will vote for a fundamentalist islamist? Apart from that are not the illegal immigrants flooding in from Mexico mainly catholic? Give them the vote, they don't use birth control either so maybe they can counterbalance all the Muslims.
Also not being an American I can't say I would be too worried in any case.
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
gmc;669295 wrote: If you actually read what I had posted I think you would see we are broadly in agreement. I have never been in support of this war and can't understand why so many were taken in by the arguments in favour of it. I get the impression you are responding to what you think I said rather than what I actually said.
I needed a hook to hang my post on and your paragraph was convenient, relevant and a good lead in. I've been reading carefully enough to have a good idea of your position both in this thread and earlier ones.
I needed a hook to hang my post on and your paragraph was convenient, relevant and a good lead in. I've been reading carefully enough to have a good idea of your position both in this thread and earlier ones.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
I was being slightly facetious. I do however get the impression that get the impression that criticising the war in iraq is viewed as being unpatriotic rather than the normal exercise of free speech you would expect in a free country.
I'm sorry I didn't pick up on that. I think you are right in that criticism is viewed as a lack of patriotism. Especially by Bush. I think that's obviously a self preservation tactic of his. I think in America we have "hate the war, love the soldier." At least a lot of us feel that way. Whether the war was necessary or not, we still have men who died in it and yes, I do understand what you guys are saying regarding being a victim rather than a hero but that patriotism and idea of honor is deeply ingrained in us from the start. It's hard to get past.
There is a considerable difference between criticising the actions of your government and being anti-American. It seems no comment can be made without the knee jerk you are simply anti-american with no regard to the factual case being presented. Many don't seem to know what foreign policy has been pursued in your name and don't think it relevant to what is happening now which is a breathtaking disconnection that means the same mistakes will go on being made.
I tried to explain how that is earlier. We do often have a kneejerk reaction to that because the other parts of the world are so anti-American right now. It's only natural for us to be defensive. Your last comment sounds liek we deserved what we got because of actions we've taken in the past. Is that correct?
British activities in the middle east don't exactly stand up to close scrutiny either but I doubt you would find anyone criticising what was done in our name being accused of simply being anti British. Stop being defensive because either a valid point is being made or it is not. Just assuming the comment is anti American stops you thinking about it. If it's wrong correct it but there will also be many you just don't agree with. Then again what fun is a discussion forum if all agree?
I'm glad to hear that another country has been scrutinized because it feels to me like America has become the world's new whipping boy. And I hope you didn't take me for arguing with you because I wasn't. Thanks for telling me about the quote box- as long as I've been here I never knew I could do that.
The ones that degrade their memory are the ones that take advantage of their heroism. It's not just your soldiers that are dying and being maimed.
I do understand that, that there are other nationalities besides American involved in this war.
this is how such things are reported here.
http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1170362007
There is a tremendous amount of anger over the Iraq war but it's directed at our own politicians.
We *are* angry at our politicians too! Even Bush supporters are angry at his administration. But it's like Vietnam- when our soldiers come back I for one don't want them treated as victims of gov't stupidity because they still fought and still put their lives on the line for what many of us think is a good cause. I'm not talking about oil.
I'm sorry I didn't pick up on that. I think you are right in that criticism is viewed as a lack of patriotism. Especially by Bush. I think that's obviously a self preservation tactic of his. I think in America we have "hate the war, love the soldier." At least a lot of us feel that way. Whether the war was necessary or not, we still have men who died in it and yes, I do understand what you guys are saying regarding being a victim rather than a hero but that patriotism and idea of honor is deeply ingrained in us from the start. It's hard to get past.
There is a considerable difference between criticising the actions of your government and being anti-American. It seems no comment can be made without the knee jerk you are simply anti-american with no regard to the factual case being presented. Many don't seem to know what foreign policy has been pursued in your name and don't think it relevant to what is happening now which is a breathtaking disconnection that means the same mistakes will go on being made.
I tried to explain how that is earlier. We do often have a kneejerk reaction to that because the other parts of the world are so anti-American right now. It's only natural for us to be defensive. Your last comment sounds liek we deserved what we got because of actions we've taken in the past. Is that correct?
British activities in the middle east don't exactly stand up to close scrutiny either but I doubt you would find anyone criticising what was done in our name being accused of simply being anti British. Stop being defensive because either a valid point is being made or it is not. Just assuming the comment is anti American stops you thinking about it. If it's wrong correct it but there will also be many you just don't agree with. Then again what fun is a discussion forum if all agree?
I'm glad to hear that another country has been scrutinized because it feels to me like America has become the world's new whipping boy. And I hope you didn't take me for arguing with you because I wasn't. Thanks for telling me about the quote box- as long as I've been here I never knew I could do that.
The ones that degrade their memory are the ones that take advantage of their heroism. It's not just your soldiers that are dying and being maimed.
I do understand that, that there are other nationalities besides American involved in this war.
this is how such things are reported here.
http://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1170362007
There is a tremendous amount of anger over the Iraq war but it's directed at our own politicians.
We *are* angry at our politicians too! Even Bush supporters are angry at his administration. But it's like Vietnam- when our soldiers come back I for one don't want them treated as victims of gov't stupidity because they still fought and still put their lives on the line for what many of us think is a good cause. I'm not talking about oil.
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
spot;669322 wrote: I needed a hook to hang my post on and your paragraph was convenient, relevant and a good lead in. I've been reading carefully enough to have a good idea of your position both in this thread and earlier ones.
If you look at the last "posted by spot" attribution in your post you've got me saying something quite unlike me, beginning "It's a question of whether or not it is justified" - that is so not my words! If you edit it right I'll drop this paragraph.
o My apologies. Cut and pasting without due care and attention. I plead guilty.
If you look at the last "posted by spot" attribution in your post you've got me saying something quite unlike me, beginning "It's a question of whether or not it is justified" - that is so not my words! If you edit it right I'll drop this paragraph.
o My apologies. Cut and pasting without due care and attention. I plead guilty.-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
Skyhawk691;669063 wrote: He is the old guy bagging groceries at the supermarket, palsied now and aggravatingly slow, who helped liberate a Nazi death camp and who wishes all day long that his wife were still alive to hold him when the nightmares come.
This one. This one touched me. Thanks.
This one. This one touched me. Thanks.
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
posted by red glitter
I tried to explain how that is earlier. We do often have a kneejerk reaction to that because the other parts of the world are so anti-American right now. It's only natural for us to be defensive. Your last comment sounds liek we deserved what we got because of actions we've taken in the past. Is that correct?
No more than people in London or Birmingham deserved being blown up by the IRA . It might be true that you could make a case that past actions in Ireland justify such attacks. Do you think innocents should be attacked by the IRA?
No one deserves to be attacked by terrorists but just to dismiss them as nutters or evil is also to not think about why they did it and why so many in the middle east initially cheered them on. If a terrorist movement has mass support sooner or later you need to sit down and start talking and find a way of resolving things.
You assumed my comment was anti-American yet I was only pointing out that perhaps past foreign policy has a part to play in explaining the present situation in the middle east. If it makes you fell better I could equally go on to condemn British action in the middle east, same with the french-both countries couldn't resist poking their fingers in the countries of the old empire-especially when it came to the oil supply. The west perhaps has a lot to answer for but it is this generation that is paying the price for the past just as our grandchildren will pay for what we do about it. The US just happened to be the biggest and perhaps the easiest since Europeans are more geared up to dealing with terrorists.
posted by red glitter
I'm glad to hear that another country has been scrutinized because it feels to me like America has become the world's new whipping boy. And I hope you didn't take me for arguing with you because I wasn't. Thanks for telling me about the quote box- as long as I've been here I never knew I could do that.
I don't mind you arguing. We have diverging opinions to me the whole point of joining a discussion forum is I like discussing-or arguing about things especially politics-with people who disagree with me. It makes you think about what you think and why you think the way you do.
posted by red glitter
We *are* angry at our politicians too! Even Bush supporters are angry at his administration. But it's like Vietnam- when our soldiers come back I for one don't want them treated as victims of gov't stupidity because they still fought and still put their lives on the line for what many of us think is a good cause. I'm not talking about oil.
I don't understand why soldiers returning from iraq would face hostility from anyone whether opposed to the war or not. Most people here are opposed to the war but very few suggest the troops do anything but serve us well. Any ire is aimed at politicians. At the moment you seem to have politicians running you country who seem to think US military power should be used to preserve US economic interests anywhere in the world. Especially oil. it is a moot point whether in the 21st century such a policy is not counter-productive. But at least GW acts in what he sees as Americas interests, god knows what tb was up to.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/state ... ciples.htm
Curious what you think of these guys. Look at some of the signatories. Most American politicians are nonentities outside of america but even i have heard of some of these guys.
I tried to explain how that is earlier. We do often have a kneejerk reaction to that because the other parts of the world are so anti-American right now. It's only natural for us to be defensive. Your last comment sounds liek we deserved what we got because of actions we've taken in the past. Is that correct?
No more than people in London or Birmingham deserved being blown up by the IRA . It might be true that you could make a case that past actions in Ireland justify such attacks. Do you think innocents should be attacked by the IRA?
No one deserves to be attacked by terrorists but just to dismiss them as nutters or evil is also to not think about why they did it and why so many in the middle east initially cheered them on. If a terrorist movement has mass support sooner or later you need to sit down and start talking and find a way of resolving things.
You assumed my comment was anti-American yet I was only pointing out that perhaps past foreign policy has a part to play in explaining the present situation in the middle east. If it makes you fell better I could equally go on to condemn British action in the middle east, same with the french-both countries couldn't resist poking their fingers in the countries of the old empire-especially when it came to the oil supply. The west perhaps has a lot to answer for but it is this generation that is paying the price for the past just as our grandchildren will pay for what we do about it. The US just happened to be the biggest and perhaps the easiest since Europeans are more geared up to dealing with terrorists.
posted by red glitter
I'm glad to hear that another country has been scrutinized because it feels to me like America has become the world's new whipping boy. And I hope you didn't take me for arguing with you because I wasn't. Thanks for telling me about the quote box- as long as I've been here I never knew I could do that.
I don't mind you arguing. We have diverging opinions to me the whole point of joining a discussion forum is I like discussing-or arguing about things especially politics-with people who disagree with me. It makes you think about what you think and why you think the way you do.
posted by red glitter
We *are* angry at our politicians too! Even Bush supporters are angry at his administration. But it's like Vietnam- when our soldiers come back I for one don't want them treated as victims of gov't stupidity because they still fought and still put their lives on the line for what many of us think is a good cause. I'm not talking about oil.
I don't understand why soldiers returning from iraq would face hostility from anyone whether opposed to the war or not. Most people here are opposed to the war but very few suggest the troops do anything but serve us well. Any ire is aimed at politicians. At the moment you seem to have politicians running you country who seem to think US military power should be used to preserve US economic interests anywhere in the world. Especially oil. it is a moot point whether in the 21st century such a policy is not counter-productive. But at least GW acts in what he sees as Americas interests, god knows what tb was up to.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/state ... ciples.htm
Curious what you think of these guys. Look at some of the signatories. Most American politicians are nonentities outside of america but even i have heard of some of these guys.
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
I have to think about this before I try to respond in depth, but what comes to mind right now is that if we didn't have people who volunteered to go to war, then you know what the alternative would be. I, for one, don't like that alternative.
Not to derail the thread Scrat, but as a curious aside, how did you feel about the Gulf War, may I ask?
Not to derail the thread Scrat, but as a curious aside, how did you feel about the Gulf War, may I ask?
-
RedGlitter
- Posts: 15777
- Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:51 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
Scrat;670203 wrote: What would the alternative be? Communism? If America hadn't stood up to the Soviet Union would we all be dead? Perhaps Red? What if the addled mentally defeicent brains in the 40s and 50s in charge in America and the USSR had chosen another path than building enough nuclear devices to destroy the earth 100 times over?
Where would we be now? Not as Americans and Russians but as humans.
If we as humans didn't volunteer for war it seems we would volunteer for peace. It's a choice we all make isn't it? Unfortunately the Reptilian side of us, the baser side of our mind instead of our higher mind that seems to take the day.
Seems to me the alternative to war is never chosen when the reptile in certain/enough people come to the fore.
Scrat, I'm not disagreeing with you in that peace is a desirable thing or that if everyone volunteered for peace we might have it. I do think though, that it is a wee bit idealistic because as you mentioned, the baser side of our humanity comes into play. And it's only my opinion that if the US were to become completely peace abiding, there would be some other country to test that.
By the alternative, I meant forced enlistment. That we'd have the draft again if we had no volunteers. So I'm thinking it's better to use people (and I do say use) who wish to go rather than people who don't.
Thank you for replying about the Gulf War.
Where would we be now? Not as Americans and Russians but as humans.
If we as humans didn't volunteer for war it seems we would volunteer for peace. It's a choice we all make isn't it? Unfortunately the Reptilian side of us, the baser side of our mind instead of our higher mind that seems to take the day.
Seems to me the alternative to war is never chosen when the reptile in certain/enough people come to the fore.
Scrat, I'm not disagreeing with you in that peace is a desirable thing or that if everyone volunteered for peace we might have it. I do think though, that it is a wee bit idealistic because as you mentioned, the baser side of our humanity comes into play. And it's only my opinion that if the US were to become completely peace abiding, there would be some other country to test that.
By the alternative, I meant forced enlistment. That we'd have the draft again if we had no volunteers. So I'm thinking it's better to use people (and I do say use) who wish to go rather than people who don't.
Thank you for replying about the Gulf War.
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
Scrat;665836 wrote: Honor? That's a word I never hear in this society anymore.
I'm not insulting him. Is the fact that he died in a stupid war to gain access to oil wealth for a few people a dishonorable act? Not by him, his was an act of youthful hormones and ignorance.
The dishonorable people are the ones who gave him the opportunity to off himself. And I am quite sure encouraged him.
His death was a pitiful act enabled by a sick and weak society.
Never hear honor anymore???????????:-5
well Mr. SCEERATTT
Honor is putting your Country on your profile in a forum...........whether you agree with YOUR country or NOT
Oil wealth from Iraq......HUH?......
Mr Sceerrattt, again, show us how much of this IRAQI BLOOD oil we burn every day or month for that matter???
Who are these people getting wealthy in Iraq?
Name them and their companies!!! (If you can) And ONLY facts not some Michael Moore liberal made up story
And about this brave solider being encouraged by dishonorable people.
Is this the same thing that happened to all the under aged Americans that VOLUNTEERD for WW1 and 2. (encouraged by dishonorable people)
If you say this is so then I say you are spittin on their graves..........
many Americans are STILL PISSED about the sucker punch we took Sept. 11th 2001 and feel that Iraq was a strategic move to control the middle east threat we were experiencing at the time.
I'm not insulting him. Is the fact that he died in a stupid war to gain access to oil wealth for a few people a dishonorable act? Not by him, his was an act of youthful hormones and ignorance.
The dishonorable people are the ones who gave him the opportunity to off himself. And I am quite sure encouraged him.
His death was a pitiful act enabled by a sick and weak society.
Never hear honor anymore???????????:-5
well Mr. SCEERATTT
Honor is putting your Country on your profile in a forum...........whether you agree with YOUR country or NOT
Oil wealth from Iraq......HUH?......
Mr Sceerrattt, again, show us how much of this IRAQI BLOOD oil we burn every day or month for that matter???
Who are these people getting wealthy in Iraq?
Name them and their companies!!! (If you can) And ONLY facts not some Michael Moore liberal made up story
And about this brave solider being encouraged by dishonorable people.
Is this the same thing that happened to all the under aged Americans that VOLUNTEERD for WW1 and 2. (encouraged by dishonorable people)
If you say this is so then I say you are spittin on their graves..........
many Americans are STILL PISSED about the sucker punch we took Sept. 11th 2001 and feel that Iraq was a strategic move to control the middle east threat we were experiencing at the time.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
-
nvalleyvee
- Posts: 5191
- Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 8:57 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
My father died being called up to Viet Nam. I have his coffin flag. It means so much to me.
What do you want to tell me? I will get in touch with Iraq families and explain the loss. I will write the letters.......just let me know how they died. If they are close to NM............I will personally visit them.
What do you want to tell me? I will get in touch with Iraq families and explain the loss. I will write the letters.......just let me know how they died. If they are close to NM............I will personally visit them.
The growth of knowledge depends entirely on disagreement..........Karl R. Popper
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
Scrat;665844 wrote: I agree.
War is nothing more than forfeiting your future, your hopes, and your dreams for the hopes and dreams of others to cowardly to fight themselves.
SCEEERATTT
I can tell your family was NOT here (America) in the latter 1700's as mine that stood and fought beside George Washington to create the freest nation ever, before or after.
And you say "to cowardly to fight themselves"
Where would we be NOW with your P!!SS poor attitude?
War is nothing more than forfeiting your future, your hopes, and your dreams for the hopes and dreams of others to cowardly to fight themselves.
SCEEERATTT
I can tell your family was NOT here (America) in the latter 1700's as mine that stood and fought beside George Washington to create the freest nation ever, before or after.
And you say "to cowardly to fight themselves"
Where would we be NOW with your P!!SS poor attitude?
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
"I'm very proud of the boy," his father said. "He's a hero."
July 18, 2007
BY STEVE NEAVLING
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
With teary eyes, David Kube peered down at the cell phone in his hands and remembered the last call he got from his son Christopher, a day or so after Father's Day.
"He said, 'Don't worry about me. Everything is fine,' " Kube, of Fraser, recalled Tuesday, his voice breaking. "I worried all the time."
Army Pfc. Christopher Kube was only 18 when a blast from an improvised explosive device Saturday killed the gunner in a truck in Baghdad.
With his parents' permission, Kube enlisted in the Army when he was 17, doubtful that a future awaited him in Shelby Township, where he spent most of his life. He was shipped to Iraq in October, one month after turning 18.
While home on leave in February, he married his girlfriend, Tianna, whom he met while in the military in Colorado.
A troubled kid who found an outlet in riding dirt bikes and deer hunting, Kube left the Utica Center for Applied Learning in Shelby Township when he was 16 and enrolled in a military school, the Michigan Youth Challenge Academy in Battle Creek.
He graduated third in his class and earned his GED.
"I'm very proud of the boy," his father said. "He's a hero."
Kube was assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 17th Field Artillery Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, based at Ft. Carson, Colo., the Defense Department said.
July 18, 2007
BY STEVE NEAVLING
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER
With teary eyes, David Kube peered down at the cell phone in his hands and remembered the last call he got from his son Christopher, a day or so after Father's Day.
"He said, 'Don't worry about me. Everything is fine,' " Kube, of Fraser, recalled Tuesday, his voice breaking. "I worried all the time."
Army Pfc. Christopher Kube was only 18 when a blast from an improvised explosive device Saturday killed the gunner in a truck in Baghdad.
With his parents' permission, Kube enlisted in the Army when he was 17, doubtful that a future awaited him in Shelby Township, where he spent most of his life. He was shipped to Iraq in October, one month after turning 18.
While home on leave in February, he married his girlfriend, Tianna, whom he met while in the military in Colorado.
A troubled kid who found an outlet in riding dirt bikes and deer hunting, Kube left the Utica Center for Applied Learning in Shelby Township when he was 16 and enrolled in a military school, the Michigan Youth Challenge Academy in Battle Creek.
He graduated third in his class and earned his GED.
"I'm very proud of the boy," his father said. "He's a hero."
Kube was assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 17th Field Artillery Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, based at Ft. Carson, Colo., the Defense Department said.
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
spot;669125 wrote: What the recruits intend and what they achieve are not necessarily connected, even if they're as idealistic as you paint them. The excuse, that if these people didn't protect you you'd not have the freedom to express a critical opinion, hasn't held water since before any of us were born, and for the Americans among us it's a lot longer than that. This isn't protection. Armies in the Homeland protect. Armies in Iraq are the offense team, they're nothing to do with protection.
Regardless of desire or intention they are doing nothing at all to protect their Homeland, on the contrary they're adding to any eventual risk it might face. I defy anyone to explain how the Iraq War has improved Homeland Security for countries involved in the Coalition. "brave men who willingly face death so that you can spew your bile unmolested" has been trotted out every time this topic has shown itself on ForumGarden, year after year. It has no validity whatever, it is as offensive to those it's addressed to as could easily be imagined.
There is no increased safety to the Homeland produced by armed forces projecting their power in Iraq. If you think there is, you should at least try to explain why you think it. It is the Blair White House propaganda line and nothing more.
Eulogizing individual soldiers doesn't add merit to the argument in this thread any more than eulogizing Pat Tillman did in earlier ones. It's more relevant to note that for every hundred members of the armed services deployed into the Middle Eastern theater since the Coalition of the Willing attacked Iraq, one member has returned home either dead or permanently disabled.
A reasonable estimate would be that another will be lost to suicide (that's the proportion found from the Falklands War after 25 years as an example), not an insignificant figure when it's projected as ten thousand veterans.
Even if you count the additional lives of the native population to be utterly worthless - which seems to be a commonplace American reaction to the slaughter - it's still too high a cost for whatever's being bought, whatever that is. Whatever it is it's not the protection of civil rights at home. "That's your choice courtesy of such men" may give a glow to some people but it's not justified by reality.
Sooo Spotttt.........
why does al qaeda state that Iraq is the main front of their war on us(infidels)?
If this is so as THEY say, then they are HOOKED up and TOO busy to attack us again.
If so (AND IT IS SO) then this is one reason why we have not been attacked since the first SUCKER PUNCH. The other is our tightened security that the ACLU loaths......
I ask:
What if we liberated Iraq and Afghanistan as we are trying?
Just who is is the middle (country)? Look on your map (clue they want nukes and have a LOOSE cannon for their DICK-TATER)
Starts with an I..........
Yes they would be sandwiched. Maybe that is WHY they squirm SOOOOO?
Maybe that is a stratgic move by MY country to STOP another SUCKER punch...
I believe it is
Regardless of desire or intention they are doing nothing at all to protect their Homeland, on the contrary they're adding to any eventual risk it might face. I defy anyone to explain how the Iraq War has improved Homeland Security for countries involved in the Coalition. "brave men who willingly face death so that you can spew your bile unmolested" has been trotted out every time this topic has shown itself on ForumGarden, year after year. It has no validity whatever, it is as offensive to those it's addressed to as could easily be imagined.
There is no increased safety to the Homeland produced by armed forces projecting their power in Iraq. If you think there is, you should at least try to explain why you think it. It is the Blair White House propaganda line and nothing more.
Eulogizing individual soldiers doesn't add merit to the argument in this thread any more than eulogizing Pat Tillman did in earlier ones. It's more relevant to note that for every hundred members of the armed services deployed into the Middle Eastern theater since the Coalition of the Willing attacked Iraq, one member has returned home either dead or permanently disabled.
A reasonable estimate would be that another will be lost to suicide (that's the proportion found from the Falklands War after 25 years as an example), not an insignificant figure when it's projected as ten thousand veterans.
Even if you count the additional lives of the native population to be utterly worthless - which seems to be a commonplace American reaction to the slaughter - it's still too high a cost for whatever's being bought, whatever that is. Whatever it is it's not the protection of civil rights at home. "That's your choice courtesy of such men" may give a glow to some people but it's not justified by reality.
Sooo Spotttt.........
why does al qaeda state that Iraq is the main front of their war on us(infidels)?
If this is so as THEY say, then they are HOOKED up and TOO busy to attack us again.
If so (AND IT IS SO) then this is one reason why we have not been attacked since the first SUCKER PUNCH. The other is our tightened security that the ACLU loaths......
I ask:
What if we liberated Iraq and Afghanistan as we are trying?
Just who is is the middle (country)? Look on your map (clue they want nukes and have a LOOSE cannon for their DICK-TATER)
Starts with an I..........
Yes they would be sandwiched. Maybe that is WHY they squirm SOOOOO?
Maybe that is a stratgic move by MY country to STOP another SUCKER punch...
I believe it is
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
SlipStream;666055 wrote: war stinks...:-1
Thank god the USA changed their feelings about war stinking in the year 1941 or you just might be a speekin germun today........:-1
Thank god the USA changed their feelings about war stinking in the year 1941 or you just might be a speekin germun today........:-1
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
Scrat;666082 wrote: Then what in the hell are we there for? Aside from teaching some crazy sand niggers about democracy.
Granted there are other reasons.
I've studied warfare for a long time and if there's one pattern that stands out warfare exists for one reason.
The Reptilian brain.
War is never necessary. It will never be necessary, it is a primitive animalistic behavior that stems from stupid acts by the few whom control the many.
It's a question of whether or not it is justified. He died fighting in a war that cannot be justified. To me he is not a hero, he is a victim of his own bad choice.
Pitiful.
QUEEEOTE SCeeeRRATTT"
"War is never necessary. It will never be necessary, it is a primitive animalistic behavior that stems from stupid acts by the few whom control the many. "
My Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Spanish American War, WW1 and WW2 forefathers ALL roll over in their graves and say..............
RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!
PITIFUL
Granted there are other reasons.
I've studied warfare for a long time and if there's one pattern that stands out warfare exists for one reason.
The Reptilian brain.
War is never necessary. It will never be necessary, it is a primitive animalistic behavior that stems from stupid acts by the few whom control the many.
It's a question of whether or not it is justified. He died fighting in a war that cannot be justified. To me he is not a hero, he is a victim of his own bad choice.
Pitiful.
QUEEEOTE SCeeeRRATTT"
"War is never necessary. It will never be necessary, it is a primitive animalistic behavior that stems from stupid acts by the few whom control the many. "
My Revolutionary War, War of 1812, Spanish American War, WW1 and WW2 forefathers ALL roll over in their graves and say..............
RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!
PITIFUL
"If America Was A Tree, The Left Would Root For The Termites...Greg Gutfeld."
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
BTS;670215 wrote: Sooo Spotttt.........
why does al qaeda state that Iraq is the main front of their war on us(infidels)?
If this is so as THEY say, then they are HOOKED up and TOO busy to attack us again.
If so (AND IT IS SO) then this is one reason why we have not been attacked since the first SUCKER PUNCH. The other is our tightened security that the ACLU loaths......
I ask:
What if we liberated Iraq and Afghanistan as we are trying?
Just who is is the middle (country)? Look on your map (clue they want nukes and have a LOOSE cannon for their DICK-TATER)
Starts with an I..........
Yes they would be sandwiched. Maybe that is WHY they squirm SOOOOO?
Maybe that is a stratgic move by MY country to STOP another SUCKER punch...
I believe it is
It's not often one sees as precise and accurate a summary of the last few years as this. I congratulate you.
Yes, Iraq is the main front of AQ's war on the US. That's because it's where you sent your troops. If you'd sent them to Sweden then Sweden would be the main front of AQ's war on the US. They fight you where they find you by the look of it. They also have this seemingly uncanny ability to look like the locals, which is why it would be so interesting to have you park your quivering war machine in Sweden for a while to see if AQ pops up there. My theory is that after you'd got through killing your first ten thousand or so Swedes, the great majority of the chicken-livered AQ terrorists picking off the noble defenders of freedom, democracy and motherhood would look startlingly Swedish.
Why invade Sweden, I hear you ask? Because you got attacked at home by an outfit of anti-Western Saudi fundamentalists, it stands to reason the bloody snowball-eating moose-killing scum should bear the brunt of your honest righteous wrath.
What Iran is now - a theocratic radical state with no love for the West - is a consequence of the West's successful coup against its secular democratic non-aligned government. You push one way and opinion swings back to the extreme you were trying to avoid. Iran's no longer non-aligned, it's anti-Western because the US created SAVAK to prop up the figurehead local leadership with "virtually unlimited powers of arrest and detention" which "routinely subjected detainees to physical torture" - how familiar does that sound? Just as well you didn't overthrow the Swedish government instead, huh? An anti-American Sweden would be a catastrophe for world peace.
Sadly you're doing it all over again with Iraq, which until it was thrown into turmoil was notably the Middle East's most secular republic. "What if we liberated Iraq and Afghanistan as we are trying" is a bit like asking "What if pigs flew and we could just net them for the larder as they migrated over the back yard".
So surrounding Iran "is a stratgic move by MY country to STOP another SUCKER punch", and for that you've just parted company with $450 billion. Tell me, is Iran with nukes a strategic threat to the USA? I think not. No more than Pakistan with nukes is, or India or the UK with nukes is or even, God help us all, the foam-spittled nuclear-armed frog-eating maniacs in Paris are. This stirred-up artificial loathing of Iran has nothing to do with safety, it has everything to do with the New American Century wish-list. What PNAC wishes for is just plain immoral and needs to be stopped.
Anyway - let's get back to the thread topic? Volunteers and conscripts? I'll go back and check.
why does al qaeda state that Iraq is the main front of their war on us(infidels)?
If this is so as THEY say, then they are HOOKED up and TOO busy to attack us again.
If so (AND IT IS SO) then this is one reason why we have not been attacked since the first SUCKER PUNCH. The other is our tightened security that the ACLU loaths......
I ask:
What if we liberated Iraq and Afghanistan as we are trying?
Just who is is the middle (country)? Look on your map (clue they want nukes and have a LOOSE cannon for their DICK-TATER)
Starts with an I..........
Yes they would be sandwiched. Maybe that is WHY they squirm SOOOOO?
Maybe that is a stratgic move by MY country to STOP another SUCKER punch...
I believe it is
It's not often one sees as precise and accurate a summary of the last few years as this. I congratulate you.
Yes, Iraq is the main front of AQ's war on the US. That's because it's where you sent your troops. If you'd sent them to Sweden then Sweden would be the main front of AQ's war on the US. They fight you where they find you by the look of it. They also have this seemingly uncanny ability to look like the locals, which is why it would be so interesting to have you park your quivering war machine in Sweden for a while to see if AQ pops up there. My theory is that after you'd got through killing your first ten thousand or so Swedes, the great majority of the chicken-livered AQ terrorists picking off the noble defenders of freedom, democracy and motherhood would look startlingly Swedish.
Why invade Sweden, I hear you ask? Because you got attacked at home by an outfit of anti-Western Saudi fundamentalists, it stands to reason the bloody snowball-eating moose-killing scum should bear the brunt of your honest righteous wrath.
What Iran is now - a theocratic radical state with no love for the West - is a consequence of the West's successful coup against its secular democratic non-aligned government. You push one way and opinion swings back to the extreme you were trying to avoid. Iran's no longer non-aligned, it's anti-Western because the US created SAVAK to prop up the figurehead local leadership with "virtually unlimited powers of arrest and detention" which "routinely subjected detainees to physical torture" - how familiar does that sound? Just as well you didn't overthrow the Swedish government instead, huh? An anti-American Sweden would be a catastrophe for world peace.
Sadly you're doing it all over again with Iraq, which until it was thrown into turmoil was notably the Middle East's most secular republic. "What if we liberated Iraq and Afghanistan as we are trying" is a bit like asking "What if pigs flew and we could just net them for the larder as they migrated over the back yard".
So surrounding Iran "is a stratgic move by MY country to STOP another SUCKER punch", and for that you've just parted company with $450 billion. Tell me, is Iran with nukes a strategic threat to the USA? I think not. No more than Pakistan with nukes is, or India or the UK with nukes is or even, God help us all, the foam-spittled nuclear-armed frog-eating maniacs in Paris are. This stirred-up artificial loathing of Iran has nothing to do with safety, it has everything to do with the New American Century wish-list. What PNAC wishes for is just plain immoral and needs to be stopped.
Anyway - let's get back to the thread topic? Volunteers and conscripts? I'll go back and check.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
Troops mourn teenage comrade who insisted: 'I ain't no baby'
Scrat;670446 wrote: Typical. Had no clue about life and no clue about what he was getting into.
As opposed to you, who at 20 years old apparently researched every angle and prepared for every possible variation before making any decision or taking any action??
Stop sh1tting on this kid's memory and start another thread for your vent, scrat.
As opposed to you, who at 20 years old apparently researched every angle and prepared for every possible variation before making any decision or taking any action??
Stop sh1tting on this kid's memory and start another thread for your vent, scrat.