Kids Throwing Rocks at US Troops

[quote]lixy wrote:

I’m not disappointed by anything. Rather, I’m appalled at the fact that people not only support Bush’s imperialistic adventure, but actually try to rationalize it. The notion that some people believe Bush when he talks about “spreading freedom” and “bringing democracy” makes me wanna puke. We all know what it’s about. Yet, they pretend that the major reason for your interventions in the mid-East’s got nothing to do with money.[/quote]

Lixy, this is a volunteer military. Bush may well have wanted this war solely for money. But I did not go to make Bush rich. We did go to liberate Iraq. Whether or not Bush profits is irrelevant to me. I don’t like Bush and didn’t vote for him. To me the only good the man has done IS not backing down on Iraq. But don’t tell me that America went for oil and money. The reasons for men going to Iraq are as varied as the numbers that signed up. I didn’t have to go. My buddy who died over there didn’t have to go. But neither of us are a rarity. He, I, and thousands more of us went to liberate Iraq. You cannot bash Iraq as imperialistic adventurism without bashing us. [quote]

I know that you feel betrayed by your government and there’s little you can do to change that. We’ve all seen the sweeping victory of the Democrats in the chambers. But we’ve also seen what little difference it makes it makes on foreign policy. They may have passed some laws about education and taxes, but at the end of the day, your troops are still in Iraq and are going to be forever. [/quote]

laugh It IS their laws about education, health care and taxes that make me feel betrayed by my gov’t. I can’t walk to the grocery store without hearing the jingle of my chains. Part of the reason I helped Iraq is so that way when America needs a hand to liberate us from our eventual Saddam, perhaps they’ll be there to send some AK rounds downrange alongside me.

To the Democrats I have but one thing to say:

O it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Tommy, go away”;
But it’s ``Thank you, Mister Atkins,‘’ when the band begins to play,

For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Chuck him out, the brute!”
But it’s “Saviour of 'is country,” when the guns begin to shoot;
An’ it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ anything you please;
But Tommy ain’t a bloomin’ fool - you bet that Tommy sees!

I’d recommend reading Kipling’s entire poem.
http://www.web-books.com/classics/poetry/anthology/Kipling/Tommy.htm

mike

Lixy,I truly doubt who or what you claim to be.

[quote]mstott25 wrote:
No I didn’t. I said we haven’t had another 9/11. We went to war in Afghanistan and Iraq and the american people have not been attacked since. You were criticizing the fact that america had troops stationed in other countries. You want us to bring all of our troops back, you want us out of Iraq, you want us to be nice and kiss each other on both cheeks when we say hello and i was merely pointing out to you that we haven’t been attacked since 9/11. [/quote]

I don’t get your point then. Why do you feel compelled to point out the lack of attacks since 9/11? Was there a pattern of attacks you supposedly broke? Is it because of the fall of Saddam that you’re not attacked?

Please explain.

Did you even listen to Bush/Cheney’s speeches in the buildup to the war.

Can’t argue with that. I’m sick of their constant bitchin’ too. They’re obviously not helping their cause by acting like jerks.

However, there are two legitimate grievances. The first is unarguable: US military interventionism. It’s not just the Arabs that complain about this. It’s the whole fucking world. From South America to Eastern Europe, everybody’s had it with you. You act like you own the world, and that’s not something people are fed up with. The second is trickier: the question of Israel. I can’t see why the US and Israel keep refusing the international consensus of the two-state solution. Yes, the Arabs fucked up big time by refusing to recognize Israel and giving the Palestinians false hope. The fucked up big time when, instead of trying to work the problem early on, they chose confrontation. But, when you scratch the surface, the Palestinians were robbed of their lands in broad daylight. In simple terms: Nazis killed Jews; Palestinians are paying for Nazis crimes. Doesn’t compute, now does it?

[quote]lixy wrote:
But, when you scratch the surface, the Palestinians were robbed of their lands in broad daylight. In simple terms: Nazis killed Jews; Palestinians are paying for Nazis crimes. Doesn’t compute, now does it?[/quote]

Have the Palestinians considered Baja California? Beautiful land. Less bloodshed, less stuffy neighbors. (it was john stewart’s idea)

[quote]lixy wrote:
If you can provide substantial proof that they are meddling in a sovereign country’s affairs, I’ll denounce them. They get a free pass on the nuclear issue because of the NPT, nothing more, nothing less. [/quote]

You spend your entire existence on this board linking, posting, and finding ways to critisize a country you’ve never been to, yet can’t spend a minute to research Iran’s interventionist policy and actions in the middle east?

I pity you, very disingenuous.

[quote]vladsmicer wrote:
You spend your entire existence on this board linking, posting, and finding ways to critisize a country you’ve never been to [/quote]

I’ve been to the US alright. I’m just not in a hurry to return there under present circumstances. (Patriot act and all…)

You mean like arming Hezbollah? The group that drove T’sahal out of Lebanon? In that case, yes. They intervene alright. However, they evidently don’t invade other countries and bomb them to oblivion. If you got evidence to the contrary, do share.

Wow. Just wow.

When we have statements like “we’ll take that oil any way we have to” and/or “we’ll do whatever we want, fuck em all” it’s little wonder that people outside the US get can get a negative impression.

“Fuck the world” is not a good long term policy… neither is “reveling in your military might”. If your foreign policies matches those types of statements then there would be no need to wonder “why they hate you” anymore.

[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
What is interesting about this arguement is the anti-US one sidedness of it. When talking about the Iran-Iraq war, Saddam is portrayed as our ally. We supposedly supplied him with weapons when in reality it was the Soviet Union. Well, if that is the case, shouldn’t we have known whether or not we gave Saddam weapons of mass destruction? Either we did or we didn’t.

Where in my argument did you see any mention of the Iran-Iraq war or that your country armed him? I pointed out that in the hypothetical scenario that he had a nuke (a far-fetched on at that), he wouldn’t be able to hurt you with it because you’re so far away. Concentrate a bit.[/quote]

New York City, Washington DC: Far away from Kabul…

[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
What is interesting about this arguement is the anti-US one sidedness of it. When talking about the Iran-Iraq war, Saddam is portrayed as our ally. We supposedly supplied him with weapons when in reality it was the Soviet Union. Well, if that is the case, shouldn’t we have known whether or not we gave Saddam weapons of mass destruction? Either we did or we didn’t.

Where in my argument did you see any mention of the Iran-Iraq war or that your country armed him? I pointed out that in the hypothetical scenario that he had a nuke (a far-fetched on at that), he wouldn’t be able to hurt you with it because you’re so far away. Concentrate a bit.[/quote]

I did not see it in this argument, but it has been said many times in other threads. When it is convenient for you to attack the US policy toward Saddam, you say that we armed him. When it is convenient for you to attack the reasons behind the Iraq war, you say he had no arms. I was just pointing out a contradictory fact.

[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:Yes alqaeda is in Irag, and yes it is a result of the war, but they caused more of the deaths and destruction and I never see you start threads when car bombs go off in the middle of markets or outside shia shrines killing hundreds.

Again, I won’t start threads on the crack head in Washington blowing up the head of his local dealer simply because it won’t have much relevance to the forum. In case you missed that, it’s called “Politics and world issues” not “Random crime bits”.[/quote]

Nice that you see a hundred or so car bombs killings, attacks on police, beheadings, killing of construction workers, and bombing of mosques, and video taped executions as “random bits of crime…”

who put YOUR oil under Their Sand?

Is that the question you want answered, Lixy?

Who built the refineries that in turn made the Arabs into one of the richest people on earth who in turn use their money to fund terrorists who wish to destroy us?

Talk about stabbing someone in the back.

[quote]vroom wrote:
Wow. Just wow.

When we have statements like “we’ll take that oil any way we have to” and/or “we’ll do whatever we want, fuck em all” it’s little wonder that people outside the US get can get a negative impression.

“Fuck the world” is not a good long term policy… neither is “reveling in your military might”. If your foreign policies matches those types of statements then there would be no need to wonder “why they hate you” anymore.[/quote]

I think you guys make too much of a big deal about our fuck the world attitude. This is a forum on Testosterone Nation, not the Condoleeza Rice Tupperware forum.

I generally have a fuck my neighbor approach even in my cul-de-sac. Fortunately I have my wife around to nudge me in the ribs and tell me to be polite and smile but she’s not here while I type bullshit on the computer.

I guess the thing of it is…I really don’t give a fuck what the rest of the world thinks and I don’t think most Americans do. The liberal ones definitely do because they cry about it on tv every now and again.

Listen, I know I’m a sarcastic son of a bitch and I know that most of the time I just argue with Lixy so that he has to stay up later at night to study but I’m pretty convinced that you are never going to please everybody. It’s popular to hate america, that’s how Europe gets along, they blame everything on America.

Well pleasing the world is not going to help us out one bit so we really do need to look out for ourselves and just because we have the ability to wage wars and secure oil and maintain our lifestyles doesn’t mean everybody has to be haters.

Don’t hate the player, just hate the game. This is the game of evolution and sooner or later, America will be knocked off the top but I just don’t see that happening anytime soon especially if we have all of the oil and satellites. Maybe in a hundred years you guys can start hating China or Russia.

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
I did not see it in this argument, but it has been said many times in other threads. When it is convenient for you to attack the US policy toward Saddam, you say that we armed him. When it is convenient for you to attack the reasons behind the Iraq war, you say he had no arms. I was just pointing out a contradictory fact.[/quote]

Yet, look at the way you phrased it

What is interesting [b]about this arguement/b is the anti-US one sidedness of it.

Then you say,

I did not see it in this argument

You get the reason someone might get confused, right?

Anyway, there is absolutely no controversy about whether you supported Saddam or not. Declassified document show thigh cooperation between you two to try bringing down the - at the time - new regime in Tehran.

You supplied him with weapons that he used in the Iran-Iraq war. He then used them to attack Kuwait and to defend his country from the “Desert Storm”. His country was then strained by a very harsh embargo that lasted more than a decade.

There is absolutely no contradiction because, in the words of 15th century poet John Heywood, he couldn’t “eat the cake and have it too”. You see, after you explode a bomb, it’s gone for good. Seriously, use your brain buddy!

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
As I figured…you won’t address the issues of my post…you truly are ignorant. [/quote]

I re-read your post and still couldn’t figure out what the exact issues you wanted addressesd were. I answered based on the issues I could decipher from your post. It maybe clear in your head, but it wasn’t clear when it came out.

I’ll be happy to address any issue (related to the topic of the thread preferably) provided you take the time to phrase them correctly and not in a brainstromy-drafty way.

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
Lixy, this is a volunteer military. Bush may well have wanted this war solely for money. But I did not go to make Bush rich. We did go to liberate Iraq. Whether or not Bush profits is irrelevant to me. I don’t like Bush and didn’t vote for him. To me the only good the man has done IS not backing down on Iraq.

But don’t tell me that America went for oil and money. The reasons for men going to Iraq are as varied as the numbers that signed up. I didn’t have to go. My buddy who died over there didn’t have to go. But neither of us are a rarity. He, I, and thousands more of us went to liberate Iraq. You cannot bash Iraq as imperialistic adventurism without bashing us. [/quote]

“Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns” – Henry Kissinger

I respect your commitment and don’t doubt your good faith for a second. But, a quick look at the PNAC’s agenda should set off anyone remotely critical. The very nature of the military (blind loyalty to some politician) makes you susceptible to complicity in crime.

Not in a court of law or in front of God on judgement day, but it doesn’t make it any less evil from a humanist point of view. At the end of the day, you did attack and kill people who didn’t do you any harm, and that, I personally couldn’t deal with whatever my motives for joining the army were.

I’m sorry to hear about your buddy; May he rest in peace.

I don’t know whether you’re serious or not, but if you’re not being sarcastic, then you are REALLY out of touch with reality.

AKs don’t grow on trees and unless a country has something to gain there’s no way any one of them will be sending his people to die for you. I am genuinely moved by your idealism, but it’s a bit over the edge.

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Lixy,I truly doubt who or what you claim to be.[/quote]

From member of a terrorist cell associated with Al-Qaeda (HH actually suggested I am in Afghanistan; hedo keeps insisting I am from the M.E.) to college kid in the US who likes hugging trees, I heard it all before. So please, spare us…

[quote]lixy wrote:

You supplied him with weapons that he used in the Iran-Iraq war. He then used them to attack Kuwait and to defend his country from the “Desert Storm”. His country was then strained by a very harsh embargo that lasted more than a decade.

There is absolutely no contradiction because, in the words of 15th century poet John Heywood, he couldn’t “eat the cake and have it too”. You see, after you explode a bomb, it’s gone for good. Seriously, use your brain buddy![/quote]

Read the article. You mean to tell me that Saddam used every single last bomb that we and the Soviets sold him? If weapons were given to him, and we knew about it, then he’d have to account for them. If the weapons are not there in Iraq, then where are they?

And if they are not there, it does not mean that Iraq was not actively trying to aquire them, does it? They could have bought the know-how from Pakistan just like North Korea did.

[quote]mstott25 wrote:
uh, okay

Results 1 - 12 of about 291 for saudi arabia beheading. (0.28 seconds)

by the way, you too can find such hidden gems of knowledge by using the powerful google machine [/quote]

Thanks for taking the time. I really had no idea those bastards had such a wicked interpretation of the Quran.

Let me speak for the majority of Muslims and denounce these acts as barbarious. And to think that they rule over the holy cities…geez…

Whatcha gonna do? Procrastination rules! It’s also been raining non-stop lately, so I’m stuck indoors.

Well, chances of a chick masquerading as a guy on the web is infinitessimal.

But hey, if calling me a girl makes you feel good, suit yourself…

Any commentary on this is superfluous at best.

[quote]There there, don’t get all butt hurt over this. It’s just that you know, you said some stuff about the US and how stupid we are and I couldn’t help but point out that half of your country can’t read. It’s not a pissing contest, it’s just a frank discussion about who’s really from the stupid country in this discussion.

You’re over here critiquing the american people for not discussing this or reading that when your fucking country can’t even get people to read. Every Morrocan should have taken a lesson from 9/11. What is that lesson? When President Bush found out about the towers being hit he was reading to a class of elementary school children. The Morrocans should have stopped right there and said, “You know what? We need a leader who can read”. Once you guys get that under your belt you can start critiquing our foreign policy and faulty intelligence reports. Crawl, Walk, Run my little friend. Spread the gift of literacy from Sweden back to your fellow countrymen. [/quote]

What gives? I never said anyone was stupid. I said you had no right to bomb and invade other people’s lands - unless it’s in self-defense. Resorting to ad-hominems of this level is just despicable.

[quote]vroom wrote:
Wow. Just wow.

When we have statements like “we’ll take that oil any way we have to” and/or “we’ll do whatever we want, fuck em all” it’s little wonder that people outside the US get can get a negative impression.

“Fuck the world” is not a good long term policy… neither is “reveling in your military might”. If your foreign policies matches those types of statements then there would be no need to wonder “why they hate you” anymore.[/quote]

Step 1: Fascism.
Step 2: Attempt Global Domination.
Step 3: World War.
Last Step: Castration. Just like what happened to former Nazi Germany. Fascist bastards.

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
If the weapons are not there in Iraq, then where are they?[/quote]

Duh! Somewhere else!

Maybe he sold them. Palaces don’t build themselves out of nothing you know.