Soldiers are Soldiers, the Big Lie

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
141

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Actually, you are the one that misread my post twice:

  1. “air superiority is 50/50” means in rainjack-land that the defender has air superiority?

Didn’t you just say that the details weren’t important? Dude - you are the one that used the term first. I misread nothing.

  1. I wrote: “…if the enemy was a real threat…”, explored a few possibilities (details which aren’t important) all of which don’t mean that the enemy has the total advantage: I even wrote: “wouldn’t have been that drastically in your favour” meaning you still have THE advantage.

Who has suggested that the enemy had to have the total advantage?

Go back. Think about what you want to say, then say it in the fewest words possible. It sounds like you don’t even know what you are saying at this point.

Can we get to the point, please`?
I feel like I’m a teenager again and arguing with hysterical girlfriends. Countless bickering over words and (I’ll tell you what you said! No, you said…) nonsense.

The point was, how eagerly would have all those goodly soldiers- who all want to do some good and make a difference- went to a much more difficult war, like say GBritain - Argentina '83 (was it?), only longer.

Can I have a no bullshit answer please?

[/quote]

It was supposed to be that way in Gulf War I. Surely you can remember all the hoopla about how great and mighty the Republican Guard was, can’t you? They were the 4th largest army on the face of the planet.

You never know how a fight is going to go until you are in one.

You question is a bullshit question because there is no way to know how difficult an opponent will be.

There are those pro-terrorist cheerleaders on here who will tell you the US is losing in Iraq right now.

If you really want a no bullshit answer - try asking a no bullshit question.

142

Bullshit.

There was no hoopla with the real experts. What you remember was propaganda. 4th Biggest army my ass. When you don’t pay or feed the guys you have no army.
It’s not like there is “basic route” chance like in your risk kind of game.
You believe your intelligence was so bad that you expected a “real” fight?

Years later, the propaganda again proclaimed a tough fight with the taliban. Bullshit again. There was also much talk about “the same guys who routed the russkies”. Every reliable source told you how the russians never lost ONE fight and that it was the expansive 10-year struggle with the guerrilla that wiped them off Afghanistan.
But I guess that’s not good enough for propaganda.

144

[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Bullshit.

There was no hoopla with the real experts. What you remember was propaganda. 4th Biggest army my ass. When you don’t pay or feed the guys you have no army.
It’s not like there is “basic route” chance like in your risk kind of game.
You believe your intelligence was so bad that you expected a “real” fight?

Years later, the propaganda again proclaimed a tough fight with the taliban. Bullshit again. There was also much talk about “the same guys who routed the russkies”. Every reliable source told you how the russians never lost ONE fight and that it was the expansive 10-year struggle with the guerrilla that wiped them off Afghanistan.
But I guess that’s not good enough for propaganda.[/quote]

Bullshit yourself. Read a book or two. Many of the top commanders thought we would lose thousands in GW 1.

145

[quote]Chushin wrote:
I think perhaps your fundamental premise is flawed, and have to wonder if you aren’t a bit of a victim of “Orion-itis.” (That’s the too-prevalent illness where the unfortunate sufferer believes that the media actually gives him an accurate representation of what American culture and society are.)
[/quote]

Questions, Chushin, albeit a bit off-topic:

I don’t watch Japanese TV (or any TV, for that matter), so I really have no way of knowing, but would you say that NHK and the various Japanese networks are pretty accurate in how they present the United States to the Japanese public?

And in your experience, do most Japanese question the accuracy of the information presented about the U.S., or do they accept it at face value?

And further to that, wouldn’t you say that the media of most countries presents a less flattering view of another country’s culture and society to its viewers than is the reality?

And don’t most people accept it as the truth, especially if they’ve never visited, and have little interest in, that particular country?

And can’t the same be said, indeed, for many Americans who have never traveled abroad, and get all their information from the television and newspaper?

I’ll go out on a limb here and guess “yes.” What you describe as “orionitis” is, I believe, the default condition of most people in the world.

146

[quote]rainjack wrote:
orion wrote:
rainjack wrote:
orion wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
I ask the especially the soldiers who are or were in Iraq:

If the tactical and strategical advantges wouldn’t have been that drastically in your favour, would you have still gone?

So, if large parts of the republican army was trained and equipped with, say T-90s, [b]air superiority was 50-50[/b], your satellites would have been occasionally shot down, your tanks and soldiers attacked by Frogfoots etc…

In short, if the enemy would have been a real threat and the danger tenfold, how much would the situation change, you believe?

Here was his original question. I highlighted the part that you evidently can’t read, Orion. Read it slow. Read it twice if you have to.

But I guess it doesn’t matter since Schwartzie says details aren’t important.

Now how about trying to read the entire fucking thing before proving you are an idiot?

My pointing out that you constantly change the premise of your argument so that your half-baked conclusion still stands makes me an idiot?

No - your inability to read makes you an idiot. It’s right there. This is the second time I have had to say it.

It is just that my ability to read is only called into question if I cannot seem to pin the ever changing premise of your argument down.

Hence the question.

Nothing has changed. I just don’t think that if the original question included references to the use of aircraft, he should stay in that era to back up his shit. He didn’t.

But I forgot one, though - the US kicked the living shit out of the Axis in WWII. I think they were fairly well matched militarily - you guys were just too busy trying to exterminate the inferior races in cyanide showers.

[/quote]

They were “vermin” - I guess that makes it ok then, doesn´t ?

147

Interesting just how many people actually think that we don’t have to continuously fight for your freedom. There are those out there that would be happy to see your freedoms stripped away. They are not all non Americans either. The US supreme court it constantly being challenged on the rights and freedoms of the American people.

A lot of you remind me of the communist sympathizers that sat in free countries and stated how great communism was. So don’t sit their on your perches and spew crap about how wrong it is to fight for freedom on every level.

Maybe you idiots such remember what kind of catch 22 the USA gets put in. I remember the Teliban blowing up Budda statues and screwing the Afghan people and everyone screaming that someone should stop them, well they’ve been stopped and now you’re all pissed about that. And having that fucked up stupid notion that you could talk to those fucked up extremists.

And if we left the middle east alone they would just start killing each other all over again. These countries are thousands of years old and they still can’t get their shit together. It’s like they love to hate and live to kill.

148

Yes, you constantly have to fight for your freedom.

Bombs going off in the ME or even towers collapsing in NY won´t make you less free.

RICO, FBI agents issuing their own warrants, automatic gag orders for your lawyers, doctors, spouses if the FBI is investigating you, wire tapping, big companies going along with illegal wiretapping, institutionalized torture, a president that can declare you an unlawful combatant whenever he damn well pleases, off-shore prison complexes, no-knock raids, national health care, earmarks in every budget, increasing public debt, judges raping your constitution from the bench…

THAT is going to cost you your freedom.

So, if you want to fight someone you know where to look for the enemy.

That a corrupt regime turns a nations aggression outwards against a largely made up enemy is neither new nor imaginative, but it works with every new generation because most people have the attention span of gerbils.

149

[quote]streamline wrote:
And if we left the middle east alone they would just start killing each other all over again. [/quote]

So what’s wrong with that?

Just for a lark, why don’t we leave the Middle East alone?

Completely alone, meaning no more meddling in the affairs of any country in the Middle East. Leave every country, including Israel, to its fate.

Without us there, perhaps everyone would become too preoccupied with killing one another to blow up any more of our buildings over here.

Yes, I’m kidding. Sort of.

150

[quote]streamline wrote:
Maybe you idiots such remember what kind of catch 22 the USA gets put in. I remember the Teliban blowing up Budda statues and screwing the Afghan people and everyone screaming that someone should stop them, well they’ve been stopped and now you’re all pissed about that. And having that fucked up stupid notion that you could talk to those fucked up extremists. [/quote]

Screw the Talibans! Kill 'em all for all I care.

That said, you should remember that the USA has been supporting Afghan jihadists for a long long time. And they didn’t invade the country out of pity for the Buddhist artwork, or the oppressed Afghans. They did so because two tall buildings crumbled.

I don’t think you’ll find anyone here who didn’t support the toppling of the Talibans. Iraq on the other hand…

So…?

Do you see me coming over to Detroit or Winnipeg to stop people from killing each other?

“Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery.”
– Malcolm X.

151

[quote]Chushin wrote:
As I tried to make clear with my last post, for me, for the most part, their pedestal is no higher than the monk’s or your grandmother’s, in an “all things being equal” scenario. I guess to the small extent that I DO elevate them, it would be because, to at least some degree – even if misguidedly – they are fighting on behalf of ME and my country, too, unlike the monk and grandma.
…
Yes, of course. Do you recall what I wrote earlier?
“Anyone who willingly risks his life in combat is, at a minimum, worthy of respect for his bravery…”

Please be clear that I have NO respect for those whose methodology involves attacking unarmed innocents.
…
Finally, I’d like to echo what Zap wrote in response to V’s note: I don’t buy that the military is being held “in awe” by most Americans. Gratitude? Yes. Respect? Yes. But awe? Not the Americans that I know.

I think perhaps your fundamental premise is flawed, and have to wonder if you aren’t a bit of a victim of “Orion-itis.” (That’s the too-prevalent illness where the unfortunate sufferer believes that the media actually gives him an accurate representation of what American culture and society are.)
[/quote]

I appreciate your no Bullshit attitude and your willingness to debate, again. Thanks a lot. For this could definitely propel the discussion forward.

OK, so let’s nail this.
Someone risk his life for you and your kin and you respect him for that. Understood.
Just risking your life (extreme sport) is a personal matter, and guys who are risking their life for something not of your concern can at least expect (basic) respect.
If someone risks or sacrifices his life for things you view as heinous and immoral (relax, I do the same with suicide bombers), he is out of line and get nada respect.
Granted- but let’s take this to a higher level, as life is rarely that uncomplicated.

What if someone’s motivations are misguided, his intentions untrue or just wishful thinking, serving a different outcome in the end? And what if he is intentions aren’t noble, although the outcome is?

Examples for these :

  1. Some soldier is sent to a warzone. You know from countless sources, even veteran soldiers returning from this very warzone, that it’s purely a massacre, benefitting dubious corporations. The soldier claims: I shall serve my country there with my life.
  2. A guy proclaims to be a soldier for the good deeds he can do.
    You know the guy and think he’s a complete asshole. Benefit of a doubt for someone armed to the teeth sent to a declared “warzone” in a total foreign country with, as he said, “crazy traditions”?
  3. A looming conflict in the near future will cement bad relations with a lot of now neutral countries, according to your best knowledge. Your relative is a soldier preparing for this operation “cakewalk” , which will undoubtedly win the battle practically without casualities, but not the diplomatic strife. This ensures radicalization in the whole region, which ultimately leads to more suffering and less of that fledgling democracy that was the aim of that operation.
    After some years, all these events you foretold were exactly as you predected.
    Your relative, worthy of respect?
    4)A mercenary from a PMC works in Iraq. He sometimes claims to do this also for spreading the democracy, but doesn’treally insist on this, it’s more a bonus for him. How do you view him when in ten years
    scenario a) Iraq is a warlord state, human atrocities and woman abuse a lot higher then under Saddam.
    scenario b) Iraq is a ME model democracy, things def. get better.
152

[quote]streamline wrote:
And if we left the middle east alone they would just start killing each other all over again. These countries are thousands of years old and they still can’t get their shit together. It’s like they love to hate and live to kill.[/quote]

Sounds like a good foreign policy. Your post was right on.

153

[quote]lixy wrote:

That said, you should remember that the USA has been supporting Afghan jihadists for a long long time. And they didn’t invade the country out of pity for the Buddhist artwork, or the oppressed Afghans. They did so because two tall buildings crumbled.
[/quote]

Now there’s a problem with the reason we attacked Afghanistan? Give me a break already.

We funded the jihadists to kick the Russians out. Then the bastards turned on us. Too bad the Reagan administration could not see into the future or look to examples of the past and see how backstabbing muslims are.

We should have let the Russians exterminate the scum. How’s that for foreign policy?

154

[quote]lixy wrote:
That said, you should remember that the USA has been supporting Afghan jihadists for a long long time. And they didn’t invade the country out of pity for the Buddhist artwork, or the oppressed Afghans. They did so because two tall buildings crumbled.

[/quote]

Crumbled? As if they were dilapidated structures, doomed to failure on their own. Instead of, you know, attacked. Let’s not forgot the people that were inside those ‘crumbly’ buildings.

155

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Crumbled? As if they were dilapidated structures, doomed to failure on their own. Instead of, you know, attacked. Let’s not forgot the people that were inside those ‘crumbly’ buildings. [/quote]

156

[quote]lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Crumbled? As if they were dilapidated structures, doomed to failure on their own. Instead of, you know, attacked. Let’s not forgot the people that were inside those ‘crumbly’ buildings.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/crumble[/quote]

Cute. But, you chose the words to your statement in order to trivialize an attack, an act of war, on American soil.

Edit: Don’t play dumb on this. We both know you phrased your statement to miniminze 9-11. “…because two tall building crumbled.”

157

[quote]Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Crumbled? As if they were dilapidated structures, doomed to failure on their own. Instead of, you know, attacked. Let’s not forgot the people that were inside those ‘crumbly’ buildings.

Cute. But, you chose the words to your statement in order to trivialize an attack, an act of war, on American soil.

Edit: Don’t play dumb on this. We both know you phrased your statement to miniminze 9-11. “…because two tall building crumbled.”[/quote]

And you call it an act of war though no sovereign nation stood behind this.

It was a crime.

159

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
No moral truths on Wednesday, the Golden Rule is a moral truth on Thursday - what will Lifticus believe on Friday?[/quote]

Do not be so simple. You know for a fact that I was arguing against absolute truths. There are no ABSOLUTE truths. All truths are RELATIVE. I believe in the golden rule and always have. There are others who feel it is impractical; therefor it is RELATIVE to what one believes, etc.

I have stated many times that absolute truth is only relevant to individual value judgments and thus is relative to what others believe.

160

[quote]Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Crumbled? As if they were dilapidated structures, doomed to failure on their own. Instead of, you know, attacked. Let’s not forgot the people that were inside those ‘crumbly’ buildings.

Cute. But, you chose the words to your statement in order to trivialize an attack, an act of war, on American soil.

Edit: Don’t play dumb on this. We both know you phrased your statement to miniminze 9-11. “…because two tall building crumbled.”[/quote]

What is there to trivialize about 9/11? The couple of thousands innocents dead? The global repercussions it is having to this day? The subsequent trauma it caused in New York?

For me, the buildings collapse is the most tragic part of the story, and it is what I chose to describe the event.

And you missed my point. I was arguing with Streamline who seemed to believe that the invasion of Afghanistan had anything to do with the way the Talibans were treating the Afghans.

162

So when is the USA going to turn Iraq into a straight up colony and stop bullshitting.

I don’t get why we are there unless we are real about it.