[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
lixy wrote:
… I don’t compromise when it comes to innocent human life.
We have seen your definition of innocent. A rape victim is not innocent because she is in a car with a man. [/quote]
His varying definitions of “innocents” have proved awfully convenient for him, haven’t they?
Teufel Hundren,
Pookie asked a great question to rogue way back at the beginning of this thread that flew under the radar. I’d be interested in hearing your perspective on it.
[quote]pookie wrote:
I’d have a question about the political side of the effort.
Are you in a position where you can assess whether there is any political progress in Iraq? Do you feel as if the Iraqis are taking advantage of the relative peace provided by your efforts? Do you think they’ll have done enough during the surge for the stability to endure and grow after troop levels are reduced? Are there signs of social and civil structures being put in place?
Thanks for offering to answer those questions. It’s pretty amazing to be able to ask someone directly “on site” and not have to try and guess what the media has filtered out.[/quote]
Simply put, what is your opinion of the Iraqis’ progress at building a stable, central gov’t that can stand on its own once we leave?
[quote]lixy wrote:
“…Closely related are failing to consider a range of options, called the law of the excluded middle, and the tendency to think in extremes, called black-and-white thinking.”.[/quote]
I could just as easily say the same thing about you.
[/quote]I don’t have a “pre-pubescent” nephew, but no, I would never hurt a single innocent even if it is to kill a thousands of invaders. I don’t compromise when it comes to innocent human life.[/quote]
The “pre-pubescent nephew” was hypothetical b/c you said teen and I said 10 year old, and my having to shoot him (not hypothetical) b/c some grown man wants to strap a bomb to him is what US Soldiers have to make daily. What makes him any less innocent?
[quote]Himora22 wrote:
lixy wrote:
“…Closely related are failing to consider a range of options, called the law of the excluded middle, and the tendency to think in extremes, called black-and-white thinking.”.
I could just as easily say the same thing about you.
I don’t have a “pre-pubescent” nephew, but no, I would never hurt a single innocent even if it is to kill a thousands of invaders. I don’t compromise when it comes to innocent human life.
The “pre-pubescent nephew” was hypothetical b/c you said teen and I said 10 year old, and my having to shoot him (not hypothetical) b/c some grown man wants to strap a bomb to him is what US Soldiers have to make daily. What makes him any less innocent?[/quote]
Hypothetical or not, I gave you my answer.
I understand that US soldiers have to deal with some twisted shit over there, but I also expect Iraqis to fight as long as there is one of them standing.
I’m sure we totally agree on the principles, but we’re quibbling over details. So, for the sake of keeping this constructive, would you mind sharing your position on the 2003 invasion of Iraq? Do you think the US had the right to do what it has done? Do you think the average American is better off because of it? How about the average Iraqi?
[quote]lixy wrote:
Back to the “real Iraq”.
More than 70 people have been killed in blasts at three cities in Iraq, in one of the deadliest days there for weeks.
[/quote]
Your “Freedom Fighters” are at it again. Bravo.
[i]At least 30 people have been killed and many wounded in a suicide attack on a crowd of mourners in Iraq.
The attacker detonated his explosives in the Sunni village of Bu Mohammed, near the city of Baquba, north of the capital, Baghdad.
Officials said the funeral was for two members of a local group who had died fighting al-Qaeda in Iraq militants. [/i]
These attacks on funerals are becoming common place.
[quote]Himora22 wrote:
Mark Mabry wrote:
Hey Lixy,
Just to let you know your not alone on this site full of right wing nut-jobs.=)
how can you think what we are doing in Iraq is right? just look at history. Korea. even though we “won that war” we still have troops over there.
It is obvious that you are an uneducated person…Im sry misinformed b/c the Korean war never ended, that is why we are still there. That is why we are still there and you need to do some research on North Korea b/c they were just as bad if not worse than China.
If you dont believe me then lessen to what Sir Charles has to say
LoL…now thats funy[/quote]
Your call me uneducated! You spell listen, lessen, and you say Im sry misinformed b/c the Korean War never ended. WTF. And as for the Korean War I can agree than it never truly ended. But what makes you think Iraq will be any different. In BOTH countries the people hate us and think of us as oppressors. Why will this war truly end? Your a fool.
Another thing for you guys who think we’re in Iraq to free the people to think about. If you look at the amount of resources, troops, money, ect that we spend in Iraq compared to the amount we spend in African nations were GENOCIDE is going on TODAY its not even close. It seems to me that the good old USA tends to protect countries with lots of valuable OIL and leave the poorer countries to fend for themselves. But hey maybe when we get some crack pot rumor than Africans have WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION then we’ll go LIBERATE them.
NO BILLIONAIRE LEFT BEHIND!!!
Is it our job to stop genocide? None of the other countries of the world have any responsibility? We stopped genocide in Europe and the radical muslims still hate us. We kicked out a genocidal dictator in Iraq and the get same response.
We are damned regardless of what we do. While the other countries sit on the sidelines (China supports genocide and gets the friggin Olympics) and sit on their hands. No one says squat about them.
[quote]lixy wrote:
These attacks on funerals are becoming common place.[/quote]
Which is why Iraq needs the presence of our troops and continued backing even more.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Is it our job to stop genocide? None of the other countries of the world have any responsibility? We stopped genocide in Europe and the radical muslims still hate us. We kicked out a genocidal dictator in Iraq and the get same response.
We are damned regardless of what we do. While the other countries sit on the sidelines (China supports genocide and gets the friggin Olympics) and sit on their hands. No one says squat about them.[/quote]
The genocide in Iraq is not even close to that which is still taking place as I write this in African. But hey I can understand why we don’t seem to care about the Africans. I mean they aren’t even “niggers” right. They’re just Africans. Sub-Human. It just makes me sick to see that the USA will only step in and stop genocide when the country it is taking place in is full of valuable resources.
A Few FACTS:
Genocidal Deaths
Rowanda: 800,000
Darfur: 475,000
Democratic South Africa: 2,000
+one not many people know about
Uganda: 820,000
But hey who cares about Uganda right they don’t have any oil. =(
Now Iraq
500,000-600,000(+100,000 people killed by US troops)-Mostly civilians.
As I said its not even close. & its SICK. DISGUSTING. Also stoping the genocide in these coutries would have cost much less than stoping the one in Iraq.
[quote]lixy wrote:
The concept of right and wrong is very blurry for soldiers. As a general rule, in this sort of situation, the victor is always right. And no matter what you say, the crushing majority of people considers you part of a horrible and criminal endeavor. But you don’t care. Well, you shouldn’t if you want to be able to do your job. You’re not paid to think. You’re paid to execute what politicians tell you to do. And it always helps to waive a flag and tell yourself that you’re defending your motherland and spreading freedom. Nothing new really, it’s the way it has always been done.[/quote]
I have just been skimming this thread, and felt compelled to respond to this part, here.
Lixy, my older brother joined the Army as a reserve and, for various personal reasons, went active after the war started . About a month ago, he came home on a short leave from his tour in Iraq, where he serves as a medic.
While home, he drank heavily, rarely went out due to anxiety attacks, and mentioned he was also on anti-depressants prescribed to him while he was there.
He went back a few weeks ago, and will be there until next December, at the earliest.
He says that, despite what you may read in papers and hear on the news, outside of the green new arrivals - who have no idea what to expect - no one there is terribly Gung-Ho about the whole situation. He doesn’t agree with the war, and doesn’t kid himself about the reasons why he is there. According to him, many troops who publicly voice their support and enthusiasm for the war do so because they are pressured to. Because they are told to.
He doesn’t “waive a flag and tell himself that he is defending the motherland and spreading freedom”; he cringes and sweats when a door slams or a car backfires.
You are not a soldier in our military. You are not over there fighting for your life and checking the corpses of dead animals for IEDs 16+ hours a day. While it is interesting that you think you have some sort of insight into the minds of American soldiers, I figured I would just chime in and save you the trouble of typing this bullshit ever again, as you are offensively off base.
[quote]Mark Mabry wrote:
As I said its not even close. & its SICK. DISGUSTING. Also stoping the genocide in these coutries would have cost much less than stoping the one in Iraq.
[/quote]
Nigeria has oil, right?
Once again, I ask you, are we the world’s police? Why is it up to us to stop genocide when all the other countries do not do anything? Why not bitch about China? They’re supplying the guns.
What if we move into Sudan to stop the genocide and are stuck fighting muslim terrorists for the next 5 years, 10 years? You’ll be saying “Why the hell did we get involved in this war? It wasn’t our fight. And it costs so much!”
Am I right? Am I right?
[quote]anonym wrote:
I figured I would just chime in and save you the trouble of typing this bullshit ever again, as you are offensively off base.[/quote]
Tell your brother thanks for serving our country!
Hell, don’t worry about Lixy. If this were 1972, he’d be rooting for the Khymer Rogue.
[quote]anonym wrote:
lixy wrote:
The concept of right and wrong is very blurry for soldiers. As a general rule, in this sort of situation, the victor is always right. And no matter what you say, the crushing majority of people considers you part of a horrible and criminal endeavor. But you don’t care. Well, you shouldn’t if you want to be able to do your job. You’re not paid to think. You’re paid to execute what politicians tell you to do. And it always helps to waive a flag and tell yourself that you’re defending your motherland and spreading freedom. Nothing new really, it’s the way it has always been done.
I have just been skimming this thread, and felt compelled to respond to this part, here.
Lixy, my older brother joined the Army as a reserve and, for various personal reasons, went active after the war started . About a month ago, he came home on a short leave from his tour in Iraq, where he serves as a medic.
While home, he drank heavily, rarely went out due to anxiety attacks, and mentioned he was also on anti-depressants prescribed to him while he was there.
He went back a few weeks ago, and will be there until next December, at the earliest.
He says that, despite what you may read in papers and hear on the news, outside of the green new arrivals - who have no idea what to expect - no one there is terribly Gung-Ho about the whole situation. He doesn’t agree with the war, and doesn’t kid himself about the reasons why he is there. According to him, many troops who publicly voice their support and enthusiasm for the war do so because they are pressured to. Because they are told to.
He doesn’t “waive a flag and tell himself that he is defending the motherland and spreading freedom”; he cringes and sweats when a door slams or a car backfires.
You are not a soldier in our military. You are not over there fighting for your life and checking the corpses of dead animals for IEDs 16+ hours a day. While it is interesting that you think you have some sort of insight into the minds of American soldiers, I figured I would just chime in and save you the trouble of typing this bullshit ever again, as you are offensively off base.[/quote]
I sincerely apologize if any of that came out “offensively off base”. It wasn’t addressed to your brother or any other soldier who has some intellectual honesty. I have a cousin who serves in the American military and I know some soldiers who have participated in the initial invasion. Heck, there are plenty of them on this very board who pop up from time to time as their schedule permits them to do so. Many of which are opposed to the war and opposed it from day one, but hey, they don’t call the shots so they had to make do.
Yes, I am not a soldier and I have no way to know what goes on inside the mind of every one of them. All I did there was speculate about that one based on his posts.
Here’s hoping your brother gets out of there unharmed and manages to work out his anxiety issues.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
If this were 1972, he’d be rooting for the Khymer Rogue.[/quote]
It’s spelled Khmer Rouge.
I copied and pasted the name from google, actually. I am obviously not the only one who does not know how to spell it.
But it does not take away from the truth of what I am saying.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Yes, I am not a soldier and I have no way to know what goes on inside the mind of every one of them. All I did there was speculate about that one based on his posts.[/quote]
That’s what I figured, though I still felt the need to make clear that not all of our troops over there are soulless, puppy killing marauders.
No harm, man.
[quote]Mark Mabry wrote:
Korea. even though we “won that war” we still have troops over there.
[/quote]
Then they must have a lot of oil in Korea, no?
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Mark Mabry wrote:
Korea. even though we “won that war” we still have troops over there.
Then they must have a lot of oil in Korea, no?[/quote]
During the beginning of the cold war the US as well as many other non-communist countries adapted a policy of helping any country that was being attacked by a communist country. We did this to try to stop the spread of communism. We did the same in Vietnam & when Afganistan was invaded by the Soviet Union.
Now in Iraq I admitt that the people were in a poor state. Not necessarily unhappy but still in a terrible environment. But Gkhan I want to ask you this. If we did go into Iraq just to free the people then why did we choose Iraq. I’m mean with these African nations clearing in a much worse state than Iraq. WHY IRAQ?
& as for me saying -What if we move into Sudan to stop the genocide and are stuck fighting muslim terrorists for the next 5 years, 10 years? You’ll be saying "Why the hell did we get involved in this war? It wasn’t our fight.
And it costs so much!"- Stoping the genocide in these countries wouldn’t take even 5 years. In these countries the majority of the people actually want our help. & they would show it by blowing our troops up with road side bombs.