2000 American Soldier deaths

Actually, hundreds of thousands of muslims have died because of US-supported U.N. sanctions against Iraq. Millions, actually, but who counts when they're just a bunch of camel-jockeys. Right?

And every single casualty under Osama can be traced back to the American Government. Someone had to arm them and train them after all.

 

i dunno about you guys, but a little bright side helps keep me from breaking my teeth in a grinding session:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...9.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/10/19/ixportal.html

i especially like the quote:

"In 1950 each conflict killed 38,000 people on average. By 2002 that had dropped to 600."

 

I didn't enlist because I went to college so I could start paying taxes for our military, you know, someone has to pay for it...this is a real weak point, some are made for military action, some are not...their choice was voluntary, and the fact is I did not volunteer...

Was a free US worth the war with Great Brittian? Of course it was, same thing with Iraq.
I guess the muslims that Saddam murdered under his rule of power were not innocent, right?

hmmmm, 9/11 maybe, how about the original tower bombings? They have brought lots of terrorist attacks to other countries, and if we just let them do what they are going to WE WILL BE attacked, it is not a matter of being attacked, it's a matter of when...

Except they will be able to kill US citizens, they may walk into where you work and set of a bomb, maybe if you have kids they will walk into a school like they did in Russia not so long ago and attempt to cause all kinds off terror there. I personally would rather fight those fucktards in their own territory instead of having the chance of them bombing us on our territory.

War is a terrible thing, but sometimes it is needed.

 

No, it is a completely different thing. America fought for its independence; it wanted democracy. You cannot impose democracy on a nation; it has to be earned, or it won't take.

Not only that, but it wasn't America's plan to institute democracy there. You went for both security reasons and oil. Iraq needed a government to sign international trade agreements and begin exporting oil - you impose a government. It was merely an afterthought.

What about the Iranians you armed Saddam to attack? We're they not innocent? What about Turkey? They're still killing Kurds, why are you not fighting them as well. Hell, Iraq was killing them with American weapons. Why not try Reagan for war crimes?

If Bush was just a little bit dumber, we could trick him into invading the US and instituting a "regime change."

 

"Same thing with Iraq"... and you're in college? Scary.

who helped put Saddam in power...?

There's been absolutely no connection found between Iraq and the supposed people who supposedly brought the planes down. Colin Powell admitted this, and I do believe Bushie did as well.

Apart from Kuwait 14 or 15 years ago, what other countries did Iraq attack?

No surprise that you're an American...

You're sure that was Iraq, eh? Then you know more than all of the world's intelligence agencies! You must be an Iraqi spy!

There's been no evidence found that Iraq was going to attack America. Where did you find this information? The bible maybe?

 

This, as well as many other Threads, illustrates the shortcomings of a democratic form of Government.


"He (Clemenceau) said war was too important to be left to the generals. When he said that, 50 years ago, he might have been right. But today, war is too important to be left to politicians (or civilians). They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought.
--General Jack D. Ripper

 

Real people have opinions and not quotes.

 

no im not in college.

did i even say that? no, because I do not believe that either. but there are some terrorists in Iraq right now that are killing civilians and marines.

they didn't. but the proof that he had wmd's was their. he did gas the kurds.

o rly?

no it was russia, or chechnia or some fuckin country...but now that i think of it im not sure if they were muslims...but i was just trying to make a point, they have a "jihad", they basically declared war on all non believers. I know i am a non believer so they declared war on me.

agree. didn't say it but sounds like you assume i did. currently there are terrorists there. there was a tyrranical dicator, with some terrorist ties. possibly some wmd which they did indeed find some. now what do you see? a constitution being drawn up, a government elected by the people, and terrorists being killed.

America, fuck yea!

 

How about some links to back up that jive? All that is is more conspiracy theorist talk right now. Thousands and millions is a pretty big difference.

 

soul

so i take it you support the war then

I suppose it comes down to why you dislike war? I hate the cost in human misery the destruction that it causes in peoples lives, the death, the maiming and those left behind to grieve and to pick up the pieces of their often shattered world.

What you seem to be telling me is that if I don’t actively wish for the death of some 200,000 human beings then I must be a supporter of war?

**

i dont care if you do, but you cant be against the war while supporting the troops. the troops are the ones fighting the war, are they not? do you want the fighting to keep on keepin' on?? because, in the end, it is the troops doing the fighting...

The thing about US society is that it is increasingly militaristic in nature with large parts of its identity, economy and social provision based in some way around the military.

As others have stated people join the military for many reasons, some because they think it patriotic other believe they are doing good others do it to get training, education or health care they could not receive elsewhere.

To me these people are as much victims of a system than products of it. These people have often been taken in by myths perpetrated by a ruling elite or are in need of help that shouldn’t involve them signing a pact with the devil in the guise of a recruiting sergeant.

They might be the ones doing the killing but to some extent many others with no direct involvement with pulling the trigger are also part of those or similar deaths around the world. You might not be paying for the military hardware and wages of those troops in your taxes, you might not be putting petrol in your SUV or RangeRover you might not vote for the neo-cons or Tony Blair, but we both are members of societies that have and do. And the longer it goes on the guiltier of murder by association we become. That is definitely how many people around the world see it.

So why stop at 200,000 American or 10,000 British troops why not “for the good of the world” wish for the death of 280 million Americans and 60 million British, are they not all in some way guilty and wouldn’t that end the war? But then why stop there, isn’t it Islamic people that are attacking people around the world why not wish to kill all of them I believe there are only some 2 billion of them, wouldn’t that stop the war? But then human beings have always at some time been involved with war so since we all have that potential why not wish for the death of the whole fucking human race.

**

So let us say that tomorrow all the coalition troops were brought home (or just as you seem to wish, died) do people in the US honestly believe that would stop the fighting, that conflict in the region would cease?

I know many just don’t care they might have been supportive if it had gone the way the neo-cons had dreamed. Which was a pro-American puppet government in Baghdad, 18 ‘enduring bases’ to threaten Syria, Iran and dominate the region plus all the contracts that go with the worlds second largest oil supply. That hasn’t happened so now they screech isolationism, that people should choose their own path unaccompanied by US helping hands, without seeming to realise that it was US hands that has caused the dire situation that these people now find themselves in but want to leave for others to clean up.

The point is that the US has no right to cut and run, it was warned over and again not just by high ranking experts but by many common people, to not go in this way. The neo-cons were too blinded by their dreams and hopes to think about reality, they may have conned the American people into following, but the American people (unlike the British) were willingly led. Now that reality has well and truly bitten them on the arse more and more Americans seem to want to get out or think they should have nothing more to do with it all.

The thing is that now the US has opened this particular can of worms in the messiest of fashions (imaging a can of beans opened with a grenade) it has to live with it. This situation could turn into a lot worse than the one that came about when the USSR and US lost interest in Afghanistan, that country had little to offer (except opium and other pipe dreams) as said Iraq has large oil reserves.

Iraq is not a natural nation it is a colonial construct made up of three main groups all with their own aspirations and agendas. If the US starts in earnest to help the people of the region it might just divert a civil war (or worse) but I don’t hold out much hope because what Americans would have to do is eat a large slice of humble pie and cough up an amount of money that would make the Marshall Plan look like a bring and buy sale.

Do I want the US and UK troops in Iraq, frankly no, but some type of peacekeeping force needs to be there.

**

 

Reading comprehension deficiency or 'Block Opinion Filter' selected?

 

what did you say about college before, then? i misunderstood you.

they are killing the marines because the marines are the invaders.... derrrrh.

what proof?? no proof has been found!! no evidence at all!!! the administration has even admitted this.

we're talking about iraq here, farmer john.
iraq declared a jihad on you then eh? how come nobody else in the world heard this declaration of war?

there's going to be terrorists wherever the U.S. military is deployed.

it has been proven that he had no terrorist ties whatsoever.

they found nothing. where did you get this information?? not even FOX has said that wmd's were found.

voter fraud does equal "elected by the people" when it comes to america, doesn't it?

 

i'd love to know how you came to this conclusion. yes, i want the troops dead... go war!!!!

you want the american troops to do good, don't you?

**

its pretty damn foolish no matter what the reason. armies, especially the U.S. military, are trained for the sole purpose of fighting wars.

if they wanna get out so bad, why in the fuck dont they run then?

I dont see how people like us/myself if you're not talking about you are "guilty by association."

So why stop at 200,000 American or 10,000 British troops why not “for the good of the world” wish for the death of 280 million Americans and 60 million British, are they not all in some way guilty and wouldn’t that end the war?[/quote] the entire populations of the united states and england are not soldiers, are they?

if they were dead they couldnt fight then, could they?

that felt so good to read...
no matter what the outcome is, it appears that our government has lost/will lose no matter what.

but did they even have the right to invade the country in the first place? no.

i cant really imagine either country's troops to be peacekeepers.

 

http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/oaw98/sanction.htm

Essential Point:

The UN publishes annual satistics and laments the deplorable conditions in some countries whose governments spend too much on armaments, disregarding the needs of their civilian population. The US, Britain and France, the terrible western trio, also join this chorus of ritual condemnation. In the case of Iraq, however, it is these same 'civilised' countries, especially the Us, whose rulers are directly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi children.

One million children equals many more adults.

Also read:
http://www.harpers.org/CoolWar.html

and

http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/1998/msg00315.html
Quotes:
The following month, the Pentagon published its three-volume
official history of the war, but a draft chapter on casualties is deleted
and there is no mention of Iraqi deaths

August 14, 1998: The Washington Post front page: "U.S. Sought To Prevent
Iraqi Arms Inspections; Surprise Visits Canceled After Albright Argued That
Timing Was Wrong," regarding Scott Ritter.

Essentially the US was using a weapon of mass destruction on the Iraqi population to remove Saddam.

 

So to the query -

So let us say that tomorrow all the coalition troops were brought home (or just as you seem to wish, died) do people in the US honestly believe that would stop the fighting, that conflict in the region would cease?

You replied -“if they were dead they couldnt fight then, could they?”

By “they” do you just mean US troops, also you don’t say if you thought the fighting in the region would stop?

**

no matter what the outcome is, it appears that our government has lost/will lose no matter what.

Soul we are taking about peoples lives here? I hate the Bush Admin but in my opinion the US and the American people still have a responsibility to put right what they have so royally fucked up.

This is one of the major problems with the US and many other empire throughout the ages, power without responsibility, it is why many people warn against the imperialist mind set.

But as noted in Neil Ferguson’s book Colossus this characteristic seems a lot more pronounced in the US than in other empires.

Actions that are taken for purely domestic reasons are overturned if they go wrong with little regard for the victims of such a policy.

If something turns to shit, it is blamed on the President and administration that began it, oh no it is not the fault of the American people, oh no there is no such thing as collective responsibility.

I very much doubt that so many Americans would be calling for cut and run if things had gone according to the neo-con dream. In fact there would be many poster on these forums crowing about it that are now keeping very quiet and are very conspicuous by their absence.

You ask did the US (and UK) have the right to invade Iraq my answer is no they didn’t, but the thing is that they did.

We could wash our hands and walk away, but what I would ask is – is that the right thing to do? I think the US troops should be removed but the people of the region would still need a lot of expensive help and I fear that for many Americans that rather than dead US troops is the deciding matter.

**

To me these people are as much victims of a system than products of it. These people have often been taken in by myths perpetrated by a ruling elite or are in need of help that shouldn’t involve them signing a pact with the devil in the guise of a recruiting sergeant.
if they wanna get out so bad, why in the fuck dont they run then?

Are you saying they should get out of the US? Where are they meant to go?

 

dont believe i said that...if i did could you point it out?

Really? We are the invaders? Did we invade the Saudis? That is where alot of these terrorists are coming from. Again, I would rather we kill them over here than have them kill some of us, and have to kill them on our own soil.

what did he gas the kurds with? There were things stored, syrine gas one of them, but the media does not report that.

Well they have, what you never heard of 9/11? what about all those videos with OBL declaring his jihad on us?

It has been known that he did indeed have a relationship with OBL and his family [yes so has Bush]. Were they good friends? Probably not. But they knew each other, had conversations together, and if Saddam got is Nuclear capabilities up and running, I beleive that OBL would have bought from him.

voter fraud? please link me up to some proof.

 

you said "I didn't enlist because I went to college so I could start paying ta...."

We invaded Iraq, did we not?

The media did report that Saddam probably did have WMD's (that is how the public was duped into supporting this war). no WMD's have been found in Iraq.

Iraq/Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.
Osama had nothing to do Iraq/Saddam.
Saddam Hussein never declared a jihad.

So basically, it's okay to go to war with someone if you believe that that country [/i]may[/i] get nuclear capabilites [/i]someday[/i]?
Please, please tell me you're not serious...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/chitribts/20051018/ts_chicagotrib/iraqiofficialstoscrutinizepollturnout
http://www.sfbayview.com/101905/elections101905.shtml
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1119617,00.html?promoid=rss_world
http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=2107192005
http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/S...SJ_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1128767599805




what's the point though... you believe that saddam declared a jihad on the world, and therefore it is our right to get him out of power before he does anything bad.

typical american.

 

It is my partial belief that if there were no U.S. troops, most of the fighting would stop.

Ideally though it'd be nice if every single soldier over there were killed, regardless of the country they are serving for.

**

and you believe that keeping the U.S. soldiers over there not as peacekeepers but as soldiers will fix what is wrong?

I did not want there to be war, how in the hell is it my fault?

well yeah... most americans are mindless idiots who think only what they told to think by an image on television.

The US troops seem to be killing more and more each day, why keep them over there if you want peace in the nation?

**

To me these people are as much victims of a system than products of it. These people have often been taken in by myths perpetrated by a ruling elite or are in need of help that shouldn’t involve them signing a pact with the devil in the guise of a recruiting sergeant. [/quote] but they still joined, no matter how you look at it.
tell me, what do you think of when you hear or read the word "military?" you think of wars and fighting, do you not?
i actually did a poll of this in my school a couple of weeks ago -- the only people to answer "defense" were the history teachers.

somewhere else... it doesn't matter where. in vietnam and still today, the popular place seems to be Canada.

 

THE MEDIA...Infrormation/fact/speculation: Long known for taking storys out of context / beyond there natural life..and being driven by a cause not always for the truth.. Take media storys for what they are.. If you have stopped listening to anything other than what the 'media' says, then i feel sory for you.



If you are listening to what the media tell you , then telling you the Saddam/OBL connection is a bit of a waste of time.

 

Haha, I WENT to college. Now I am making money and start paying taxes. IF you would have read the quote you just posted you would have seen that.

We are liberating Iraq.

And he gassed the Kurds with what? Not being found, and not having them are two different things. They did indeed find sarine gas, and other weapons of mass destruction. Did they find the huge stockpile they were hoping for? No. But he did indeed have them. You are kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

Where did I ever say the first and last statement? Say what you want but I think they are pretty sure that they knew each other.

If they are a hostile country ran be a helacious dictator, then yes. But, of course, there were other motives. $$$$....am I saying the way the war was gone about was right? No, Bush is a moron...But, In my opinion the war is justified.

Haha, you know, it's funny you put those words in my mouth.

Typical Liberal.