I can say this...I teach high school, and alot of my boys are very concerned about the possibility of a draft. One day we were talking about it, and I told them that, if a draft happens, I'll drive the bus to Montreal and they're all invited. Then I started to worry if I'd get fired for saying shit like that.
What a noble philosophy to be teaching America's youth.
What, you shouldn't be forced to kill and die? I agree.
So, just to clarify, you're fine with enjoying the freedoms that the United States gives, but against fighting or dying for them, that about right?
I'm against being forced to kill anyone, yes. There are some things worth dying for. The misguided stupidity of the leaders of this country is not one of them.
Your feelings towards the current leaders are irrelevant. You either support what the country stands for, or you don't.
70% of the country wants the fuck out of Iraq. I support that. President GW does not, and neither do the remnants of his fanatical followers, who against all odds are OPPOSING what this country wants, and what this country used to stand for.
You either support the country or you snub it and push it further into a bloody mess, I think we all know what decisions are being made for us by 'the current leaders'.
That's something every American citizen should be forced to watch. If you showed that to the President (as when people ask him about the current American death toll) I suspect he would speak of 'sacrifice' that is so necessary to bring 'freedom' to the Iraqi people. Globalists tend to think of deaths in the thousands as common routine, but the sad thing is America didn't sign up for this routine. We wanted out a year after Saddam was removed.
I have a problem with this way of thinking - if people were dumb enough to support this immoral and/or illegal war, then they can't justify whining now when their incompetent leadership causes problems and demand a solution by withdrawing the troops. If someone was a cheerleader for the war - whether they were duped or they just like wars - they screwed up and they basically argued in favour of all those deaths, now they're arguing to make a bad situation worse
I would in no way support the draft for an attack on Iran unless they openly attacked us on our soil first. Should we be invaded (olol) I doubt more than a few nitwits would NOT stand to defend our country.
We WILL be attacked again on our soil. Read the writing on the walls. Listen to the tone of the administrations voice when they poke around at the 'possibility' of future attacks on America. It's not a hint to the clueless public, it's subconscious preparation for the inevitable, which they will again, allow to happen.
I would in no way support the draft for an attack on Iran unless they openly attacked us on our soil first. Should we be invaded (olol) I doubt more than a few nitwits would NOT stand to defend our country.
We WILL be attacked again on our soil. Read the writing on the walls. Listen to the tone of the administrations voice when they poke around at the 'possibility' of future attacks on America. It's not a hint to the clueless public, it's subconscious preparation for the inevitable, which they will again, allow to happen.
Oh I know we will be attacked. But I do not think Iran will claim responsibility and I do not think we will be able to 100% tie it to the government of Iran should it happen. Not even commenting on your assertation that the government is willfully allowing us to be attacked.
That's something every American citizen should be forced to watch. If you showed that to the President (as when people ask him about the current American death toll) I suspect he would speak of 'sacrifice' that is so necessary to bring 'freedom' to the Iraqi people. Globalists tend to think of deaths in the thousands as common routine, but the sad thing is America didn't sign up for this routine. We wanted out a year after Saddam was removed.
I have a problem with this way of thinking - if people were dumb enough to support this immoral and/or illegal war, then they can't justify whining now when their incompetent leadership causes problems and demand a solution by withdrawing the troops. If someone was a cheerleader for the war - whether they were duped or they just like wars - they screwed up and they basically argued in favour of all those deaths, now they're arguing to make a bad situation worse
The thing is, Iraq is in a state of civil war. It's really not going to be fixed any time soon. Yes, it's mostly our fault, and we (and when I say we I mean the Government) fucked up big time. So our responsibility now is to ask "Can we really make anything better by staying?" The answer (at least I think) is not really. In fact, I think we're making things somewhat worse by staying. So what to do?
The one thing that really sickens me about this war is really, it doesn't feel like a war. Turn off of the TV or watch any other channel but the news and you feel like it's just a normal day. Nobody bothers with the gold ribbons anymore. Assholes still buy brand new hummers despite our dependency on foreign oil, and people just don't give a shit anymore. Just this last week, some kid was joking about which cars are ideal for blowing up at an US base in Iraq or something at some Starbucks and I wanted to jack him in the face. It's like American Soldiers are over there and they are dying for this!?
I mean in WW2, people went out of their way to conserve oils, food, metals, and often recycled their own property, (not trash,) to help their nation. That's true patriotism, not fucking buying a stupid magnet and sticking it to the side of your V8 pickup that you use to drive to the office.
I would in no way support the draft for an attack on Iran unless they openly attacked us on our soil first. Should we be invaded (olol) I doubt more than a few nitwits would NOT stand to defend our country.
We WILL be attacked again on our soil. Read the writing on the walls. Listen to the tone of the administrations voice when they poke around at the 'possibility' of future attacks on America. It's not a hint to the clueless public, it's subconscious preparation for the inevitable, which they will again, allow to happen.
Oh I know we will be attacked. But I do not think Iran will claim responsibility and I do not think we will be able to 100% tie it to the government of Iran should it happen. Not even commenting on your assertation that the government is willfully allowing us to be attacked.
Substitute Iraq for Iran and you've just described the War on Iraq. They claimed 0 responsibility for Al Qeida and 9/11... and nobody expected the US to somehow tie the Iraqi leadership to our war on Terror. But look what happened.
I think people are underestimating (or misunderestimatin eh heh-heh) the current administration and it's capacity to push an agenda. Ask any dis-enfranchised military leader and they will tell you things are not ok.
Why would Iran attack us on our soil? They aren't religious fanatics in the same way Al Quaeda are. They are a government that wants to keep control over its people, its land, and its interests.
If they are helping insurgents in Iraq, it's because the longer we are tied up there, the longer they will be free of US involvement in Iran, and the less willing the American people are to see another botched invasion of a country in the Middle East.
I would in no way support the draft for an attack on Iran unless they openly attacked us on our soil first. Should we be invaded (olol) I doubt more than a few nitwits would NOT stand to defend our country.
We WILL be attacked again on our soil. Read the writing on the walls. Listen to the tone of the administrations voice when they poke around at the 'possibility' of future attacks on America. It's not a hint to the clueless public, it's subconscious preparation for the inevitable, which they will again, allow to happen.
Oh I know we will be attacked. But I do not think Iran will claim responsibility and I do not think we will be able to 100% tie it to the government of Iran should it happen. Not even commenting on your assertation that the government is willfully allowing us to be attacked.
Substitute Iraq for Iran and you've just described the War on Iraq. They claimed 0 responsibility for Al Qeida and 9/11... and nobody expected the US to somehow tie the Iraqi leadership to our war on Terror. But look what happened.
I think people are underestimating (or misunderestimatin eh heh-heh) the current administration and it's capacity to push an agenda. Ask any dis-enfranchised military leader and they will tell you things are not ok.
As an aside, now that the number of posts per page is adjustable, the whole BOP thing doesn't necessarily apply anymore. For instance, that wasn't at the bottom of the page for me.
That's something every American citizen should be forced to watch.
You know what's really horrible? Watching the date approach your tour, and then realizing that in a small region of that map you actually know who those blips were. That you were there when their bodies were loaded up for the flight home. So yeah, now I'm depressed.
I support the draft because I think the pain of bad policies really ought to be spread around a little better. But I also don't blame anybody for trying to avoid it, especially in the case of Iraq or a future operation in Iran, because lord knows I'm not excited about dying for somebody else's stupidity. Hell, I was a volunteer and the decision of whether or not to try and get out of it was tough...I only went because I figured the guys in my unit needed me. Had I been drafted, would I have tried to get out of it? You bet your ass.
Yes, I realize my positions there aren't entirely consistent. I'm human.
War with Iran? Unlikely. Even if it was politically feasible (it might well be the final straw that gets the public to start really supporting the idea of impeachment), it's not militarily feasible right now. We don't have the forces to go in, and if we did the old "bomb the brown people" routine they may well come over the Iraqi border and start really fucking with us. And if you think things in Iraq are a clusterfuck now.....
The thing is, Iraq is in a state of civil war. It's really not going to be fixed any time soon. Yes, it's mostly our fault, and we (and when I say we I mean the Government) fucked up big time. So our responsibility now is to ask "Can we really make anything better by staying?" The answer (at least I think) is not really. In fact, I think we're making things somewhat worse by staying. So what to do?
I see what you're saying, but I disagree that the troops being there are making things worse - I don't see that happening. Instead, frankly, I see soldiers dying instead of civilians - everyone bomb that kills a soldier can't be used against civilians - which always seems more acceptable than the reverse. It might be (and, some stuff actually suggests) that the groups attacking soldiers and those attacking civilians are somewhat separate but the amount of confusion (which Bush and Blair and partly to blame for) about the insurgency makes it hard to tell
Why would Iran attack us on our soil? They aren't religious fanatics in the same way Al Quaeda are. They are a government that wants to keep control over its people, its land, and its interests.
Ahmadinejad is just a political figure, the Ayatollahs call the shots. And what the Ayatollahs say is pretty much abided by with no questions.
I would in no way support the draft for an attack on Iran unless they openly attacked us on our soil first. Should we be invaded (olol) I doubt more than a few nitwits would NOT stand to defend our country.
We WILL be attacked again on our soil. Read the writing on the walls. Listen to the tone of the administrations voice when they poke around at the 'possibility' of future attacks on America. It's not a hint to the clueless public, it's subconscious preparation for the inevitable, which they will again, allow to happen.
Oh I know we will be attacked. But I do not think Iran will claim responsibility and I do not think we will be able to 100% tie it to the government of Iran should it happen. Not even commenting on your assertation that the government is willfully allowing us to be attacked.
Substitute Iraq for Iran and you've just described the War on Iraq. They claimed 0 responsibility for Al Qeida and 9/11... and nobody expected the US to somehow tie the Iraqi leadership to our war on Terror. But look what happened.
I think people are underestimating (or misunderestimatin eh heh-heh) the current administration and it's capacity to push an agenda. Ask any dis-enfranchised military leader and they will tell you things are not ok.
I would in no way support the draft for an attack on Iran unless they openly attacked us on our soil first. Should we be invaded (olol) I doubt more than a few nitwits would NOT stand to defend our country.
We WILL be attacked again on our soil. Read the writing on the walls. Listen to the tone of the administrations voice when they poke around at the 'possibility' of future attacks on America. It's not a hint to the clueless public, it's subconscious preparation for the inevitable, which they will again, allow to happen.
Oh I know we will be attacked. But I do not think Iran will claim responsibility and I do not think we will be able to 100% tie it to the government of Iran should it happen. Not even commenting on your assertation that the government is willfully allowing us to be attacked.
Substitute Iraq for Iran and you've just described the War on Iraq. They claimed 0 responsibility for Al Qeida and 9/11... and nobody expected the US to somehow tie the Iraqi leadership to our war on Terror. But look what happened.
I think people are underestimating (or misunderestimatin eh heh-heh) the current administration and it's capacity to push an agenda. Ask any dis-enfranchised military leader and they will tell you things are not ok.
Aye. But there was no draft for Iraq. I have many friends that are in, just returning or headed to Iraq. Feeling are very mixed when you talk to actual soldiers - even across Air Force, Army and Marines (I don't know any current Navy personnel)
Back to the Draft and Iran. If Iran attacked us and started an outright war (instead of some sideways terrorist organization which may or may not be somehow tied to Iran) then I would have little problem with them using it to fill ranks BUT I don't think if we were outright attacked by another country that we would even need the Draft to do that.
As an aside, now that the number of posts per page is adjustable, the whole BOP thing doesn't necessarily apply anymore. For instance, that wasn't at the bottom of the page for me.
That's something every American citizen should be forced to watch.
You know what's really horrible? Watching the date approach your tour, and then realizing that in a small region of that map you actually know who those blips were. That you were there when their bodies were loaded up for the flight home. So yeah, now I'm depressed.
I support the draft because I think the pain of bad policies really ought to be spread around a little better. But I also don't blame anybody for trying to avoid it, especially in the case of Iraq or a future operation in Iran, because lord knows I'm not excited about dying for somebody else's stupidity. Hell, I was a volunteer and the decision of whether or not to try and get out of it was tough...I only went because I figured the guys in my unit needed me. Had I been drafted, would I have tried to get out of it? You bet your ass.
Yes, I realize my positions there aren't entirely consistent. I'm human.
War with Iran? Unlikely. Even if it was politically feasible (it might well be the final straw that gets the public to start really supporting the idea of impeachment), it's not militarily feasible right now. We don't have the forces to go in, and if we did the old "bomb the brown people" routine they may well come over the Iraqi border and start really fucking with us. And if you think things in Iraq are a clusterfuck now.....
The problem with a draft is that it wouldn't be spread around evenly, even if certain folks were drafted they would spend no time overseas or in territory seeing heavy combat. If we enacted a true draft that was presided over by a council that makes sure the affluent and those of influence don't get to pick their tour, I would be much more behind it.
It would do things like make people really think about what voting for a war would mean, and what filling up your hummer with gas every other day so you can cruise for chicks really means. It also means that when soldiers came back, they'd be everyones children, not just some poor folks, or some kids wanting to go to school. They'd end out with better care and more respect from it.
Back to the Draft and Iran. If Iran attacked us and started an outright war (instead of some sideways terrorist organization which may or may not be somehow tied to Iran) then I would have little problem with them using it to fill ranks BUT I don't think if we were outright attacked by another country that we would even need the Draft to do that.
I think you'd be surprised. A lot of units, particularly reserve/Guard units, are pretty thin right now. They may be making their recruiting goals or whatever, but you can look around and see all the empty slots. In a situation like that, we'd need a ton of forces to fill in like yesterday. But I think we could probably pull quite a few from the IRR rather than resorting to the draft.
However, unless things went spectacularly well in Iran, and started turning around in Iraq, I'm not sure how long we could maintain that kind of optempo. Toby Keith songs will only convince so many people to enlist, especially when shit starts to drag on. I can't imagine what would happen if we were trying to occupy Iraq and Iran (oh yeah, and Afghanistan...can't forget that one).
I agree McDermott - and I think if Iraq was openly responsible for 9/11 we wouldn't have this situation - but when you start playing connect-the-dots, even if the 3rd or 4th dot is really responsible, it would be (and obviously is) hard to maintain an offensive against them. But yeah, if Iran attacked us, it wouldn't be Iran attacking us... it would be an Iran-funded terrorist organization which is just as bad, but holds less "water" if you will with the general population.
People here having mistakenly associated my feelings with serving under the draft if called up with the current war in Iraq. My personal feelings in the war with Iraq is that we should pull out. Not because soldiers who volunteered to fight are dying. Not because the war became the unpopular thing to do two years after everyone was crying for it post-9/11. But because there is no "victory" to be had in Iraq. There's no reason for us to continue fighting in the middle-eastern region because in the end it is ultimately pointless.
KNYTE on
The best defense is a good offense.
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
People here having mistakenly associated my feelings with serving under the draft if called up with the current war in Iraq. My personal feelings in the war with Iraq is that we should pull out. Not because soldiers who volunteered to fight are dying. Not because the war became the unpopular thing to do two years after everyone was crying for it post-9/11. But because there is no "victory" to be had in Iraq. There's no reason for us to continue fighting in the middle-eastern region because in the end it is ultimately pointless.
One should be very careful in making crucial decisions in times of emotional stress and trauma, as such decisions tend to be very poorly thought-out and ultimately lead to disaster.
...just because they're volunteers doesn't mean their deaths aren't a bad thing.
I never said otherwise. However I disagree totally with people making their fallen sons, brothers, and fathers into political standpoints when they joined the military by their own free will.
One should be very careful in making crucial decisions in times of emotional stress and trauma, as such decisions tend to be very poorly thought-out and ultimately lead to disaster.
But you already know this.
Indeed.
And when we, as a country, decided to go to war again with Iraq I knew then that the whole idea was poor and pointless. The absolute best thing we can hope for in a Iraq long-term is what? A permanent air base? What will really change? Nothing.
KNYTE on
The best defense is a good offense.
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
and I think if Iraq was openly responsible for 9/11 we wouldn't have this situation
They weren't even covertly responsible. They had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda - OBL reffered to Hussein as the "Socialist Infidel".
We went to war with Iraq for the same reason humans have been going to war for thousands of years: to express dominance.
We were hurt collectively after 9/11, and when an animal (even a human) is hurt or threatened it naturally does one of two things: fight back, or run and hide. We knew we could not fight "the terrorists" directly, so we selected a country that we could fight directly.
KNYTE on
The best defense is a good offense.
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
and I think if Iraq was openly responsible for 9/11 we wouldn't have this situation
They weren't even covertly responsible. They had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda - OBL reffered to Hussein as the "Socialist Infidel".
We went to war with Iraq for the same reason humans have been going to war for thousands of years: to express dominance.
We were hurt collectively after 9/11, and when an animal (even a human) is hurt or threatened it naturally does one of two things: fight back, or run and hide. We knew we could not fight "the terrorists" directly, so we selected a country that we could fight directly.
Except that's not the way the world works anymore and even if what you say is true it made us look like monsters in the eyes of the international community.
Death of Rats on
No I don't.
0
Options
CrayonSleeps in the wrong bed.TejasRegistered Userregular
I can say this...I teach high school, and alot of my boys are very concerned about the possibility of a draft. One day we were talking about it, and I told them that, if a draft happens, I'll drive the bus to Montreal and they're all invited. Then I started to worry if I'd get fired for saying shit like that.
What a noble philosophy to be teaching America's youth.
What, you shouldn't be forced to kill and die? I agree.
So, just to clarify, you're fine with enjoying the freedoms that the United States gives, but against fighting or dying for them, that about right?
Rarely do I get involved in conversations, but I just had to say something. You're a goddamned idiot.
Enjoying does not somehow magically equal forcing oneself into a position they are not comfortable with. I'm sorry, but there is very little in this world that would get me to kill-and that is mostly only happenstance "what if" moments anyways. I'm sorry that I won't kill, but I'm sure there will be plenty of misguided gung ho kids like yourself who will.
...just because they're volunteers doesn't mean their deaths aren't a bad thing.
I never said otherwise. However I disagree totally with people making their fallen sons, brothers, and fathers into political standpoints when they joined the military by their own free will.
One should be very careful in making crucial decisions in times of emotional stress and trauma, as such decisions tend to be very poorly thought-out and ultimately lead to disaster.
But you already know this.
Indeed.
And when we, as a country, decided to go to war again with Iraq I knew then that the whole idea was poor and pointless. The absolute best thing we can hope for in a Iraq long-term is what? A permanent air base? What will really change? Nothing.
I kind of understand your points. You don't agree with the premise for the war or the leaders decision to go into it, but you support the leadership's decision to call for a draft to fight in that war.
It's like the administration in general deserves to be respected/listened to, regardless of who actually holds that position?
Saved on
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
and I think if Iraq was openly responsible for 9/11 we wouldn't have this situation
They weren't even covertly responsible. They had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda - OBL reffered to Hussein as the "Socialist Infidel".
And Hussein was a Secular ruler until we began attacking. He found religion real quick at that point, but he had NO PART in any Fundamentalist Islamic anything...
syndalis on
SW-4158-3990-6116
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
and I think if Iraq was openly responsible for 9/11 we wouldn't have this situation
They weren't even covertly responsible. They had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda - OBL reffered to Hussein as the "Socialist Infidel".
We went to war with Iraq for the same reason humans have been going to war for thousands of years: to express dominance.
Well that makes it alright then.
We were hurt collectively after 9/11, and when an animal (even a human) is hurt or threatened it naturally does one of two things: fight back, or run and hide. We knew we could not fight "the terrorists" directly, so we selected a country that we could fight directly.
Do you honetly think that is a justification? That's like saying "I got mugged but I couldn't find the guy who mugged me - so instead I punched a granny."
and I think if Iraq was openly responsible for 9/11 we wouldn't have this situation
They weren't even covertly responsible. They had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda - OBL reffered to Hussein as the "Socialist Infidel".
We went to war with Iraq for the same reason humans have been going to war for thousands of years: to express dominance.
We were hurt collectively after 9/11, and when an animal (even a human) is hurt or threatened it naturally does one of two things: fight back, or run and hide. We knew we could not fight "the terrorists" directly, so we selected a country that we could fight directly.
Except that's not the way the world works anymore and even if what you say is true it made us look like monsters in the eyes of the international community.
I'm inclined to agree with you, but neither could we (the United States of America) just sit back and say "Well, you got us there."
Something overt had to be done to show the world that you couldn't mess about with the US and not have any consequences. The overt thing we chose to do was (unfortunately) the war with Iraq.
Rarely do I get involved in conversations, but I just had to say something. You're a goddamned idiot.
Enjoying does not somehow magically equal forcing oneself into a position they are not comfortable with. I'm sorry, but there is very little in this world that would get me to kill-and that is mostly only happenstance "what if" moments anyways. I'm sorry that I won't kill, but I'm sure there will be plenty of misguided gung ho kids like yourself who will.
Your short-sighted and overtly personally attacking post would lead me to reply in kind.
Do you honetly think that is a justification? That's like saying "I got mugged but I couldn't find the guy who mugged me - so instead I punched a granny."
No, I don't think it's logical justification, and I hope my posts have never given anyone that impression. However, as a citizen of the United States of America if they called me up to fight in this war, regardless of my personal reservations on why it started, I would go.
Afghanistan wasn't big enough (comparitively). Ask the average citizen if they even know that we had a short conflict there and you'll get a deer-in-headlights look.
KNYTE on
The best defense is a good offense.
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
and I think if Iraq was openly responsible for 9/11 we wouldn't have this situation
They weren't even covertly responsible. They had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda - OBL reffered to Hussein as the "Socialist Infidel".
We went to war with Iraq for the same reason humans have been going to war for thousands of years: to express dominance.
We were hurt collectively after 9/11, and when an animal (even a human) is hurt or threatened it naturally does one of two things: fight back, or run and hide. We knew we could not fight "the terrorists" directly, so we selected a country that we could fight directly.
You either support what the country stands for, or you don't.
Your ultra-patriotic tripe is duly noted.
Does it being ultra-patriotic tripe make it not true?
It makes it retarded.
For one thing, "what the country stands for" is really vague, and in most situations people will have different interpretations of it. And even in cases where the interpretations don't vary, the implications will.
For another thing, it is nonsensical rhetoric that comes dangerously close to "you are either with us or against us."
ege02 on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Afghanistan wasn't big enough (comparitively). Ask the average citizen if they even know that we had a short conflict there and you'll get a deer-in-headlights look.
Actually, we're still there. And now we're losing there as well.
Afghanistan wasn't big enough (comparitively). Ask the average citizen if they even know that we had a short conflict there and you'll get a deer-in-headlights look.
Actually, we're still there. And now we're losing there as well.
We were only "commited" to action in Afghanistan for a short time prior to the build-up for Iraq, but your point still stands nonetheless.
It's like the administration in general deserves to be respected/listened to, regardless of who actually holds that position?
Exactly.
(this post will be met with a myriad of responses which basically boil down to "question everything lozl")
KNYTE on
The best defense is a good offense.
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
and I think if Iraq was openly responsible for 9/11 we wouldn't have this situation
They weren't even covertly responsible. They had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda - OBL reffered to Hussein as the "Socialist Infidel".
We went to war with Iraq for the same reason humans have been going to war for thousands of years: to express dominance.
We were hurt collectively after 9/11, and when an animal (even a human) is hurt or threatened it naturally does one of two things: fight back, or run and hide. We knew we could not fight "the terrorists" directly, so we selected a country that we could fight directly.
But... wasn't that Afghanistan?
Shhh! We aren't supposed to think!
It's a shame that life isn't a Tom Clancy novel really. I get the impression that people expected/wanted to see on the news that Sam Fisher had found Osama hiding in a cave, along with a stash of suitcase nukes and tons of heroin and other drugs. Unfortunately real life is a bit more complicated.
Coldred on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
It's a shame that life isn't a Tom Clancy novel really. I get the impression that people expected/wanted to see on the news that Sam Fisher had found Osama hiding in a cave, along with a stash of suitcase nukes and tons of heroin and other drugs. Unfortunately real life is a bit more complicated.
Tom Clancy novels are sooooo much more sexy though.
KNYTE on
The best defense is a good offense.
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
Do you honetly think that is a justification? That's like saying "I got mugged but I couldn't find the guy who mugged me - so instead I punched a granny."
No, I don't think it's logical justification, and I hope my posts have never given anyone that impression. However, as a citizen of the United States of America if they called me up to fight in this war, regardless of my personal reservations on why it started, I would go.
You would fight in a war that you believe to be unjustified because the administration tells you too?
You're a dumbass and you're probably the only person here who doesn't know why you're a dumbass.
Posts
70% of the country wants the fuck out of Iraq. I support that. President GW does not, and neither do the remnants of his fanatical followers, who against all odds are OPPOSING what this country wants, and what this country used to stand for.
You either support the country or you snub it and push it further into a bloody mess, I think we all know what decisions are being made for us by 'the current leaders'.
I have a problem with this way of thinking - if people were dumb enough to support this immoral and/or illegal war, then they can't justify whining now when their incompetent leadership causes problems and demand a solution by withdrawing the troops. If someone was a cheerleader for the war - whether they were duped or they just like wars - they screwed up and they basically argued in favour of all those deaths, now they're arguing to make a bad situation worse
We WILL be attacked again on our soil. Read the writing on the walls. Listen to the tone of the administrations voice when they poke around at the 'possibility' of future attacks on America. It's not a hint to the clueless public, it's subconscious preparation for the inevitable, which they will again, allow to happen.
Oh I know we will be attacked. But I do not think Iran will claim responsibility and I do not think we will be able to 100% tie it to the government of Iran should it happen. Not even commenting on your assertation that the government is willfully allowing us to be attacked.
stout's Amazon Wishlist | my lastFM
The thing is, Iraq is in a state of civil war. It's really not going to be fixed any time soon. Yes, it's mostly our fault, and we (and when I say we I mean the Government) fucked up big time. So our responsibility now is to ask "Can we really make anything better by staying?" The answer (at least I think) is not really. In fact, I think we're making things somewhat worse by staying. So what to do?
I mean in WW2, people went out of their way to conserve oils, food, metals, and often recycled their own property, (not trash,) to help their nation. That's true patriotism, not fucking buying a stupid magnet and sticking it to the side of your V8 pickup that you use to drive to the office.
Substitute Iraq for Iran and you've just described the War on Iraq. They claimed 0 responsibility for Al Qeida and 9/11... and nobody expected the US to somehow tie the Iraqi leadership to our war on Terror. But look what happened.
I think people are underestimating (or misunderestimatin eh heh-heh) the current administration and it's capacity to push an agenda. Ask any dis-enfranchised military leader and they will tell you things are not ok.
If they are helping insurgents in Iraq, it's because the longer we are tied up there, the longer they will be free of US involvement in Iran, and the less willing the American people are to see another botched invasion of a country in the Middle East.
Not that I disagree with you, but entropykid?
As an aside, now that the number of posts per page is adjustable, the whole BOP thing doesn't necessarily apply anymore. For instance, that wasn't at the bottom of the page for me.
You know what's really horrible? Watching the date approach your tour, and then realizing that in a small region of that map you actually know who those blips were. That you were there when their bodies were loaded up for the flight home. So yeah, now I'm depressed.
I support the draft because I think the pain of bad policies really ought to be spread around a little better. But I also don't blame anybody for trying to avoid it, especially in the case of Iraq or a future operation in Iran, because lord knows I'm not excited about dying for somebody else's stupidity. Hell, I was a volunteer and the decision of whether or not to try and get out of it was tough...I only went because I figured the guys in my unit needed me. Had I been drafted, would I have tried to get out of it? You bet your ass.
Yes, I realize my positions there aren't entirely consistent. I'm human.
War with Iran? Unlikely. Even if it was politically feasible (it might well be the final straw that gets the public to start really supporting the idea of impeachment), it's not militarily feasible right now. We don't have the forces to go in, and if we did the old "bomb the brown people" routine they may well come over the Iraqi border and start really fucking with us. And if you think things in Iraq are a clusterfuck now.....
I see what you're saying, but I disagree that the troops being there are making things worse - I don't see that happening. Instead, frankly, I see soldiers dying instead of civilians - everyone bomb that kills a soldier can't be used against civilians - which always seems more acceptable than the reverse. It might be (and, some stuff actually suggests) that the groups attacking soldiers and those attacking civilians are somewhat separate but the amount of confusion (which Bush and Blair and partly to blame for) about the insurgency makes it hard to tell
Ahmadinejad is just a political figure, the Ayatollahs call the shots. And what the Ayatollahs say is pretty much abided by with no questions.
EDIT: Thankyou Mcdermott.
I've heard of him before but no. I lurk mostly.
Aye. But there was no draft for Iraq. I have many friends that are in, just returning or headed to Iraq. Feeling are very mixed when you talk to actual soldiers - even across Air Force, Army and Marines (I don't know any current Navy personnel)
Back to the Draft and Iran. If Iran attacked us and started an outright war (instead of some sideways terrorist organization which may or may not be somehow tied to Iran) then I would have little problem with them using it to fill ranks BUT I don't think if we were outright attacked by another country that we would even need the Draft to do that.
stout's Amazon Wishlist | my lastFM
The problem with a draft is that it wouldn't be spread around evenly, even if certain folks were drafted they would spend no time overseas or in territory seeing heavy combat. If we enacted a true draft that was presided over by a council that makes sure the affluent and those of influence don't get to pick their tour, I would be much more behind it.
It would do things like make people really think about what voting for a war would mean, and what filling up your hummer with gas every other day so you can cruise for chicks really means. It also means that when soldiers came back, they'd be everyones children, not just some poor folks, or some kids wanting to go to school. They'd end out with better care and more respect from it.
That's just my opinion on that.
I think you'd be surprised. A lot of units, particularly reserve/Guard units, are pretty thin right now. They may be making their recruiting goals or whatever, but you can look around and see all the empty slots. In a situation like that, we'd need a ton of forces to fill in like yesterday. But I think we could probably pull quite a few from the IRR rather than resorting to the draft.
However, unless things went spectacularly well in Iran, and started turning around in Iraq, I'm not sure how long we could maintain that kind of optempo. Toby Keith songs will only convince so many people to enlist, especially when shit starts to drag on. I can't imagine what would happen if we were trying to occupy Iraq and Iran (oh yeah, and Afghanistan...can't forget that one).
stout's Amazon Wishlist | my lastFM
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
Your ultra-patriotic tripe is duly noted.
One should be very careful in making crucial decisions in times of emotional stress and trauma, as such decisions tend to be very poorly thought-out and ultimately lead to disaster.
But you already know this.
Does it being ultra-patriotic tripe make it not true?
I never said otherwise. However I disagree totally with people making their fallen sons, brothers, and fathers into political standpoints when they joined the military by their own free will.
Indeed.
And when we, as a country, decided to go to war again with Iraq I knew then that the whole idea was poor and pointless. The absolute best thing we can hope for in a Iraq long-term is what? A permanent air base? What will really change? Nothing.
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
They weren't even covertly responsible. They had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda - OBL reffered to Hussein as the "Socialist Infidel".
We went to war with Iraq for the same reason humans have been going to war for thousands of years: to express dominance.
We were hurt collectively after 9/11, and when an animal (even a human) is hurt or threatened it naturally does one of two things: fight back, or run and hide. We knew we could not fight "the terrorists" directly, so we selected a country that we could fight directly.
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
Except that's not the way the world works anymore and even if what you say is true it made us look like monsters in the eyes of the international community.
Rarely do I get involved in conversations, but I just had to say something. You're a goddamned idiot.
Enjoying does not somehow magically equal forcing oneself into a position they are not comfortable with. I'm sorry, but there is very little in this world that would get me to kill-and that is mostly only happenstance "what if" moments anyways. I'm sorry that I won't kill, but I'm sure there will be plenty of misguided gung ho kids like yourself who will.
I kind of understand your points. You don't agree with the premise for the war or the leaders decision to go into it, but you support the leadership's decision to call for a draft to fight in that war.
It's like the administration in general deserves to be respected/listened to, regardless of who actually holds that position?
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Well that makes it alright then.
Do you honetly think that is a justification? That's like saying "I got mugged but I couldn't find the guy who mugged me - so instead I punched a granny."
But... wasn't that Afghanistan?
Your welcome to argue it from a basic human nature standpoint if you wish.
I'm inclined to agree with you, but neither could we (the United States of America) just sit back and say "Well, you got us there."
Something overt had to be done to show the world that you couldn't mess about with the US and not have any consequences. The overt thing we chose to do was (unfortunately) the war with Iraq.
Your short-sighted and overtly personally attacking post would lead me to reply in kind.
No, I don't think it's logical justification, and I hope my posts have never given anyone that impression. However, as a citizen of the United States of America if they called me up to fight in this war, regardless of my personal reservations on why it started, I would go.
Afghanistan wasn't big enough (comparitively). Ask the average citizen if they even know that we had a short conflict there and you'll get a deer-in-headlights look.
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
Shhh! We aren't supposed to think!
It makes it retarded.
For one thing, "what the country stands for" is really vague, and in most situations people will have different interpretations of it. And even in cases where the interpretations don't vary, the implications will.
For another thing, it is nonsensical rhetoric that comes dangerously close to "you are either with us or against us."
Actually, we're still there. And now we're losing there as well.
We were only "commited" to action in Afghanistan for a short time prior to the build-up for Iraq, but your point still stands nonetheless.
Exactly.
(this post will be met with a myriad of responses which basically boil down to "question everything lozl")
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
It's a shame that life isn't a Tom Clancy novel really. I get the impression that people expected/wanted to see on the news that Sam Fisher had found Osama hiding in a cave, along with a stash of suitcase nukes and tons of heroin and other drugs. Unfortunately real life is a bit more complicated.
Fuck you. I think that authority should be respected, up to a point. We crossed that point with the current Admin a long time ago.
Tom Clancy novels are sooooo much more sexy though.
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms, history shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall"
- Adolf Hitler, Edict of March 18, 1938.
You would fight in a war that you believe to be unjustified because the administration tells you too?
You're a dumbass and you're probably the only person here who doesn't know why you're a dumbass.