Why I Support Our Troops
POSTED BY: SignyM
UPDATED: Tuesday, August 2, 2005 15:49
VIEWED: 13777
PAGE 5 of 10
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Any organization or group that threatens to use WMD on innocent civilians is guilty of terrorism.
What do you mean by "any"? What about the whole theory of detterance? That mught be too general. How about John F. Kennedy, was he a terrorist when he threatened nuclear war against Russia during the Cuban Missle Crisis?
Pretty clear to me, Hero. That's what Signy's saying. The threat of nuclear holocaust is the Big Daddy of all terror. You say no? Have you been alive for any of the past 40 years?
Quote:
Just trying to nail down the particulars.
Liar.
Quote:
Maybe its those you oppose are terrorists, like Bush, and those who oppose Bush, like Saddam and Bin Ladden, can't be.
Cheap shot.
Quote:
That doesn't make sense.
No it doesn't, does it? And who came up with that? You.
Quote:
So, does your argument make Saddam a terrorist for his use of such weapons in the '80s and if so, does it not then make prewar US claims of Iraqi ties to terror much more obvious?
Only to the extent that it makes our own ties to terror much more obvious as well.
Quote:
Or maybe your concern is innocet civilians. Who are they? We know the Bush-haters, liberals, and appeasors have said that American, British, and other pro-Isreali anti-terrorist civilians are not innocent. Is that your position? A kind of relative innocence test?
Cheap shot, again. I'm sorry if it's all too complicated for you, Hero. But there can be terrorism and innocence on the same "side." This whole "sides" mentality is the problem.
I know I prolly should have left this to Signy, but I'm past caring about "should." I try to avoid giving Mr. Tar Baby and his quips the time of day, but the war-hysteria in this country has to stop. I have to believe that talking sense, and calling people like Hero on their b.s. will encourage some of the lurkers here to think a little more critically than Hero.
Sing with me! "I'm turning SignyM, I think I'm turning SignyM, I really think so!"
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
MAD has made us safer? All it seems to have done is encourage nuclear proliferation and place a whole bunch nations on hair trigger. I thought Reagan had a much better idea with nuclear disarmament. Obviously he must have been a left-leaning, American-hating, enemy-appeasing loony for even thinking of such an idea!
But- DANG! Me and my memory! 
I forgot that Hero still owes me a couple of answers! Since he said that an enemy is a nation (or group) that "takes the field in armed conflict" against us, I asked him how Saddam became our enemy, since Saddam had not militarily acted against us, our interests in the Mideast, or even his neighboring nation-states. I'm just not gonna respond to Hero until he does. (Signy- make a note of that!) 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
blaming our troops for atrocities and barbarity.
Hey, nice backhand. American soldiers do not commit atrocities and barbarity. If you really supported them you'd ackowledge that our soldiers not only do the best they can, they do the best that has ever been done by soldiers under any flag (with the possible exception of the British...those guys are all class and have been for decades). Not only do they fight fair, they are all volunteers, and they all are subject to to Uniform Code of Military Justice. Our enemies cannot claim the same thing. Matter of fact we treat our enemies better then anyone could possibley imagine (at least we do once we stop shooting at them). The meals at Gitmo are better then local school lunches, the cells are better in the local county jail, and I don't have health insurance, but I bet those prisoners have the best health care they've ever had.Quote:
I choose to support our troops by opposing George Bush. He and his Cabinet have been humping for Mideast invasions for YEARS, and it's all because of oil. I respect our troops more, I feel more responsibility for them, than Bush does.
Its fine to oppose the President. Thats what Democracy is all about. I do not believe the President wanted a war in the Middle East or anywhere else. But neither is he one to back down from a fight, thats part of the reason I voted for him. Before 9/11 the President's main foriegn policy focus was on tensions with China. Domestically his main concerns were taxes and education.
9/11 made us take a long hard look at the Middle East and right there in the middle was Saddam looking back at us. He has no one to blame but himself (and a few hijackers and Osama Bin Ladden). We looked at the Middle East, we saw it wasn't working, and we set out to change the dynamic in the hopes of defeating Bin Ladden and anyone who supports, harbors, or otherwise encourages people to fly planes full of innocents into buildings full of innocents.
If thats what you oppose you've got a lot of company. Some look just like you, others wouldn't be allowed to get on an airplane, and some would gladly join you in a mass demonstration just for the opportunity to blow themselves up killing you and your fellows and anyone else. You've got issues, thats fine, just be careful who you stand next too during the protest march.
H
Nice response. I agree with you.
NY/NJ Browncoats: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/firefly_nyc
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Just going to make one QUICK comment, then it's back to work for me!
Quote:I'm not sure there is "the" inside perspective. Like anywhere else, people currently or previously in the military have a wide variety of views on the war in Iraq. One officer told me it was "a big mess". One ex-Marine colleague said the same thing. There are soldiers who support the war and soldiers who are looking to get out of the service by any means possible and soldiers who hate it but are sticking it out.
But I shared some of the first few posts with some friends of mine who have and do serve in order to get the inside perspective.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I assume you've never been a kid?? If you had, you'd understand that there's a difference between getting BLAMED for something and actually doing it. But to tell yu the truth, it does make me a little queasy that a "government prosecutor" didn't catch the distinction.
...blaming our troops for atrocities and barbarity...
R: Hey, nice backhand. American soldiers do not commit atrocities and barbarity.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
MAD has made us safer? All it seems to have done is encourage nuclear proliferation and place a whole bunch nations on hair trigger. I thought Reagan had a much better idea with nuclear disarmament.
MAD kept the world from war. Mutual Assured Destruction delayed the inevitable conflict and drew out the cold war straining the resources of the major powers to the breaking point and turning a interval peace between ever more destructive global conflict into a marathon of social, political, economic and military endurance. Reagan's gift was that as the two superpowers were running out of steam, he kicked our asses into a sprint. The Soviets were unable to keep up and when Reagan started threatening to take the "M" out of MAD, they came to the bargaining table. MAD was never about terror, it was always a diplomatic tool.
Funny. Never saw the Soviets as terrorists. Not even Kruschev and the shoe banging "we will bury your children" bit.
So in your world everybody is a terrorist except you, those you support, and Madagascar. Well I hate Madagascar, but there's no oil there, so I guess we'll let them live...for now.
If we are terrorists, why haven't we killed you for having a dissenting opinion? Wow, if you respond and disagree with me and by proxy the American government, are you not proving my point?
Quote:
But- DANG! Me and my memory!
Ignoring his invasion of Kuwait, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Isreal (since they mostly occured during or prior to 1991), how about this: daily attacks on coalition aircraft in the no-fly zone, an attempt to assanate a former US President, the Oil for Food fraud (the largest fraud in human history, with the possible exception of Barbara Steisand), terrorist safe-havens and training camps, medical aid and haven for high ranking terrorists, money for suicide bombers, failure to surrender or leave the country in the face of American invasion (hence taking the field against us in armed conflict). Torture, Murder, and Rape as state institutions (similar to our local Parks and Rec Department next door to our City law deptartment). Goes on and on.
Now the war is over and Iraq is a valued and trusted ally. But Syria and Iran better watch out, they're on the list. Enemies they are becoming, if not already (since they are mostly responsible for the continued violence in Iraq).
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
I try to avoid giving Mr. Tar Baby and his quips the time of day, but the war-hysteria in this country has to stop.
"Tar Baby"? No need to get all racial. I demand an apology. You don't see me making racial comments about you.
Lucky I'm white or I'd be really offended...
Quote:
I have to believe that talking sense, and calling people like Hero on their b.s. will encourage some of the lurkers here to think a little more critically than Hero.
Ha! Bring em on. One at a time or all of ya. Heck pile on, a room full a liberals is just a room full of wrong and I've faced that before...
Hey look everybody! The liberals are ganging up on me! Guess I better watch out, those folk might appease me to death. Help, help, they are burying my with understanding and compromise. Oh, no, they're setting free all the child molesters and keeping me from smoking in my car!
A liberal idea is like a rotten fish. Don't matter how many there are, what they are doing, or where you put them, they just smell bad.
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
If we are terrorists, why haven't we killed you for having a dissenting opinion? Wow, if you respond and disagree with me and by proxy the American government, are you not proving my point?
God help us! If someone used mass terror to force policy, they would be committing an act of "terrorism," yes? An act, an instance. If they did this habitually, you could reasonably term them "terrorists," yes? All this rant about killing people for having dissenting opinions does not necessarily enter into a definition of "terrorism." Although, such threats are definitively "terrorist." It's the inverse/converse problem. How 'bout we say that the Islamic-identified terrorists we see today are much more committed to their policies of terrorism than we have been.We are not essentially a terrorist nation, but we have certainly relied upon demoralizing terror to get our way. The problem is, if we do not disavow that legacy we tacitly perpetuate it. The nations of the world hear the implied "or else" behind our policies even if we don't.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
I try to avoid giving Mr. Tar Baby and his quips the time of day, but the war-hysteria in this country has to stop.
"Tar Baby"? No need to get all racial. I demand an apology. You don't see me making racial comments about you.
Uh-oh. Sorry. Seriously, Hero, I meant no racial slur. I take the reference from the story "Br'er Rabbit and the Tar Baby." A tar baby is a trap made up to look like an innocent baby. You don't want to touch it, 'cause if you do you just end up getting tar all over you. It's been my experience that responding to your posts has tended to result in you simply posting more and uglier ones. I have imagined you setting them out as bait to catch the unwary, so you could use your lawyerly skills to unman them. I don't think you play fair, Hero. However, I've been in a contentious mood for a few days now, not my strongest suit, but I'm trying to do the best I can.
I was not aware that "tar baby" had any racial connotations to anyone on the planet, but I could be much mistaken. If I am, I seriously apologize to everyone here! That is never what I intended.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I didn't either. I always thought that a "tar baby" was something you stuck to if you attacked it- as in "Br'er Rabbit". "Tar baby" seems particularly appropriate when talking about the Mideast and its oil, something that we keep sticking to every time we get ivolved. But I looked up "tar baby" and apparently it's being used as a racial slur at Redstone Arsenal and I presume elsewhere. Too bad- it was so apropos!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME