Happy Veterans Day!

[Bal-Sagoth]

Radical Muslims in Iraq don't want to wipe out Israel or the United States. They want to wipe out Sunni/Shia Muslims.

It would depend on which group you were talking about I suppose, the entire area is a cluster fuck.

I really did mean it when I said I will be happy when we are out of Iraq. Even if Obama will be throwing two more combat battalions into Afghanistan. At least we have a clear enemy there.

I still am curious how you feel about such groups as Al-Qaeda and Hezbollah. Also about the war in Afghanistan? While Iraq will be drawing to a close, Afghan is somewhere we will still be for quite some time it appears.

 

[Kilus]

Al-Qaeda is pretty bad. Hezbollah isn't so bad, Resistance groups tend to go a little nutty. And Afghanistan has through 30 years of pure crap and it's got another 30 left in it.

 

[ceacar99]

well with afganistan.... no single ruler has controlled afganistan since alexander the great sucessfully pacified the region. warlike isnt the best term for these people... however it should be said that their way of life is such that they are some of the few people on earth who truely and honestly like guns more then americans. afganistan is home of the world's largest gun trade, and the world's most skilled private gunsmiths. gunsmiths that dont do minor adjustments to your arms but actually construct new ones out of scrap by hand. truth was that the taliban was the closest thing afganistan had to a unifying ruling party in a long time.... the violence in the region has created their own brand of ethics and sense of honor that in a few ways can feel like bushido.

iraq.... well, you had the people in civil war for actual religous reasons and then you had a LOT of mercs hired by wealthy iraqi for one reason or another. this iraqi doenst like that we outlawed the baath party or that iraqi bla bla... the end truth is that we finally achieved proper force to space ratio and the place is calm as shit. many marines i talk to talk about thier recent deployments as "more garrison then garrison", lol.

anyway happy veterans day, i got a really long weekend out of it . didnt have to show up for work till noon on wednesday .

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

the end truth is that we finally achieved proper force to space ratio and the place is calm as shit. many marines i talk to talk about thier recent deployments as "more garrison then garrison", lol.

I agree with you on that, it is the main reason my Marine friend I spoke of earlier was so happy to finally get to shoot someone. When he called me he said "How does it feel knowing your tax money is paying me to sit over here and play Xbox 12 hours a day"

 

[Kilus]

I'm more in the camp that the militants have simply accomplished their localised goals.

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

I'm more in the camp that the militants have simply accomplished their localised goals.

What exact goals would that be per say? Things calmed down quite a bit after the surge. Hopefully the same will be said with Afghanistan once we pull out of Iraq and push more man power into the region.

Edit: To be exact what of the ones whose object is of "liberating Iraq from Foreign Occupation"

They have not exactly accomplished said goal.

 

[Kilus]

Ethnic cleansed neighbours. That the real fight for the Sunni and Shia militias. I mean why would 'liberating Iraq from Foreign Occupation' be even a big goal for them, the Foreign Occupation is what let them have their wholesale slaughter.

Ps. Weren't you advocating withdrawing from Iraq, a action which would accomplish this goal?

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

Ethnic cleansed neighbours. That the real fight for the Sunni and Shia militias. I mean why would 'liberating Iraq from Foreign Occupation' be even a big goal for them, the Foreign Occupation is what let them have their wholesale slaughter.

Ps. Weren't you advocating withdrawing from Iraq, a action which would accomplish this goal?

I am for withdrawing from Iraq and putting more man power into Afghanistan and possibly Pakistan. It is time we push the Iraqi Government off the dock and see if it will sink or swim.

So yes that would accomplish the goal if you look at it that way. I still have a feeling some of the insurgents we are fighting in Iraq will take the fight to what ever country in the middle east we are in.

As long as we hold a presence in the Middle East there will always be the religious zealots who want to try and stick it to the "Jew loving infidels from The West".

 

[duffers]

Despite being anti-mercenaries (I believe jingoists call them army servicemen?), I wholeheartedly support the role of the military; they vet degenerates from society, so people like you are either rendered useless when you leave the mutant brigade, or are killed.

I am not a religious man, but always think that's karma at work.

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

Despite being anti-mercenaries (I believe jingoists call them army servicemen?), I wholeheartedly support the role of the military; they vet degenerates from society, so people like you are either rendered useless when you leave the mutant brigade, or are killed.

I am not a religious man, but always think that's karma at work.

Obvious troll is obvious

If I am understanding your post right you are saying everyone in the military is either rendered useless upon being discharged or killed?

I personally know many veterans who are very successful post military. All of that is a very different topic tho and I do not think you are even serious about discussing it.

Thank you for your contribution, post like yours make me even more happy we are still fighting The War On Terror.

Also: For a real life example my Uncle served in the Army and he is currently an engineer at Duke Power making over $100 thousand a year. Sure sounds like the military ruined his life eh?

 

[ceacar99]

see, people talk about afganistan and all that. now the talk is that afganistan is the real target and that we should have focused our troops there in the first place instead of putting a small army there and preparing to invade iraq.

as a well schooled student in history and strategy i know that you TACKLE THE HARDEST PROBLEM FIRST, and you make sure that its gone before you get done with it. this is actually one of napoleon's famous strategic norms. often he would be in the field against two armies. his army better articulated and designed to split into divisions(a new innovation for the time) could out pace any other army in movement and rapid concentration of force. he would use this advantage and choose a situation where he could face his two enemies individually, he would then slam the strongest first and then hit the weakest second in rapid succession.

i as a serviceman dont debate weather it was right to invade iraq. i debate the proper methodology to win the fights we are in. now kilus has a very common SORT of opinion. that we couldnt ever actually gain control. its a normal idea amongst people who have little idea of the rules of occupation and enforcing control on the populous. you see, the fundamental need in such an operation such as the one we experienced in iraq is FORCE TO SPACE RATIO. it doesnt matter how kick ass your troops are, each unit can only completely control so much space. its why napoleon couldnt conquer spain and keep his puppet on the throne, its why france capitulated so quickly after its armed forces were encircled and strangled, hell its even why england had no hope of controlling france in the hundred years war, even with its methodology of slowly consolidating territory with castles and fortresses and its why we had so much trouble in iraq for a long time.

now we did try to overcome our lack of force to space ratio with a strategy similar to how alexander the great managed to actually pacify afganistan. the idea was to form secure zones and then clean them out one at a time. the problem is that the plan relies on the ability to CONTROL BOARDERS, its worthless clearing a zone if when you progress to the next one you allow the insurgents to infiltrate back into the cleared territory. this was happening all over iraq, we'd clear a town and then a few weeks or months later it'd be infested again. just absolutely no zone control.... buuuuut what do you know, when we got more troops over there and as iraqi police forces gained in size and competence we actually started to pacify to the place....

 

[duffers]

Well for starters, you're not. Do you see the word everyone in my post? I don't.

Anecdotal evidence, the proof when none can be found. Do you think that garners acceptance or respect? Perhaps in your teenage circle of friends it does, but in the real world, people will laugh at you for espousing something so devoid of logic.

Pray tell, would soldiers suffering from severe PTS, lost limbs, or mental health issues register as rendered useless with you? Or would you say missing both his legs is the mark of someone "very successful"?

The only terror I and the rest of the world see being committed is American hegemony. A man defending his country from foreign aggressors is no terrorist to anyone. America as a whole would of course accept invasion if it occurred, and not resist, since you have such great qualms with others doing so against your rule, right?

Generation upon generation of Iraqis will take up armaments. Besides resistence, your country has paved the way for extremism. There is no dealing with this beast, it's not possible to kill every Muslim, bloodlusting desire aside.

Are you aware of the irony, that a country created by 'terrorism' has no qualms branding others as terrorists? One rule for you...

And it's not very surprising an American equates success to financial gains. Being morally bankrupt is moot if your wallet's overflowing, eh?

 

[Bal-Sagoth]

Well for starters, you're not. Do you see the word everyone in my post? I don't.

Anecdotal evidence, the proof when none can be found. Do you think that garners acceptance or respect? Perhaps in your teenage circle of friends it does, but in the real world, people will laugh at you for espousing something so devoid of logic.

Pray tell, would soldiers suffering from severe PTS, lost limbs, or mental health issues register as rendered useless with you? Or would you say missing both his legs is the mark of someone "very successful"?

The only terror I and the rest of the world see being committed is American hegemony. A man defending his country from foreign aggressors is no terrorist to anyone. America as a whole would of course accept invasion if it occurred, and not resist, since you have such great qualms with others doing so against your rule, right?

Generation upon generation of Iraqis will take up armaments. Besides resistence, your country has paved the way for extremism. There is no dealing with this beast, it's not possible to kill every Muslim, bloodlusting desire aside.

Are you aware of the irony, that a country created by 'terrorism' has no qualms branding others as terrorists? One rule for you...

And it's not very surprising an American equates success to financial gains. Being morally bankrupt is moot if your wallet's overflowing, eh?

I apologize I thought for a moment you were simply trying to get a rise out of me so I brushed your post off. If you were being serious however...

Your post stated

"they vet degenerates from society, so people like you are either rendered useless when you leave the mutant brigade, or are killed. "

That sounds like an attack on all of the military and its servicemen and women. Unless you want to tell me what organization you are referring to in particular when you mention the "mutant brigade".

The issue of PTS,maimed and other mental health problems are what I spoke of when I said I would not discuss it as I did not think you were serious.

My view on that however is that they should be helped by the government and giving every possibly opportunity to make something of themselves. Regardless as much as I honor the men and women who sacrificed so much for this country they knew the price they might have to pay when they took the oath.

That being said I still think our government could do so much more to help them and I hope Obama addresses the issue better than previous presidents have.

Just to be clear we are talking about Iraq in particular when it comes to the having no right to be there argument, correct?

I would love to hear your reasons on why we did not have every right to go after the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. If you do in fact harbor that view that is.

Iraq I will admit is a much more murky situation and will not attempt to defend it at this point.

The only terror I and the rest of the world see being committed is American hegemony. A man defending his country from foreign aggressors is no terrorist to anyone. America as a whole would of course accept invasion if it occurred, and not resist, since you have such great qualms with others doing so against your rule, right?

Of course not, you and I both know Americans would die fighting if our country was invaded. The people we are fighting have every right to resist and I am not going to curse them for it. At the same time our Marines and Soldiers have every right to put them down when they bring arms against Coalition servicemen and women. I am sorry but that is just the situation we are in right now.

And it's not very surprising an American equates success to financial gains. Being morally bankrupt is moot if your wallet's overflowing, eh?

You know us Americans, we are all about the Benjamins



edit: Sorry missed this

Are you aware of the irony, that a country created by 'terrorism' has no qualms branding others as terrorists? One rule for you...

Different circumstances and situations. Even tho the founding fathers and the ones who waged war against the British could be called Terrorist I obviously view them in a different light than the people who flew planes into the Twin Towers.

Obviously personal bias and it goes back into that "One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter" We discussed earlier in this thread.


Second edit:

This also is a bit off topic from what we are discussing but I am curious as to your answer so I can better understand your side of it.

What exactly is it about the war in Iraq that makes you take such an obvious anti U.S. stance? I am not stupid and I already have a general idea but I would like to hear your reasons and find out if there is some way in particular this conflict has wronged you.

Or is it you just look at the estimated 88-97 thousand dead civilian number on bodycount.org and get steamed that the United States is able to do what it is doing?

Either way I am not criticizing you, I just enjoy hearing first hand why the person holds the opinion that he or she does. It helps me better understand the argument they are trying to make.

 

[ceacar99]

And it's not very surprising an American equates success to financial gains. Being morally bankrupt is moot if your wallet's overflowing, eh?

um.... lets look at the historic aspects of this.... you see before we became our own nation wealth still was one of the fundamental methods of social movement. titles in most european nations could in many ways could be bought. people rose and fell both by how much wealth they could make for themselves but also how much they could make for the crown. MANY early pirates in the caribbean earned titles both for striking at their nation's enemies but also for the large profits that went to the crown. it was only in the "later years" when those nations learned that they could make more money in peace then they could ever make with pirates that piracy started to die out.

the colonies were made even more concerned with comerce then europe by the very nature of what the colonies were. all the thirteen, ultimately the colonies of every other nation in the new world were given charter by their monarchs as BUSINESS VENTURES. each colony was supposed to generate money for the crown, which is ironic that after the french and indian war britian was loosing money through the colonies and we went into civil war over their attempts to make money. that got even worse when british soldiers operating in the colonies discovered that even the poor americans lived better off then their european counterparts.

really, we were a nation founded as a business plan for empires in eurppe, populated with men seeking their own wealth and sucess and sought out own independance when we thought someone was going to take it from us. every ounce of our history shows one thing, we are a nation of merchants and our primary concern will forever be comerce. the problem is that these days true capitalists like andrew carnagee are in short supply..... we really do need a new capitalist champion to spread the gospel of wealth once again....

The only terror I and the rest of the world see being committed is American hegemony. A man defending his country from foreign aggressors is no terrorist to anyone. America as a whole would of course accept invasion if it occurred, and not resist, since you have such great qualms with others doing so against your rule, right?

the only problem is that today our leaders are becoming as stupid as many of the business leaders. other then iraq and somolia as a tradition EVERY nation, or province that comes under direct american control comes out for the better. compare east germany to west germany, look at south korea vs north korea, japan, the phillipines, porto rico. hell how about all the land in the south west that we took by force and cohersion?

american power and aggression is not a bad thing when we stick to the things that made ourselves great. REAL CAPITALISM and human rights(which should be part of capitalism in the first place). careful and practical attention to what is needed to build a great trade partner has been demonstrated to be beneficial for everyone. historically when we controlled an area we put a stop to fighting, enforced stability and did our best to bring out whatever the people are good at so that they can trade with us. greed isnt bad, exploitationism and stupidity is....

 

[mulaalia]

In Afghanistan Mula Omar wanted to destroy poppy trade by classifying it as un-islamic, the clero-fascistic USA government that profited greatly from this miserable trade had other plans. Occupy Afghanistan, take out Mula Omar and put another clero-fascist taliban to power.
I would also like to give my thanks to a serbain soldier who endured the unendurable protecting his homeland from austrian and later german aggression.

 

[Loxley]

And it's not very surprising an American equates success to financial gains. Being morally bankrupt is moot if your wallet's overflowing, eh?

um.... lets look at the historic aspects of this.... you see before we became our own nation wealth still was one of the fundamental methods of social movement. titles in most european nations could in many ways could be bought. people rose and fell both by how much wealth they could make for themselves but also how much they could make for the crown. MANY early pirates in the caribbean earned titles both for striking at their nation's enemies but also for the large profits that went to the crown. it was only in the "later years" when those nations learned that they could make more money in peace then they could ever make with pirates that piracy started to die out.

the colonies were made even more concerned with comerce then europe by the very nature of what the colonies were. all the thirteen, ultimately the colonies of every other nation in the new world were given charter by their monarchs as BUSINESS VENTURES. each colony was supposed to generate money for the crown, which is ironic that after the french and indian war britian was loosing money through the colonies and we went into civil war over their attempts to make money. that got even worse when british soldiers operating in the colonies discovered that even the poor americans lived better off then their european counterparts.

really, we were a nation founded as a business plan for empires in eurppe, populated with men seeking their own wealth and sucess and sought out own independance when we thought someone was going to take it from us. every ounce of our history shows one thing, we are a nation of merchants and our primary concern will forever be comerce. the problem is that these days true capitalists like andrew carnagee are in short supply..... we really do need a new capitalist champion to spread the gospel of wealth once again....

The only terror I and the rest of the world see being committed is American hegemony. A man defending his country from foreign aggressors is no terrorist to anyone. America as a whole would of course accept invasion if it occurred, and not resist, since you have such great qualms with others doing so against your rule, right?

the only problem is that today our leaders are becoming as stupid as many of the business leaders. other then iraq and somolia as a tradition EVERY nation, or province that comes under direct american control comes out for the better. compare east germany to west germany, look at south korea vs north korea, japan, the phillipines, porto rico. hell how about all the land in the south west that we took by force and cohersion?

american power and aggression is not a bad thing when we stick to the things that made ourselves great. REAL CAPITALISM and human rights(which should be part of capitalism in the first place). careful and practical attention to what is needed to build a great trade partner has been demonstrated to be beneficial for everyone. historically when we controlled an area we put a stop to fighting, enforced stability and did our best to bring out whatever the people are good at so that they can trade with us. greed isnt bad, exploitationism and stupidity is....

Ehh Korea was switching between useless elected representatives and dictatorship until 1987.
Germany and Japan had no giant internal quarrels and were pretty much capitalists before any us/western power domination started. They only needed to rebuild their system to get going, capitalism was a help, but not the main reason for the massive success.

Somalia and Iraq were both ethnic conflict problem areas before you went into the places.

This is ofcourse a gross oversimplification, but if you are such a well schooled student in history, then you will know that there is more than just capitalism and american administration that was the reason for the successes of Japan and Germany.

 

[Blakut]

I'd rather have the US invade Irak, Adfghanistan and Iran than Russia or China invading them. Sure, the US made Irak look like hell, but what would have been the alternative?

 

[Loxley]

I'd rather have the US invade Irak, Adfghanistan and Iran than Russia or China invading them. Sure, the US made Irak look like hell, but what would have been the alternative?

The thing is, neither the russians or the chinese are dumb enough to try to invade those countries. Hell even the US is smart enough to keep itself out of Iran.

 

[ceacar99]

This is ofcourse a gross oversimplification, but if you are such a well schooled student in history, then you will know that there is more than just capitalism and american administration that was the reason for the successes of Japan and Germany.

how about the phillipines? porto rico?(though porto rico actually liked american administration enough that succession movements never gained ground)

and yes, the us wasnt the only factor in all the nations that we controlled and guided to prosperity, but here is something to chew on.

the second world war was caused by a few things but one of the major causes(especially so with japan) was the global great depression. every nation on earth turned to socialism to try to solve the problem. the "haves"(such as the us, britian, france, and russia) were all content with trying to solve the problems internally with their own brand of socialist policies, the have nots(the central powres, italy, japan) sought to solve their ecenomc issues by acquiring potential raw material for their industries. over the recent iraqi war people have had slogans of "no war for oil", but back in 1937 japan continued to advance into china for coal and iron, and they expanded across the sea to get rare materials such as rubber and oil. the idea was that they could do what belgium did to its part of africa and get high cheep output of resources that they coudlnt get any other way, and in the end in their minds that would bring an end to a lot of the issues in the great depression.

after the war all the have nots under american influence were FAR worse off then they were in 1937 which is when the first real sparks of the second world war started. now at the end of the first world war all the major powers SAVE the us demanded reparations from the defeated. in the case of germany a destroyed empire unreasonable economic sanctions and monetary reparations were demanded. our presedent fought to prevent these things, but the flu(the deadly 1918 flu) made him ill enough that he couldnt push the subject for very long. so, the victors believing that the only way they could pay off their massive war debt pushed onward with that plan.

after the second world war we did the opposite of the majority. we spent resources rebuilding those nations. we forced nations punished by the nazi ragime to feed germans and ensured that so long as we were in control prosperity would gain good roots. where every other nation had a history of taking the spoils of war we had a different mind. what good were a few things taken at force compared to the potential of a great friend and trading partner? and aside for a few mistepps we behaved largely on that plan until the 1980s. in reality my friend, no power in history has provided so much for prosperity and human rights as the "american empire", as i said we traditionally take the view that good friends and trading partners provide more wealth then abusing and exploiting them and the end truth is that the defeated powers were so utterly smashed that it could have taken them 50 years to recover without our help. everyone wins.

the problem is as i said before is that we have been recently plagued by moronic exploitationists both in the governmental and business sectors of our nation. stupid idiots that dont realize how profitable seeking human rights and building up another group of people in business actually can be.