War - thread

MutantScalper

MutantScalper

Dogmeat
A thread about war-related stuff.

Just saw this clip in the Ruptly - channel. US ground troops in armored vehicles in Syria. Is this a thing now, US in a 'balls in' - type war in Syria? With Russia basically on the other side? Taking part in the same war? Something that didn't really happen during Cold War?

 
Well, we've always been there fighting alongside the Syrians. It's just we pretend otherwise to avoid the appearance of being in war in Syria. It's how Vietnam got started. Also, the Russians are not shooting at the Americans or vice versa.

Because they're not stupid.
 
CT Phipps said:
Well, we've always been there fighting alongside the Syrians. It's just we pretend otherwise to avoid the appearance of being in war in Syria. It's how Vietnam got started. Also, the Russians are not shooting at the Americans or vice versa.

Because they're not stupid.
Click to expand...

No, they are just arming the opposition.
 
CT Phipps said:
And vice versa.

Russia really hopes we'll just say, "fuck it, Assad wasn't so bad."

Which isn't going to happen.

Yeesh.
Click to expand...

Pretty soon Trump will step up in front of the press and say something like: "The United States has taken a bold new step in Syria, we are now engaged in actively promoting peace in the region" *thunderous applause from both GOP and war-lovin' democrats.*
 
To me it all seems abit of joke really. It not really war at all but there they want war but they don't it almost very confusing. It kinda like at school when people would 'fight' but they would just push each other. I don't think either side really understands that at best if a war happens millions dead at worst there isn't a earth anymore. You would't really want to toy around in those situation. But they will still piss about putting in troops in venerable position. I completely agree about them not shooting each other in purpose but it only takes one bullet one misjudgement and both side would start pouring in soldiers and equipment.



People make a big deal about american causality being to high (I agree I think anything above 0 is too high). And generally how bad wars and how many people are killed. But I think you actually have to look at it with some perspective.



Operation Enduring freedom (Afghanistan) 2001-2014 Casualties 2356

Operation Iraqi freedom (Iraq) 2003-2012 Casualties 4489

They are high numbers but If you think about in terms of population size of USA its not massive especially as they went on for a long period of time. I know people think these numbers are too high and again I agree I think these number are very very small compered to ;

World War one 1917-1918 Casualties 116,516

World war two 1941-1945 Casualties 405,399

I know you can't compare these numbers exactly but there are people who are ruing around screaming how many war are killing some many people etc. They make out that the whole world is at war and everything is shit. Yes I know things aren't the best and it is total peace but yeah things could be a hell of alot worse.

I mean people are losing there shit over like 3 people dying or something. I understand thats bad of course I do but can you imagine if a report of the battle of the Somme came in ? I mean 57k British Casualties on one day alone. Bring it about to USA what about Battle of Meuse-Argonne World War I: Deaths 26,277. That was in one battle.

I dunno I think the world is pretty shitty but it isn't as bad as people make out ;

sauce ; https://historylist.wordpress.com/2008/03/18/10-deadliest-battles-in-american-history/

http://www.militaryfactory.com/american_war_deaths.asp
 
lolpop109 said:
To me it all seems abit of joke really. It not really war at all but there they want war but they don't it almost very confusing. It kinda like at school when people would 'fight' but they would just push each other. I don't think either side really understands that at best if a war happens millions dead at worst there isn't a earth anymore. You would't really want to toy around in those situation. But they will still piss about putting in troops in venerable position. I completely agree about them not shooting each other in purpose but it only takes one bullet one misjudgement and both side would start pouring in soldiers and equipment.

People make a big deal about american causality being to high (I agree I think anything above 0 is too high). And generally how bad wars and how many people are killed. But I think you actually have to look at it with some perspective.

Operation Enduring freedom (Afghanistan) 2001-2014 Casualties 2356

Operation Iraqi freedom (Iraq) 2003-2012 Casualties 4489

They are high numbers but If you think about in terms of population size of USA its not massive especially as they went on for a long period of time. I know people think these numbers are too high and again I agree I think these number are very very small compered to ;

World War one 1917-1918 Casualties 116,516

World war two 1941-1945 Casualties 405,399

I know you can't compare these numbers exactly but there are people who are ruing around screaming how many war are killing some many people etc. They make out that the whole world is at war and everything is shit. Yes I know things aren't the best and it is total peace but yeah things could be a hell of alot worse.

I mean people are losing there shit over like 3 people dying or something. I understand thats bad of course I do but can you imagine if a report of the battle of the Somme came in ? I mean 57k British Casualties on one day alone. Bring it about to USA what about Battle of Meuse-Argonne World War I: Deaths 26,277. That was in one battle.

I dunno I think the world is pretty shitty but it isn't as bad as people make out ;

sauce ; https://historylist.wordpress.com/2008/03/18/10-deadliest-battles-in-american-history/

http://www.militaryfactory.com/american_war_deaths.asp
Click to expand...

Vietnam was a game changer in how Americans viewed war in large part because it was a war where people really had no idea what the end objective was or goal other than "win" and "defeat communism." American participation in World War 1 and 2 had the benefit of being the result of military attacks against US interests as well as a desire to free Europe.

It's a large reason why people were okay with the Afghanistan War while the Iraqi War is considered a mistake.
 
CT Phipps said:
Vietnam was a game changer in how Americans viewed war in large part because it was a war where people really had no idea what the end objective was or goal other than "win" and "defeat communism." American participation in World War 1 and 2 had the benefit of being the result of military attacks against US interests as well as a desire to free Europe.

It's a large reason why people were okay with the Afghanistan War while the Iraqi War is considered a mistake.
Click to expand...
CT Phipps said:
Vietnam was a game changer in how Americans viewed war in large part because it was a war where people really had no idea what the end objective was or goal other than "win" and "defeat communism." American participation in World War 1 and 2 had the benefit of being the result of military attacks against US interests as well as a desire to free Europe.

It's a large reason why people were okay with the Afghanistan War while the Iraqi War is considered a mistake.
Click to expand...

I don't want to get really into any reason why america went into the war because world wars could be argued america was attacked so therefore they joined the way. Where as Afghanistan and Iraq where in my opion both pretty sketchy. I was looking plainly at the numbers ! I dunno
 
lolpop109 said:
To me it all seems abit of joke really. It not really war at all but there they want war but they don't it almost very confusing. It kinda like at school when people would 'fight' but they would just push each other. I don't think either side really understands that at best if a war happens millions dead at worst there isn't a earth anymore. You would't really want to toy around in those situation. But they will still piss about putting in troops in venerable position. I completely agree about them not shooting each other in purpose but it only takes one bullet one misjudgement and both side would start pouring in soldiers and equipment.



People make a big deal about american causality being to high (I agree I think anything above 0 is too high). And generally how bad wars and how many people are killed. But I think you actually have to look at it with some perspective.



Operation Enduring freedom (Afghanistan) 2001-2014 Casualties 2356

Operation Iraqi freedom (Iraq) 2003-2012 Casualties 4489

They are high numbers but If you think about in terms of population size of USA its not massive especially as they went on for a long period of time. I know people think these numbers are too high and again I agree I think these number are very very small compered to ;

World War one 1917-1918 Casualties 116,516

World war two 1941-1945 Casualties 405,399

I know you can't compare these numbers exactly but there are people who are ruing around screaming how many war are killing some many people etc. They make out that the whole world is at war and everything is shit. Yes I know things aren't the best and it is total peace but yeah things could be a hell of alot worse.

I mean people are losing there shit over like 3 people dying or something. I understand thats bad of course I do but can you imagine if a report of the battle of the Somme came in ? I mean 57k British Casualties on one day alone. Bring it about to USA what about Battle of Meuse-Argonne World War I: Deaths 26,277. That was in one battle.

I dunno I think the world is pretty shitty but it isn't as bad as people make out ;

sauce ; https://historylist.wordpress.com/2008/03/18/10-deadliest-battles-in-american-history/

http://www.militaryfactory.com/american_war_deaths.asp
Click to expand...

If you factor in the pro-US mercenary troops, which played a huge part in committing a lot of the atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan, and their deaths and casualties, you can easily double the US military deaths. Then you can add in the coalition deaths and the pro-US native troop deaths, Iraqi and Afghan troops that were loyal to US. There's at least six of those deaths for each US military death. So US deaths + coalition deaths + mercenary deaths + allied Iraqi/Afghan deaths = ~ 100 000 deaths. So, not that little.

And of course the civilian deaths eqlipse that figure. And since US started both those wars, Iraq and Afghanistan, they have to carry some responsibility of those as well.
 
lolpop109 said:
I don't want to get really into any reason why america went into the war because world wars could be argued america was attacked so therefore they joined the way. Where as Afghanistan and Iraq where in my opion both pretty sketchy. I was looking plainly at the numbers ! I dunno
Click to expand...

I generally take the view the Taliban bore responsibility for the events of the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks which is an entirely different matter versus the Iraq War. I'm genuinely surprised so many people tend to think of the Afghanistan war as similar.
 
MutantScalper said:
If you factor in the pro-US mercenary troops, which played a huge part in committing a lot of the atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan, and their deaths and casualties, you can easily double the US military deaths. Then you can add in the coalition deaths and the pro-US native troop deaths, Iraqi and Afghan troops that were loyal to US. There's at least six of those deaths for each US military death. So US deaths + coalition deaths + mercenary deaths + allied Iraqi/Afghan deaths = ~ 100 000 deaths. So, not that little.

And of course the civilian deaths eqlipse that figure. And since US started both those wars, Iraq and Afghanistan, they have to carry some responsibility of those as well.
Click to expand...

Blackwater right? Or Academi as they're now known as. I didn't know they were involved with Afghanistan.
 
Prone Squanderer said:
Blackwater right? Or Academi as they're now known as. I didn't know they were involved with Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

I don't think he's referring to the PMCs who are legally obligated not to participate in combat but just serve as guards for American facilities. But instead the actual Afghanis and Syrians who are hired by the US to fight their wars. Which can be labeled partisans.

MutantScalper said:
http://www.spiegel.de/international...as-warlords-grow-more-powerful-a-1137475.html

Maybe Assad will have to step down. Or not. Anyway, a c-phug of the highest order. One of those conflicts with no good outcome in sight.
Click to expand...

Assad was believed to be on the verge of falling to begin with but Obama and a bunch of others gleefully let it be known if he ever did leave the country that he'd be charged with war crimes. So, instead, he doubled down and committed a LOT MORE WAR CRIMES and stabilized his position as a third side to the divided rebels.

He also cozied up to Russia, which was all to eager to feel like they were important again.
 
CT Phipps said:
I don't think he's referring to the PMCs who are legally obligated not to participate in combat but just serve as guards for American facilities. But instead the actual Afghanis and Syrians who are hired by the US to fight their wars. Which can be labeled partisans.
Click to expand...

Ah right I see. Not sure why I said that now that I think about it.

CT Phipps said:
Assad was believed to be on the verge of falling to begin with but Obama and a bunch of others gleefully let it be known if he ever did leave the country that he'd be charged with war crimes. So, instead, he doubled down and committed a LOT MORE WAR CRIMES and stabilized his position as a third side to the divided rebels.

He also cozied up to Russia, which was all to eager to feel like they were important again.
Click to expand...

I don't suppose Assad can afford not to pal up with Russia.
 
lolpop109 said:
To me it all seems abit of joke really. It not really war at all but there they want war but they don't it almost very confusing. It kinda like at school when people would 'fight' but they would just push each other. I don't think either side really understands that at best if a war happens millions dead at worst there isn't a earth anymore. You would't really want to toy around in those situation. But they will still piss about putting in troops in venerable position. I completely agree about them not shooting each other in purpose but it only takes one bullet one misjudgement and both side would start pouring in soldiers and equipment.



People make a big deal about american causality being to high (I agree I think anything above 0 is too high). And generally how bad wars and how many people are killed. But I think you actually have to look at it with some perspective.



Operation Enduring freedom (Afghanistan) 2001-2014 Casualties 2356

Operation Iraqi freedom (Iraq) 2003-2012 Casualties 4489

They are high numbers but If you think about in terms of population size of USA its not massive especially as they went on for a long period of time. I know people think these numbers are too high and again I agree I think these number are very very small compered to ;

World War one 1917-1918 Casualties 116,516

World war two 1941-1945 Casualties 405,399

I know you can't compare these numbers exactly but there are people who are ruing around screaming how many war are killing some many people etc. They make out that the whole world is at war and everything is shit. Yes I know things aren't the best and it is total peace but yeah things could be a hell of alot worse.

I mean people are losing there shit over like 3 people dying or something. I understand thats bad of course I do but can you imagine if a report of the battle of the Somme came in ? I mean 57k British Casualties on one day alone. Bring it about to USA what about Battle of Meuse-Argonne World War I: Deaths 26,277. That was in one battle.

I dunno I think the world is pretty shitty but it isn't as bad as people make out ;

sauce ; https://historylist.wordpress.com/2008/03/18/10-deadliest-battles-in-american-history/

http://www.militaryfactory.com/american_war_deaths.asp
Click to expand...
Don't forget the casualties of the other side.

Some estimate that the American campaigns in Afghanistan and the middle east might have costed more than 100 000 lives.
 
Prone Squanderer said:
Blackwater right? Or Academi as they're now known as. I didn't know they were involved with Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Yea. They're in Afghanistan, plus a lot of other mercs.

CT Phipps said:
I don't think he's referring to the PMCs who are legally obligated not to participate in combat but just serve as guards for American facilities. But instead the actual Afghanis and Syrians who are hired by the US to fight their wars. Which can be labeled partisans.
Click to expand...

Err wat?

Assad was believed to be on the verge of falling to begin with but Obama and a bunch of others gleefully let it be known if he ever did leave the country that he'd be charged with war crimes. So, instead, he doubled down and committed a LOT MORE WAR CRIMES and stabilized his position as a third side to the divided rebels.

He also cozied up to Russia, which was all to eager to feel like they were important again.
Click to expand...

Whole thing Obama's fault. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top