Killing People For Our Freedom

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Konekokaze, Nov 12, 2006.

  1. Stealth09

    Stealth09 Well-Known Member

    Age:
    33
    Posts:
    1,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    War is almost like a game, only ONCE in US history has a president led his troops into battle. The Commander in chief no longer fights at the front lines, he just sits in his office and calls the shots, but that doesn't mean it is not nessesary. You NEED wars to keep control of the world, if you refuse to fight someone will invade you and you'll be ----ed. If you don't start a war someone else will.
     
  2. Morv

    Morv Well-Known Member

    Age:
    32
    Posts:
    3,883
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Location:
    I want a xlink shirt
    War is like a game? So you think being stuck in mud, -14 degrees, you've seen your friends get killed, you haven't seen a bed in 2 weeks, haven't had a shower since god knows and you're being shot at is a game ?
    Also, why do you refer to America? America has only existed since 1776.
     
  3. ferret

    ferret Well-Known Member

    Age:
    35
    Posts:
    1,015
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2005
    Location:
    United States
    I agree. War is like Counter Strike. You can totally re-spawn and bunny hop and nobody dies and it's loads of fun.

    You wanna try getting Bush into the field? The dude's overweight as is, wouldn't be of much use except for kidnap fodder.
     
  4. rbo

    rbo Well-Known Member

    Age:
    33
    Posts:
    432
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2006
    well end of the day.. im proud of my country and agree with the war in iraq but now saddam is gone why not leave iraq let them have civil war and then go back in no point us dieing because they cant decide to vote and leave it at that all those sunny and sheites or however you spell it...
    usa dont have alabamans and texans going at it if theyre chocie of president does not get in to office
     
  5. Machiavelli X

    Machiavelli X Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006

    Finally me, morv and ferret agree on something. War is not a game. War is horrible, and is not a game. Death of your brothers isnt a game.
     
  6. Morv

    Morv Well-Known Member

    Age:
    32
    Posts:
    3,883
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Location:
    I want a xlink shirt
    Exactly, and ofcourse, presidents or kings or prime ministers don't fight. You need people who command and give orders.
     
  7. moviegoer

    moviegoer Senior Member

    Posts:
    97
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2004
    While Iraq Burns

    by Bob Herbert

    Americans are shopping while Iraq burns.

    The competing television news images on the morning after Thanksgiving were of the unspeakable carnage in Sadr City — where more than 200 Iraqi civilians were killed by a series of coordinated car bombs — and the long lines of cars filled with holiday shopping zealots that jammed the highway approaches to American malls that had opened for business at midnight.

    A Wal-Mart in Union, N.J., was besieged by customers even before it opened its doors at 5 a.m. on Friday. “All I can tell you,” said a Wal-Mart employee, “is that they were fired up and ready to spend money.”

    There is something terribly wrong with this juxtaposition of gleeful Americans with fistfuls of dollars storming the department store barricades and the slaughter by the thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians, including old people, children and babies. The war was started by the U.S., but most Americans feel absolutely no sense of personal responsibility for it.

    Representative Charles Rangel recently proposed that the draft be reinstated, suggesting that politicians would be more reluctant to take the country to war if they understood that their constituents might be called up to fight. What struck me was not the uniform opposition to the congressman’s proposal — it has long been clear that there is zero sentiment in favor of a draft in the U.S. — but the fact that it never provoked even the briefest discussion of the responsibilities and obligations of ordinary Americans in a time of war

    With no obvious personal stake in the war in Iraq, most Americans are indifferent to its consequences. In an interview last week, Alex Racheotes, a 19-year-old history major at Wesleyan University in Connecticut, said: “I definitely don’t know anyone who would want to fight in Iraq. But beyond that, I get the feeling that most people at school don’t even think about the war. They’re more concerned with what grade they got on yesterday’s test.”

    His thoughts were echoed by other students, including John Cafarelli, a 19-year-old sophomore at the University of New Hampshire, who was asked if he had any friends who would be willing to join the Army. “No, definitely not,” he said. “None of my friends even really care about what’s going on in Iraq.”

    This indifference is widespread. It enables most Americans to go about their daily lives completely unconcerned about the atrocities resulting from a war being waged in their name. While shoppers here are scrambling to put the perfect touch to their holidays with the purchase of a giant flat-screen TV or a PlayStation 3, the news out of Baghdad is of a society in the midst of a meltdown.

    According to the United Nations, more than 7,000 Iraqi civilians were killed in September and October. Nearly 5,000 of those killings occurred in Baghdad, a staggering figure.

    In a demoralizing reprise of life in Afghanistan under Taliban rule, the U.N. reported that in Iraq: “The situation of women has continued to deteriorate. Increasing numbers of women were recorded to be either victims of religious extremists or ‘honor killings.’ Some non-Muslim women are forced to wear a headscarf and to be accompanied by spouses or male relatives.”

    Journalists in Iraq are being “assassinated with utmost impunity,” the U.N. report said, with 18 murdered in the last two months.

    Iraq burns. We shop. The Americans dying in Iraq are barely mentioned in the press anymore. They warrant maybe one sentence in a long roundup article out of Baghdad, or a passing reference — no longer than a few seconds — in a television news account of the latest political ditherings.

    Since the vast majority of Americans do not want anything to do with the military or the war, the burden of fighting has fallen on a small cadre of volunteers who are being sent into the war zone again and again. Nearly 3,000 have been killed, and many thousands more have been maimed.

    The war has now lasted as long as the American involvement in World War II. But there is no sense of collective sacrifice in this war, no shared burden of responsibility. The soldiers in Iraq are fighting, suffering and dying in a war in which there are no clear objectives and no end in sight, and which a majority of Americans do not support.


    They are dying anonymously and pointlessly, while the rest of us are free to buckle ourselves into the family vehicle and head off to the malls and shop.
     
  8. GuitarGuru

    GuitarGuru Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Location:
    Texas
    i think that we are doin a good thing over in iraq, i wouldnt really say its for our freedom though, its more for the iraqis freedom
     
  9. -=117=-

    -=117=- Well-Known Member

    Age:
    32
    Posts:
    496
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Location:
    2553.55 miles from my dream. Seriously.
    Complete freedom is a fantasy. Certain freedoms are reality. Killing for freedom is i guess good and bad. Only in certain ways though.
     
  10. .Artificial I

    .Artificial I Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,183
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2006
    Obviously you say that. You think there is not plenty of cover ups and stuff and cencorship you dont know about in the US?!
     
  11. Machiavelli X

    Machiavelli X Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    1,167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    dam bumping an old ass thread. But is ok.
     
  12. .:Apostle:.

    .:Apostle:. Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    148
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Its really sad that little mindless ----ers like yourself have an internet connection, but what can be done.....maybe you would like to try population control and war entertainment on you or your family? I think you might get a kick out of that, who knows whats inside your little ----ed up mind?

    Anyway on topic,
    I realize that this an old thread, but since it got bumped ....

    War must be waged sometimes,When there is just no other way, like WWII, WWI or many other wars that were necessary to defend homelands.
    But Iraq was never a threat to the US, come on, what kinda military threat did the Iraqi army pose, when the US invaded Iraq and Saddam's army was wiped out in a matter of days...
    And it is really pointless to say why did the US invade Iraq or not, because that will not change anything. No point to dwell on reasons, than solutions.
    We can only hope that the US will learn from these war lessons, like Vietnam, Iraq and other wars that preceded those in the same manner...But I don't think the US is learning anything from them at all, and some "rumors" are already starting to surface about a US strike on Iran, which (by these rumors account) is more than likely...That is really alarming.
     
  13. RebelYell101

    RebelYell101 Well-Known Member

    Age:
    32
    Posts:
    957
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    May 23, 2004
    Location:
    Norfolk, Virginia
    The only valid reason for war, is not just to defend our homeland. That is a valid reason, but not the only. People in the past have raged war to take over places, some of the best leaders in history did, and were considered hero. When the leadership of a country IS a threat to another, it is very valid for the "other" to take control and appoint another leader, is it not? That's taking the threat and making it no longer a threat. It's logical, and we should appreciative. However, we're not. We want our leader to be wrong, so we can have someone to blame. He made the right decision. Just it's taken too long. We need to end this, and let it go.
     
  14. scarletham

    scarletham Well-Known Member

    Age:
    33
    Posts:
    1,163
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Location:
    Chicago
    Your friend's kind of stupid, but that's beside the point.

    I sort of agree with you. I mean, the other day I was thinking to myself 'How come people say "support our troops, fighting in Iraq for our freedom"?' I'm not quite sure, seeing as how Saddam could have stayed up in Iraq doing his thing, and to be honest our freedom would never once have been infringed upon.

    I think the whole idea behind the war was to do something nice for the people in the middle east. And get back at Osama, but lets face it, he's gone, AMIRITE?!
     
  15. Aznddongman

    Aznddongman Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    411
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2006
    I think that killing the organizations that are a threat to us is alright, but killing innocents that might have been forced into war is wrong. Even if you were about to die, isn't murder illegal? Lets say that two people were fighting one on one and one almost died and he luckily headshotted the other guy. Wouldn't that be the same as war? Isn't murdering someone and killing people with a permit the same thing, but just legal? So many people innocents died not directly from the United States, but attacks that were towards the USA.

    But, on the other hand, if we just sat at our country, who says we might be able to defend against a hijack in our country.

    Indeed, that is very powerful. That will strike fear and we will not stop until we are sure that we are safe. But people are never safe. If everyone was safe, this world would be without war, without conflict, and that will never happen. If we sat at our border, we would not be able to stop the attacks in advance to prevent other casualties.

    But as we are defending, we 'cause Iraqis to die. A life may seem like not a lot to kill, but think about the family, the parents, the brothers, the sisters, the cousins, etc. When one person dies, you 'cause many more grief. When you 'cause grief, there may be a suicide, or someone else goes into war. They might die and 'cause more grief.

    So what if the Iraqis die? We might live, but they will hate us forever, and the remaining people may become terrorists and attack. We would also go down the charts of respect from other countries, we've already lost much of it, why lose more?
     

Share This Page