Sick of Support Our Troops

The fact remains that we aren't at risk, nor are our liberties or freedoms. Those are given to us by God.

I CHALLENGE, I DARE, ANYONE to name a time we were aggressed upon by a foreign military.

I DARE ANYONE, to make an argument that we are actually fighting for freedom, against poorly armed militia in a developing country. This isn't Patriots vs Red Coats, this is a modern military force against a ragged militia, in a country that America has destroyed for the past 30 years.

(9/11 does not count, neither does Pearl Harbor, both were enabled by the strict inaction of the United States, and in 9/11's case there is much evidence for government involvement.)

Just a couple days ago it came out that Iraq has NO ties to Al Qaeda or the Taliban, and that Al Qaeda and the Taliban aren't linked, wow, really, 10+ years and we just are being told this?

Me has a feeling we knew that all along.
_______


I’d like to address the idea of freedom being at risk. I’m not sure where this idea stems from, it is Fact, not sentiment that radical Islam does not hate our freedoms, they hate our “lax morality” and “Our God”. Many members in Congress, including Ron Paul have stated many times that it is not our freedom they are attacking, it is their hatred of our morality, Christianity, and our Foreign Policy.

History Lesson:
In the 1st Gulf War, we targeted and bombed, sewage treatment plants, food processing plants, baby food manufacturing plants, electrical plants, water treatment plants, communications centers, major transportation centers, bridges, railroads, etc.

That is fact, we destroyed the infrastructure of their country, and war historians have said we “sent them back to the stone age”.

We blockaded their ports, and imposed sanctions that disallowed the trade of any country with Iraq, these sanctions were not lifted until years later in the Clinton administration. Minimum 3,000,000 Iraqi children and babies died as a result of this. That is fact.

After the sanctions were lifted, we continued to bomb and mortar their country sporadically until 1998 again, this ended in the Clinton administration. That is fact.

Now:
With this newfound knowledge, I ask you: are you still surprised that they hate us over there? The people in the Iraqi streets with guns are what any self respecting man in the U.S. military would be doing if the U.S. was invaded: take to the streets and defend.

This is not a war, they do not have an airforce, tanks, kevlar, helmets...I'm sorry this falls far closer to the definition of a massacre.

Originally posted by wildshoetwt
I CHALLENGE, I DARE, ANYONE to name a time we were aggressed upon by a foreign military.

Hmmmm....7 December 1941.

Originally posted by wildshoetwt
(9/11 does not count, neither does Pearl Harbor, both were enabled by the strict inaction of the United States, and in 9/11's case there is much evidence for government involvement.)

Ah, lemme guess, Pearl Harbor was the fault of the US? Give me a break! The Japanese were looking to take over the entire Pacific and were afraid the US was going to beat them to the punch, so they attacked. Research.

Originally posted by wildshoetwt
History Lesson:
In the 1st Gulf War, we targeted and bombed, sewage treatment plants, food processing plants, baby food manufacturing plants, electrical plants, water treatment plants, communications centers, major transportation centers, bridges, railroads, etc.

That is fact, we destroyed the infrastructure of their country, and war historians have said we “sent them back to the stone age”.

History lesson: These are legit military targets in time of war if they are supporting military operations (except that "baby food factory BS").

Originally posted by wildshoetwt
We blockaded their ports, and imposed sanctions that disallowed the trade of any country with Iraq, these sanctions were not lifted until years later in the Clinton administration. Minimum 3,000,000 Iraqi children and babies died as a result of this. That is fact.

UN imposed sancations. "Oil for Food" was abused by Saddam (and some of Kofi's family), so try your best to point the blame in the correct direction.

Originally posted by wildshoetwt
After the sanctions were lifted, we continued to bomb and mortar their country sporadically until 1998 again, this ended in the Clinton administration. That is fact.

Because Saddam decided that he wanted to breach the "no fly zone". And we didn't mortar them, just bombed them.

Originally posted by wildshoetwt
This is not a war, they do not have an airforce, tanks, kevlar, helmets...I'm sorry this falls far closer to the definition of a massacre.

Actually, the Iraqis do have those things. It's the insurgents that don't.

"Massacre" is an insurgent setting off a car bomb in a crowded market, murdering women and children. How do you want to spin that?

Pearl Harbor was allowed to happen by the United States, you can say what you want, but there's a TON of evidence that the U.S. knew the attacks were coming. Same with 9/11

Even so, does it not strike you as stupid that we have been at war for almost 100 years now, and haven't been aggressed upon by a foreign military once? We find any excuse to go to war, and in some cases let "tragedies" occur to create another war.

Most of your replies to my thread could basically be summed up as: "Yeah, you're 90% correct, but here's the 10% that you are forgetting."

The U.N. opposed sanctions as opposed to the U.S...so what? 3 million Iraqi babies and children died as a result, that is a massacre. A suicide bomber killing 20 people in a marketplace and injuring 40 more is unfortunate, one could argue random. But the U.S./U.N. bombing a country and keeping it 3rd world while imposing sanctions and killing 3,000,000 babies even while Ramsey Clark visited and reported on all the terrible things we'd done, now that is not random, that is a massacre.

Saddam violated the no-fly zone? Give me a break, man. If you held European and American politicians to the strict legality you seem to apply to Saddam, America and Europe should be crumbling in ruins from International attacks in recompense for International violations.

It's like the American military and people LIKE war, and LIKE to be lied to.

Everything, I firmly repeat, everything that brought us to war with Iraq was a lie.

If Americans started treating their government like they treat their significant other, I'm pretty sure they'd be more strict on this sort of blatant lie.

Wake up, how can you not see that there is a huge agenda here?

reply to post by wildshoetwt


I don't care if your father is a three-star. But it makes sense. Your one of those kids who's mad because his daddy didn't love him enough so he hates anything that his father was involved with. How pathetic, how typical. If your dad had been some rich guy, you would be living in a slum whining about how the rich white people are the devil. Everytime you post, it just further proves my point. Military people can't pick and choose which orders they follow. You should know this growing up in a military household. Do you really think that everyone there wants to be there. They are there because they have no choice, and have chosen not to make a run for it and let their squadmates down. They don't want their buddies to die because they got scared and left a hole in the unit, so they could run to Canada. I really wish some day that you would need the help of a soldier, and he has no idea how much distain you have for him or her. But in the end, he or she would probably save your sorry excuse for a youknowwhat because that is what they do.

Originally posted by wildshoetwt
Most of your replies to my thread could basically be summed up as: "Yeah, you're 90% correct, but here's the 10% that you are forgetting."

Yeah, the 10% that you're forgetting blows your BS statements out of the water, tho. It must be easy to cherry pick history to fit your opinions.

Originally posted by wildshoetwt
The U.N. opposed sanctions as opposed to the U.S...so what? 3 million Iraqi babies and children died as a result, that is a massacre. A suicide bomber killing 20 people in a marketplace and injuring 40 more is unfortunate, one could argue random. But the U.S./U.N. bombing a country and keeping it 3rd world while imposing sanctions and killing 3,000,000 babies even while Ramsey Clark visited and reported on all the terrible things we'd done, now that is not random, that is a massacre.

There was a program called, "Oil for Food", and it was abused by Saddam. He allowed those children to die, not the UN or the US.

And Ramsey Clark is clownshoes.

Originally posted by wildshoetwt
Saddam violated the no-fly zone? Give me a break, man. If you held European and American politicians to the strict legality you seem to apply to Saddam, America and Europe should be crumbling in ruins from International attacks in recompense for International violations.

But guess what? The No-Fly Zone was for Saddam, and he decided to violate it like every other UN resolution. Once again, you aren't holding the right person to blame for the actions that took place.

Originally posted by wildshoetwt
It's like the American military and people LIKE war, and LIKE to be lied to.

The US Military doesn't like war, because we are the ones that have to fight.

Originally posted by wildshoetwt
Wake up, how can you not see that there is a huge agenda here?

The only agenda I'm seeing is yours, and it's pretty lame.

I CHALLENGE, I DARE, ANYONE to name a time we were aggressed upon by a foreign military.

I DARE ANYONE, to make an argument that we are actually fighting for freedom, against poorly armed militia in a developing country. This isn't Patriots vs Red Coats, this is a modern military force against a ragged militia, in a country that America has destroyed for the past 30 years.

(9/11 does not count, neither does Pearl Harbor, both were enabled by the strict inaction of the United States, and in 9/11's case there is much evidence for government involvement.)

I CHALLENGE, I DARE, ANYONE to name a time in which the Dallas Cowboys won a Super Bowl.

(SuperBowls VI,XII, don't count, neither does XXVII, XXVIII, and XXX, all were enabled by the strict action of good coaching, and don't fit in my argument).