• Why the Coalition sucks in the War on Terror.
    232 replies, posted
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;22789470]Not trolling. The government doesn't really have any responsibilities to me either. So I'm not a drain on society. I don't want to give anything to the government, but I don't expect to take anything. All the government really should do for me is the basics like enforce contracts, and protect my rights from being violated like if I'm attacked by someone. Generally, I take the most issue with the federal government. I really don't mind the state and local governments so much. They provide roads, education, and stuff like that. Which I would at least reluctantly be willing to pay for. It's stuff like the military, social security, and the other federal programs that I don't like.[/QUOTE] Did you learn to type all this nonsense at your government funded school. Or did the wolves teach it too you in the wild?
[QUOTE=Gordy H.;22789634]They also provide clean water, standards for Food care(I assume you like not getting sick every time you eat at a restaraunt?), etc. You can't be older then 13, you really sound like an un-educated Anarchist. You talk about killing Police if you were to break a law, then say "oh yeah all the government should do is protect me".[/QUOTE] Clean water is provided by the city. Like I said, I don't really have any problem with city governments. I live out of town though and I get well water. The government doesn't control my well, and I haven't died from "unclean" water yet. As for food, yeah their's the FDA that would regulate stuff you get out of a grocery store. But there is also the local health department that inspects restaurants. However, I don't think having the FDA really improves food quality all that much. Ideally, if a company put out unclean food nobody would buy from them. Or if someone got sick, they could sue. So there isn't much incentive to do that. But that's an ideal situation. I am actually 19. That's not that old, but it's certainly more than 13. My beliefs are pretty closely related to that of Thomas Jefferson and many of the other Founders. So I don't think that I'm totally crazy. And I said the government should protect me from other people, they shouldn't drag me out of my house to serve in a war I don't support. If somebody mugs me, I can go to court and get my stuff back.
The US has been snuffing out rulers in that region for the past few decades. This just makes them hate us even more.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;22789936]Clean water is provided by the city. Like I said, I don't really have any problem with city governments. I live out of town though and I get well water. The government doesn't control my well, and I haven't died from "unclean" water yet. As for food, yeah their's the FDA that would regulate stuff you get out of a grocery store. But there is also the local health department that inspects restaurants. However, I don't think having the FDA really improves food quality all that much. Ideally, if a company put out unclean food nobody would buy from them. Or if someone got sick, they could sue. So there isn't much incentive to do that. But that's an ideal situation. I am actually 19. That's not that old, but it's certainly more than 13. My beliefs are pretty closely related to that of Thomas Jefferson and many of the other Founders. So I don't think that I'm totally crazy. And I said the government should protect me from other people, they shouldn't drag me out of my house to serve in a war I don't support. If somebody mugs me, I can go to court and get my stuff back.[/QUOTE] So you support Local Government but not Federal Government. Ok, but it's still the local government that would arrest you for draft dodging. Being in the Selective Service is a requirement for being a U.S. citizen, if you don't like it you can leave.
[QUOTE=lulzbocks;22789882]Did you learn to type all this nonsense at your government funded school. Or did the wolves teach it too you in the wild?[/QUOTE] I hate admitting it, but I went to a public school. But the most important thing I learned from school is that you gotta teach yourself. You can't rely on other people to give you all the information you need. Which is what I think schools should teach, rather than all this rote crap. You have to get people to want to teach themselves. Most people don't take that away from their school experience. [editline]10:53PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Gordy H.;22789957]So you support Local Government but not Federal Government. Ok, but it's still the local government that would arrest you for draft dodging. Being in the Selective Service is a requirement for being a U.S. citizen, if you don't like it you can leave.[/QUOTE] I haven't been saying that I [b]want[/b] to shoot a cop. But if I feel my rights have been infringed, I'll protect myself.
The only weird thing about this to me is: We freed them, and now they're attacking us. I completely agree with the OP that the "dethroning a dictator" shit was bullshit. The reason we went in there was to get answers, no matter what the media says about an oil war. Besides, even if it was an oil war, both sides would profit from it.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;22789958]I hate admitting it, but I went to a public school. But the most important thing I learned from school is that you gotta teach yourself. You can't rely on other people to give you all the information you need. Which is what I think schools should teach, rather than all this rote crap. You have to get people to want to teach themselves. Most people don't take that away from their school experience. [editline]10:53PM[/editline] I haven't been saying that I [b]want[/b] to shoot a cop. But if I feel my rights have been infringed, I'll protect myself.[/QUOTE] If they come to arrest you for dodging a draft, your rights aren't being violated. You'd be a criminal, just like someone who stole money, ripped off Social Security or dodged taxes.
[QUOTE=archangel125;22771836]Americans, Britishers, Canadians, and other nationals whose soldiers are serving as part of the Coalition, put aside your blind patriotism for a while and hear me out. I spent the first thirteen years of my life in the Middle East, and I'm familiar, to an extent, with the way people there think. It's easy for the big rich western empire to brand anyone who opposes them a terrorist, but how many of us, through the veil of news propaganda, are looking at the big picture? Let's look at Iraq in this case, since it's the most obvious example by far. The United States really, really had no reason whatsoever to go into Iraq. The claim that sending thousands of armed troops across a border had the noble intention of dethroning a dictator is so much hot air. Since the United States invaded Iraq, many tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians have died because of firefights, accidents with hellfire missiles, explosives, etc. - that's a LOT of women and children. Unless the Western world suffers under the delusion that the lives of brown people are somehow cheaper than those of Anglo-Saxons, I'm sure we agree that something is wrong. What disgusts me the most by far, however, is the fact that in the event we capture some of the militiamen that are attacking US troops, we try them as terrorists or as common criminals. Sometimes - no, most times - they're held for many years without a hope of a trial. And the trials are shams. It's fucking disgusting. War is bad. People die. Get over it. If the United States expects the enemy to form ranks and march like sheep into a hail of their bullets, they've got another thing coming. Look at it from their point of view. A foreign western nation has invaded their country (or, in the case of foreign national militants, the country of an ally or relative.) Hundreds of people are dying every month. They have no army to defend them. Many of them will have lost people they loved to US explosive ordinance fuck-ups. Are they not justified in resisting the invaders? To try them as criminals is just sickening. They should be treated as POWs. Unless you've played too much Call of Duty and think that one guy with an AK47 can kill hundreds of tanks and helicopters and thousands of troops singlehandedly, you'll know that the guerilla hit-and-run tactics they've been employing are the only ones that will work. I don't claim to know who is right and wrong, but I do consider the enemy legitimate combatants, even if white US politicians who are obviously motivated by racial prejudice try to claim otherwise. If you disagree, please tell me why.[/QUOTE] I agree.
[QUOTE=starpluck;22790725]I agree.[/QUOTE] I disagree, read my essay on the prior page.
[QUOTE=MR-X;22774907](It is war after all, tell me a war that didn't have civilian casualties).[/QUOTE] and that somehow makes it okay and any better? the US shouldn't have been in Iraq in the first place [QUOTE=MR-X;22774907]Taking out Saddam was the best thing anyone could do, people where being killed by the hundreds due to his actions.[/QUOTE] okay, what about the other 20 dictators in the world? [QUOTE=MR-X;22774907]Sitting around and allowing it to happen more would be just as worse as going in and trying to do something about it.[/QUOTE] not really Iraqis are actually worse off now than they were before under Saddam hundreds of thousands of civilians have been killed [QUOTE=MR-X;22774907]People need too stop being so god damn naive and realize talking about it isn't going to do a damn thing.[/QUOTE] yeah, how dare we discuss something on a forum [QUOTE=MR-X;22774907]War will never be nice or pretty, this isn't a fucking action movie where the heroes can get all the bad guys and no one else gets hurt.[/QUOTE] lol where did anyone say that war was nice or pretty, and that it is an action movie you're grasping at straws [editline]01:36AM[/editline] [QUOTE=yodafart9;22775974]Are any of you actually going to do anything about it, or just post in an online forum?[/QUOTE] how dare we discuss stuff on a forum
[QUOTE=JDK721;22867736]and that somehow makes it okay and any better? the US shouldn't have been in Iraq in the first place okay, what about the other 20 dictators in the world? not really Iraqis are actually worse off now than they were before under Saddam hundreds of thousands of civilians have been killed yeah, how dare we discuss something on a forum lol where did anyone say that war was nice or pretty, and that it is an action movie you're grasping at straws [editline]01:36AM[/editline] how dare we discuss stuff on a forum[/QUOTE] Seriously dude, read the fucking research.
[QUOTE=Rofl_copter;22775224][IMG]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_IzGDYJE7jOs/RlezyjdEWoI/AAAAAAAAAXs/pcPul6wqygw/s320/falluja_bridge.jpg[/IMG] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_military_company[/url] [/QUOTE] At first I didn't see the bodies in the back. I thought it was a roller coaster ride that the contractors built or something and that guy was on it screaming, "yay"
[QUOTE=Vocal Massacre;22886982]Seriously dude, read the fucking research.[/QUOTE] uh, what research are you talking about? don't tell me you're going to say the Iraq war was justified
[QUOTE=JDK721;22892232]uh, what research are you talking about? don't tell me you're going to say the Iraq war was justified[/QUOTE] In every way. Read the following from my short essay. [QUOTE=Vocal Massacre;22789526] According to the Congressional Research Service it all began during the late 1980s when Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein demonstrated the use of chemical weapons on Iraqi Kurds during the Iraq-Iran war (Decision to go to War). In a different article, the Congressional Research Service also talks about the actions taken by the United Nations. The article mentions that the United Nations began by conducting multiple inspections of chemical weapon production. Multiple U.N. Security resolutions began to emerge but Iraq would not comply. In the late 1990's evidence of chemical weapons began to emerge after multiple U2 spy plane missions. By 2000, the U.N had not seen compliance to disarm the chemical weapons. On September 11, 2001, the United States was attacked by terrorist in New York City. After the attacks, a growing fear began to rise. It was speculated that terrorist forces may obtain the weapons in Iraq and use them against the U.S. On October 16, 2002, President Bush signed into law a deceleration of war against Iraq. The priority of the law was to uphold U.N. Security Council resolution 1441. The secondary goal of the law was to eliminate the Iraqi dictator due to a possible national security threat. The invasion commenced on March 20 of 2003 (Squassoni). Since the liberation of Baghdad, the country of Iraq has seen much improvement. However, there is still a lot of work to be done. United States forces have provided stability to the cities of Iraq. Without the presence of the United States this stability would be no more. Since the fall of Saddam Hussein, the United States has shown the Iraqi people democracy. United States should continue to occupy Iraq to provide stability, ensure political success, and continue reconstruction. [/QUOTE] It's really quite simple. The United States is there to uphold U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441. I cannot say the same for other members of the coalition forces, for I did not research that.
You had me at britisher had me stop reading that is. Joking But I do see where you're coming from. To put it in the words of Immortal Technique "They say the rebels in Iraq still fight for Saddam But that's bullshit, I'll show you why it's totally wrong Cuz if another country invaded the hood tonight It'd be warfare through Harlem, and Washington Heights I wouldn't be fightin' for Bush or White America's dream I'd be fightin' for my people's survival and self-esteem" That is a gross simplification obviously, but the message still stands. If a foreign presence unlawfully enters your country in pursuit of its natural resources it is obvious that some presence would try to repel the invaders. Incoming flamestorm guaranteed , but flaming still doesnt change the fact that its true.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;22789958]I hate admitting it, but I went to a public school. But the most important thing I learned from school is that you gotta teach yourself. You can't rely on other people to give you all the information you need. Which is what I think schools should teach, rather than all this rote crap. You have to get people to want to teach themselves. Most people don't take that away from their school experience. [editline]10:53PM[/editline] I haven't been saying that I [b]want[/b] to shoot a cop. But if I feel my rights have been infringed, I'll protect myself.[/QUOTE] Maybe if you don't like the country that you live in you should just get the fuck out? Ever thought of that idea? There always has to be some little anarchist kid with a head full of video games who needs come here and spout his anarchist bullshit logic. And by the way if you even point a gun at a cop you can expect to get your head ventilated pretty quick, mr badass, assuming if you even know how to use a gun outside of counter strike. You sound like just another videogame-educated fool who thinks he's a bad ass, but if the world really was in a state of anarchy you'd be the first one crying for the police to save you if something went wrong. Another fucking American teenager who hates the country but continues living here. Amazes me how you types think you've got the whole world figured out after playing a bunch of fucking video games. Just STFU and leave the country if you don't like it. [QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;22786843]Everyone always says "support the troops", but I say fuck the troops. [/QUOTE] Fuck you too, you ungrateful cunt. People died to defend your right to spout your videogame-educated bullshit logic. Just stfu
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;22789170]My belief is that governments can't give rights, they can only take them away. Everyone is born with natural rights, the 2nd amendment being one of them. The 2nd amendment merely states the government isn't taking away that right. [/QUOTE] Interesting, can you point out to me where in the human body the "rights" organ is? Or perhaps the Earth is some kind of "rights" field?
[QUOTE=Mingebox;22901001]Interesting, can you point out to me where in the human body the "rights" organ is? Or perhaps the Earth is some kind of "rights" field?[/QUOTE] You are obviously sarcastic but I'll just say that rights belong to a human in a non-physical way, it's pretty simple actually.
The USA don't want the war to end.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;22786843]Everyone always says "support the troops", but I say fuck the troops. If those idiots would stop enlisting in the army in droves this retarded "war" would have been over before it started. [/QUOTE] That is one of the most naive comments I have ever read.
[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;22904671]You are obviously sarcastic but I'll just say that rights belong to a human in a non-physical way, it's pretty simple actually.[/QUOTE] There are no inherent rights, only those given to you by other people. If you and Bob are the only two people on Earth, and Bob decides he doesn't like you, you no longer have any rights.
The communists started this war. We must fight to defeat them!
I haven't been up to date, and this is sort of on topic, is baghdad cleaner? i recall it being filled with garbage.
[QUOTE=Vocal Massacre;22892987]In every way. Read the following from my short essay. It's really quite simple. The United States is there to uphold U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441. I cannot say the same for other members of the coalition forces, for I did not research that.[/QUOTE] it's not that simple. and the US supplied/helped Iraq develop chemical and biological weapons during the Iraq-Iran war. and Iraqis said they were better off before under Saddam - [url]http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/14282[/url] you're missing a lot of citations too.
[QUOTE=JDK721;22905463]it's not that simple. and the US supplied/helped Iraq develop chemical and biological weapons during the Iraq-Iran war. and Iraqis said they were better off before under Saddam - [url]http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/14282[/url] you're missing a lot of citations too.[/QUOTE] Which Iraqis exactly? I'm sure the Kurds would disagree with you.
I don't want to read through 4 pages of posts, so I don't know if anybody has said this yet: Civilians are any persons not a member of the armed forces their country. Belligerent civilians in occupied territory are never lawful combatants. Unlawful combatants do not qualify for POW status under international law, regardless of the nature of the conflict. They are instead subject to the jurisdiction of a regular court recognized by the detaining power. Military tribunals, being convened for this purpose, are recognized as regular courts. That is part of international humanitarian law as recognized by at least every member state of the United Nations, not just the dictum of American politicians. EDIT: [QUOTE=Mingebox;22905123]There are no inherent rights, only those given to you by other people. If you and Bob are the only two people on Earth, and Bob decides he doesn't like you, you no longer have any rights.[/QUOTE] You are a very smart person. The power of all law, all rights, all authority, stems from the recognition thereof. Prohibition, for example, was largely unrecognized by the American people, and therefore ultimately failed. When somebody claims violation of their rights, it means that they recognize something the violator does not. For example, Germany does not recognize an individual's right to suicide, Ireland does not regognize an individual's right to blaspheme, and Thailand does not recognize an individual's right to go commando outside of their home. Or, to express the marked insubstanciality of the term, I do not recognize my own right to sue my neighbor for liking the color maroon, to yell in everyday conversation, or to shred my armchair for fun.
[QUOTE=hehe;22771939] Bin Laden woke the sleeping giant, now hes paying for it. [/QUOTE] what WHAT It really gets me when people say shit like that. 9/11 was intended to provoke military reaction, Bin Laden wanted the US to invade Afghanistan (they also invaded Iraq for no good reason, woohoo!) Nothing gets a terrorist organization support like a foreign nation coming in, bombing your country, and imposing their customs on you. Also, you talk about Bin Laden like he's an omnipotent god or something. Bin Laden is just one man, one man who isn't paying for [U]shit.[/U] other people are dying while he's either dead from an un-related medical complication, or he's still holed up in some cave somewhere. All the invasion has accomplished is killing a lot of expendable terrorists and insurgents, destroying a lot of property, and killing a lot of innocents in the crossfire.
[QUOTE=hehe;22771939]The coalition's reasons for invading Iraq where definitly mixed up. They tried really hard to establish a link between Al-Queda and local Iraqi fighters. Afganistan and the whole Al Queda business is more of a response to the attack planned and executed by Bin Laden while he was a part of the Islamist movement in the late 80s, America was in Saudi Arabia at the time and Bin Laden saw that as threat to the Islamic nations, thus he started a war against the West and particularity Jews. Bin Laden woke the sleeping giant, now hes paying for it. Edit: Al Queda can be labeled as a Terrorist organization and its member are terrorists, the intentionally spread panic and fear through violent acts against non combatants.[/QUOTE] You do fucking realise the mujahideen was propped up by America, right? Bin Laden is a direct result of American Imperialism. [editline]11:10PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Gregah;22772154] I'm almost 100% certain that if the tables were turned and Iraq invaded the US (let's just play along now and make Iraq the powerhouse that the US are/were back in the days, and USA is a poorly armed country) then the US citizens would use IEDs and fight with whatever means they could to repel the conquerors.[/QUOTE] There was a BRILLIANT documentary that covered this. [editline]11:13PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Timebomb757;22773938]As much as your reasoning makes sense archangel, they arent technically considered enemy combatants by the Geneva convention, and arent reserved the same rights as such. Deliberatly trying to use you enemies ROE against them by firing indirect weapons from the middles of major civilian population centers or using crowds of civilians for cover is not the tactics of a legitimate fighting force.[/QUOTE] Fucking americans do it, soooo uuuhhh [editline]11:18PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Sector 7;22774168]You're fooling yourself if you think the US invasion was worse than the actions of Saddam Hussein. Saddam was a small-time Hitler. His documented actions include the slaughter of many tens of thousands of people, and actions ordered by him may have caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands more. and, of course, there are likely to be countless undocumented brutalities. If you think accidental death from the occasional hellfire missile is worse than the systematic elimination of sections of a populace, you're insane. I don't fully agree with the invasion of Iraq, but I feel the overthrow of Saddam Hussein alone justifies much of what the US has done there. [url]http://civilliberty.about.com/od/internationalhumanrights/p/saddam_hussein.htm[/url][/QUOTE] Actually his death toll is about 300,000 The us is documented from 600,000 to 1.3 million I don't know about you, but I'd prefer a dictator over a military tsar like L. Paul Bremer The US also fucked up in the post-invasion. They fucked up time and time again, and this fuck up has cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. Now if the Bush Administration wasn't so fucking retarded and actually handled the invasion well, then I would agree that the US did something remotely good. oh, and btw sparky, the large sum of deaths at the hands of Saddam were funded and supplied by the US. This "mini-Hitler" had an American Checkbook
Sorry middle east but we just love bombing you so much. Hell, we even bombed the moon. We bombed the fucking MOON.
[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;22904932]That is one of the most naive comments I have ever read.[/QUOTE] uh, he's right lol that's all you have? lolnaiveeee you're a fucking conservative apologist, and you want to talk about naive [editline]11:26PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Aide;22775646]If we leave the was on terror just leave what good will that do. If we fight it out what good would it do. None it's gonna play out bad every time. Tried of the threads about the US and War. I see the US stated more that coalition in the OP. It's obvious a bias post. I see US mentioned about 7 times in the OP and CA & UK mentioned once. The OP lives in CA... [editline]11:01AM[/editline] It was one president that decide we should go to war and it was another one that decided to set a end date. It will end but we have to make sure they can support them selfs by providing support.[/QUOTE] i think the "how is babby formed" thing makes more sense then you [editline]11:28PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Aide;22775454]I love how the OP is stating my government is racist. War will never end as long as man is alive there will be war. If it wasn't the 'Coalition' fighting them it would be someone else. Get over it. It will continue as long as it will have to. The middle east is shit hole(In my eyes). It has it's own problems with it's own people and people governing it military.[/QUOTE] most problems caused by the United States
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.