Soulja Boy " F* the US troops.. "

[Rev2010]

Originally Posted by dragonblade629

There should be a military should the need for protection arise, but don't pretend to be doing something you're not, it makes you look like an asshole.

I was gonna neg you but figured it would be better to state my words to you publicly. I agree with nearly everything you said for the mostpart. But calling someone an asshole (I know you didn't directly call him that but it was definitely implied by your wording) is just plain stupid and not very well thought of a reply.

Again, I agree with most of what you are saying. But the other day I thought about what it would be like if the US didn't initiate this "war on terror". Our economy would surely be way stronger than it is now without all that spending, regimes such as Saddam's would still have control over their people - especially the bad one's etc. But, the US did take down a shit load of terrorist training camps, terror cells, etc. It took down the Taliban, though that's still proving hard keeping them down. All in all the US said we are NOT going to stand for this shit. Killing 5000 people is not a small joke done by a few punk criminals. We responded in a way I think for a while was good. I am not happy with the whole Iraq thing and there I think we made things worse in the long run.

Either way, I find it sad that you'd rip into the guy when he's the one following orders daily, not seeing his family from across the other side of the world, etc. Maybe he's frustrated at how his sacrifices are not appreciated. Either way I wouldn't blame him or call him names for the governments actions. Not cool.


Rev.

[Hemi-Powered Drone]

I really don't see how we are being defended. We have been defended, we probably will be defended in the future, but for now we aren't. If you have proof otherwise I'd love to see it.

[Rev2010]

Originally Posted by dragonblade629

I really don't see how we are being defended. We have been defended, we probably will be defended in the future, but for now we aren't. If you have proof otherwise I'd love to see it.

So you don't see destroying terrorist cells and training camps as preemptive defense?? It's preventing further loss of thousands of lives in terrorist attacks.


Rev.

[DrakkarTyrannis]

Originally Posted by dragonblade629

I really don't see how we are being defended. We have been defended, we probably will be defended in the future, but for now we aren't. If you have proof otherwise I'd love to see it.

I'm sure he'd love to provide that proof..IN PRIVATE MESSAGES AND NOT IN THE THREAD...kay?

[Hemi-Powered Drone]

Originally Posted by Rev2010

I was gonna neg you but figured it would be better to state my words to you publicly. I agree with nearly everything you said for the mostpart. But calling someone an asshole (I know you didn't directly call him that but it was definitely implied by your wording) is just plain stupid and not very well thought of a reply.

Again, I agree with most of what you are saying. But the other day I thought about what it would be like if the US didn't initiate this "war on terror". Our economy would surely be way stronger than it is now without all that spending, regimes such as Saddam's would still have control over their people - especially the bad one's etc. But, the US did take down a shit load of terrorist training camps, terror cells, etc. It took down the Taliban, though that's still proving hard keeping them down. All in all the US said we are NOT going to stand for this shit. Killing 5000 people is not a small joke done by a few punk criminals. We responded in a way I think for a while was good. I am not happy with the whole Iraq thing and there I think we made things worse in the long run.

Either way, I find it sad that you'd rip into the guy when he's the one following orders daily, not seeing his family from across the other side of the world, etc. Maybe he's frustrated at how his sacrifices are not appreciated. Either way I would blame him or call him names for the governments actions. Not cool.


Rev.

I have no problem with him following orders, in fact I commend him for actually following orders. It's something I'd have trouble doing. When I said nothing would change, I was referring to the status of our government and our rights. I know it's pretty self centered in that I'm only referring to the US, but I was only speaking of how we aren't being protected.

He has every right to be frustrated, but I call him an asshole not because of what he is doing, but the fact that he or anyone else would blatantly lie when there is extremely loud proof that its false. That makes someone seem like an asshole to me.

Originally Posted by Rev2010

So you don't see destroying terrorist cells and training camps as preemptive defense?? It's preventing further loss of thousands of lives in terrorist attacks.


Rev.

Is there any proof that it's actually been worth it, considering how much military personnel and civilians have died to attain these goals?

[Hemi-Powered Drone]

Originally Posted by DrakkarTyrannis

I'm sure he'd love to provide that proof..IN PRIVATE MESSAGES AND NOT IN THE THREAD...kay?

Good idea.



I'll be waiting.

[Grand Moff Tim]

Originally Posted by dragonblade629

Is there any proof that it's actually been worth it, considering how much military personnel and civilians have died to attain these goals?

How exactly would one go about proving that preemptive defense has worked?

[Hemi-Powered Drone]

Originally Posted by Grand Moff Tim

How exactly would one go about proving that preemptive defense has worked?

Statistical analysis could give them an approximation. They could at least tell us how many have actually been taken down, maybe even a body count/capture count.

[Rev2010]

Originally Posted by dragonblade629

Statistical analysis could give them an approximation. They could at least tell us how many have actually been taken down, maybe even a body count/capture count.

Sorry, but no. There is not yet any accurate statistics for such a thing. For one, no statics could've foreseen the lives lost in the 9/11 attacks since the number of deaths from Islamic extremist attacks in the past never came close to such a casualty number.


Rev.

[Grand Moff Tim]

Originally Posted by dragonblade629

Statistical analysis could give them an approximation. They could at least tell us how many have actually been taken down, maybe even a body count/capture count.

That seems like an odd way to measure the success of preemptive defense. Do you judge the effectiveness of bug spray based on how many bugs it killed, or how many bug bites you got?

[Hollowway]

Holy crap, I can't believe someone just called a soldier an asshole for saying he's fighting for our right to live in this country freely. I voted in the last election and I'm damn sure if I didn't vote the outcome would not have changed. But I voted because I'm doing my part to make this a better country. Do you doubt that? Tonight I ate peas for dinner because I am trying to be healthier. Are you going to call me an asshole because I think my dinner is going to make me live longer? Look at the big picture man. And if that doesn't help, consider that the US military is not likely going to give you evidence of what they're working on. You pissed because you didn't get a phone call before Bin Laden was taken out?

[Hemi-Powered Drone]

Originally Posted by Hollowway

Holy crap, I can't believe someone just called a soldier an asshole for saying he's fighting for our right to live in this country freely.

So you're saying that you aren't an asshole if you lie? Yeah, I lie, but I also know I'm an asshole.

Originally Posted by Hollowway

I voted in the last election and I'm damn sure if I didn't vote the outcome would not have changed. But I voted because I'm doing my part to make this a better country. Do you doubt that? Tonight I ate peas for dinner because I am trying to be healthier. Are you going to call me an asshole because I think my dinner is going to make me live longer? Look at the big picture man.

The thing about those situations is that they contribute. Voting contributes to the overall election's decision, eating healthy contributes to a longer life. Assisting the Libyan rebels to overthrow their dictator does not contribute to protecting our rights.


Again, am I missing something? I honestly would love to see how the US is actually being protected from being overthrown. The only protection I see, the preemptive defense stated earlier, is protecting more American citizens from being murdered. There haven't been any acts to overthrow the US government, really, since WWII. Since then the US has just been assistance or an aggressor.

Originally Posted by Hollowway

And if that doesn't help, consider that the US military is not likely going to give you evidence of what they're working on. You pissed because you didn't get a phone call before Bin Laden was taken out?

I would like the military to give me as much information as they can without incriminating anyone. I understand, for example, the military not releasing who was part of the operation to kill Bin Laden. What I don't get, though, is why they can't give us simple, ambiguous statistics like how many terrorist camps they have taken down.

It's not like I'm saying the military has done nothing, I just want clarity.

[Grand Moff Tim]

Originally Posted by dragonblade629

So you're saying that you aren't an asshole if you lie? Yeah, I lie, but I also know I'm an asshole.

If someone says he's defending our rights because that's what he thinks he's doing, whether he actually is or not, is he lying?

[Michael T]

I see the ban list growing out of control.

[Hemi-Powered Drone]

Originally Posted by Grand Moff Tim

If someone says he's defending our rights because that's what he thinks he's doing, whether he actually is or not, is he lying?

If there is proof against it that is easy to access, yes.

I'm going to stop posting in this thread, I don't want to get banned over something this stupid.

[Grand Moff Tim]

Originally Posted by dragonblade629

If there is proof against it that is easy to access, yes.

I'm going to stop posting in this thread, I don't want to get banned over something this stupid.

That's absurd. Lying is being intentionally misleading. What you've been describing is being wrong, not lying.

[groph]

Originally Posted by dragonblade629

Okay, I have to say this. How exactly are you fighting for our rights? There is no threat that those rights will be removed, so I don't know where you get that from. You may say terrorists but it really would be impossible for them to do that. They have no means in which to remove our governments legitimacy, and it's not like they could destroy it. Al Qaeda's tactics are a farce, "Let's kill soldiers and innocent people! That'll sure take down their government!" and half the time they're reducing their own numbers in the process, or killing people that aren't their enemies.

Sorry for going off topic, but it's things like that I have a problem with. Anyway, like I said before, he has the right to say it, and you can't deny him that right, no matter how much of a dumbass he is.

As far as rights being removed, it's not the "terrorists," its your own government stepping up security and interfering more and more with your private business in the name of national security.

A terrorist organization like Al Qaeda doesn't need to dismantle Western governments, they need to create instability and fear, or terror. They also don't need to defeat the US Army in a final grand battle. They simply can't, so they'll fight an asymmetrical war and beat the US Army through attrition. The Soviets against the Afghani Mujahideen ended that way as far as I know. The Soviets pulled out because their casualties were just getting too high (they weren't that high, even) and you'd figure eventually America will withdraw once the body count gets high enough. Popular opinion seems to suggest there's a desire for that to happen, same deal with Vietnam. The US got their asses handed to them by a smaller, far less technologically advanced force. The VC knew the land and they mastered guerilla tactics. "Insurgents" and "terrorists" (I'm using quotations because I don't necessarily subscribe to the notion that everybody resisting US military occupation are what you hear they are, IE religious extremists who hate our very way of life and want to see a Muslim flag over the White House. Not trying to spare the feelings of such people either, I just go to a liberal arts university so I literally can't help it..) know the villages, language, the land, everything. They're resourceful and effective in the face of the technological monstrosity that is the US military and they've racked up quite a killcount while it SEEMS that we have no bleeding clue how much their numbers are dwindling. According to Wikileaks, 60-90% of Iraqi deaths are civilians (Wikipedia, not bothering with a scholarly research job here). Not trying to imply that the US Army are a bunch of genocidal murderers as so many love to say, but the situation regarding "who is dead and who isn't" is really cloudy.

Anyway, getting back on track, "terrorists" don't need to kill every last US soldier to win the war, they just need to wear them down so the US State decides the cost to benefit is no longer in their favor, that's how attrition works, at least. Things will start to look shady when the bodycount gets REALLY high and the US stays there regardless. And the terrorists won't strip our rights, our own governments will while the people sit on their asses bitching about how much of a blowhole Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh or Wolf Blitzer or whoever the .... else are and not doing a goddamn thing to exercise something called "democracy" or real social resistance. Nobody cares enough to educate themselves and do something, and that could very well be the downfall of freedom.

As for me, I won't automatically support the mission just because it's our military and our military is awesome, but I am sympathetic to people who are having bullets whiz by their heads and are losing friends. This leaves room for the enemy, and I feel uncomfortable being sympathetic to somebody who would actually want to kill me, so I'm not, but I don't know who wants to kill me and I sure as .... don't trust the mainstream news.

[the fuhrer]

I would have never known about this if it wasn't for this thread. Who cares what some retard thinks. I hear at least 27 idiot's point of view in my daily life. I don't need another.

[jkguitar]

Originally Posted by Rev2010

So you don't see destroying terrorist cells and training camps as preemptive defense?? It's preventing further loss of thousands of lives in terrorist attacks.


Rev.

No need to try to explain or even respond... This guys an idiot...

[Rev2010]

Originally Posted by jkguitar

No need to try to explain or even respond... This guys an idiot...

You saying *I'm* an idiot or someone else? If you're referring to me please say how I'm an idiot exactly, I haven't said anything outlandish.


Rev.

[DrakkarTyrannis]

How the .... did a misinformed thread about a rapper's vague sentence become a misinformed thread about what the military really does. Do you people see why threads get closed now? Did any of you stop and think "hey..this might derail it, I should take this to private messages"?

[JJ Rodriguez]

I think anyone should have the right to say any god damn thing they want, but I also think if someone says something completely out of line, we should have the right to punch them square in the ....ing dick.

Sure, you have the right to say anything, but everything has consequences.

[that short guy]

Originally Posted by dragonblade629

If there is proof against it that is easy to access, yes.

I'm going to stop posting in this thread, I don't want to get banned over something this stupid.

I'm a soldier, just like the guy that started this thread, and i'm not gonna get in to this with anyone. but i will put this wanting proof thing to rest. Bottom line what we do isn't fun, easy or even something i'd want anyone else to have to do. but we live by a simple rule, If the general population knows what we've done-we failed.

wes

[Explorer]

I've been thinking about the questions, "How do you prove what is prevented by having the military respond? How does it preserve anyone's rights?"

Second firstly: If you're dead, then your right to life without it being wrongfully taken has been violated. That's a cornerstone of US law.

Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda had been trying for years to destroy the World Trade Center. On one occasion, their plan succeeded. That means that all those other occasions where the plan was thwarted, those lives were saved.

Now extend that out, and disprove that those other terrorist cells were not going to kill just as many people. Let us know exactly how many incidents wouldn't have happened even if those groups hadn't been stopped.

Personally, I like the idea that one doesn't believe leaving one's front door open isn't an invitation to crime. "I don't believe security protects my right to life and property. Prove I'm wrong!" I'd rather see someone prove the opposite, and walk into those areas where people are known to be hostile without getting harmed.

Well, known to be hostile to everyone but the person who doesn't believe they are. What a great way to put their money where their mouth is, don't you think?

And that's what the US soldier does every day.

Which one do you think is more dishonest? The one putting themselves on the line, or the one posting from the safety of home... safety provided by the ones putting themselves on the line?

[K3V1N SHR3DZ]

Originally Posted by Rev2010

Either way, I find it sad that you'd rip into the guy when he's the one following orders daily, not seeing his family from across the other side of the world, etc. Maybe he's frustrated at how his sacrifices are not appreciated. Either way I wouldn't blame him or call him names for the governments actions. Not cool. Rev.

Last time I checked, there isn't a draft. Those people Volunteer to serve.

Those guys sign up for lots of different reasons, some noble but misguided (brainwashed bastards), some economic (poor bastards), some rather repugnant (sick bastards). Just because he wears a uniform doesn't entitle him to my fawning praise and allegiance. It DOES entitle him to lots of other things like what's in the GI bill It does entitle most of them to my sympathy because, no matter how misguided their choice, they get thoroughly ....ed by our system before, during, and after their enlistments are up.

Regardless of what soldiers THINK they're fighting for, they are fighting so some rich bastard can make a lot of money.
As for defending your rights and freedom: We haven't been in that type of war since 1945. During our lifetime, the ACLU (and, occasionally, the Supreme Court) have done more to defend our rights than soldiers.
As for fighting religious extremists: considering the Air Force's track record with Christo-Fascist Fundamentalists in its training academies, the US military should be concentrating a little more locally. The Religious Right (particulalry the Dominionists) is a greater threat to America than Al Queda.