Anti American sentiment

Post Reply New Topic

Soldiers are not objective witnesses. If any soldiers were then we wouldnt have every side blaming the other in every war and there would be no need for war crimes trials. They also dont get much time to look into the politics of it all or make polls over public opinion. You join the army as a career then you have took a side right away and do as your told without any moral stances. They are trained to take orders and be killing machines, too much objectiveness will get them killed or at least lose their careers.

I'm saying that if liberal factions in the US were not moved to action in the 1960's as a result of the stiffling conservative conformity of the 1950's, we would still have PCB's being dumped into rivers, the Cuyahoga river would still be burning. We would still be having incidents like those that happened in Donora Pennsylvania.

I thought that was probably what you meant but wasnt sure.

This just is not a free country when it as easy as it is to set freedoms aside.

I just have a few questions for all the left wingers in the topic, based on what I've been seeing so far.

Do you differentiate between Iraqi civilians and insurgents? If you don't, please explain why the Iraqis target themselves so often when they're in theory fighting the Coalition?

Do you consider them insurgents, or "freedom fighters"?

Do you differentiate between civilian deaths caused by the US and allied troops, and by the insurgents? Because if you do, I'd like to see you explain how a suicide bomber from Saudi Arabia setting himself off in front of a Mosque during Ramadan and killing over 100 people, counts as "murders by the coalition".

I'm still new to the forums and hesitant to start shooting my mouth off, but some of the stuff I'm reading here is pretty insane... do you really think that if the US just leaves, that the insurgency will disappear? Do you want to see the insurgents succeed in installing a fundamentalist theocracy like they have in Iran, with thought control, public floggings and stoning women for the sin of getting raped?

Stoning is officially banned in Iran, although it may still happen in remote areas.

Its asymettrical warfare, so i just see them as soldiers.
Islamic revolutionaries certainly arnt freedom fighters, neither are the US, as a brief scan of their resume will show;

US Interventions 1945 - 1999

There is no moral equivalency between Iraqi civilians who have died at the hand of coalition forces, and Iraqi civilians and coalition military personnel who have died at the hand of the insurgents. Iraqi civilian deaths are a tragic by-product of what is known as the "double effect" rule of the just war place--being in the wrong place at the wrong time. These deaths were a result of errors, mistakes, accidents, and miscalculations. The aim of the coalition forces is to eliminate Saddam's regime first and then help establish democracy in Iraq, not to indiscriminately kill Iraqi civilians. This is because military commanders are fallible human beings. The deaths at the hands of the insurgents are the result of purposeful action to thwart democracy and re-establish totalitarian rule in Iraq. There is no moral equivalency between the two. Of course, the loss of human life is tragic under any circumstances, but it is necessary to look at the context.

I will continue to defend the U.S. action in Iraq even if there are no WMDs in Iraq, because Saddam killed about 1.3 million of his own citizens, a portion of them with WMDs, started wars against two of his neighbors (Iran and Kuwait), threatened Israel with destruction, harbored some of the most notorious terrorists in the world (including members of al-Qaeda). War is tragic, but Saddam's regime was also a tragedy. It is also necessary to look at Operation Iraqi Freedom in the context of the war on terror. This is not imperialism--the U.S. does not want to rule Iraq. This is removal of a threat to world peace.

Thank you McJeff, and glad to have you around

My simple answer would be;
It should be none of our business. WMD is now an admitted lie

Its about oil. what a crazy summer it had been for oil, nice record setting prices. They gotta meet their bottom line, or rip off the consumer to the fullest degree, while they still got Gee Dub in their pocket.

We have no business dictating (dictatorship) to other countries until we can pull ourselves together as a Nation. Why should innocent young Americans be forced to die for greed.
I would be interrested to know what the greater good is, with us being in Iraq and all..

Put yourself in the shoes of an Iraqi. If a "friendly" american bombing campaign wiped out half of your family and you went to war with then would you see yourself as a terrorist? The US administration is to blame for the deaths because it is them and their allies that have started this unjust war.

We know Saddam was responsible for a lot of killings and over 1 million people died in Iraq'a war with Iran but dont you remeber that Iraq had British and American backing at the time of nearly all his evil deeds including that war? Why bring up how evil he is when he was doing the evil deeds they were propping him and his government up with weapons including of the chemical variety?

No doubt most of the civillians killed by the US army were accidental but the war wasnt and when you have a lot of testosterone filled young men in danger im sure they let off their weapons in a panic when there was no attack on them. I never said i thought the US should pull out now. To do so once they have already stirred the pot in the region would make them look weak and the situation would become worse again. All i was pointing out is i thought the war was unjustly started.

*waits for civil war to occur either following Bush's retreat or US forces staying in Iraq too long*

That's one of the main reasons Bush hasn't pulled out isn't it? Civil war would look bad.

There is a civil war (with foreign troops involved too) but the US administration wont admit it as they want us to believe that a tiny minority of outcast bandits are killing all the Iraq citizens and US soldiers. If that was to be believed then the US would probably only have lost a handful of soldiers down to the insurgents, (Britain would have lost only a handful too but that would have been the inevitable "friendly fire" incident that happens during every gulf war) and Bush and co would not be under the pressure to pull out that they are now. The reason why they are fighting each other is because of the civil war between the different factions. Id also like to point out that im not left wing in all my views, depends on every situation.

i remember the constant updates on the news.

How they would highlight the maps to the sections of iraq that we were in control of. The rapid speed by which we would dominate.

then we would learn about the death toll. We would have killed a bazillion of the enemy, whil only 38 Americans would have been killed. Of those 38 37 were from friendly fire. SPIN?

what about that heartfelt story of the female soldier rescued by Rainbow Six forces. All neat and tidy, until she refused to be a pawn in the SPIN game.

The current SPIN is what?

non SPIN!

Out of sight out of mind.

While we steal all the oil we can for the next 2 years and 10 months. OIL that my tax dollars spent to acquire. OIL hich is being sold back to us at a premium. OIL rich texans, who by their elite status, don't even have to pay taxes.

Hmmmm.

I wonder.

Im not entirely sure that the allies had planned for after the conventional war. Of course with their superior weapons and organisation they were going to take over most of the country easily. Keeping hold of it while avoiding substansial losses is proving to be a lot more difficult.

Sounds like you've just described your wife. That is also roughly my favourite type of woman (at the moment, it sometimes changes) but i probably prefer jet black to brown but obviously it depends on the individual.

Waddaya lookin at my wifes boobs?