A victory for terrorists?

[kallend 1,672]

Quote

Quote

So, in light of the recent bombing in Madrid which killed 200 and injured 1,500, Spain is threatening to withdraw its 1,300 troops from Iraq in June unless the UN takes control of the country. The prime minister-elect described Spain's participation in the war as a "total error".

PUSSY

He's not alone.

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63816-2004Mar16.html

"U.S. Credibility Hurt, Survey Finds"

www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationworld/iraq/bal-te.pew17mar17,0,4247486.story?coll=bal-news-nation

"U.S. sinking in the eyes of the world, poll shows"

www.dw-world.de/english/0,3367,1433_A_1145476_1_A,00.html
"Poll: America Losing Its Credibility"

people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=206
"Mistrust of America in Europe Ever Higher, Muslim Anger Persists"

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DJL 232]

Quote

The U.S. soldiers signed up for this kind of thing, people strolling through a mall in Cleveland didn't.

Whoa...where to begin...well, the line between Iraq and Al Queda seems to have been completely elimated...

Are you saying that it is OK that soldiers are being killed? Nevermind, that this thread is linked to an attack against civilians, your metaphorical Cleveland mall-goers...

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Are you saying that it is OK that soldiers are being killed?

Not at all. What I'm saying is that I would prefer that the people who signed up to fight this battle fight this battle somewhere besides here, and keep it somewhere besides here. The soldiers signed up for this kind of thing, civilians didn't. We owe them a lot, really.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[DJL 232]

Ok, ok...I thought there was some sentiment of "they're getting what they signed up for"...so it's no big deal.

cool,

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[newsstand 0]

I think if you did a survey you would find that most military members signed up to get a paycheck and/or for money for college. Some to serve their country or because it is a family tradition. Some even to defend their country. I doubt any signed up to go sleep in the sand in Iraq or Afghanistan. In particular the reservists will fall in to the category of "what the hell am I doing here?"

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

I think if you did a survey you would find that most military members signed up to get a paycheck and/or for money for college.

To get that money for college and/or paycheck, they ALL agreed to fight for, and defend, the United States of America. The benefits aren't free, I can't imagine that any of them didn't know that.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[Dagny 0]

Quote

I doubt any signed up to go sleep in the sand in Iraq or Afghanistan. In particular the reservists will fall in to the category of "what the hell am I doing here?"

Perhaps, they will, but should they? The military serves a purpose and that purpose isn't hidden. You can't get something for nothing...a paycheck, money for college, or freedom. Now, I'm not saying that military personnel have to unilaterally agree with the views of the government or even with their tours of duty, but they do have an obligation to fulfill the oath they made when they enlisted.

Here's something interesting I read about a staff seargent and reservist who served from april to october in Iraq and has gone AWOL after a two-week return home. He is refusing to return to Iraq, states that it is a war for oil, that he is opposed to war, and is claiming conscientious objector status.

Quote

SAVANNAH, Ga. -- A soldier who says he refused to report to duty because he opposes the war in Iraq will be assigned regular duties while commanders decide whether to prosecute him for a five-month absence, a Fort Stewart official said Wednesday.

The Army has no immediate plans to charge or arrest Staff Sgt. Camilo Mejia when he returns to the post, said Maj. Robert Resnick, chief of military justice at Fort Stewart.

"He's not going to be singled out for any different type of treatment," Resnick said.

Mejia, 28, a Florida National Guardsman, is seeking conscientious objector status. On Tuesday, a Florida Guard spokesman said Mejia has been classified as a deserter.

If Mejia is charged with desertion, he could get up to five years in prison.

Mejia, 28, served in Iraq last year but failed to return from a two-week leave in October. He surrendered Monday, and was given a 3 p.m. deadline Wednesday to report for duty at Fort Stewart.

His attorney, Louis Font, said Mejia would report by Wednesday's deadline.

Mejia said he witnessed civilian deaths in Iraq and would rather go to prison than return there. "The justification for this war is money and no soldier should go to Iraq and give his life for oil," Mejia told reporters.

He is facing criminal prosecution and I completely support that. You make decisions in your life, you make commitments and it's vital that you follow through on them. The military can be a great career and provide a great life, but it's not just meant to support Americans only during times of peace. There are other career options which don't require the same obligations.

Take me, I am the drug; take me, I am hallucinogenic.
-Salvador Dali

[kallend 1,672]

Quote

Quote

I think if you did a survey you would find that most military members signed up to get a paycheck and/or for money for college.

To get that money for college and/or paycheck, they ALL agreed to fight for, and defend, the United States of America. The benefits aren't free, I can't imagine that any of them didn't know that.

-
Jim

Trouble is, the USA apparently didn't need defending from Iraq. All the claims about their capabilities to attack the USA turned out to be FALSE.

What the USA needed was a focused fight against terrorism. The fiasco* in Iraq just diverted attention away from that and lost the support and goodwill of most of our allies (see links in a previous post).

*according to Spain's newly elected leader.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Dagny 0]

But, it comes down to this, don't you think?

Quote

they ALL agreed to fight for...the United States of America

Take me, I am the drug; take me, I am hallucinogenic.
-Salvador Dali

[jakee 1,271]

Quote

I think if you did a survey you would find that most military members signed up to get a paycheck and/or for money for college. Some to serve their country or because it is a family tradition. Some even to defend their country. I doubt any signed up to go sleep in the sand in Iraq or Afghanistan. In particular the reservists will fall in to the category of "what the hell am I doing here?"

Don't insult their intelligence. Iraq is not the first time that US or European soldiers have been put in war zones that pose no threat to US or European interests. I couldn't even count how many other countries western troops are deployed in right now.
Anyone currently in Iraq or Afghanistan KNEW when they signed up that this not only could happen but most likely would happen, they just didn't know what country.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kallend 1,672]

Quote

But, it comes down to this, don't you think?

Quote

they ALL agreed to fight for...the United States of America

My son is in the Army (sergeant, infantry) so I'm well aware of that. What is in dispute is the value of the action in Iraq compared with fighting actual terrorists who do threaten the USA and its allies.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

What is in dispute is the value of the action in Iraq compared with fighting actual terrorists who do threaten the USA and its allies.

What is in dispute, or what was in disupute. I don't think that anyone would disagree that Al Queda is not currently in Iraq. I also don't think that anyone would disagree that even before the war that Iraq did indeed sponsor terrorism. Maybe not directly against the United States, but certainly against her allies.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[newsstand 0]

Quote

Quote

I think if you did a survey you would find that most military members signed up to get a paycheck and/or for money for college.

To get that money for college and/or paycheck, they ALL agreed to fight for, and defend, the United States of America. The benefits aren't free, I can't imagine that any of them didn't know that.

I never said they didn't agree to it or know what it meant. Just that most of them who signed up more than two years ago probably never thought it would really happen. They saw the neat commercials about "Be All You Can Be" or "An Army of One.", heard about the cash, looked at the economy and said "Sounds like a good deal to me."

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[newsstand 0]

Quote

... but they do have an obligation to fulfill the oath they made when they enlisted.

Here's something interesting I read about a staff seargent and reservist who served from april to october in Iraq and has gone AWOL after a two-week return home. He is refusing to return to Iraq, states that it is a war for oil, that he is opposed to war, and is claiming conscientious objector status. ...

He absolutely should go to jail. I was in the reserves during GW-I. Fortunately my unit did not get activated. Had it I would have gone even though I was opposed to that action because I made the commitment to serve my country. However as soon as it was over I reasigned and stated in my resignation letter that I was resigning because I did not agree with my governments position.

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[newsstand 0]

Quote

Don't insult their intelligence.

Since I once was one I won't although I think I have a pretty good idea of the relative intelligence levels.

This has nothing to do with intelligence it has to do with how 18 year old boys think, or more often, don't think. Yes I know there are women in the military and I would venture to say they have a better grasp of what they were getting in to than most of their male counterparts.

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[billvon 2,463]

>I also don't think that anyone would disagree that even before the
>war that Iraq did indeed sponsor terrorism. Maybe not directly
>against the United States, but certainly against her allies.

So did we. We turned a bunch of disorganized Islamic terrorists into the Mujahideen, a massive terrorist organization that gave rise to Al Qaeda. Heck, we sponsored _Hussein._

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

>I also don't think that anyone would disagree that even before the
>war that Iraq did indeed sponsor terrorism. Maybe not directly
>against the United States, but certainly against her allies.

So did we. We turned a bunch of disorganized Islamic terrorists into the Mujahideen, a massive terrorist organization that gave rise to Al Qaeda. Heck, we sponsored _Hussein._

Yes we did. However, this conversation is (was) about fighting for, or defending the United States and her allies, and whether or not there were/are terrorists in Iraq.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

>I also don't think that anyone would disagree that even before the
>war that Iraq did indeed sponsor terrorism. Maybe not directly
>against the United States, but certainly against her allies.

So did we. We turned a bunch of disorganized Islamic terrorists into the Mujahideen, a massive terrorist organization that gave rise to Al Qaeda. Heck, we sponsored _Hussein._

That is such a convenient "arm chair" rebuttal. Was anyone, in the 1980s, against the idea of supporting Iraq against Iran after what we had been through (up to the point when Hussein completely short-circuited and used his WMDs)? I don't know anyone. Our priorities at the time were different.

Was anyone against our participation in helping the Mujahideen (via Saudi Arabia and Pakistan BTW) fight against the Soviet Union? That's also a key factor, bin Laden himself is quoted as never knowing that the training and materiel support he was getting from Pakistan was hot off the docks of American planes and ships. Our backing, while known, was not 100% overt. Our priorities at the time were different.

In the grand scheme, if Spain withdraws its active participation in Iraq, they will have bowed to the terrorists 100%. The Terrorists will have effectively altered the political and sovereign right of a whole country to shy away at the fundamentalists that will not be satisfied by this anyway.

If anyone in here is from Spain, don't tuck and run, stand and hold your ground. If you think withdrawing from the coalition is going to make a rats-ass of a difference, I fear that you will invite only more misery upon yourselves and those that you would hope to have "cordial" relations with.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

Our priorities were different

Bin Laden's were not.
While it's debatable whether or not the US's support for the terrorists errr.. freedom fighters in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation was justifiable, the question that really needs to be asked is whether the US's support for the Saudi regime is justifiable. These guys are a medieval theocratic absolute monarchy. These guys are nuts. They officially support a brand of Islam that makes Iran look positively enlightened. When you add to that that the absurd wealth that comes to that country never sees the street, it's no coincidence that a high proportion of the the terrorists in AQ are Saudi. But the US considers them friends. For this there is no justification.