Is Anti-War the same as Anti-Troops?

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Batz
6 years on Submarine.  Why do wanna know?

And does it make any difference in regards to my opinions?

Just trying to understand your perspective... don't take it personal.

[Toad]

Each time of the very few times that situation arose. And there were a few. Each time I was either briefed and/or shown documentation that convinced me there was no problem with the order.

I think the troops know that in October of 2002, the Congress authorized Bush to use military force against Iraq if diplomacy failed. I'm sure that was part of their mission brief at some point. So, I'm pretty sure most normal folks in the chain of command have no doubt about the legality of the order to use military force in Iraq. After all, Congress authorized Bush to use force. End of story.

Yes, we can certainly ask if it is right.

Note that the Congress, the representatives of the people, seem to have no doubt. Have you seen any Representative or Senator put a motion on the floor to stop the Iraq action or to impeach the President or in any way push for a vote indicating Congress does not support this action?

I have not.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Toad
Note that the Congress, the representatives of the people, seem to have no doubt. Have you seen any Representative or Senator put a motion on the floor to stop the Iraq action or to impeach the President or in any way push for a vote indicating Congress does not support this action?

I have not.

I haven't either, but I've seen a few that are turning this into what appears to be a campaign platform.

[Saurdaukar]

Theres a natural order to protesting.  The Anti-Troops crowd thinks the Anti-War crowd are a bunch of studmuffins.

[Batz]

I am not wrong sholz if you place your moral comopess to what ever direction 14 guys on the UN think you infact have no morality. The UN is not the world government its voluntary organization and the authority it has comes from those Nations who voluntarily comply with its descisions.

No Nation is bound by what it decides and the only means it has for enforcing its descisions comes from just a few Nations.

If you defer your own judgement to a group who only are looking after their own self interests then you deserve what you get.

No offense taken Sandman.

But trust me each one of the Crew members on the Sub I was on was drilled on what lawfull orders are and when they should be questioned. But that wasnt my point.

I would expect your definition of "support" is the same as Dowdings

Wishing they don't come to harm? Hoping they don't get maimed, executed, tortured, burnt to death? Hoping they all come home?

I dont think that is "support". Support helps keep up morale and helps reinforce the reason these troops are sacrificing the way they are.

You may have a personal steak seeing your country men not killed, maimed, or tortured but I dont think thats the same as support.

I dont think it makes one any less a patriot but to me it seems a bit wishy washy to say.

"I dont support the war, but I sure support the troops."

[Sandman]

Well... if support is narrowly defined as making the troops feel good about where they are and what they're doing, the best that I can offer is that I don't hold any of them personally responsible and that I hope they all return safely.

It's not as much as you want, Batz, but I think it's a far sight more than spitting on them and calling them "baby killers."


I listened to some interviews of injured soldiers that had been transferred to Rammstein. When asked about why they are there in Iraq, it's strange just how naive and childish their answers sounded. The politics and the arguments surrounding the war and Bush's motivations are irrelevant to the troops there on the field in the war zone. They just want to survive. They want to get the job done and get home. The ones that were injured expressed regret that they could not be in the field, helping their friends, not regret that they couldn't do their part to liberate Iraq. Their emotions seem far more basic than that.

[Sandman]

[Batz]

Sholz I am not going argue with you.

You can defer to the un for a moral compess the rest of us will make up our own minds.

I and a good number in the US see no reason for a UN as its now designed. Its a useless organization, even its humanitarian programs can be run more efficiently through private organizations.

The UN hasnt brought peace, ended war, or brought freedom and security to anyone. Its an organization where irrelevent Nations can feel important. Its no more effective then the League of Nations was.

The UN means nothing outside of that.

Support after 9/11 really didnt mean much out side of the "show". We still had thousands of dead. We didnt need the world to go into afghanistan just like we dont in Iraq. We would have went into afghanistan without the UN just like we did in Iraq and Kosovo.

The Russians dont defer to the UN to solve their problems with  the Chechens, the French didnt wait on the UN to go into Africa. The Chinese didnt listen to the UN when they went into Tibet. I can go on and on. Whatever legitmacy the UN had came from very few Nations like the US UK etc.....

I don't hold any of them personally responsible

Well thats a relief, I guess........

[midnight Target]

Originally posted by Nash
I think it's perfectly reasonable to have been AGAINST the Vietnam War while at the same time NOT spitting on the soldiers.

Do you have to immediately agree with the policy the minute that troops are sent over to become instruments of it? Because the logical extension of that is that all one has to do to legitimize their policy is send in the troops.

"I think going to war would be a mistake Mr. President because.... oops.... I see you sent in the troops.... seems like a great idea to me God bless and Godspeed".

What's the point of the very American expression of dissent if all one has to do to quell it is to ignore it?

well typed sir.

[Batz]

I am not gonna fumble through that wall of text. Use some spaces.

Norway didnt solve anything in the Balkans. So as much as you claim Norway was against Milosevic's regime you were certainly incapable of doing anything about it. The UN certainly would not have rallied  around Norway to do anything. You may think thats "belittling" but thats reality.

The UN has brought no peace, hasnt stopped any war or freed any people. It hasnt solved world hunger, aids or any of the like.

The UN has no place because it is like any other "democratic" (not that they are elected but in how the un vote system is structured)body around the world. Split into factions and along partisan lines so that "majority" descisions are rare. Couple that with a self defeating rules system that allows nothing but a log jam.

The UN isnt "elected" by the world to solves its problems. The UN is worthless. You may want it to be more but it isnt.

The US can form its own alliances and organizations with those Nations that share mutual interests. This is already true. Search for the various regional organizations from Africa to Europe to the Americas the far and mid east.

The UN needs us more then we need it. You cant say the same for Norway. As well intentioned and altruistic as you make Norway out to be Norway on its own would be irrelevant in world affars. Thats why you and other members of irrelevant Nations cling to this idea that the World needs a UN.

We (the US) dont need it. It hasnt provided onething to the benefit of the US.

The idea that the UN is a place for the Nations of the world to debate is BS. Most of the talking between Nations goes on outside the scope of the UN. Even in gulf 1 Bush Sr. put together his coalition not by begging before the UN but through individual dealings with each Nation involved. As a result he swayed the UN. But the UN wasnt any more relevant then as it is now

If Norway or you defer your idea of what right and wrong on how a body like the UN security council votes then you and either blind or naive.

The UN is not the "world government" and we arent obligated by it descisions.

Theres a reason the US spends so much on defense, theres a reason we engage other nations economically and politically. Thats to preserve US interests.

You are from Norway so we can expect you not to understand what that means but I doudt the US will ever defer its political or military descision to the UN.

Not ever.

So you can hold onto to this candyland "we are the world" bs all you want. That means as much to me as Norway's opposition to Milosevic's regime meant to Albanians/Muslims in Serbia.

This has been covered in numerous other threads. For any further discussions you can search for those threads.

[Dowding]

Well said, GScholz, well said. I just watched that same piece on the news here and reached the same conclusion. I tried at first to persuade myself that they are nervous of the camera, but the more I looked at that woman's face the more I realised that that simply isn't the case. It was shame, pure and simple. Desperation had brought them to seek help for their kid.

We've sent our troops into a ****-storm of epic proportions from which we can't afford to back out. We can't afford to lose. And there's already rumblings that it might widen to include Iran and Syria in some kind of insurgent conflict.

I really hope for a speedy victory, I really do. The longer this goes on, the more accidental civilian deaths that inflame the Arab world, the more seeds we sow to be reaped in future years.

Here's hoping it all works out in the end.

[Hangtime]

I know it is difficult to understand these people, but they are not like you and me. They don't have the same culture and upbringing as you and me. Their understanding of concepts like freedom, liberty and democracy are not like ours.

Yer gawdamned right. and it's why were taking out that murdering savage that was in power, and it's why when we leave that disgusting camel turd heap the most dangerous thing those folks will have in their military will be a piper cub and a case of raid bugspray. not unlike we left japan and germany, 50 years ago.

next we're gonna settle koreas hash.

like batz sez.. the hell with the UN debating club.

1/3 of this planets nations behave like kindergarden brats. so we'll deal with 'em like they ARE kindergarden brats.

we're gettin the word out.. if yer potentate toymaker decides to rattle their nasty toys at america, america will be around soon enough to take the toys away and install a rational babysitter.

if europe don't love us anymore.. boo hoo. if ANYONE decides to threaten us.. they are gonna get spanked.

time for the world to get it's diaper changed. the sooner the lil miserable shiits of this world get potty trained, the better.

get this europe and the 'world'.. we don't need your love, or your respect. we require peace.. and freedom from threats against our security.

make it plain you intend to harm us, threaten us.. we're gonna act. no more sittin on our butts waiting for the next planeload of citizens to be hijacked and slaughtered. no waiting for some murdering dune coon to figure out how he's gonna subvert his nation and it's resources to harm us. now it's time to 'pre-empt' the regularly scheduled terrorist attacks with a lil regime changing and map re-drawing.

don't bother flamin me.. myself and about 700 million americans have heard it all before.

'wanh wanh wanh'.

take a nap, learn to deal with it.

[Toad]

You know, I truly was against this war without UN sanction. I wrote and called my Reps, knowing it wouldn't make a difference. Did it anyway.

Longterm, I believe this will hurt us more than help us. I do.

In my heart, I feel it IS a mistake even if we were to take massive homeland casualties later on from an Iraqi supplied WMD. That would perhaps at least provide the clear link and "wake up call" we seem to need.




Now that we're "in it", though I do feel that we have to "win it". If for no other reason than the message that a pull out would send to the other dictatorial WMD oriented leaders out there. We grabbed this tarbaby with both hands, so now we've GOT to win through.

But I did not wish for this; my heart goes out to all those who have and will lose their loved ones..... on both sides of this..... in this conflict.




All that being said............

Some of what Hang said still resonates deeply for some reason. There's something there that calls out to me.

I'm staring deep into my own navel, but there's almost a feeling of inevitability. The arrival of Armageddon, in the sense of the final battle between right and wrong.

Because while some of you are not, I am also convinced that a person like Saddam, who will use means and the methods he has used to rule, to slaughter and to conquer, needs to be killed and removed from his seat of power. I can say the same about Kim Jong Il without a crease in my brow. There are others. Mugabe springs to mind.

So, does Syria want a piece of this? Does it want finally the determination of Armageddon? Iran too? Anyone else? Come forward!

Fine. So be it. Part of me says "bring it". Let's get this over with so that the world can either go forward into light or descend into the darkness of dictatorship.

As I said, I don't fully understand why lately this feeling has been staying with me. I know that I would volunteer once again and probably be told I was too old, again.

I suspect that it is the continual TV bombardment of US boys in uniform being shot at in a foreign country because they came to remove a mass murderer from power.

Yeah, I know the rest of the world doesn't see it that way. But that isn't resonating right now.

There ya go. My bare soul. Enjoy.

[Dowding]

The arrival of Armageddon, in the sense of the final battle between right and wrong.

Because while some of you are not, I am also convinced that a person like Saddam, who will use means and the methods he has used to rule, to slaughter and to conquer, needs to be killed and removed from his seat of power. I can say the same about Kim Jong Il without a crease in my brow. There are others. Mugabe springs to mind.

So, does Syria want a piece of this? Does it want finally the determination of Armageddon? Iran too? Anyone else? Come forward!

Fine. So be it. Part of me says "bring it". Let's get this over with so that the world can either go forward into light or descend into the darkness of dictatorship.

As I said, I don't fully understand why lately this feeling has been staying with me. I know that I would volunteer once again and probably be told I was too old, again.

I suspect that it is the continual TV bombardment of US boys in uniform being shot at in a foreign country because they came to remove a mass murderer from power.

Yeah, I know the rest of the world doesn't see it that way. But that isn't resonating right now.

There ya go. My bare soul. Enjoy.

You know, these have been my exact same feelings in the last few days. As I've watched the news and see it all unfold in technicolour, I've felt like I'm staring over the edge of a precipice. I know that sounds melodramatic and hysterical - but that's been my gut reaction.

I was talking to my dad today about the war. I said to him that I had a bad feeling about it, and he just smiled and said it would all work out in the end. I tried to explain what I meant, but couldn't really put it into words.

As I looked at the pictures of American servicemen and women on TV last weekend, the way they pushed a mic into the face of that wounded guy, all I could say was '****ing Savages'.

When I saw the pictures of the two dead British Army sappers, I couldn't put the anger I felt into words. There was nothing but fury.

Today, I was watching some rally in Egypt and they interviewed some of the people there. The stuff they spouted was just utter crap - one guy, an accountant, no less was trying to say that Coalition forces were dragging people out of their houses in the night and shooting them. How can we 'win' when people have such ignorance in their heads?

I'm not sure we can.

But hey, I'm going a university reunion tomorrow. And for sure there will be a toast for the two guys out in the Gulf right now, who won't be able to make it.

[bowser]

"...anti-war sentiment and protest emboldens saddams regime and lengthens the war. this costs troops lives. since we are THERE and we ain't leaving till the regime is replaced, should we not then cease anti-war activisim and instead provide a united front against saddam?...".

Let me say up front that I do support this war since I believe the WMD are there (god help us if they aren't found).

Having said that I must disagree with the above statement.  What about the demonstrations against the Vietnam War?...were they out of line also?  Not saying it's the case here, but there were and will be in the future unjust wars that may be prevented or stopped by anti-war activism.  To deny the right to anti-war activism is to believe all wars your government participates in are just...which is very naive.

And yes, I believe you can wholeheartedly support the troops, hoping the war is over quickly and everybody returns safely, without supporting the war itself.  Don't see any conflict there.

bowser