NationStates Jolt Archive

"Some"? I'd personally have to agree with that. Considering what little I get from the German media, I assume they'd be much happier to show me dead American soldiers than dead Iraqi civilians, so I'm gonna guess that "some" doesn't quite fit. "Most" would fit better. I have no experience in this, but I believe it would be more fun to shoot at someone that doesn't wear body armor and has a gun than someone that does. I also have a feeling that most of the insurgents that would have disagreed with me are dead.
http://www.lefthook.org/Charts/CSIS.jpg
They aren't targetting civilians- they're targetting troops. We have to remember that.

The poll is badly phrased. While I do not wish to see American soldiers suffer and die, and would very much like to see them all come home safe, the term "support our troops" is a loaded phrase. To "Support our troops" one must also support the immoral, unjustified war they are fighting and the administration with ordered them there.

So... Yes, I support our troops, but no, I do not "Support our troops", if that makes any sense.


I'm with you 100% on that bro

Ok Dobsworld are you french or German?
Irrelevant. But neither, in any event.

Ok Dobsworld are you french or German?
Ahhhh. Nice to seem to jingoism on the boards.

The poll is badly phrased. While I do not wish to see American soldiers suffer and die, and would very much like to see them all come home safe, the term "support our troops" is a loaded phrase. To "Support our troops" one must also support the immoral, unjustified war they are fighting and the administration with ordered them there.

So... Yes, I support our troops, but no, I do not "Support our troops", if that makes any sense.

So... liberating a country of a brutal dictator is "immoral"? Insteresting.... How do you explain that?

Ok Dobsworld are you french or German?

Because clearly one must be French or German to be anti-military. :rolleyes:

There are some American liberals who are anti-military too, you know? Stop being intollerant towards non-Americans, the rest of us don't need the hate you're ingendering in them.

And people wonder why most of the world hates us... :rolleyes:

I don't cheer or spit on them. I pity them, though only slightly.

So... liberating a country of a brutal dictator is "immoral"? Insteresting.... How do you explain that?

So making war upon a sovereign nation with a fallacious justification is moral? News to me. :rolleyes:

I support our "troops" in the sense that they are there as a job, that being to distribute an answer to the violent dictatorship spread about by local "freedom fighters". However I do not support any type of killing of innocents in anyway. My point is simple.

If you have a gun, and your going to use it on a child.

Fry the fooker.

And theres nothing anyone can say to make me change my mind that killing children is wrong.

TERRORISTS SENT BY THE GOVERNMENT!?!?!? What is wrong with you people? Any one not part of the US Coalition shouldn't even speak. I'm really sick of Europeans whining and not contributing to the world (Excluding the UK).I hear a lot of my fellow Americans tell my fellow Europeans not to tell them what to do. I have the feeling you might agree with them. Why should Europeans then do what the US tells them to.
And that's ignoring the blatant overgeneralization you made. Other than the UK, there's Poland, the Czech Republic, Denmark, and the Netherlands in Iraq right now, so please don't say "Europeans". We're quite divided on the issue.

If you people had actually put your foots down (and not backed out *glares at Spain*) We could be out of this right now and Al Quaeda could have been crippled.I have to laugh at this. Especially considering that we're giving Al Qaeda live fire training in a place that had little support for Al Qaeda in the first place. Pakistan is where Al Qaeda is setting up shop. And I seriously doubt that anyone would have been out anywhere anytime soon, no matter who would have helped.

But no. You sit and watch this on the news while you whine about the US. Yes I know our current administration is a bunch of dweebs but you have to support the troops.I don't know about the other governments, but I know that the German one stayed out of it because A) they won the elections because they said they wouldn't, unlike her (http://www.eulenspiegel-zeitschrift.de/Eulenspiegel/Hintergrundbilder/Prakt1024/prakt1024.html), and B) because they thought it would cause a serious mess, which, my gosh, it did.

I kind of resent your last statement in your post. Please don't do something like that again.

So... liberating a country of a brutal dictator is "immoral"? Insteresting.... How do you explain that?
Okay, so say this was a war about liberating people from dictatorships. Why didn't we take out the chinese government? I mean, there's like 1/6 of the world population living under a dictator who you could take out with one swoop. Why take out Saddam? Why was he the worst dictator in the world who absolutely had to be taken out immediately?

http://www.lefthook.org/Charts/CSIS.jpg
They aren't targetting civilians- they're targetting troops. We have to remember that.I'm always sceptical of any sources that look like they might come from either extreme... What is CSIS? If I knew that I might be able to accept it.

I'm always sceptical of any sources that look like they might come from either extreme... What is CSIS? If I knew that I might be able to accept it.

its just a chart which shows who have been targetted by insurgent attacks

The question of whether or not one "supports the troops," as typically asked, is an utterly meaningless one, amounting to what is basically an implied slur against those opposed to the war.

I voted "no" because I do not support aggression and I do not support mass murder, and those who willingly and knowingly participate in crimes against the Iraqi people should be condemned, not "supported," whatever that is supposed to mean. But not all of the soldiers in Iraq are guilty of that; a large portion are either opposed to what they are doing or think it is the right thing.

I neither "support" nor "oppose" the troops in general. They are too diverse a body to do so. I certainly support those troops who are actively attempting to stop the occupation, and I oppose those troops who commit atrocities. I hope for the well-being of all the troops, and for all humanity, and I believe both would be served by an immediate end to the murderous and brutal occupation of Iraq.

I wholeheartedly support the non-violent Iraqi resistance aiming at such a development, though I cannot support the violent actions of those opposed to US domination of their country.

Wrong--
191 Nations said they did not approve--that does not make it Illegal.
Yet US violation of UN Resolution 1441 and the UN Charter does make it illegal.

I dont understand why it so hard for people to grasp this, something not being popular and being Illegal are two different things--I blame MTV.
In the case of Iraq, it is both unpopular and illegal. I blame the Bush administration.

The UN has placed no sanctions, no nation has petitioned the Security Council, no one has done anything but say "We dont like that"--wake up that is not grounds for calling it Illegal.
Actually people affliated with the UN have called it illegal, along with Richard Perle, and a host of International lawyers. As I stated before, this one is a gimme for the US.

So... liberating a country of a brutal dictator is "immoral"? Insteresting.... How do you explain that?Since when was that the reason? Oh, now I remember, after we failed to find WMDs...
I wouldn't exactly consider the Iraqi civilians that much better off, considering that electricity and water supplies have broken down and they've traded oppression by Saddam with fear from standing too close to an American convoy / Iraqi police or military recruitment queue...

I'm always sceptical of any sources that look like they might come from either extreme... What is CSIS? If I knew that I might be able to accept it.
I hope this helps:

Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) (http://www.csis.org/about/index.htm)

For four decades, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has been dedicated to providing world leaders with strategic insights on — and policy solutions to — current and emerging global issues.

CSIS is led by John J. Hamre, formerly deputy secretary of defense, who has been president and CEO since April 2000. It is guided by a board of trustees chaired by former senator Sam Nunn and consisting of prominent individuals from both the public and private sectors.

I support the British troops in the sense that I respect them and their bravery in actually going out and fighting to keep me safe. I don't agree with Iraq completely, but the soldiers are following Orders. I spit at the government, not the troops.

I'm going to apologize for last two posts. They were stupid and unthoughtfull. HOWEVER I think it's pretty pathetic to root for a bunch of guys who resort to killing innocent people and children. I'll just leave it at that. Again I apologize for my last two posts.

I hope this helps:

Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) (http://www.csis.org/about/index.htm)

For four decades, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has been dedicated to providing world leaders with strategic insights on — and policy solutions to — current and emerging global issues.

CSIS is led by John J. Hamre, formerly deputy secretary of defense, who has been president and CEO since April 2000. It is guided by a board of trustees chaired by former senator Sam Nunn and consisting of prominent individuals from both the public and private sectors.
Thankyou :)

I pity the troops having to fight this pointless war.

I wouldn't call it pointless. At the least we took out a tyrant and are giving support to a highly unstable country. You have to give us that much. But as a whole, war was definatly not the sollution.

I'm going to apologize for last two posts. They were stupid and unthoughtfull. HOWEVER I think it's pretty pathetic to root for a bunch of guys who resort to killing innocent people and children. I'll just leave it at that. Again I apologize for my last two posts.


Again, the Majority of insurgents are from Iraq and are targeting coalition troops. The minority are foreign and are targeting civilians. Proof already supplied a couple times in this thread. Noone here supports the targetting of civilians.

I'm going to apologize for last two posts. They were stupid and unthoughtfull. HOWEVER I think it's pretty pathetic to root for a bunch of guys who resort to killing innocent people and children. I'll just leave it at that. Again I apologize for my last two posts.There aren't very many of us "rooting" for a bunch of guys that kill innocent people and children. And if you seriously go by that criteria, then you shouldn't be in favor of the US military either; they've been known to shoot innocents by accident, children included.
And I hope you don't mean that voting "I don't support the Troops" means that someone "roots" for the insurgents.

On a side not: "Stupid and unthoughtful" is not what I'd use to describe some of the things you said to me. Calling me a Nazi is just about the most offensive thing you can do to me.

You guys are seriously f'ed up if you can find nothing wrong with the bombing of the twin towers, the pentagon, the bombings in london and in spain. These attacks were done by terrorists. They are people bent on killing as many innocent people as they can in the name of honor, country and getting into "the afterlife". If you still can find nothing wrong, screw you guys.

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!

You guys are seriously f'ed up if you can find nothing wrong with the bombing of the twin towers, the pentagon, the bombings in london and in spain. These attacks were done by terrorists. They are people bent on killing as many innocent people as they can in the name of honor, country and getting into "the afterlife". If you still can find nothing wrong, screw you guys.

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!

Whos f'd up exactly? Could you point o specific examples? Also, what did the invasion of Iraq have to do with fighting terrorism?

You guys are seriously f'ed up if you can find nothing wrong with the bombing of the twin towers, the pentagon, the bombings in london and in spain. These attacks were done by terrorists. They are people bent on killing as many innocent people as they can in the name of honor, country and getting into "the afterlife". If you still can find nothing wrong, screw you guys.

And that has what to do with the question?

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!

A false association. One can be opposed to terrorism while still not "supporting the troops," whatever that is supposed to mean.

I don't see what is so liberating about littering a country with depleted uranium anyway.

You guys are seriously f'ed up if you can find nothing wrong with the bombing of the twin towers, the pentagon, the bombings in london and in spain. These attacks were done by terrorists. They are people bent on killing as many innocent people as they can in the name of honor, country and getting into "the afterlife". If you still can find nothing wrong, screw you guys.

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!
As many people have pointed out before, there is no real link between 9/11 and Iraq. 9/11 and Afghanistan, maybe, but not Iraq. I agree that it's immoral not to find anything wrong with terrorist attacks, but that doesn't really have anything to do with whether or not you support troops.
And I hope you noticed that a lot of people aren't citizens of coalition countries, so there's no need for them to support our troops.

"Originally Posted by DHomme
Okay it seems that a few right-wingers have been calling me "sick" and a "fascist". What a fucking joke.

I don't want Americans/Brits to die, but ultimately I support the Iraqi resistance over the Coalition Forces. Now somehow because I support a different side to the war to you I am sick?

You ultimately seek the deaths of Iraqis who are trying to destroy an imperialist force occupying their country. I am seeking the withdrawal of this invading army and will support most (not all) actions that further this, which includes the killing of coalition troops.

It seems as though most people think that because I am from Britain I should be supporting "our boys" over there. Bollocks to that, I'm not bound by this sickening nationalist spirit which determines that people from my country are more important than any other.

Sorry if this is a little confused. It's late."

Again I'm really sorry Laerod, I thought you had said that. Heh...

They are people bent on killing as many innocent people as they can in the name of honor, country and getting into "the afterlife".

Sounds like our current administration to me...

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!

Indeed, stop wasting their lives like this.

I wouldn't call it pointless. At the least we took out a tyrant and are giving support to a highly unstable country. You have to give us that much. But as a whole, war was definatly not the sollution.Okay, the bold part is pretty funny. Saddam may not have been a very nice guy, but he did provide stability. The US and the Coalition are to blame for the current instability.

Again I'm really sorry Laerod, I thought you had said that. Heh...Honestly, you should only call real Nazis by their name. Using it as a common insult is completely unacceptable.

Okay, the bold part is pretty funny. Saddam may not have been a very nice guy, but he did provide stability. The US and the Coalition are to blame for the current instability.

Yes, I suppose that killing anyone and everyone who apposes you could create stability.

And it's not like the actual Nazi foot soldier was a bad guy. The bad guys were the SS/upper ranks.

but..but you have to support the troops.Nope, I dont have to.

And it's not like the actual Nazi foot soldier was a bad guy. The bad guys were the SS/upper ranks.

Which is what many people who don't "Support The Troops" beleive as well. The troops aren't at fault for the evil people in office, but supporting the troops doesn't have to mean agreeing with the people giving them orders.

Now what exactly do we all mean by "support"?

Now what exactly do we all mean by "support"?

Dictionary.com definition:

1. To bear the weight of, especially from below.
2. To hold in position so as to keep from falling, sinking, or slipping.
3. To be capable of bearing; withstand: “His flaw'd heart... too weak the conflict to support” (Shakespeare).
4. To keep from weakening or failing; strengthen: The letter supported him in his grief.
5. To provide for or maintain, by supplying with money or necessities.
6. To furnish corroborating evidence for: New facts supported her story.
7.
1. To aid the cause, policy, or interests of: supported her in her election campaign.
2. To argue in favor of; advocate: supported lower taxes.
8. To endure; tolerate: “At supper there was such a conflux of company that I could scarcely support the tumult” (Samuel Johnson).
9. To act in a secondary or subordinate role to (a leading performer).

The administration failed to do the bolded part.

Yes, I suppose that killing anyone and everyone who apposes you could create stability.You'll learn that after you've killed enough, people stop trying as much. He didn't kill everyone, just the ones that voiced their opinions and didn't manage to flee. A lot of people we Germans would call "Mitläufer" (people who go with the flow) lead rather comfortable lives.

And it's not like the actual Nazi foot soldier was a bad guy. The bad guys were the SS/upper ranks.This isn't the thread for addressing that issue.

Which is what many people who don't "Support The Troops" beleive as well. The troops aren't at fault for the evil people in office, but supporting the troops doesn't have to mean agreeing with the people giving them orders.

It's not like our generals are doing a bad job. It's when idoit people (The Bush administration) decide that "When you go to war, you have to go with what you have". I thought we were a superpower... Not Russia in 1943.

It's not like our generals are doing a bad job. It's when idoit people (The Bush administration) decide that "When you go to war, you have to go with what you have". I thought we were a superpower... Not Russia in 1943.

Heh. Actually, I was referring to the Bush administration, since they have made the mistake of trying to do the general's jobs for them. If memory serves me correctly, many generals advised against invading with the number of troops we had and expecting things to end quickly.

1. To aid the cause, policy, or interests of: supported her in her election campaign.


Well if the troops are just following the Generals, who are following Dubya n' Dick, then that's just saying you hate Bush, and we ALL hate Bush.

Well if the troops are just following the Generals, who are following Dubya n' Dick, then that's just saying you hate Bush, and we ALL hate Bush.

Yes... that would be what I'm saying.

Unfortunately, some people have decided to support the troops you must also support the administration and the war.

I'm going to apologize for last two posts. They were stupid and unthoughtfull. HOWEVER I think it's pretty pathetic to root for a bunch of guys who resort to killing innocent people and children.Thats why I do NOT Support the Bushite Occupation Army.

Sounds like our current administration to me...



Indeed, stop wasting their lives like this.



Damn, I hate having to explain this... Alright Look, the US went into Iraq to destroy a dictator oppressing his people. He supported terrorism, as you can see: Car bombins, suicidal attacks, yadayadayada... There was no stability in Iraq, well there was, but could ya define stablitiy for me, cuz that didn't look like it. Men beating wives. Women having to cover every part of their bodies and have to be escorted by their husbands everywhere outside of the country. Forcing people to drink gasoline then shooting them. Covering people with honey, then letting rabid, starving dogs eat them alive? Is that what you call stability???

There aren't very many of us "rooting" for a bunch of guys that kill innocent people and children.so far there is 133 on the poll.

Damn, I hate having to explain this... Alright Look, the US went into Iraq to destroy a dictator oppressing his people. He supported terrorism, as you can see: Car bombins, suicidal attacks, yadayadayada... There was no stability in Iraq, well there was, but could ya define stablitiy for me, cuz that didn't look like it. Men beating wives. Women having to cover every part of their bodies and have to be escorted by their husbands everywhere outside of the country. Forcing people to drink gasoline then shooting them. Covering people with honey, then letting rabid, starving dogs eat them alive? Is that what you call stability???

Thanks for backing me up.

Damn, I hate having to explain this... Alright Look, the US went into Iraq to destroy a dictator oppressing his people. He supported terrorism, as you can see: Car bombins, suicidal attacks, yadayadayada... There was no stability in Iraq, well there was, but could ya define stablitiy for me, cuz that didn't look like it. Men beating wives. Women having to cover every part of their bodies and have to be escorted by their husbands everywhere outside of the country. Forcing people to drink gasoline then shooting them. Covering people with honey, then letting rabid, starving dogs eat them alive? Is that what you call stability???

So that's this weeks excuse?

I was told we were going because we had "incontrovertable proof" that Iraq had nuclear weapons. Indeed, that was the only reason I ever agreed with the damnable war (I admit it, I was duped). I see no nukes, so now you invent new reasons.

There are many parts of the world which are many times worse in terms of human rights abuses and support of terrorism, so that excuse doesn't work either.

Ok "buddy" why do you support this man and his dumbass administration? He has done nothing and you know it.

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!how can I answer this?
Oh yeah...the image is back :D

http://i.cnn.net/cnn/SPECIALS/2004/reagan/stories/first.lady/just.say.no.jpg

So that's this weeks excuse?

I was told we were going because we had "incontrovertable proof" that Iraq had nuclear weapons. Indeed, that was the only reason I ever agreed with the damnable war (I admit it, I was duped). I see no nukes, so now you invent new reasons.

There are many parts of the world which are many times worse in terms of human rights abuses and support of terrorism, so that excuse doesn't work either.
I did not just make up these reasons. They happened. If Saddam was a real man, If he had no nukes, if he wasn't such a pussy, he would of surrendured before this thing ever started. rather than hiding in a underground cave, then surrenduring with a bunch of rifles and nades pointed at him

He also oppressed the Iraqi people of the North, the Kurds. He "religiously" killed them all. If Iraq was a big happy place as you say it was, there wouldn't be uprisings would there?

Damn, I hate having to explain this... Alright Look, the US went into Iraq to destroy a dictator oppressing his people. He supported terrorism, as you can see: Car bombins, suicidal attacks, yadayadayada... There was no stability in Iraq, well there was, but could ya define stablitiy for me, cuz that didn't look like it. Men beating wives. Women having to cover every part of their bodies and have to be escorted by their husbands everywhere outside of the country. Forcing people to drink gasoline then shooting them. Covering people with honey, then letting rabid, starving dogs eat them alive? Is that what you call stability???
Did you forget that Reagan and Bush Sr. supported this very same man? Heck, they even gave him chemicals and weapons to fight the Iranians.

And as far as those atrocities that you say Saddam committed, can you provide a source for those allegations?

Ok "buddy" why do you support this man and his dumbass administration? He has done nothing and you know it.


That was my bad, clicked on the wrong quote. As you may see, i deleted the post.

I did not just make up these reasons. They happened. If Saddam was a real man, If he had no nukes, if he wasn't such a pussy, he would of surrendured before this thing ever started. rather than hiding in a underground cave, then surrenduring with a bunch of rifles and nades pointed at him

He also oppressed the Iraqi people of the North, the Kurds. He "religiously" killed them all. If Iraq was a big happy place as you say it was, there wouldn't be uprisings would there?


I'm not saying that; I'm saying it isn't a sufficient reason for war, unless you intend to invade every nation on earth, and correct the many abuses against freedom commited by the American government. And moreso, why start with Hussein? He's small fish in the human rights abuse sea. What about North Korea? China? Saudi Arabia? All of them have worse human rights abuse problems.

I'm saying the reason Bush cited was nucular (misspelled on purpse thanks... I'm not THAT dumb.) weapons. Now that they aren't there, the 101st fighting keyboardists are forced to come up with new reasons for their unjustifiable war.

There. were. no. weapons. There never were. Weapons inspectors have said so. Deal.

NEVER OUR BUSSINESS HELLO DID I MISS SOMETHING DID YOU ALL FORGET 9/11 IM SURE I DIDNT MY UNCLE WAS GOING INTO THE PENTEGON AND WOULD HAVE BEEN KILLED BUT DECIDED HE WASNT FEELING WELL I BELIEVE THAT THIS WAR IS OUR BUSINESS.


I'm glad to hear your uncle lived throught that terrible day. I have two cousins on the NYPD who were supposed to be at the WTC that day, but their lives were saved because they got called somewhere else. But you seem to have forgotten that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. al-Qaeda was responsible for that. Even the Bush Administration has said that there was no link between Iraq and al-Qaeda -- after telling us there was, of course.

Not that far into it Bush explains that Saddam used gas to kill thousands of his own...Right Here (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html)

Thank you for apologizing to Laerod, New Stalinburg. Take care not to name-call in the first place next time, please.

It already is. People hating the troops rather then thanking them and welcoming them home from tours of duty; Seemingly innocent civilians blowing themselves up near troops, etc, etc, etc... how much more of a comparison do you need before we can call it what it has become?

Our troops in Iraq aren't casually killing civilians.

I don't want Americans/Brits to die, but ultimately I support the Iraqi resistance over the Coalition Forces. Now somehow because I support a different side to the war to you I am sick?

No, you're sick because you support people who kill civilians. And calling me right wing is about as true as calling Tom DeLay a leftist.

http://www.lefthook.org/Charts/CSIS.jpg
They aren't targetting civilians- they're targetting troops. We have to remember that.

Try finding something more recent.

You guys are seriously f'ed up if you can find nothing wrong with the bombing of the twin towers, the pentagon, the bombings in london and in spain. These attacks were done by terrorists. They are people bent on killing as many innocent people as they can in the name of honor, country and getting into "the afterlife". If you still can find nothing wrong, screw you guys.

And none of these were comitted by Hussein. What's your point?

Not that far into it Bush explains that Saddam used gas to kill thousands of his own...Right Here (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html)



A whitehouse press release... How reliable. :rolleyes:

To be fair, yes, Hussein had commited travesties. He was still a small fish compared to other dictators, so that excuse won't fly.

just a reminder, calm down guys, we all have different opinions and unless you're the slaughtering ruler of a totalitarian, right-winged regime that happens to be in control of the most powerful divisions of armed forces in the world, there's nothing that's gonna change that :p

Not that far into it Bush explains that Saddam....
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/trall/2005/trall050609.gif

Not that far into it Bush explains that Saddam used gas to kill thousands of his own...Right Here (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html)
And who continued to support Hussein after these terrible atrocities? Reagan and Bush. Hussein was supported right up until the time Iraq invaded Kuwait and even then, the US had some complicity.

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/trall/2005/trall050609.gifHey, you should post more cartoons by the guy who said soldiers get what they deserve when they are killed. Good Idea!

Hey, you should post more cartoons by the guy who said soldiers get what they deserve when they are killed. Good Idea!sure...I can help you with that...
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/trall/2005/trall050730.gif

Hey, you should post more cartoons by the guy who said soldiers get what they deserve when they are killed. Good Idea!this one is in colors.

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/trall/2005/trall050606.gif

this one is in colors.

Hey, maybe next you could post O.J. Simpsons guide to fine cutlery.

Sad. Thirty nine people have voted no. How very sad. :(

I support them if they are right or wrong, and I support what they are doing. I hope Cindy Sheehan takes a fall and lands in a pile of cow dung, because that's all shes made of, and her efforts are a spit in the face of her deceased son.

I support them if they are right or wrong, and I support what they are doing. I hope Cindy Sheehan takes a fall and lands in a pile of cow dung, because that's all shes made of, and her efforts are a spit in the face of her deceased son.
What you are saying is that you don't support freedom of speech?

What you are saying is that you don't support freedom of speech?

No, I do support freedom of speech. Anything that happens to her as a result means she pissed someone off, IE if I run into LA and start shouting bad things about black people and as a result I get beaten up, does that mean they don't support the freedom of speech? No, it means I was stupid and pissed some people off. She can say what she wants, but if she gets beaten as a result it's her fault (50/50).

No, I do support freedom of speech. Anything that happens to her as a result means she pissed someone off, IE if I run into LA and start shouting bad things about black people and as a result I get beaten up, does that mean they don't support the freedom of speech? No, it means I was stupid and pissed some people off. She can say what she wants, but if she gets beaten as a result it's her fault (50/50).
No. No, that's as wrong as it's messed up. If she gets beaten it's the fault of the people who beat her.

The Hell is wrong with you people blaming victims around here? Christ, you'd think this was the frickin' Inquisition in America these days.

Over 3/4ths majority....at least that gives some hope

I support them if they are right or wrong, and I support what they are doing. I hope Cindy Sheehan takes a fall and lands in a pile of cow dung, because that's all shes made of, and her efforts are a spit in the face of her deceased son.

Cindy Sheehan is a hero who honors her son's memory by demanding that no other people - American or Iraqi - be sacrificed on the altar of power and domination in this war of aggression.

I'm in Australia, but we have troops in Iraq, so it's still relevant for me to answer this question.

I do indeed support the troops and respect them for putting their lives on the line. What I don't support is the war itself.

That seems contradictory, but it's not. It means I'll direct any scathing at the government, and NOT the troops.

Sad. Thirty nine people have voted no. How very sad. :(

I have to admit, my very first reaction to some of the contemptible posts in this very thread, the, ‘the soldiers are no different than the terrorists,’ and other crap like that, and I found it so despicable to me that it caused me to turn off my computer and walk away from it, I’m tempted to leave this forum, it’s seems no better than a haven for anarchist terrorists sometimes, and juvenile in execution.

But there is a myriad of topics discussed here and I like that…and there is encouragement from time to time … Like your post, pointing out my feelings as well.
;)

As we know, the vast majority of Generalites do not support America's illeagal war with Iraq.

Barring the politics in the situation, do you "support the troops"?

Do you cheer for them, or spit on them?


Support the troops, hate the war. And just by hating the war, doesn't mean that you are "spitting on the them"

Support the troops, hate the war. And just by hating the war, doesn't mean that you are "spitting on the them"

In what sense do you "support the troops"?

Cindy Sheehan is a hero who honors her son's memory by demanding that no other people - American or Iraqi - be sacrificed on the altar of power and domination in this war of aggression.

Cindy Sheehan is a whining, sniveling coward who is using her son's death as an excuse to make the deaths of American Miltary men and women a vain sacrifice, her son included.

War of aggression? Where? I have yet to see one except in Iran, where the goverment there is actively working on obtaining nuclear weapons and is skirting on the "line".

I have to admit, my very first reaction to some of the contemptible posts in this very thread, the, ‘the soldiers are no different than the terrorists,’ and other crap like that, and I found it so despicable to me that it caused me to turn off my computer and walk away from it, I’m tempted to leave this forum, it’s seems no better than a haven for anarchist terrorists sometimes, and juvenile in execution.

But there is a myriad of topics discussed here and I like that…and there is encouragement from time to time … Like your post, pointing out my feelings as well.
;)

Just try to stay away from the crap and those who would spit on the prople who protect their freedom and the freedom of others with their lives.

Cindy Sheehan is a whining, sniveling coward who is using her son's death as an excuse to make her son's sacrifice for nothing.

Her son was sacrificed in a criminal war aimed at securing US domination of the Middle East.

Unlike you, apparently, I am opposed to destroying lives, and so is Cindy Sheehan.

Just try to stay away from the crap and those who would spit on the prople who protect their freedom and the freedom of others with their lives.
Whats with the 'spitting' business? Sounds like Eutrusca has really penetrated into your mid-term memory...

Support the troops, hate the war. And just by hating the war, doesn't mean that you are "spitting on the them"

I'm a Vietnam Vet. There is no way you can support the troops and be against the war. You have no idea what your attitude does to those men and women who are risking their lives for the freedom we enjoy and the freedom of the Iraqi people. You have no idea what comfort your anti-war protest gives to the enemy. It gives them the will to keep on fighting and every day they keep on fighting more of our men and women die. Don't you ever tell me you support the troops but are against the war. If you are against the war, that is your right but don't tell me you are supporting the troops while giving hope, aid, and comfort to those who are trying to kill those troops.

Whats with the 'spitting' business? Sounds like Eutrusca has really penetrated into your mid-term memory...

No he didn't. Both of us remember what happened when we came home from the Vietnam war, Eut from Nam and me from Thailand. The spitting was real.

I'm a Vietnam Vet. There is no way you can support the troops and be against the war. You have no idea what your attitude does to those men and women who are risking their lives for the freedom we enjoy and the freedom of the Iraqi people. You have no idea what comfort your anti-war protest gives to the enemy. It gives them the will to keep on fighting and every day they keep on fighting more of our men and women die. Don't you ever tell me you support the troops but are against the war. If you are against the war, that is your right but don't tell me you are supporting the troops while giving hope, aid, and comfort to those who are trying to kill those troops.
You can't tell people what they can or cannot think, feel, support, condone or condemn. How does "risking their lives for the Iraqi people" translate into "protecting the freedoms" of those who purportedly spit on US troops?

I'm a Vietnam Vet. There is no way you can support the troops and be against the war. You have no idea what your attitude does to those men and women who are risking their lives for the freedom we enjoy and the freedom of the Iraqi people. You have no idea what comfort your anti-war protest gives to the enemy. It gives them the will to keep on fighting and every day they keep on fighting more of our men and women die. Don't you ever tell me you support the troops but are against the war. If you are against the war, that is your right but don't tell me you are supporting the troops while giving hope, aid, and comfort to those who are trying to kill those troops.
Thanks for telling me how I have to think. I'm sure the founding fathers would agree with your statement.

Just try to stay away from the crap and those who would spit on the prople who protect their freedom and the freedom of others with their lives.

Amen. That guy who ran the "Forsake the troops" website was a traitor.

No he didn't. Both of us remember what happened when we came home from the Vietnam war, Eut from Nam and me from Thailand. The spitting was real.
And so they're still spitting on you now, are they? How? By not elevating you, as former soldiers, to some exalted place above the shoulders and beyond the ken of the ungrateful peasants you've been consigned to co-existence with?
I guess you feel pretty cheated that this isn't a feudal state, huh? Like in the good old days of the Middle Ages?

Thanks for telling me how I have to think. I'm sure the founding fathers would agree with your statement.

I think the founding fathers would agree more with his statement than yours.

"Oh, we support good ol' George Washington and his jolly band of pantaloon clad men, but we do not support what they are doing! It is a travesty against international law...."

Oh please.

I think the founding fathers would agree more with his statement than yours.

"Oh, we support good ol' George Washington and his jolly band of pantaloon clad men, but we do not support what they are doing! It is a travesty against international law...."

Oh please.
Oh yes, the founding fathers would have enjoyed having a bunch of power mad men with guns running around, who apparantly think that they are better then everyone else. :rolleyes:


Equality for all, it's in the bloody thing you're supposed to be protecting. No class of people, civilian or not, is better then any other. Kindly come off your horse, it makes you look bad and only drives people away.

Oh yes, the founding fathers would have enjoyed having a bunch of power mad men with guns running around, who apparantly think that they are better then everyone else. :rolleyes:


LMAO.... By your definition, the founding fathers were power mad men with guns running around arguing that they were better than everyone else (since only they would get the rights to vote and be citizens etc.,).

:p

LMAO.... By your definition, the founding fathers were power mad men with guns running around arguing that they were better than everyone else (since only they would get the rights to vote and be citizens etc.,).

:p
Which is why listening to what the founding fathers says is stupid :D.


Better to read the words. The amendments make it a bit more fairer, no?


I should call it a rest after 10 :D

I think President Bush went about Iraq the wrong way (in fact, it is a disaster), but I do support the troops. They are men and women unconditionally putting their lives on the line for Americans. They don't pick their orders, but they do follow them and I admire their strength, courage, and resolve.

Which is why listening to what the founding fathers says is stupid :D.


Better to read the words. The amendments make it a bit more fairer, no?


Without men with the attitudes of the founding fathers, waging a war with only a 35% approval rating from their own people, the people they were fighting for ~ And willing to fight a war that looked like it couldn't have a chance to be won, yet fighting because doing the right thing is sometimes preferable to just doing the safe thing…

They were contending even then with the people on their own side that were rooting against them... without people like that, armed power mad and stubborn, there wouldn't be any amendments to be made more fair.

Without men with the attitudes of the founding fathers, waging a war with only a 35% approval rating from their own people, the people they were fighting for ~ And willing to fight a war that looked like it couldn't have a chance to be won, yet fighting because doing the right thing is sometimes preferable to just doing the safe thing…

They were contending even then with the people on their own side that were rooting against them... without people like that, armed power mad and stubborn, there wouldn't be any amendments to be made more fair.
Oh no, I'm talking about the bit about the better then you ness that seems to go along. But I must bid everyone a good night, I can't think when I've had less then four hours of sleep in the last...48ish hours.

I'm against the war but I see no reason to not support my own people, especially if they're being killed for no reason.

support them, and everyone that voted "Spit on Them" should be in there shoes and see how it feels to do all that then have people disrespect you

Oh yes, the founding fathers would have enjoyed having a bunch of power mad men with guns running around, who apparantly think that they are better then everyone else. :rolleyes:


Equality for all, it's in the bloody thing you're supposed to be protecting. No class of people, civilian or not, is better then any other. Kindly come off your horse, it makes you look bad and only drives people away.

Nope, that's why they revolted against British rule. The brits tried to take away the guns of the british subjects, force them to house british soldiers, and pay unfair taxes....

Oh, I do beleive you mean the Brits when you say "Power mad men with guns"...but I could be wrong.

think about the hipocracy; those men and women volunteered - they voted something like 95% republican - they had the option to desert or to try to be classified as a concientious objector - none of these people were drafted; they all support the war so why just blame those at the top?

support them, and everyone that voted "Spit on Them" should be in there shoes and see how it feels to do all that then have people disrespect you
"Spit on them" was not a poll option. I really wish people would give this incredibly spurious 'spitting' myth a rest. You're beginning to sound like angry parrots.

think about the hipocracy; those men and women volunteered - they voted something like 95% republican - they had the option to desert or to try to be classified as a concientious objector - none of these people were drafted; they all support the war so why just blame those at the top?

Everyone has a different reason to join the military. They don't pick where they go, they don't choose how long they get to stay there. Sure, they could desert, but I'm pretty sure that is illegal or HIGHLY frowned upon. Where does it say that the entire U.S. Military voted 95% Republican. I don't believe that.

As we know, the vast majority of Generalites do not support America's illeagal war with Iraq.

Barring the politics in the situation, do you "support the troops"?

Do you cheer for them, or spit on them?

using your biased words, i 'spit on them'

I don't think I would go for either extreme. basically, I hope none of them die, but I also hope that they don't kill anyone...



how are they goin to make sure they dont die,if they dont kill the enemy.

how are they goin to make sure they dont die,if they dont kill the enemy.
By not engaging them? Just a guess...

I'm a Vietnam Vet. There is no way you can support the troops and be against the war. You have no idea what your attitude does to those men and women who are risking their lives for the freedom we enjoy and the freedom of the Iraqi people. You have no idea what comfort your anti-war protest gives to the enemy. It gives them the will to keep on fighting and every day they keep on fighting more of our men and women die. Don't you ever tell me you support the troops but are against the war. If you are against the war, that is your right but don't tell me you are supporting the troops while giving hope, aid, and comfort to those who are trying to kill those troops.

Of course it's possible. I'm against the war, but I still support the troops. I want them to come home safely, even if I disagree with what you're doing.

So I am curious.

Does this mean that only DHomme thinks its fair to kill children? I mean he supports Iraq in this side of the "conflict" and feels that their terrorist regime is better off without the "timely" interference of the US troops (amongst others).

Are there many people that feel this is the answer? Im curious. I just cant see myself "rooting" for the guy that willingly oppresses his peoples. And hey does anyone have Saddams "chair" date? I really want to get a .wav of when they announce his "Crimes against humanity".

Good luck.

I have to admit, my very first reaction to some of the contemptible posts in this very thread, the, ‘the soldiers are no different than the terrorists,’ and other crap like that, and I found it so despicable to me that it caused me to turn off my computer and walk away from it, I’m tempted to leave this forum, it’s seems no better than a haven for anarchist terrorists sometimes, and juvenile in execution.

But there is a myriad of topics discussed here and I like that…and there is encouragement from time to time … Like your post, pointing out my feelings as well.
;)

I agree. I broke my monitor in anger when I was reading this bullsh*t about "the soldiers are no different than the terrorists" and "Just because I support the insurgents doesn't make me sick". (I'm now using a laptop, but that's besides the point.) Those traitors should be charged with treason/giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

How dare you try to tell me that Al-Qaeda isn't in Iraq. They are, and you know what? The leader of the insurgency (freedom fighters as the traitors here would call them) in Iraq is Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who is the high ranking Al-Qaeda operative. Al-Zarqawi refers to his own organization as "Al-Qaeda in Iraq". U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell described Zarqawi as an "al Qaeda operative." He also has a 25 million dollar reward on his head, the same as Bin Laden.

"An emerging view holds that Zarqawi now holds significantly more power than bin Laden because of Zarqawi's heightened visibility as a leader of the insurgency against the U.S. military and Iraqi interim government. On October 21, 2004, Zarqawi officially announced his allegiance to Al Qaeda; on December 27, 2004, Al-Jazeera broadcast an audiotape of bin Laden calling Zarqawi "the prince of al Qaeda in Iraq" and asked "all our organization brethren to listen to him and obey him in his good deeds.""

"Zarqawi is the most wanted man in Iraq. According to the Pentagon, if Zarqawi is indeed killed or seriously injured, this would be a huge blow to the insurgency. The hope is that his death would be devastating, because he was the "mastermind" of multiple attacks."

So, you could say that these posters that support the insurgents in Iraq are supporters of Al-Qaeda.

To those who wish for the collation troops to die and lose in Iraq. I have one thing to say. F**k you! You ungrateful bastards!!!

It's one thing to disagree, but it's a entirely different thing to hope for us to lose in Iraq. By the way the Iraq war is not illegal. Iraq is a part of the global war on terrror. It was not the first place and it won't be the last place either.

And to those who claim they support me/the troops, but not the war are all hypocritess. They don't support us, because the majority of the troops do support the war. If you do only support the troops, but not the war. Then your nothing more then another Michael Moore.

"Moore says his film supports the troops but then bragged to the London-based newspaper The Guardian that he had snuck film crews into Iraq to document improper acts committed by soldiers. He then gushed: “Half the movie is about Iraq – we were able to get film crews embedded with American troops without them knowing it was Michael Moore. They are totally f***ed.” (June 20, 2004) Moore told the San Francisco Chronicle that he was proud of the fact that his film showed our troops as “dazed and confused” and paralyzed with a Vietnam-like syndrome."

After reading this thread, I also strongly considered leaving this forum, but I've decided to stay. Since it is a Satanist's job to fight stupidity wherever it exists, and that is what I shall continue to do.

~Satanic Reverend Medivh~

think about the hipocracy; those men and women volunteered - they voted something like 95% republican -

So just because alot of men and women in the military voted republican, you won't support them??? That seems like a real idiotic reason to me.

- they had the option to desert or to try to be classified as a concientious objector - none of these people were drafted; they all support the war so why just blame those at the top?

There is no option to desert! Deserting is illegal, you would get bounty hunters going after you. Then get charged with treason.

And just because the majority of the troops do support the war, means you want to blame us? Blame us for what exactly? We don't go around shooting at innocents on purpose or because we are order to. Like you sick bastards would like to credit us with.

~Satanic Reverend Medivh~

We don't go around shooting at innocents on purpose or because we are order to. Like you sick bastards would like to credit us with.
Show sufficient examples to back up your supposition. Or go ahead and break another monitor. Whatever works best.

Doesn't change how I feel. Not one damn bit. And breaking your equipment just serves to underscore my previously-stated belief, so go ahead, knock yourself out to your heart's content.

I agree. I broke my monitor in anger when I was reading this bullsh*t about "the soldiers are no different than the terrorists" and "Just because I support the insurgents doesn't make me sick". (I'm now using a laptop, but that's besides the point.) Those traitors should be charged with treason/giving aid and comfort to the enemy.Right. Tell me how you'd like to get that past any reasonable judge.

How dare you try to tell me that Al-Qaeda isn't in Iraq. They are, and you know what? The leader of the insurgency (freedom fighters as the traitors here would call them) in Iraq is Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who is the high ranking Al-Qaeda operative. Al-Zarqawi refers to his own organization as "Al-Qaeda in Iraq". U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell described Zarqawi as an "al Qaeda operative." He also has a 25 million dollar reward on his head, the same as Bin Laden.I don't know about any others, but I never said AQ wasn't in Iraq. I have, however, stated that AQ wasn't in Iraq prior to the invasion, and only came in to kill Americans after we got rid of the one person keeping them out (not that I'm saying that Saddam was a *nice* person).

So, you could say that these posters that support the insurgents in Iraq are supporters of Al-Qaeda.True. You can also say "Bananafish".

To those who wish for the collation troops to die and lose in Iraq. I have one thing to say. F**k you! You ungrateful bastards!!! There's nicer ways of saying that.

It's one thing to disagree, but it's a entirely different thing to hope for us to lose in Iraq. By the way the Iraq war is not illegal. Iraq is a part of the global war on terrror. It was not the first place and it won't be the last place either.
The bold part just destroyed your arguement. Fact is, by international law, the Iraq war was illegal. Oh, I'm not saying that it isn't part of the war on terror. Now at least. It wasn't before. There's a good reason countries participating in the War on Terror are not participating in Iraq.

And to those who claim they support me/the troops, but not the war are all hypocritess. They don't support us, because the majority of the troops do support the war. If you do only support the troops, but not the war. Then your nothing more then another Michael Moore. So a couple lines before it was still ok to disagree but now it's not? And we're supposed to be hypocrites?

"Moore says his film supports the troops but then bragged to the London-based newspaper The Guardian that he had snuck film crews into Iraq to document improper acts committed by soldiers. He then gushed: “Half the movie is about Iraq – we were able to get film crews embedded with American troops without them knowing it was Michael Moore. They are totally f***ed.” (June 20, 2004) Moore told the San Francisco Chronicle that he was proud of the fact that his film showed our troops as “dazed and confused” and paralyzed with a Vietnam-like syndrome." You know, it's not necessarilly bad for him to be proud. He might be proud that soldiers are not only shown as those in brand new uniforms, especially if it might be true that not all of them are. But this thread isn't about Moore.

After reading this thread, I also strongly considered leaving this forum, but I've decided to stay. Since it is a Satanist's job to fight stupidity wherever it exists, and that is what I shall continue to do.

~Satanic Reverend Medivh~Ok... I'm not the one that broke a monitor over this.

As we know, the vast majority of Generalites do not support America's illeagal war with Iraq.

Barring the politics in the situation, do you "support the troops"?

Do you cheer for them, or spit on them?
The latter.

Since it is a Satanist's job to fight stupidity wherever it exists, and that is what I shall continue to do.

~Satanic Reverend Medivh~
I find it rather ironic that a Satanist is backing the US troops.

BTW, the war in Iraq is illegal. Unfortunately, nobody will pursue the legalities at this time.

I find it rather ironic that a Satanist is backing the US troops.

Considering their cic.

The funny thing is, the over-the-top antics of the 'let's-worship-the-troops' crowd makes it easier to stand firm on my convictions.

Ptui.

Since it is a Satanist's job to fight stupidity wherever it exists, and that is what I shall continue to do.

~Satanic Reverend Medivh~

Don't overlook yourself in that fight. I know it's tough to look at our own arguments and see how we can be wrong, and it's even tougher to change it, but it's really worth it once the battle is won. Keep up the good fight!

Sumamba Buwhan, there is a TG for you.

Ya know, since no-one seems to read any of my posts, I'll be on my way.

Ya know, since no-one seems to read any of my posts, I'll be on my way.


Well, you are conservative, therefore, you have no right to hold an opinion.

I'm a Soldier in the US Marine Corps I've been to Iraq, its not easy to not know which 12 year old arab kid is going to run up too you and blow himself up in your face.

what the hell is wrong with all of you leftist commie pigs?

i've met our president, he is a good man and hes furthering the causes of democracy. all of you saying he is a nazi have no idea what its like over there. we've started schools, created jobs and helped them to know the american dream.

if I could I would go to all the countries in the middle east and make them like the Great United States of America, and bomb whomever doesn't like it.

"south islands" I'd like to see you try to spit on me, I'll kick your ass.

Hey, maybe next you could post O.J. Simpsons guide to fine cutlery.his guides are not any good.

Sad. Thirty nine people have voted no. How very sad. :(
57

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2003-12/08/xin_6e13b345c04e4c70a365fbb837b0ae5b_nr_just_say_no.jpg

I'm a Soldier in the US Marine Corps I've been to Iraq, its not easy to not know which 12 year old arab kid is going to run up too you and blow himself up in your face.

what the hell is wrong with all of you leftist commie pigs?

i've met our president, he is a good man and hes furthering the causes of democracy. all of you saying he is a nazi have no idea what its like over there. we've started schools, created jobs and helped them to know the american dream.

if I could I would go to all the countries in the middle east and make them like the Great United States of America, and bomb whomever doesn't like it.

"south islands" I'd like to see you try to spit on me, I'll kick your ass.As much as I can understand your anger at some comments you have to read here, your post sounds like a new version of the white man's burden.

I support them if they are right or wrong, and I support what they are doing. I hope Cindy Sheehan takes a fall and lands in a pile of cow dung, because that's all shes made of, and her efforts are a spit in the face of her deceased son.what is the full name of you mother?

Sad. Thirty nine people have voted no. How very sad. :(A lot of people voted no because they're not citizen's of the US. I voted no because I don't consider posting comments or not bothering the the only American serviceman I know of to have visited the city I live in "support".

A lot of people voted no because they're not citizen's of the US.Its just that they do not agree with the Bushite or NoeCon definition for "SUPPORTING THE TROOPS".

Most people in this Forum had Troops on Irak...and if they dont...they can ask themselves "what if my president involved us in this war?"...like it happened to the Brits...or the Spaniards.

I'm a Soldier in the US Marine Corps I've been to Iraq, its not easy to not know which 12 year old arab kid is going to run up too you and blow himself up in your face.

what the hell is wrong with all of you leftist commie pigs?

i've met our president, he is a good man and hes furthering the causes of democracy. all of you saying he is a nazi have no idea what its like over there. we've started schools, created jobs and helped them to know the american dream.

if I could I would go to all the countries in the middle east and make them like the Great United States of America, and bomb whomever doesn't like it.

"south islands" I'd like to see you try to spit on me, I'll kick your ass.Anyone here can say "I am a Marine"...But I my BS-meter is beeping...

I think you are a ChikenHawk, a yellow elephant.

Anyone here can say "I am a Marine"...But I my BS-meter is beeping...

I think you are a ChikenHawk, a yellow elephant.

People wouldn't lie about such things!

I've been in both World Wars, Vietnam, and both Gulf Wars.

People wouldn't lie about such things!

I've been in both World Wars, Vietnam, and both Gulf Wars.Then I have to tell you in your face:
"I do/did not support you in Vietnam" and "I do not support you in Gulf War2"...

At least not in the way the Bushites define "SUPPORT THE TROOPS"

Its nothing personal Sumamba...Its just the way it is.

Then I have to tell you in your face:
"I do/did not support you in Vietnam" and "I do not support you in Gulf War2"...

At least not in the way the Bushites define "SUPPORT THE TROOPS"

Its nothing personal Sumamba...Its just the way it is.What is their definition of support, anyway?

Then I have to tell you in your face:
"I do/did not support you in Vietnam" and "I do not support you in Gulf War2"...

At least not in the way the Bushites define "SUPPORT THE TROOPS"

Its nothing personal Sumamba...Its just the way it is.

Neither do I :p

I was being a big fat liar. I'm a pacifist and would never kill someone because my govt. told me they were bad people. The only kind of military action I can agree with is defensive military action.

I only support the troops in a sense that I want them back safely at home. I don't support the mission. I'd liek to see G. Bush kicked out of office and replaced by someone who cares about the country, not their business buddies.

What is their definition of support, anyway?They have many "rules" attached to their "support the Troops" motto.

For example in neoCon-World if you "support the Troops" the minute the aggression is engaged...freedom -of-speech is suspended... You Should Never speak in public against the War...(some Neo-Cons even think you cant criticize the President).

and they think that If you are against the war..or the President..you must keep it to yourself until the end of the war.

They have many "rules" attached to their "support the Troops" motto.

For example in neoCon-World if you "support the Troops" the minute the aggression is engaged...freedom -of-speech is suspended... You Should Never speak in public against the War...(some Neo-Cons even think you cant criticize the President).

and they think that If you are against the war..or the President..you must keep it to yourself until the end of the war.Meh, my definition of support is to go out of your way to make US uniformed personnel feel welcome when back in the States. But then again, I'm not a neo-con. I'm a conservative Green.

Meh, my definition of support is to go out of your way to make US uniformed personnel feel welcome when back in the States. But then again, I'm not a neo-con. I'm a conservative Green.


What the Hell is a conservative Green? Isn't that an Oxymoron?

Meh, my definition of support is to go out of your way to make US uniformed personnel feel welcome when back in the States. But then again, I'm not a neo-con. I'm a conservative Green.99% of the time they get the full red carpet..from the Gov...and from their Families and Friends.

also there is the local small town welcome...
I already support the soldiers that way.

The US warriors have always been treated better than thier counterparts.
at all levels.
before, during and after every war.

What the Hell is a conservative Green? Isn't that an Oxymoron?It means I'm a Green, I vote Green, I act Green, but compared to the rest of my Green friends, I'm conservative. I blame it on spending the first ten years of my life being a military dependent and my dad being republican, as well as a bit of realism. The American Greens believe in pulling out of Iraq as soon as possible, which is something I can't support. I believe that would be another mistake on top of starting the damn war in the first place.

As I said earlier in this forum, thank all of you for your support of myself and my brothers in arms.

Thanks for telling me how I have to think. I'm sure the founding fathers would agree with your statement.

Go through it and tell me how you feel. It isn't about how you think, it is about the reality of what happens and that is protest the war and support the enemy, not the troops. PS It has nothing to do with the founding fathers.

You can't tell people what they can or cannot think, feel, support, condone or condemn. How does "risking their lives for the Iraqi people" translate into "protecting the freedoms" of those who purportedly spit on US troops?

I did not "tell people what they can or cannot think, feel, support, condone or condemn ." But you you can not tell me how the troops feel because you have never been there.

And so they're still spitting on you now, are they? How? By not elevating you, as former soldiers, to some exalted place above the shoulders and beyond the ken of the ungrateful peasants you've been consigned to co-existence with?
I guess you feel pretty cheated that this isn't a feudal state, huh? Like in the good old days of the Middle Ages?

You don’t have a clue do you. I feel sorry for you, maybe someday you will realize the sacrifices the American military men and women have made to protect your freedom.

I did not "tell people what they can or cannot think, feel, support, condone or condemn ."
Actually, Mr. Celtlund, you did. See?
I'm a Vietnam Vet. There is no way you can support the troops and be against the war.
And you kinda repeated yourself a bit, here (though it's a little more personal, and a little less imperative):
Don't you ever tell me you support the troops but are against the war.
And again, this time personally, but just a smidgeon more combatively:
but don't tell me you are supporting the troops while giving hope, aid, and comfort to those who are trying to kill those troops.
I certainly see how that could be construed as "tell(ing) people what they can or cannot think, feel, support, condone or condemn.", but I'll submit the way that was written seems just as strident as your own statements.

think about the hipocracy; those men and women volunteered - they voted something like 95% republican - they had the option to desert or to try to be classified as a concientious objector - none of these people were drafted; they all support the war so why just blame those at the top?

There is no hypocrisy here. Everyone in the military today volunteered. They didn't have an option to desert or be classified as a CO, as those individuals had the option to not enlist. No shame in that.

Not all of those in the military voted Republican so there is no point in stating that unless you are saying Republicans are more willing to lay their life on the line than Democrats are. I don’t think that is what you are saying because that is not a true statement.

I really wish people would give this incredibly spurious
'spitting' myth a rest. You're beginning to sound like angry parrots.

It was not a "myth." I was there, you were not.

Catching up on all the posts, eh?

No matter, I'll check back in later.

Of course it's possible. I'm against the war, but I still support the troops. I want them to come home safely, even if I disagree with what you're doing.

The enemy appreciates your sentiments. :(

I AM a Troop..ofcourse I support myself!


:sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5:

BTW, the war in Iraq is illegal. Unfortunately, nobody will pursue the legalities at this time.

Why is it illegal?

The enemy appreciates your sentiments. :(
How is that supporting "the enemy" in anyway?

I feel the same...I don't want to see any killed or injured, I want them all to be safe, I don't want them to be in that situation, but I don't support the war. I support the troops in the sense I want to see them all safe, but I definitely do not support the war. It really isn't a difficult position to understand.

I'm a Soldier in the US Marine Corps I've been to Iraq, its not easy to not know which 12 year old arab kid is going to run up too you and blow himself up in your face.

Thank you for your service. I appreciate what you have done for the freedom of America and Iraq. A Vietnam vet.

Why is it illegal?According to the UN charter as it was written by representatives of several nations, the foremost being the United States of America, war or military action not condoned by the Security Council is illegal. The only exception is if you're doing it in self-defence. Bush claims that pre-emptive wars are necessary to defend America, but so far, no evidence has turned up that Iraq was an imminent threat to American safety. I personally doubt that American safety was on the President's mind, because he let the one country that is now a threat, North Korea, get away with it and build nuclear weapons capable of hitting the West Coast of the US. That is why the war on Iraq was illegal and why Afghanistan, for instance, wasn't.

Why is it illegal?
It is a violation of UN Resolution 1441, the UN Charter, the US Constitution, and the Geneva Conventions.

Anyone here can say "I am a Marine"...But I my BS-meter is beeping...

I think you are a ChikenHawk, a yellow elephant.

Watch the flaming, you might get burned.

Then I have to tell you in your face:
"I do/did not support you in Vietnam" and "I do not support you in Gulf War2"...

At least not in the way the Bushites define "SUPPORT THE TROOPS"

Its nothing personal Sumamba...Its just the way it is.

Oh yes it is personal.

Neither do I :p

I was being a big fat liar. I'm a pacifist and would never kill someone because my govt. told me they were bad people. The only kind of military action I can agree with is defensive military action.

I only support the troops in a sense that I want them back safely at home. I don't support the mission. I'd liek to see G. Bush kicked out of office and replaced by someone who cares about the country, not their business buddies.

Then why don't you volunteer to go into the military as a medic so you can save lives and bring them home safely?

Ah, still at it. Okay.

[QUOTE=OceanDrive2The US warriors have always been treated better than thier counterparts.
at all levels.
before, during and after every war.[/QUOTE]

Except Vietnam. :(

Except Vietnam. :(
Forget I bothered. You are way too wrapped up in yourself to talk, obviously.

Then why don't you volunteer to go into the military as a medic so you can save lives and bring them home safely?*shudders* Celtlund, have you ever met a medic that could be considered "sane"?

Catching up on all the posts, eh?

No matter, I'll check back in later.

Yep, and passionately.:)

How is that supporting "the enemy" in anyway?

I feel the same...I don't want to see any killed or injured, I want them all to be safe, I don't want them to be in that situation, but I don't support the war. I support the troops in the sense I want to see them all safe, but I definitely do not support the war. It really isn't a difficult position to understand.

You could never understand it unless you have been there.

It is a violation of UN Resolution 1441, the UN Charter, the US Constitution, and the Geneva Conventions.

Didn't many UN Security Council resolutions threaten "severe action" if Saddam didn't comply with those resolutions?

You asked a stupid question and are getting unexpected replies...dont be a loser Crybaby now.
YESSSSSSS!!!

4 more YEARS...Please GOD give me 4 more Years...
I pray to you GOD...give me 4 more years...and some Pretzels to go...
YESSSSSSS!!!
4 more YEARS...Please GOD give me 4 more Years...
GOD Bless Americaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!
GOD bless George W. Bush.
I pray to you GOD...give me 4 more years...and some Pretzels to go...
Posting the same thing again a page or so later.

what is the full name of you mother?
Anyone here can say "I am a Marine"...But I my BS-meter is beeping...
I think you are a ChikenHawk, a yellow elephant.

You've said quite enough there, OceanDrive2, along with posting several links to pictures, while including no text to continue any sort of debate, as well as hijacking the thread for a few posts.

OceanDrive2: Official Warning for Trolling/Flaming



Morvonia
i support the troops and what they are doin 100% and i am not even american.i am canadian and support all the brave fighting men who fight and die just to keep you ungrateful bastards alive and free....you people sickin me those are your own country men and you turn your back on them....they fight to keep not only you free but the people of iraq and afgan. free....and i as a member of earth are proud to to live in the presants of these men...you should be proud too....but no that would respectful woundnt it?

. You people suck!
Knock off the name calling.



The South Islands
This is the type of person who does not deserve to hold an opinion, due to inherent stupidity.

http://www.facade.com/celebrity/photo/Adolf_Hitler.jpg

FOLLOW THE LEADER!

Think of what "good" Hitler did for the Russian People
http://www.ushmm.org/research/doctors/images/19091a.jpg

and I pissed on yous Milk-shake...to make it taste better.
Trying to make as much sense as the New Village Idiot.


So say the Neo-Cons...

Well, you are conservative, therefore, you have no right to hold an opinion.


Your continued trolling and flaming of people in this thread is horrible; therefore:
The South Islands: Official Warning for Trolling/Flaming



Stinky Head Cheese
Recognize yourself in there a little?

It's only an illegal war in the eyes of leftist fools.
You've been in trouble quite enough on these forums. You'd better be careful of what you say, because you're treading on a very thin line.


Omegastar

this is not imperialism forget it you people are all messed up. :upyours: :upyours: :upyours:

Omegastar: Official Warning for Flaming


Mesatecala
blah blah blah blah.. illegal this illegal that... it is not violation of the UN resolution 1441 (merely following it), the UN charter, geneva conventions or the US constitution. Nice try on the left wing talking point. It doesn't fly with me. I don't believe the lies that the left spreads around.

Oh, I'm just against people who hate common sense. That's all. You really need to shut up and stop harassing me. (in response to Dobbsworld)

My misguided statements? The only misguided statements around here are from the leftists. I don't ever have misguided statements.

You're full of it. My support for this war was more for personal reasons, and not the WMD issue. In fact it was never about WMDs for me.

Leftists. Accuse people of having no evidence, when you can't be bothered providing any of your own.


Mesatecala, you haven't changed the way you respond to others one bit. You continue to insult others, as well as generalize the entire 'left' of bad things. The fact that you continue to post in this manner "I agree with this, therefore you are wrong" along with providing little to no evidence in almost all of your posts is considered trolling, which you've been warned about before.

Mesatecala: Official Warning for Trolling/Flaming


Dobbsworld
1. Very enriching post. Very illuminating. I am glad to know of what doesn't fly with you. I don't know if I could've gone on another moment without knowing.

Wow, this changes my whole outlook, it does. You are a masterful debator and I am but a lowly fly in your presence, sir. I shall now go lick my wounds while considering how best to display my obeisance to your superior intellect, wit, vocabulary, and everything.

Enough with the sarcasm/flamebait.

2. And so they're still spitting on you now, are they? How? By not elevating you, as former soldiers, to some exalted place above the shoulders and beyond the ken of the ungrateful peasants you've been consigned to co-existence with?
I guess you feel pretty cheated that this isn't a feudal state, huh? Like in the good old days of the Middle Ages?
You're treading very close to a warning as well, Dobbsworld. I'd suggest you stop before you receive one.


Greater Mactopia
Ya know what? Where are you from. Are you involved in this war? Were you bombed for no apparrent reason except that "The Devils of the West stand for everything that we appose? Freedom, Women's rights, schools, Free Speech? So I only have one thing to say and I think the smiley covers it! :upyours:

You guys are seriously f'ed up if you can find nothing wrong with the bombing of the twin towers, the pentagon, the bombings in london and in spain. These attacks were done by terrorists. They are people bent on killing as many innocent people as they can in the name of honor, country and getting into "the afterlife". If you still can find nothing wrong, screw you guys.

You can stop with the insults.
Greater Mactopia: Official Warning for Trolling/Flaming



Sumamba Buwhah
yes, you show nothing but blind nationalism and offer up baseless statements that have nothing to back them up. I win and you = ignored.

Gloating for no reason could be considered flamebaiting, since you are taunting Mesatecala. Don't do it again.


Spamtastica
Since I don't know them I don't really care whether they live or die.
Enough with your trolling Spamtastica.



Imperial Dark Rome
To those who wish for the collation troops to die and lose in Iraq. I have one thing to say. F**k you! You ungrateful bastards!!!


Triad of Unity
what the hell is wrong with all of you leftist commie pigs?
"south islands" I'd like to see you try to spit on me, I'll kick your ass.

Triad of Unity: Official Warning for Flamebaiting


Dark Priest
I AM a Troop..ofcourse I support myself! -snip- (10 gun smilies)
Quit spamming, Dark Priest.