Considering the political rhetoric being cast about now, i must quote the NLS song, "Swallow the leaders":
I don't @!#$ care whatever side you choose
You stack the deck so that the rest of us lose
The system's @!#$ up thr ass and so are you
Monkeys and apes throw @!#$ better than you.
Pretty much sums it all up.
Anyhow, some points to lodge in the brain of some people:
- Being against the war does not mean you don't support the troops.
- Thinking Bush, or any other political @!#$ needs to be castrated with a rusty fishook for putting our troops at risk just to make him feel better about himself is not against the troops.
- If these troops are supposedly fighting for my right to protest the government (which, if that was the real case, why the hell didn't they storm Capitol hill when the Patriot Act was initiated?), then i would be remiss in my rights as a citizen for NOT protesting the government whenever it screws the pooch. See also: every presidential regime.
- Anyone who agrees with you is not necessarily right
- Anyone who disagrees with you is not necessarily wrong.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Quote:
Being against the war does not mean you don't support the troops.
see, I'm confused
To me, That's like saying I don't want you to go to school but I want you to become a doctor?
I understand people don't like war and I don't like war but its best to fight there than fight here in our land.
how can we win a battle that we are against of? call me idiot or whatever but it doesn't make sense to me at all. You're in or you're out, we can not be in neutral all the time.
Your analogy is wrong.
I don't want you to go to school but I want you to become a doctor = You have to go to war to be a soldier.
---
if I'm against the war does not mean I don't support the troops.
so,
just like if I stand under a car garage it doesn't make me a car, right?
then
and if you don't support the war than you support the terrorist
I'm going to buy me a plane ticket to Iraq and come back as a soldier
Your problem is that you cannot separate the macro from the micro.
So you say Suppor the War = Support the Troops
So say you believe children should get a good education, so it's...
Support Education = Support Teachers.
But what if your kid's teacher is a child molester? Do you pull your kid from school forever?
Here's another...
Support the Police Department = Support the cops
But what if a few of the cops are bad? Do you stop supporting the whole department?
What if you work for a guy who's a real a-hole but you need a job? Do you stop supporting yourself?!
---
I wonder if this idea can be applied to bras...
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Your problem is that you cannot separate the macro from the micro.
So you say Suppor the War = Support the Troops
YES
So say you believe children should get a good education, so it's...
YES
Support Education = Support Teachers.
YES if we don't support our teachers then who's going to give our kids a real education?
But what if your kid's teacher is a child molester? Do you pull your kid from school forever?
NO! That's a child molester, not a real teacher; in my book
Here's another...
Support the Police Department = Support the cops
Correct...
But what if a few of the cops are bad? Do you stop supporting the whole department?
NO! Bad cops are not real cops; not in my world.
Real cops do not discriminate against anyone and if they do then they need to get fired because he or she is not a real cop and not doing their job.
What if you work for a guy who's a real a-hole but you need a job? Do you stop supporting yourself?!
No, I would quit and go get me another @!#$ JOB
Oh, well then Bush isn't a real president.
---
oh wait I got one.
I support my friends = wanting them home
not
I support my friends <> so let's send them off to war.
Doesn't that work, too?
---
^^^ I've been saying that for 7 YEARS!!!
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
When you join the military is to fight for your country and hoping to return back home safe to your family and friends, not stay home and still get your reimbursement and benefits.
The war is against terrorist, not the iraqi people who want freedom
So?
This is America.
but if this guy was our president, they all would be dead!
So? You said you can't support the troops if you're against the war? What about those veterans? You're going to tell me they don't support the troops?
---
Not supporting the war does not help supporting our troops.
if we only support 50% of the war that's not enough to win
50% =
F
We are not going to win this thing if we keep bitching about it.
So you're saying the veterans don't support the troops?
---
If you REALLY think its about terrorism, let me disabuse you of that notion:
- No terrorists in Iraq before the war.
LINK: Note Cheney didn't say Seig Heil.
- Al Qaeda and Iraq had no formal, informal or passing relationship.
LINK: Read the Summary.
- Al Qaeda infiltrated Iraq through Iran, Jordan and Saudi Arabia AFTER the invasion commenced.
LINK
- There are numerous factions that are threatening to tear Iraq apart, most of them were in Iraq long before the invasion
LINK
At this point, there's 2 options to fixing the situation: Fix Iraq, or let it plunge into civil war. As much as I applaud the soldiers that discharge their duties faithfully and honourably, they are doing the bidding of a White house that got it's hand caught in the cookie jar.
To be honest, Iraq had nothing at all to do with WMD, nor Terrorism, nor Freedom. Individuals may assign the Iraqis' freedom as the end goal, but it's pretty clear that at this point, it's not happening because if it truly was the end goal, then there would be a MUCH larger commitment by the US, and the UN wouldn't be watching the US flail around. I don't pin that responsibility on Soldiers, I pin that responsibility on the President and White House staff.
You CAN support the Troops, and NOT support the war. I think that if you want to use troops for an action, it's only honourable to use them in defence of something provable and a direct threat to American lives in the USA.
Iraq was well handled in 2001, and up until invasion day, they were being cagey about their WMD programs because they didn't consider the US to be the bigger threat. IRAN still had an axe to grind with Iraq, and the best way to keep the Iranians at bay was to keep the threat of WMD present. So, if there was no WMD, no Terrorists, and up until now there is no real interest on the part of the White House to truly and properly secure Iraq and help rebuild the country and their freedom, then what exactly was the point of going in there again?
I hate to think that the soldiers and civilian contractors that died in Iraq died in vain.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Yeah, sometimes free speach does suck, but aren't you glad you can say what you want about anyone and not have to worry about being arrested or prosecuted in some way, shape, or form. Have fun with your debate guys.
---------------------------------------------------
4 Cams...32 Valves...5 Liters...This Could Get Fun!
hey come back!
I'm in trouble here thanks to you! LOL
j/k
I have it all under control
Hope things work out for you in your Black & White world... Things are a whole lot more grey than you think.
Vets, and people like myself, Agustin, Keeper... et al can support the troops and not have any problem whatsoever with not supporting the war. In my personal opinion, Iraq won't be won, or even stabilized for at least 15-20 years, because of an inept plan of war. The war wasn't started by soldiers, it was started by politicians.
I'd rather see a soldier fight (and die, if necessary) for something tangible, and I dare say most if not all soldiers would want their deeds and deaths to not be for naught. At this point, there's no long-term tangible good going to come out of Iraq because there is no real plan to fix the long-term problems and deep-seeded rifts in that society (part of that requires having a LOT more people on the ground, not just Military, but civilian police and Army Corps of Engineers).
I support the troops, and the way that you honour the dead in Iraq is to make it better and more secure. At this point, I think that pulling out is a bad idea because it condemns the country to a civil war or being taken over by Iran. That's not support for the war, that's support for a real end.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Robby002 wrote:Not supporting the war does not help supporting our troops.
if we only support 50% of the war that's not enough to win
50% = F
We are not going to win this thing if we keep bitching about it.
well apparently for you the best way to support our soldiers would be to become one yourself and make a difference.
if
you don't join the military you don't support the troops
Robby002 wrote:hey come back!
I'm in trouble here thanks to you! LOL
j/k
I have it all under control
My grandma used to say "The first thing you say is right".
At least you admit it.
What terrorists?
The ones that were not in Iraq until after the invation?
Or the ones from Saudi that actually did attack the US?
Or the Saudi that was in Afganastan? Remember Afganastan? I know, I know, the US is active in Afganastan, but why is the focus on Iraq?
because it should be, know why? Because it's wrong, there was no justifiable reason to invade Iraq and that is a good reason to be big news. The bulk of US troops are there because after they dispacthed Husain the country became a magnet for every nut job in the region. They dumped those troops in the middle of a hornets nest and then lit a beacon that said come and get us. Like bees to honey they invaded the vacuum left by Husain and created an unwinable situation. As long as US and UK troops are in the region the radicals will keep pouring in from all over the region and likely the world.
Is this really to the benifit of the people of the US and the UK? How so?
Iraq was no threat to the US, and still is no threat to the US. If you know differently then please explain.
It was because a US puppet dictator started misbehaving. The sad fact is that the world is much more dangerous now for US citizens and to a slightly lesser extent, its allies. We have an expression up here, if the US sneezes, we catch a cold. Just in case you were wondering why we are even concerned about this situation. It's also because we care about our brothers to the south.
PAX
PS: This is what part of the alphabet would look like if Q and R were eliminated
- Mitch Hedberg (RIP)
ehh all i know is that it SUCKS being over there.................................................. and thats exactly why i wont ever join the military. I dont give a rats@^% if ppl say i dont support the troops, well I DONT. so what? i dont believe thats a crime.
You got the good flame suit I hope...
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Orlandomon wrote:ehh all i know is that it SUCKS being over there.................................................. and thats exactly why i wont ever join the military. I dont give a rats@^% if ppl say i dont support the troops, well I DONT. so what? i dont believe thats a crime.
Okay you don't support the troops ... good for you .
wouldn't it be ironic though if Bin L and his Team came crashin
in your door some day and enjoyed anal pleasures at your
expense ....
NOTE : yes i'm aware that won't happen any time soon . ... " sigh "
