Anonymous said...i am an american soldier who has fought in iraq for 2 tours. she calls me a terriost well its because of me her fat ass can even have a view.
or the people like her i wish she would say something to me face to face but that requires courage something she lacks but many american sevice men do i am ashamed that abc lets her even speak and that i defend a popus ass such as her she does't now the factsand or doesnt care to know them please remove her from society we will all be better off
thank you
3,500 dead American soldiers
650,000 dead Iraqi people
0 WMD's
Somebody Lied.
650,000 dead Iraqi people
0 WMD's
Somebody Lied.
9 comments:
I've been feeling the same thing - Rosie is on point on this issue. She can keep the other stuff. :-)
Big J
IMO, this is not even a debate. The truth that Rosie points out in reference to Iraq is very clear, concise and undebatable.
What happened to the weapons of isreal (i mean mass) destruction argument? Isn't that the reason we went to war? Ok, we went to war and for whatever reason Iraq doesn't have WMD. Based on the premise that's why we went to war, I think it's logical to conclude that we should leave.
Anon Soldier said:
"well its because of me her fat ass can even have a view."
Nope. Especially NOT because of you.
Let me first say that I grew up in the military. Being an Army brat I can tell you that the nature of today's armed forces and those of forty years ago are entirely different.
Given that the majority of soldiers at that time were draftees who didn't like where hey were, but endured it 'cause they saw it as part of their citizenship, the military, particularly the Army, was a difficult instrument to employ in long engagements which turned out to be of an aggressive nature. Also the Army of that time was, even though it was so employed, a highly unreliable instrument to use in a US civilian (like a riot and such) setting.
That's why we traditionally had the Marines. If you look at the history and function of the Marines, they were specialized shock troops mostly made up of volunteers who could be engaged in an agressive invasion of other countries without much problems.
Problem was, there were never enough Marines to sustain a long foreign war. That's not their primary function.
Thus, to an extent the Army was "Marineized" since the mid-1970s.
Now, Soldier. Tell me the honest to God truth. If your commander ordered you into an American city and, in a sustained action, told you to fire on masses of, let's say, "looters". Would you obey those orders?
40 years ago, orders like that would've been a problem for an American Army soldier. Maybe, just maybe even for a Marine.
Anon Soldier...
Not that I am a Rosie or View fan. I think the argument she was trying to make which I have heard before from even U.S. congressmen is the following. The average Iraq civilian who wears no uniform of a particular army. Whose government and country has just been attacked and invaded because another country said to their U.S. citizens "Iraq has WMDs" and is an "immiment danger". Only to later find out that there were no WMDs or links to Osama Bin. After the fact that civilian and others may think of our acts as a nation carried out by our military as terrorist acts.
Definition:
Terrorism
the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes
So your service is noble. And Rosie's clarity in blame may be deemed insufficient. But the reality of the events can not be disputed. Thus the anger is misplaced against a citizen who does not want people (including young servicemen) to die for incorrect intelligence. Otherwise, without challenging the facts we may as well serve a king or dictator which is another right we fight for. Be safe.
"So your service is noble."
Casp.
Not that I necessarily disagree, but why is that? Noble that is?
I mean, if it is so noble, why aren't the majority of the congress member's kids running around in Iraq? As soldiers, that is?
Unfortunately I cannot respect a soldier who commits illegal acts of war, especially not under the guise of "following orders", and not even if that soldier believes that he is doing the right thing. I hold Bush responsible for his decision to order the war of aggression against Iraq, and I hold everyone who participates in it accountable for their actions. A soldier who honestly repents his involvement will receive absolution from me because I believe in forgiveness.
I know this seems harsh, but I was in the military in 1991, when my unit was ordered to go go the gulf war courtesy of Bush the first. I was very conscious even at that young age that there were some things truely wrong with this foreign policy that says go along with our program or get ready for the pain. I was actually still green enough to mention this to my superiors, who told me this is what I had signed up for, I had taken the benefits and now I owed them my service. I politely informed him that I signed up with the department of defense, and I had no intention of going anywhere to kill anybody for any reason other than self defense. Nowhere in that swearing ceremony did they say I was signing on to bail out everybody in the world with a problem who was willing to pay the price for some kind of U.S. protection racket. Then I politely refused to go. I loaded trucks while everyone else loaded up and when they left, I went home. I was a Reservist and it was a short war, so I didn't have to face any ramifications. They put me on inactive status, and that was it until my discharge date in 1994.
Every soldier has a duty to understand that we are not the enforcers for some global godfather. You can't just go and blindly do the man's bidding and claim you didn't know what everybody else knows is wrong with this war and the people and ideology behind it. If you, as a soldier, don't think that there are a lot of terrified Iraqis right now, who tremble every time they hear a Blackhawk or a tank, you are delusional or part of the problem. Either way you get no pass from me.
Michael Fisher is right on point, yet again I might add. Even 40years ago the military was a completely different animal, and the people had much more control over it. Popular will was expressed by people who were not in it just for the money. they were there because their number had been called. Today's military is a bunch of underpaid mercenaries; I know because I was one of them. But every soldier is still an American citizen, a member of the most privileged society in the history of the world, and with such privilege comes the responsibility to pay attention, to know what is going on, to be a part of a positive process to benefit the rest of the world. To whom much is given, much is required.
Mike
My position is that his intent (without knowing him/her as a person) was more than likely to fight and defend my assets at least for this country against a true army of opposing soldiers. So for that his service I think is noble. It is not the fault of most service men and women for the deeds of the AIPAC and Dick Cheney.
As for why congressmen don't have skin and blood in the game. Because they no better. Next to the AARP ...AIPAC is running things and it ain't going to be pretty from here on out. Got me a place way way south of the border.
Yo, don't knock the AARP. I'm about to qualify for that outfit. (or am I already qualified? Maybe so. Gotta check into that).
Yeah man AARP... Too bad most of them are from that old school generation. I always wondered if a person was in both AARP and AIPAC would they fight to have ramps put in the temple. LOL
Post a Comment