|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,789
I feel Guilty, Oh so guilty
|
I feel Guilty, Oh so guilty
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,789 |
Originally posted by 99blacksesport:
Originally posted by Davo:
Originally posted by Andy W.:
PEBKAC!
LMAO!! 
what does that mean!?
Laugh My Ass Off
"If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit"
-Mitch Hedberg
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,718
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 3,718 |
Originally posted by Antonio:
I wonder how much Pro War in Iraq [censored] would you be spouting if you had AK and morter rounds flying over your head. I am really curious. I see idiots like Sean Hannity and other talking heads(many on this board) spout all this nonsense BUT they are not over there fighting NOR are thier kids. If you believe so much in the cause then sign up.
Basic training needs to be done by 28 or it's a no-go.
I'm out on that piece, but it wouldn't keep me from doing contract work...
CIA also recruits for most spots up until the age of 35, though you need to be 10 years younger than that for a shot at field work. I tried this route in college and afterwards for a few years, but after finally making it through 3 interviews, Langley decided I wasn't their flavor of employee (I think my former orgy of drug use came back to haunt me there).
I'll make sure to tell the friends I have in certain security and intel positions that ARE working to support those on the ground fighting that they are idiots spouting nonsense and that they are pu**ies for not forcing their kids to march off to war on an involuntary basis.
I'm willing to bet they will greatly appreciate these encouraging thoughts. 
I better lump myself in there, too, since I do support work specifically tied to a couple of government agencies that have a keen interest towards US security.
JaTo
e-Tough Guy
Missouri City, TX
99 Contour SVT
#143/2760
00 Corvette Coupe
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,307
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,307 |
I'm for the war in Iraq. Why? Because it was necessary to remove a threat BEFORE it was imminent.
All of you people b!tching about the war would be the same ones crying about us not having gone after him if he managed to kill a few thousand of us on the homeland.
Would I have served? You're damn right I would have. I've got a condition that would relegate me to a desk job. Could I do that? Yes, but I would WANT to be on that line, doing my damndest to protect the lives and freedoms of my brothers and sisters. Can I? No.
Hell, in High School, I was applying to the Naval Academy to get in as a pilot, but, suddenly found myself wearing glasses, which at the time completely barred me from my hopes of ever making it. Shattered a dream I had for MANY years.
Would I be HAPPY about being sent over? No. I would fear for my life, but I'd be more afraid of what my wife and kids would have to deal with if I got KIA.
For those of you who were saying that there was no reason for us to invade, how long do you think it was going to take Saddam to build up the guts again to roll over Saudi Arabia, realign with Iran and Al Qaeda, and then really start slaughtering innocents by the thousands, if not millions? We've removed a serious threat BEFORE he could strike us. Sorry, I see absolutely no harm in that.
Like JaTo, I disagree with the pisspoor handling of post-invasion and nation-building. We had a great military plan, but, not NO engineering plan.
1998 SVT Contour Silver Frost for sale in Classifieds.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,489
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,489 |
Originally posted by Andy W.:
TMK, it was always called OEF.
that's what it was labeled after the weapons inspectors couldn't find the wmds our intelligence agencies were supposedly helping them to look for, and we had already pulled the trigger on troop deployment.
Originally posted by Andy W.:
So if something doesn't effect you, you don't care eh.
show me where i've said that and i'll pay pal you $50. eh.
'03 Saab 9-5 Aero
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,489
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,489 |
Originally posted by RTStabler51:
Yes, the world's intelligence agencies made up a huge lie so that the US could invade, MI5, CIA, Russkies, etc....:rollseyes:
no one made up lies so the US could 'invade'. everyone provided evidence that iraq MIGHT have unaccounted for wmds. this doesn't support the assertion at the time that iraq was an imminent threat and associated with al qaeda. and btw how many of those countries which provided some evidence also provided troops to 'invade' iraq?
'03 Saab 9-5 Aero
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,039
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,039 |
Originally posted by BP:
OR the US was in imminent and legitimate clear and present danger from the nation in question.
And tell me why we should even let anyone GET to that point to begin with?
IMO, we knock 'em dead BEFORE they become a imminent, legitimate and present danger.
I didn't see you join up when 9/11 happened and OBL claimed responsibility.
-J
'98 4Runner
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,489
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,489 |
Originally posted by Davo:
That's precisely why the Democratic party and your ideology were just voted against: 1) You only respond to attacks (I don't buy the idea that you'd take pre-emptive action), and 2) You don't understand what an imminent and legitimate threat is.
every time you post here you reinforce your village idiot status.
1) no where did i insinuate 'response' mode only. i was all for afghanistan and they didn't even spit in our direction.
2) i know what imminent and legitimate threat is and iraq didn't meet the litmus test then or now.
'03 Saab 9-5 Aero
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,228
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,228 |
Originally posted by Antonio:
I wonder how much Pro War in Iraq [censored] would you be spouting if you had AK and morter rounds flying over your head. I am really curious. I see idiots like Sean Hannity and other talking heads(many on this board) spout all this nonsense BUT they are not over there fighting NOR are thier kids. If you believe so much in the cause then sign up.
I don't count?
95 Contour SE ATX V6- SOLD
2001.5 VW Passat GLX V6 Tiptronic
2004 Honda VTX 1800N1
There are no stupid questions.
There are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 637
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 637 |
Originally posted by Davo:
Originally posted by Antonio:
I wonder how much Pro War in Iraq [censored] would you be spouting if you had AK and morter rounds flying over your head. If you believe so much in the cause then sign up.
:rolleyes
I support agriculture, but I don't want to be a farmer.
Look, this is not agriculture. When we start a war, we send thousands of people to their deaths and we force later generations to pay hundreds of billions in debt. Therefore, when we start a war, we ALWAYS have to ask: is it RIGHT? This moral question is what makes your analogy meaningless.
The reason Antonio raised this question is because some wars are wrong. Some wars are not really about defending our nation. Some wars are about grabbing other people's stuff, or sticking our nose in where it doesn't belong. If this war was really about defending our nation, you and almost every other able-bodied male would be enlisting. You're not. So maybe this war is about grabbing other people's stuff (improving American companies' access to oil, looting the U.S. treasury for well-connected defense contractors) and sticking our nose where it doesn't belong (the middle east).
Originally posted by Davo:
People can support our military action but not want to be soldiers.
There's the problem. You think this is about what YOU want. A just war is about defendng our nation and sacrificing for the common good. You like the idea of the Iraq war, but you aren't willing to make the sacrifice. Deep down, it is not worth it to you.
Originally posted by Davo:
What you're trying to say here is that the cause we are fighting for is not noble enough for all people to go and get enlisted.
You are correct.
Originally posted by Davo:
That is your opinion. But your point was not made.
Antonio was simply asking those who support the war to justify their (by all accounts widespread) refusal to back up their bluster with real committment. He asked a question; he was not making a case. So your statement that his "point was not made" makes no sense. It is for you to answer the question in a way that persuades us that you are not a hypocrite.
Originally posted by Davo:
Would I go? I was interested in enlisting back in 1998 but got the immediate DQ because of asthma.
Did you try to sign up during the Iraq war, or only in 1998, when it seemed safer? Did you actually apply for enlistment even in 1998?
Originally posted by Davo:
That being said, I still think the battles we are engaged in today are worth dying for.
Translation: you think the Iraq war is worth SOMEONE ELSE dying for.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by BP:
1) no where did i insinuate 'response' mode only. i was all for afghanistan and they didn't even spit in our direction.
I bolded the relevant clause:
Originally posted by BP:
as far as volunteering to fight in any war...i'd try to join the military in a second to protect our homeland if another nation attacked us first OR the US was in imminent and legitimate clear and present danger from the nation in question.
And being in 'response mode only' was referring to the fact that you can't identify a legitimate and imminent threat. Therefore, your only action is reactive.
Originally posted by BP:
2) i know what imminent and legitimate threat is and iraq didn't meet the litmus test then or now.
Obviously you don't, because you think Iraq was all for naught. And if you think pre-emptive action should be based on a 'litmus test', then that is further proof that you do not understand the complexity of the circumstances surrounding military action.
|
|
|
|
|
