Repertoire89 said:

I'm indifferent on the whole subject, fighting an unjust war isn't exactly endearing but many soldiers apparently have/had good intentions at least. As far as people enlisting solely for the benefits, sometimes there isn't much other choice if you want to live the "American dream".

WW2 and the Revolutionary War are the only wars this country has fought that I would support on principle. For everything else I'm against the war and indifferent towards those tricked into fighting it.

---

zappaisgod said:

Who said anybody is "told that they need to thank the men and women".  If you don't want to, don't.  You are under no obligation to do so.

---

zappaisgod said:

Uzziel said:

Would you prefer them to not say anything? At least they give the minimum.

I'll thank WW2/Vietnam vets, but everyone else, I don't think we should even be overseas, I'm not going to thank them for that. I'm not going to support injustice. We've killed more civillians than terrorists over there. Fuck that.

---

This is a fucking lie.  Most of the civilian casualties, by far, were caused by our enemies.  Maybe you like the Taliban chopping heads.  Apologist.

---

Patlal said:

zappaisgod said:

Uzziel said:

Would you prefer them to not say anything? At least they give the minimum.

I'll thank WW2/Vietnam vets, but everyone else, I don't think we should even be overseas, I'm not going to thank them for that. I'm not going to support injustice. We've killed more civillians than terrorists over there. Fuck that.

---

This is a fucking lie.  Most of the civilian casualties, by far, were caused by our enemies.  Maybe you like the Taliban chopping heads.  Apologist.

---

Well it seems like the US government info bulletin worked after all. Hell it even got you to believe it.

The US killed so many more citizens than terrorists the numbers are not even comparable. Less than 1% of the population down there are considered radicals and only a few of them actually becomes terrorists. Hell lets make it 5%...

100k+ deaths

That would mean you guys hit 5000 terrorists and 95000 others. Now let say for the sake of argument that 50% of that 95k was military... Thats still maybe 45k innocents if I round it down.

Now for the sake of being conservative, instead of 45k innocents, I'll round it down to 25k innocent and I'll compare it to the rounded up 5k terrorists dead. Its still a 5:1 innocent per terrorist ratio.

So yeah... Don't even start to believe that wars such as Irak and Afghanistan doesn't make innocent casulties by the thousands. There's acertain limit to which you have to realize that government lies are government lies... Info bulletin such as this coming from the US government should be taken with at least 50 tons of salt.

---

Patlal said:

zappaisgod said:

Uzziel said:

Would you prefer them to not say anything? At least they give the minimum.

I'll thank WW2/Vietnam vets, but everyone else, I don't think we should even be overseas, I'm not going to thank them for that. I'm not going to support injustice. We've killed more civillians than terrorists over there. Fuck that.

---

This is a fucking lie.  Most of the civilian casualties, by far, were caused by our enemies.  Maybe you like the Taliban chopping heads.  Apologist.

---

Well it seems like the US government info bulletin worked after all. Hell it even got you to believe it.

The US killed so many more citizens than terrorists the numbers are not even comparable. Less than 1% of the population down there are considered radicals and only a few of them actually becomes terrorists. Hell lets make it 5%...

100k+ deaths

That would mean you guys hit 5000 terrorists and 95000 others. Now let say for the sake of argument that 50% of that 95k was military... Thats still maybe 45k innocents if I round it down.

---

zappaisgod said:

I don't think Iraq Body Count ascribes deaths to any particular side but I haven't looked at it in a while.

---

Quote:

"This is an ongoing human security project which maintains and updates the world’s only independent and comprehensive public database of media-reported civilian deaths in Iraq that have resulted from the 2003 military intervention by the USA and its allies. The count includes civilian deaths caused by coalition military action and by military or paramilitary responses to the coalition presence (e.g. insurgent and terrorist attacks). It also includes excess civilian deaths caused by criminal action resulting from the breakdown in law and order which followed the coalition invasion."

---

zappaisgod said:

Nobody was tricked.  You disapprove of the Civil War?  Do you know what happened to the people of S Vietnam after we abandoned them.  Do you think it would be a good thing if S. Korea looked like N. Korea?  Do you support the Taliban?  How about Saddam Hussein, if only on environmental criminal grounds?

---

Enjoywho said:

What about ww1? Vietnam war? Korean war?

---

Prisoner#1 said:

Patlal said:

zappaisgod said:

Uzziel said:

Would you prefer them to not say anything? At least they give the minimum.

I'll thank WW2/Vietnam vets, but everyone else, I don't think we should even be overseas, I'm not going to thank them for that. I'm not going to support injustice. We've killed more civillians than terrorists over there. Fuck that.

---

This is a fucking lie.  Most of the civilian casualties, by far, were caused by our enemies.  Maybe you like the Taliban chopping heads.  Apologist.

---

Well it seems like the US government info bulletin worked after all. Hell it even got you to believe it.

The US killed so many more citizens than terrorists the numbers are not even comparable. Less than 1% of the population down there are considered radicals and only a few of them actually becomes terrorists. Hell lets make it 5%...

100k+ deaths

That would mean you guys hit 5000 terrorists and 95000 others. Now let say for the sake of argument that 50% of that 95k was military... Thats still maybe 45k innocents if I round it down.

---

so where exactly are you getting those numbers?

---

Enjoywho said:

I don't particularly agree with anything the US government has been doing war wise but this is still my home and I would defend it with my life if it came down to it.

---

Repertoire89 said:

zappaisgod said:

Nobody was tricked.  You disapprove of the Civil War?  Do you know what happened to the people of S Vietnam after we abandoned them.  Do you think it would be a good thing if S. Korea looked like N. Korea?  Do you support the Taliban?  How about Saddam Hussein, if only on environmental criminal grounds?

---

Enjoywho said:

What about ww1? Vietnam war? Korean war?

---

Civil War: abolitionism was a pretense as far as I know, which I'm admittedly not certain about. The cause of this war as I see it was State vs Federal power, and I do not think either side was justified in violence over such a matter.

Vietnam, Korea, Taliban, Saddam: none of our business. If we were a global police force we've done more damage than good and should quit while we're behind.

That's just my opinion though, suggesting that I support the Taliban is absurd. As far as 911 goes, the issue is far too fuzzy and the reaction was too quick with far too questionable intelligence to justify a war. War is serious business, its nothing to jump into.

---

Enjoywho said:

Extremism isn't a reason to go to war with an entire country. What can you do though humans dont change were gonna blow eachother up some day it's inevitable.

---

Its pretty sad, the game hasn't changed much over the past 2000 years except that slavery has been exported overseas and away from the eyes of the public.

Civil issues have improved though through peaceful means, some of the biggest issues have been worked over through violence but not as acts of rebellion or war (workers rights). I think that's as far as things should really go when it comes to civil issues.