• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. troops hope Afghanistan sacrifices not in vain

You used, "your", wrong...lol.

Couldn't resist, sorry.
 
Last edited:
Aunt Spiker said:
Yep.
This is part of the reaon why women are not allowed in front-line combat units. Too many variables.
(Which I support - some things are just facts. You have to be able to depend on your troops)
Click to expand...
what? what variables?
 
Ikari said:
I already told you why perhaps Nazi soldiers followed rules. It's not my fault you can't read. For our side, we have a volunteer military, people choose to join and agree to contract. President is Commander in Chief. If you want to talk about how we can employ our military so freely against other countries without formal Declaration of War, I'll entertain that argument. But our military has ways for people of moral objection to be moved around. However, the basis of any military could not remain if people were free to come and go as they please. And I wouldn't want to pay someone to do nothing and then run away when needed.

You're using absurd examples of the most polarizing and extreme case you can. Trying to construct an appeal to emotion. OH NOES, the Nazis! And then you try to claim that people have supported the Nazis and their actions. All I said was don't be dumb.
Click to expand...

i did read it. i pay little attention to your guesses as to why these troops did as they did.

you have a volunteer military in the US does this make them less responsible for their personal actions? does invasion somehow fit into that?

when a person says that a US soldier is there to follow orders and he does to the extent of invading a nation and killing masses of innocents and tortures. this is okay according to many that have posted here.

when i suggest that this was the same defense that the Nazi high command tried to use. you get all pissed off.

it is in fact the same thing. if you support one you support the other. stop making excuses for a wavering standard and a broken train of logic. you can't have it both ways. if it right now for the US to invade than it was right for Russia to invade Georgia. if it was right for the US troops to follow wrong headed orders it is right for the Nazi's to have done the same. what is so hard to understand in that.
 
liblady said:
were you a u.s. citizen at some point?
Click to expand...

yes i was. i decided that the country was a shell of what it had been. i could no longer tolerate the lies from government nor many of the people that still believed that the system was working. when Bush was elected by morons for the second time. that was near the end. when Obama did not move the troops out of Iraq on day one that was the end.

if he was against the Iraq mess from day one, why are troops still there?
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
What happens when the other tribe does not have this issue?



Talk about believing in unicorns and santa clause! :lol:
Click to expand...

at least i know what i believe in. i would like to see the day when if you have children and they wake up and realize what a phony you are. what kind of story will you make up to get them to believe you again?
 
katiegrrl0 said:
yes i was. i decided that the country was a shell of what it had been. i could no longer tolerate the lies from government nor many of the people that still believed that the system was working. when Bush was elected by morons for the second time. that was near the end. when Obama did not move the troops out of Iraq on day one that was the end.

if he was against the Iraq mess from day one, why are troops still there?
Click to expand...
the troops in iraq are drawing down. there is absolutely no way obama could end that end on day 1. i too was horrified that bush was elected a second time, but we survived, if barely.

surely wherever you are now isn't perfect? are you in GB? or?
 
katiegrrl0 said:
at least i know what i believe in. i would like to see the day when if you have children and they wake up and realize what a phony you are. what kind of story will you make up to get them to believe you again?
Click to expand...





Lol.... Id report you for losing all composure and calling me names and attacking my family. But you seem so pathetically butt hurt i'll simply just laugh at you ex-american sour grapes obnoxiousness.....


You are the very intolerance you say you hate. I pity you.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
i did read it. i pay little attention to your guesses as to why these troops did as they did.

you have a volunteer military in the US does this make them less responsible for their personal actions? does invasion somehow fit into that?

when a person says that a US soldier is there to follow orders and he does to the extent of invading a nation and killing masses of innocents and tortures. this is okay according to many that have posted here.

when i suggest that this was the same defense that the Nazi high command tried to use. you get all pissed off.

it is in fact the same thing. if you support one you support the other. stop making excuses for a wavering standard and a broken train of logic. you can't have it both ways. if it right now for the US to invade than it was right for Russia to invade Georgia. if it was right for the US troops to follow wrong headed orders it is right for the Nazi's to have done the same. what is so hard to understand in that.
Click to expand...

I think Russia had reasonable beef to invade Georgia. Though their tactics are harsh. I don't think the US had reason to invade Iraq. So yes, I can have it both ways. Because the situations are different and it depends on specifics.

Many soldiers of the Nazi regime were not punished. It was only the high command, the ones issuing the orders, being punished BTW.
 
liblady said:
the troops in iraq are drawing down. there is absolutely no way obama could end that end on day 1. i too was horrified that bush was elected a second time, but we survived, if barely.

surely wherever you are now isn't perfect? are you in GB? or?
Click to expand...

he could have taken them out of there.

i have been living in Israel under a French passport. we are leaving at the end of the week and will be in South Afrika. we spent 6 months of 08 living there. it was a great time. we made a lot of friends and did so much. the land is beautiful. the poverty is alarming in certain parts. there is work to do. like any nation it has it's corruptions and struggles. it does tend to mind it's own business. it is not all about oil dollars. it does not send troops out to nation build. it does not have a huge impact on the world.

what it does have are a struggling mass of people that work each day to try and scratch out a living. it has kids that have grown up to become families of gangs. there is an entire sub culture that sleeps in the fields and in unused sewer pipes that are set to be laid.

there are a tremendous number of abandoned children. i do not see all the anti abortion people running to this nation to adopt. i see these kids getting weak and worn.

it is not America. it does not have a huge military. it does like America have a lot of good well meaning people. the leaders as all leaders have their issues.

i can do a lot of good in South Afrika. i have been lucky in life and can help some of those poor. i can maybe bring in some others that would help with such a task. we will never turn away a hungry person from our door. we will never arm ourselves against the rabble. we will just be to do what we can. that is the best i can do.

we did adopt a beautiful little girl from there her name is Kanshieka. she is such a princess. her parents are unknown, she was found on the streets at about 17 months. she is around 2 years old and will have a home for the first time since she was found months ago. we pick her up on Monday of next week. we look forward to that.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Lol.... Id report you for losing all composure and calling me names and attacking my family. But you seem so pathetically butt hurt i'll simply just laugh at you ex-american sour grapes obnoxiousness.....


You are the very intolerance you say you hate. I pity you.
Click to expand...

report me. have at it. i call it as i see it. when a person knows nothing of which they speak as you do what else is there to say. i don't pity you i feel sorry for your family having to go through life in close quarters with you. i do realize that you have this golden idea of yourself and you may have others baffled around here but it is clear you have not a grip on anything that you type. you have no idea what it is to be logical. you have no idea what it is like to stand for the same thing consistently.

i am intolerant of ignorance and you are at the head of the list.
 
Ikari said:
I think Russia had reasonable beef to invade Georgia. Though their tactics are harsh. I don't think the US had reason to invade Iraq. So yes, I can have it both ways. Because the situations are different and it depends on specifics.

Many soldiers of the Nazi regime were not punished. It was only the high command, the ones issuing the orders, being punished BTW.
Click to expand...

yes Russia had far more reason than the US had in Iraq.

but the soldiers did go to Iraq so the consequences are on them.

the high command were taking orders from Hitler. what he wanted done they did. they were following orders as well. they should have said no. just as the troops in the US should have said no to Bush. it is in fact the same thing. there were also lower officers in the Nazi regime that were put on trial as well. it was not solely the high command.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
yes Russia had far more reason than the US had in Iraq.

but the soldiers did go to Iraq so the consequences are on them.

the high command were taking orders from Hitler. what he wanted done they did. they were following orders as well. they should have said no. just as the troops in the US should have said no to Bush. it is in fact the same thing. there were also lower officers in the Nazi regime that were put on trial as well. it was not solely the high command.
Click to expand...

Try not to forget they were led by a lie.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Let's keep it civil. Last warning.
 
Not to pick on you, Katie, because I like you :)
But you vex me most deeply.

In a thread on religion you suggested that religious people are unstable and/or their religious beliefs are unacceptable and illogical - at the least...(I could go quote fishing but I don't think it's necessary).

Yet your ideas against the military are based on a tyrants actions that were expressly anti-religious as well. He, too believed that their religious beliefs were the root of all inherent evils in the world and blamed them for almost everything bad that happened (as far as his little eyes could see).

So how do your anti-religious views differ than his anti-religious views?

And, in this light, how can a non-religious war be compared to one that's waged purely against a religion (or a people)?
 
Last edited:
SE102 said:
Try not to forget they were led by a lie.
Click to expand...

i do realize this. Congress was as well. that is why i hold them less responsible then the Executive branch.

the troops who were already enlisted at the time of the first strike could be excused for their actions as they were following the lie. those that reenlisted or came once the truth was revealed i have no respect for. they should of at that point said well George have a nice war. many you can get your oil buddies to help you out with this one.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
i do realize this. Congress was as well. that is why i hold them less responsible then the Executive branch.

the troops who were already enlisted at the time of the first strike could be excused for their actions as they were following the lie. those that reenlisted or came once the truth was revealed i have no respect for. they should of at that point said well George have a nice war. many you can get your oil buddies to help you out with this one.
Click to expand...

So in Hitler's army which was lead by: fear tactics against his soldiers to coherce them into the force, the abduction of young boys in order to brainwash them into fighting and the use of lies and dire cohersion that is the equivalent of torture to get them to "see things his way" as well as lying and convincing them that "Jews are the scourge of the earth" ... all these things he used with the troops he commanded - none of that is remotely understandable or excusable in your view (from what i understand), And in your view his minions were all inherently evil regardless of their own plights.

However, having already been in the service (as you said about the US soldiers in your quoted post) prior to a (or "the") lie is presented by the leader makes subsequent actions of following commands acceptable?
Yet - if someone becomes aware of the lie after it's made public then their 'following commands' is unacceptable?
(I'm just making sure I understand this part). . .

So - does this apply to Hitler's army, as well? Those who joined before Hitler was their commander are excused and those who joined after are not?

Your belief has holes in it - though knowing what I know about your view, they're understandable to a degree but you can't overlook the differences between how different horrid events via military have been conducted.

All countries and armies are not created equal.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Not to pick on you, Katie, because I like you :)
But you vex me most deeply.

In a thread on religion you suggested that religious people are unstable and/or their religious beliefs are unacceptable and illogical - at the least...(I could go quote fishing but I don't think it's necessary).

Yet your ideas against the military are based on a tyrants actions that were expressly anti-religious as well. He, too believed that their religious beliefs were the root of all inherent evils in the world and blamed them for almost everything bad that happened (as far as his little eyes could see).

So how do your anti-religious views differ than his anti-religious views?

And, in this light, how can a non-religious war be compared to one that's waged purely against a religion (or a people)?
Click to expand...

i have used Hitler's Nazi Germany as an example to show how the people that have been posting opposing views will support the Us in the same type of actions as a global arch enemy.

what i am comparing is the attitudes. it was wrong when the Nazi's followed orders that caused the Holocaust. it is not wrong when the US troops follow orders to Invade Iraq or to waterboard.

why do people not see that these things are the same. Nazi's invaded Poland with no cause. a bad thing

the Us invades Iraq on a pack of lies with no cause but this is just fine with Americans. that is a double standard.

i am not in any way supporting Hitler's actions. i am drawing a parallel between the actions of Hitler and Bush. the troops in both cases should have refused to follow the leaders.
 
reefedjib said:
What was Russia's good reason for invading Georgia?
Click to expand...

i did not say good reason now did i.

i said they had more reason. it was because of the border problems that were happening. Iraq was not in any way attacking Florida or New York or Maine.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
So in Hitler's army which was lead by: fear tactics against his soldiers to coherce them into the force, the abduction of young boys in order to brainwash them into fighting and the use of lies and dire cohersion that is the equivalent of torture to get them to "see things his way" as well as lying and convincing them that "Jews are the scourge of the earth" ... all these things he used with the troops he commanded - none of that is remotely understandable or excusable in your view (from what i understand), And in your view his minions were all inherently evil regardless of their own plights.

However, having already been in the service (as you said about the US soldiers in your quoted post) prior to a (or "the") lie is presented by the leader makes subsequent actions of following commands acceptable?
Yet - if someone becomes aware of the lie after it's made public then their 'following commands' is unacceptable?
(I'm just making sure I understand this part). . .

So - does this apply to Hitler's army, as well? Those who joined before Hitler was their commander are excused and those who joined after are not?

Your belief has holes in it - though knowing what I know about your view, they're understandable to a degree but you can't overlook the differences between how different horrid events via military have been conducted.

All countries and armies are not created equal.
Click to expand...

no it does not make all actions after the fact acceptable. when the truth was revealed in both cases it was time for the troops to say enough. the first ones in both cases before the truth was exposed at least thought they were doing something correct.

it let's them off the hook for the early stages in both cases.

Mind you i never support a war or conflict in the case of Iraq. i never in mind see just cause to do either. i can see the troops point that they thought they were doing the right thing. once they knew the truth (if it were me) i would have told them i would no longer fight. in Germany in WWII that action would have cost me my life. in the US i would probably be in jail. i would rather the consequences for doing the right thing than the mental suffering of having done all that killing for an unjust cause.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
i have used Hitler's Nazi Germany as an example to show how the people that have been posting opposing views will support the Us in the same type of actions as a global arch enemy.

what i am comparing is the attitudes. it was wrong when the Nazi's followed orders that caused the Holocaust. it is not wrong when the US troops follow orders to Invade Iraq or to waterboard.

why do people not see that these things are the same. Nazi's invaded Poland with no cause. a bad thing

the Us invades Iraq on a pack of lies with no cause but this is just fine with Americans. that is a double standard.

i am not in any way supporting Hitler's actions. i am drawing a parallel between the actions of Hitler and Bush. the troops in both cases should have refused to follow the leaders.
Click to expand...

To the bolded - this is an excellent example of what happens when the wrong orders are given and followed mindlessly!

I, absolutely, hate such torture tactics and feel that, of course, they have no place in any nation's military or police force, etc, and in these cases I feel that the individuals should be tried, as well as the leaders who give such orders and so forth.

Yet, at the same time, I still believe the overall police-nature of the military pertaining to the country as a whole functions properly, is necessary and so forth.

While I love to debate with you further I have to get to bed!
 
Last edited:
Aunt Spiker said:
To the bolded - this is an excellent example of what happens when the wrong orders are given and followed mindlessly!

I, absolutely, hate such torture tactics and feel that, of course, they have no place in any nation's military or police force, etc, and in these cases I feel that the individuals should be tried, as well as the leaders who give such orders and so forth.

Yet, at the same time, I still believe the overall police-nature of the military pertaining to the country as a whole functions properly, is necessary and so forth.

While I love to debate with you further I have to get to bed!
Click to expand...

nite nite

to make a point about military as someone did in one of the numerous posts. the military used as homeland defense is one thing. i do not support military at all but see that there is a validreason why a country would want to protect it's shore. i see this because i realize that the entire world would not play by my rules.

what alarms me is that a President holding the reigns of the massive military power of the US can get away with such an action and the people of your nation have no recourse. there will be no punishment for him or the military leaders that supported his lies.

it is sad that your nation has fallen so far from glory to begin assaulting nations that in no way can hurt you. the revenge reason or oil are just not good reasons for all the death. they just are not. defending ones homeland is one thing. this was totally another.

in Afghanistan though i detest the policy of the Taliban we had no cause to attack the entire nation. this was a police action that should have been aimed at the specific target Bin Laden. again your military followed orders that were so far and away unnecessary it was wrong.

following wrong orders is never the right thing to do and can in my mind never be justified.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
i do realize this. Congress was as well. that is why i hold them less responsible then the Executive branch.

the troops who were already enlisted at the time of the first strike could be excused for their actions as they were following the lie. those that reenlisted or came once the truth was revealed i have no respect for. they should of at that point said well George have a nice war. many you can get your oil buddies to help you out with this one.
Click to expand...

What unit did you serve in? Because, this is one of those occasions, that if you were there, you have no place to judge them. Did you serve in Iraq? If you didn't, you're talking out of your ass.
 
apdst said:
What unit did you serve in? Because, this is one of those occasions, that if you were there, you have no place to judge them. Did you serve in Iraq? If you didn't, you're talking out of your ass.
Click to expand...

i served with Reuters, BBC, London, Independent Press out of France and UPI.

i did film and photo journalism. you may have seen some of my work. now what unit is it that you were with. maybe you saw me. i was the skinny dyke with the cameras.

i don't fight in wars i film them so people can see the hate

once one knows the truth how do they continue. the Nazi's did the same damn thing and we all know what a mess that was.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom