Fort Hood- US army base attacked!

[Adam23]

You've never been in a real fight have you

i been in many real fights before !! what's your point ??

Timpo do me a favor, next time when you say something be more clear.

thank you.

And before anyone plays the "he knew what he signed up for" bullshit....soldiers sign up for the military to protect the United States, not go police the world.

exactly bro

 

[Ironslave]

Couldn't that be considered a form of stress?

If I was forced to go fight in an illegal never-ending war, I'd go fuckin nuts.

Somewhat, but him being in the military wasn't the root cause of his stress. His root cause was the foreign policy of the US around the world, particularly towards Iraq and Afghanistan and the offenses that the milirary has done killing civilians, escalating the conflicts and imposing on the territory of people who are also Islamic.

I don't think this is similar to typical military PTSD, ie, being over there in a conflict zone, seeing and doing horrible things, and so on. It's more similar to the "blowback" concept of their being unintended consequences of the foreign policy, the fact that he was about to go over there was the straw that broke the camel's back.

And before anyone plays the "he knew what he signed up for" bullshit....soldiers sign up for the military to protect the United States, not go police the world.

Of course, you know I agree with you here word for word.

 

[Natureboypkr]

And before anyone plays the "he knew what he signed up for" bullshit....soldiers sign up for the military to protect the United States, not go police the world.

yep.... I joined the military because I believe in the constitution.

 

[tim290280]

i been in many real fights before !! what's your point ??

Timpo do me a favor, next time when you say something be more clear.

thank you.

Real fights.......

My point was pretty simple. You had a little rant about how one incident should change the opinions and positions of the entire country. You also insinuated that Obama would and should pull an entire army out of conflict immediately. Both of your points are particularly naive and smack of someone who has never seen or understood real conflict.

If you had been in a real fight you would understand how hard it is to just backout.

 

[Ironslave]

Real fights.......

My point was pretty simple. You had a little rant about how one incident should change the opinions and positions of the entire country. You also insinuated that Obama would and should pull an entire army out of conflict immediately. Both of your points are particularly naive and smack of someone who has never seen or understood real conflict.

How did 'real fights' get dragged into this? What does a fist fight have to do with an opinion on war? I don't think Adam was ranting about this one incident should change the opinions/positions of an entire country at all. This blowback against the US has happened for decades, smaller scale (well, incidents that don't get media coverage, a suicide bomber blowing up 5 people rarely constitutes a mention anymore) incidents happen essentially daily.

Why can't the US just leave as quickly as possible? They went in there illegally, their presence just 'stirs the pot' in civil conflicts which have been going on for decades/centuries, it creates hatred towards them around the world, and then there's the whole thing about them having to borrow billions upon billions of dollars from China every year at interest to finance it, or just print the money, all the while the value of the dollar is heading down the tubes and the debt/deficit is sky rocketing?

 

[tim290280]

How did 'real fights' get dragged into this? What does a fist fight have to do with an opinion on war? I don't think Adam was ranting about this one incident should change the opinions/positions of an entire country at all. This blowback against the US has happened for decades, smaller scale (well, incidents that don't get media coverage, a suicide bomber blowing up 5 people rarely constitutes a mention anymore) incidents happen essentially daily.

Why can't the US just leave as quickly as possible? They went in there illegally, their presence just 'stirs the pot' in civil conflicts which have been going on for decades/centuries, it creates hatred towards them around the world, and then there's the whole thing about them having to borrow billions upon billions of dollars from China every year at interest to finance it, or just print the money, all the while the value of the dollar is heading down the tubes and the debt/deficit is sky rocketing?

I'd remind you of GB senior's backing out of Iraq after calling for a rise up against Saddam. Worked really well.

My statement is that it is naive to think that you can just backout quickly without repercussions. I know you're not suggesting this but Adam was. Real conflict has a habit of being more complicated.

 

[jwill0214]

There was obviously better ways to deal with his situation than how he did. Too show how much you hate the war and not wanting to go over there he decides to shoot his own people. What is that going to solve? If he didn't want to go over there he should have just refused and been arrested. The only person that effects is him.

I have to agree with Tim, we just can't backout quickly. If we did this without establishing a strong government and military for these countries than the regimes that we fought so hard to get rid of would go right back into power.

 

[Adam23]

^^the regimes will go back in power sooner or later, this war is not going to change nothing.

so what the US should do is end this war, and let these people take care of their own problems.

 

[Ironslave]

I'd remind you of GB senior's backing out of Iraq after calling for a rise up against Saddam. Worked really well.

He may have called for a rise up against Saddam for a soundbyte or whatever, but at the same time, they did this... oops!:

ie, the US were the ones who gave him all his weapons that he used to gas his people. Not to mention, they were the ones who helped him and his allies in the early 60's.


the following is an excerpt from the book "Sorrows of the Empire" by Chalmers Johnson pg 223

snip:In July 1979, Iraq also acquired a new leader, Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti of the Ba'ath Party. Slightly more than 20 years earlier, in 1958, Iraqi military officers inspired by Gamal Abdel Nasser's nationalist revolt in 1952 against the British backed monarchy in Egypt, had seized power and taken the country in a Soviet leaning direction. The leader of the coup, General Abdel-Karim Kassem, proclaimed a republic, withdrew from the anti Soviet Baghdad Pact, legalized the Communist Party, decreed wide ranging land reform, and even granted autonomy to the Kurds in the north. These shifts, coming at the height of the Cold War, were too much for the US-CIA director Allan Dulles publicly called Iraq "the most dangerous spot in the world"- and in 1963, the CIA supported the anti communist Ba'ath Party's efforts to bring Kassem's republic to an end. Ba'ath activists, including a youthful Saddam Hussein, gunned down Kassem and many others on alist the CIA supplied. The plotters were able, however, only to create a coalition government. In 1968, the CIA again foment ed a palace revolt in which the Ba'athists eliminated their coalition partners and assumed direct control. According to Roger Morris, a staff member of the national Security Council during the Johnson and Nixon administrations, "It was a regime that was really primary". In July 1979, the same year as the anti American revolution in Iran, Saddam Hussein replaced his mentor, Ahmad Hasan al-Bakr, as president, a position he held until 2003. He was like many other famous beneficiaries of American political intrigue before and since, a CIA "asset".

Are you suggesting the US should have stayed and went after Hussein after the Gulf War? This is one of the very very few times I will ever say that this man says it perfectly, but his prediction on what would have happened if they went in then was exactly what happened when they did in 03.

My statement is that it is naive to think that you can just backout quickly without repercussions. I know you're not suggesting this but Adam was. Real conflict has a habit of being more complicated.

Sure I am. Maybe not over night, but in a matter of weeks. It's worse with the US there. Al Qaeda wasn't there before 2003, they are now, different parts of the country are essentially controlled by different factions (as Cheney predicted in the 90's), and again, as I said last post, the US went in there illegally, their presence just 'stirs the pot' in civil conflicts which have been going on for decades/centuries, it creates hatred towards them around the world, and then there's the whole thing about them having to borrow billions upon billions of dollars from China every year at interest to finance it, or just print the money, all the while the value of the dollar is heading down the tubes and the debt/deficit is sky rocketing?.

I have to agree with Tim, we just can't backout quickly. If we did this without establishing a strong government and military for these countries than the regimes that we fought so hard to get rid of would go right back into power.

You mean establish a strong government like putting Saddam's party in power in the first place, overthrowing Mossadegh in favor of the Shah in Iran in the 50's, helping the Taliban get into power and praise them for their potential to "bring stability to afghanistan", giving Musharraf 10 billion dollars..... the US has a pretty lousy track record when they put in their puppet governments in hopes of liberating these countries.

 

[Adam23]

^^i agree 100% with you Ironslave

Timpo, you don't know what you're talking about

 

[tim290280]

^^i agree 100% with you Ironslave

Timpo, you don't know what you're talking about

Says the guy that can't do anything other than blurt expletives and say "I agree". If you don't mind IS and I were having a discussion so go away.

 

[Ironslave]

Says the guy that can't do anything other than blurt expletives and say "I agree". If you don't mind IS and I were having a discussion so go away.

 

[Johnny5]

You wanna know what's next? I'll tell you what's next!...