|
| | | | The United States warned Saddam Hussein that if he didn't do certain things AFTER Bill Clinton ordered bombings in Iraq, we would be back.
He didn't do them; we went back. WMD's or not - he broke his own promise.
And when you sign up VOLUNTARILY for the military as ALL of the men and women serving our country do, you KNOW that there is a chance you will be sent to active duty. That doesn't mean you have to agree with it - but you CHOSE to put yourself in that position.
|
| |
| | | | Firstly, the critique was about the all-encompassing approval of any action the U.S. military has ever been involved in or will ever be involved in … to compare the battlefields of France with, for example, Vietnam or Iraq is kind of daring, isn’t it. WWII was one of the few wars where you can say the U.S. did something for humanity, and not for its own power sphere or oil consumerism support. And the soldiers knew the difference, this is why there was no My Lai, no Abu Ghraib in WWII.
The comparison the initial post made to Jesus Christ on the cross outside of Jerusalem - well it is just too dumb to comment upon.
Thirdly, when GM says that it’s the leaders, not the soldiers that have to take the blame, I have always said so. It was the U.S. administration that gave a big boost to terrorism by starting its most recent war. For this, the common soldier can’t be blamed. Yet why he deserves extra decorum is also questionable. After all, just like X-Man says, the soldiers chose to put themselves in such a position.
|
| |
| | | | | You've been banned for violating our Discussion Board rules.This message was edited by Cradz on 7-15-06 @ 11:02 AM |
| |
| | | | The Iraq War definitely doesn't compare to the other wars America engaged in. Maybe Vietnam, and still in its young age.
I think most of the U.S. soldiers believ they fight for freedom, but I think the president encourages them to believe it simply for the purposes of morale. I wish they don't have to die for a lie, though.Boyakasha.
Boyakasha. |
| |
| | | | Grau there is a serious set of misconseptions when you talk about no abu gra, or Mayli in WWII,
first they did happen, but were not reported, read Steven Ambroses "Citizen Soldiers" and you will see a pretty uncensord version of WWII ground combat in Europe,
from the persepective of US soldiers.
the media was on the side of the goverment and censorship both self and govermental were excepted as a matter of course. it was policy up until 1945 not to show US soldiers dead, (something that could never have been enforce in our time) and the news media had each report censored, if a report was "leaked" the reporter and entire news papers could and were removed from the entire theater. the simple expedient of drafting the photographers and some journalists allowed the goverment to control there reporting, the threat of which to the rest also kept them in line.
the absence of non combatants (should I say low density) in the pacific prevented much comment of US conduct on the US side, but the failure to take prisoners although much was made of the japanese non surrender code, also had a great deal to do with a no quarter unofficial policy in many units in the pacific.
attrocities commited by US troops increase markedly in germany when the first concentration camps were overrun (to the point of a no quarter policy was pretty much standard for members of the SS) and after some of the prison camps were overrun in the philipines.
it is also important to point out the difference in behavior of the combatants, both uniformed armies in the majority, with non combatants being excluded from the combat as much as possible (not used as cover and concealment, for troops) the genevia conventions generally followed by the armed forces of both countries (notable exceptions much publisized when it involed the Riech soldiers, less publisized concerning western Allied, unpublisized until the 1950's when concerning the Russians) (exception being the Japanese whom as a non signer neather had to abide by it, nor were protected by it) individuals found out of uniform or wearing false colors, or under arms and in civilian cloths were also treated appropriate to the Geneva conventions (meaning they were shot with little or no trial)
|
| |
| | | | What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?
-Mohandas Gandhi
Hmm... makes you wonder, huh? Look at that picture of that child posted by Grau.This message was edited by derpeederp on 7-18-06 @ 5:49 AM
Boyakasha. |
| |
|
|