Must read this.

[tropical_fishy]

It's simple really. Instead of being supportive of your nation's soldiers at a time of way you've concocted far fetched and ridiculous scenario in order to excuse yourself from having to support victory. To think that any reasonable (and often stated) criteria for victory would be satisified by escalating a conventionally armed counter insurgency war into a nuke contest against mostly civiliians with 150,000 of our soldiers in the blast zone is simply stupid.

It's ok to admit that you don't care one way or the other if our soldier's mission is successful, but don't pretend that that's somehow support.

This is interesting, because I just came up with two random scenarios about what could happen... I didn't mean that I thought either of them would. Yes, they're far-fetched and ridiculous, but I was in class, and that was all I could think up while still half-listening to the professor. Here's my issue with "victory:" 1. there hasn't ever been a war like this before. We don't know how to effectively fight it, nor do we know how to win it. Hell, we don't have a specific target; it's vaguely "terrorists." Most people would even have a tough time defining that term, because it's going to end up being either WAY general, or way specific. 2. I suspect that a lot of people will only be happy when the middle east is entirely westernized and Islam effectively wiped out; I don't like that at all. I think we should be wary of extremists of every flavor, not just Islamic extremists. 3. What's next? What if this war goes on forever and ever and ever, and our children's children's children are fighting it, without a sense of what happened to cause it? So many people will die fighting this war.

You say it's okay to admit I don't care one way or the other, but I truly do. The war on terror is the defining issue of my generation; I have to care. I care whether we "win" or "lose," I care about the troops we lose, and yeah, I even care about the people we kill, because I cannot begin to imagine what it would be like, psychologically, to take someone's life. I have friends in the middle east; I have friends training to go to the middle east. I just want to know what I'm signing up for before I say, wholeheartedly, "I am for this." I want people to be safe, I want peace, freedom, etc, etc, but you can't fight for peace.

[FactsOfLife]

oooh oooh can I play too?

[BeaverEater]

Well this war will not go on forever if we actually strike hard. The media has played too big of a part in the Iraq AND afgahnistan war to effectively have us win. People don't understand war and never will unless you've been in the middle of it all. Yes you can say you want the troops to come home, but if they pack up and leave, this war will follow us back here, not to mention leave a mess that will have to be cleaned up again but even worse. We can win but we will just have to crack down. It wont last forever, just look at england and their fight with the IRA

[Albinonewt]

This is interesting, because I just came up with two random scenarios about what could happen... I didn't mean that I thought either of them would. Yes, they're far-fetched and ridiculous, but I was in class, and that was all I could think up while still half-listening to the professor.

Here's my issue with "victory:" 1. there hasn't ever been a war like this before. We don't know how to effectively fight it, nor do we know how to win it.

The same way you fight and win all wars, by killing the enemy until they stop fighting.

Hell, we don't have a specific target; it's vaguely "terrorists."

Most people would even have a tough time defining that term, because it's going to end up being either WAY general, or way specific.

No, not most people. Just the moral relativists and doves. Everyone else understands who is and is not a terrorist.

2. I suspect that a lot of people will only be happy when the middle east is entirely westernized and Islam effectively wiped out;

I don't like that at all. I think we should be wary of extremists of every flavor, not just Islamic extremists.

3. What's next? What if this war goes on forever and ever and ever, and our children's children's children are fighting it, without a sense of what happened to cause it? So many people will die fighting this war.

You say it's okay to admit I don't care one way or the other, but I truly do.

The war on terror is the defining issue of my generation; I have to care. I care whether we "win" or "lose,"

I care about the troops we lose, and yeah, I even care about the people we kill, because I cannot begin to imagine what it would be like, psychologically, to take someone's life. I have friends in the middle east; I have friends training to go to the middle east. I just want to know what I'm signing up for before I say, wholeheartedly, "I am for this." I want people to be safe, I want peace, freedom, etc, etc, but you can't fight for peace.

[tropical_fishy]

Kay, sure. It's far too early to deal with that, so I'm leaving it be for now.

The same way you fight and win all wars, by killing the enemy until they stop fighting.

That worked well in Vietnam and Cambodia.



Christians who are anti-gay marriage and abortion are HARDLY the same as Islamic extremists. Wow. I'm anti-extremist Christians who blow up abortion clinics and kill doctors; I'm anti-extremist liberals/socialists/etc who obtain excessive amounts of weaponry and dominate South American countries. Can we at least agree on that much? Extremism, in any flavor, to the point of violence is a really bad thing.



So what defines losing?



Kindly do not tell me what I do or do not believe in. It is not your place, nor is it polite. I am more than willing to have a discussion, but I will not be told what I believe, especially when I've only gotten two hours of sleep.



I don't see how saying that the war on terror is the defining issue of my generation and I care whether we "win" or "lose" is doing a complete 180. Cut the ad hominem arguing.

If we "lose" this conflict, the world will be destabilized in a way it has not been for a very long time, if ever. If America's power is undercut by this conflict, I will be growing up in a very different world than you did. That alone makes me care; it will be unprecidented. I've already discussed what my issues are with the phrase "winning," so I won't repeat them. If you feel so inclined, go back and try reading them with an open mind.


Okay, a few things:

1. I've never protested the war.
2. I believe everyone should have a utopian idea of society; without ideals, we have nothing to build our morals foundations on. America is not perfect, but the ideals it was founded upon, imho, are very nearly perfect. Human error causes the inability to create a utopian society, but that doesn't mean we can't strive for perfection.
3. I do support, and I will continue to support, our armed forces. When I do meet someone who does serve, albeit rarely, I always thank them for their service; I believe that they do an incredibly honorable thing for what they believe in. I can support someone in their belief in X religion even if I don't believe; I can support someone's personal decision and sacrifice even if it is not the one I would have made in the same situation.

[Albinonewt]

Kay, sure. It's far too early to deal with that, so I'm leaving it be for now.

That worked well in Vietnam and Cambodia.

Christians who are anti-gay marriage and abortion are HARDLY the same as Islamic extremists. Wow. I'm anti-extremist Christians who blow up abortion clinics and kill doctors; I'm anti-extremist liberals/socialists/etc who obtain excessive amounts of weaponry and dominate South American countries. Can we at least agree on that much? Extremism, in any flavor, to the point of violence is a really bad thing.

So what defines losing?

Kindly do not tell me what I do or do not believe in. It is not your place, nor is it polite. I am more than willing to have a discussion, but I will not be told what I believe, especially when I've only gotten two hours of sleep.

Then kindly stop lying about it.

I don't see how saying that the war on terror is the defining issue of my generation and I care whether we "win" or "lose" is doing a complete 180. Cut the ad hominem arguing.

If we "lose" this conflict, the world will be destabilized in a way it has not been for a very long time, if ever. If America's power is undercut by this conflict, I will be growing up in a very different world than you did. That alone makes me care; it will be unprecidented. I've already discussed what my issues are with the phrase "winning," so I won't repeat them. If you feel so inclined, go back and try reading them with an open mind.

There you go again, 10 seconds ago you were all for winning, and now you have issues with it.

Quote:

1. I've never protested the war.

Liar

You said

Just out of curiousity, why? I really REALLY disagree with the war in Iraq, and I've protested it, but I've never shown ANY disrespect towards anyone in any part of the military.

2. I believe everyone should have a utopian idea of society; without ideals, we have nothing to build our morals foundations on. America is not perfect, but the ideals it was founded upon, imho, are very nearly perfect. Human error causes the inability to create a utopian society, but that doesn't mean we can't strive for perfection.

3. I do support, and I will continue to support, our armed forces. When I do meet someone who does serve, albeit rarely, I always thank them for their service; I believe that they do an incredibly honorable thing for what they believe in. I can support someone in their belief in X religion even if I don't believe; I can support someone's personal decision and sacrifice even if it is not the one I would have made in the same situation.

[billybob_81067]

T.F. I don't hate you...

Will you not hate me too?

[MedicDVG]

I have not joined into this discussion up to now, but I fear I must.

Supporting our troops is not a magnet on the back of your car, it is not "praying that they get home safe", it is not wishing for a "utopian" world view.

Support of our troops is giving them the tools in material and funds to complete the mission.

Support of the troops is understanding the sacrifice that is placed upon them as they go in harms way to protect our cushy, liberal, effed up, california perverted lifestyle with all the trimmings.

I understand your abhorance with violence. I too abhor violence. In fact I don't konw a soldier alive who willingly enters into armed conflict. It is one of the most true statements in the world that no one hates war more then the warriors.

I am a civilian. I am going to Iraq. I leave sunday.

I am going to support my troops. I am going as a medic; a healer. I am going in order to contribute what I beleive is my duty to my fellow Americans who are there protecting this country. I don't say this to toot my own horn. But Frankly, if you are not ready to put EVERYTHING on the line, somehow you are less qualified to render an opinion.


and in the words of the famous Forrest Gump... "and thats all I have to say about that."

[kosmo]

"So you support the troops, but you hate the institution that they've dedicated their lives to serving, their mission, their sexism, their violence, and just about everything else? No, it doesn't work like that."

Uh, yes it does. I hate the institution, sexism, and especially the mission. Yet Ive done more to support it than your flag waving butt ever will.

[Albinonewt]

Uh, yes it does. I hate the institution, sexism, and especially the mission. Yet Ive done more to support it than your flag waving butt ever will.

[Recon by Fire]

What if "victory" looks like a nuclear wasteland in the Middle East?

No, victory is not a nuclear wasteland in the Middle East, it is the smell of napalm in the morning. Robert Duvall says so!






You guys (and gal) are just arguing beliefs and such. My point earlier is that it doesn't matter what is in your heart and mind, your actions do not make us feel support, warm and fuzzy inside. Just the way it is, no politics.





Now lets have a big AO hug....

[kosmo]

blah blah blah, etc.

My point still stands, as of yet uncorrected. Also, youre being quite hypocritical. All you seem to give a crap about is your precious administrations ridiculous attempts at foreign policy, and not the individual soldiers lives that its affecting. Then you say that if someone cares more about the individual soldiers than the stupid policy theyre enforcing, then that persons concern doesnt count for anything due to them badmouthing your holy leader. Thats pathetic. Youre pathetic. If you want to serve so bad, go join the Red Cross or something, theres plenty of other options open to you. Or you can continue to sit on your butt and pretend to own the e&d, looking down on everyone who disagrees with you. Your choice.

RBF, I know what you mean. The average soldier feels like you do, and thats a good thing. Its a lot easier for a soldier to assume that what they are doing is right and the people disagreeing with it are crazy, because if they figure out that its wrong then theyll end up as disgruntled as I am. It sucks butt watching your friends die and putting your own life on the line for something you dont believe in.

[Albinonewt]

My point still stands, as of yet uncorrected.

Also, youre being quite hypocritical. All you seem to give a crap about is your precious administrations ridiculous attempts at foreign policy, and not the individual soldiers lives that its affecting.

Then you say that if someone cares more about the individual soldiers than the stupid policy theyre enforcing, then that persons concern doesnt count for anything due to them badmouthing your holy leader.

Thats pathetic. Youre pathetic. If you want to serve so bad, go join the Red Cross or something, theres plenty of other options open to you. Or you can continue to sit on your butt and pretend to own the e&d, looking down on everyone who disagrees with you. Your choice.

[kosmo]

A great number of people think they can "support the troops" without supporting their mission and their cause and that isn't true

Hmmmm.... Nope, cant find any lie in what I said. You think people cant have concern for the individual soldiers without supporting the agenda theyre enforcing.

I complain not because Im doing too much helping, I complain that the way we are helping is wrong, ineffective, and costing many lives while not benefitting our country or theirs. You also know very well that you can do more, but you dont want to and are choosing not to. Why not? Family or health a bigger priority to you? It was to a lot of the people who died over here, too.

[Albinonewt]

Hmmmm.... Nope, cant find any lie in what I said. You think people cant have concern for the individual soldiers without supporting the agenda theyre enforcing.

I complain not because Im doing too much helping, I complain that the way we are helping is wrong, ineffective, and costing many lives while not benefitting our country or theirs.

You also know very well that you can do more, but you dont want to and are choosing not to. Why not? Family or health a bigger priority to you? It was to a lot of the people who died over here, too.