It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


US manpower

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 05:10 PM
Since there is so little i agreed with i compiled all your posts into this one..

Originally posted by BlueRaja
Having personally served in Iraq, I would have to disagree with the assertion that US forces over there are poorly trained and unmotivated. If anything, I saw the exact opposite. The problem isn't a military one, but rather a political one.

That's what the losers always say! Does it really matter if you have political support in a immoral illegal war of aggression? That's probably why you need and never had it.

You have Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds, and they all hate each other.

And yet the 'religious' violence is almost completely unheard of in that specific area of the ME even before SH came to the scene. This is just another case of propaganda to hide American complicity in recent atrocities so easily attributable to 'religious' strife.

This is why it's difficult. In every military encounter, the insurgents get their butts handed to them.

Three line divisions worth of seriously injured and dead says otherwise.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
I agree about the public's lack of patience being a hindrance.

The public failure to prevent this war from happening never meant that they supported it despite all the rigged polls and clever media propaganda events. Fact is the average human being ( including Americans) are far too patient when it comes to government abuses of their rights.

How long did our revolution last before we had a functioning system?

If you wish to try compare whats happening Iraq with the American revolution your on your own as only really 'special' individuals would be able to find something worth comparing.

We've had troops in Germany since the 40s, and in Korea since the 50s. The western mindset is in the here and now, but the eastern mindset goes back hundreds or thousands of years.

So basically the west's failure to 'change' these people can be blamed on the fact that they are bloody minded and generally pig headed about progressive changes in their societies? It's always interesting to watch the oppressors blame their victims for the problems resulting from occupation and general indiscriminate violence against their towns and cities.

That's why setting timetables just tells them how long they have to wait.

So in pure spite the US army is trying to kill as many of them as they ( without too obviously using carpet bombing techniques) can before the deadline expires?

Originally posted by BlueRaja
Actually there is a distinction made between terrorists, insurgents, etc...

The terrorist will strike you where it is easiest to make you blood ( your own defenseless civilians) while the insurgent just fights you after you raised his home and shot his wife and children?
I think the distinctions are quite unimportant as non of these people actually want to 'destroy America' as much as they want it out of their nations business.

There are a lot of motivations for the enemy forces(whatever category they may be in).

Like getting your fellow countrymen butchered from the air ostensible because their marriage ceremony seemed a worthy target?

Political(i.e. former Ba'athists),

The Baathists as a whole are political opportunist and the massive majority that were that first and foremost will probably not be caught attacking American forces considering how inopportune that would seem. You will find the former Baathists in American sponsored public office but that is about it.


And you think American troops are being attacked because they have a different religion than Iraqi's? They are being attacked because they ARE THERE and it's got very little to do with the fact that they 'practice' ( Killing innocent people for money should disqualify you but anyways) a different religion.


So why did they release them?

unemployed(i.e. we'll pay you $X to put this bomb over there, or shoot this mortar, etc.).

Why did they send Iraqi's army home with their guns as part of their salaries? You mean you really believe that tens of thousands of Americans getting maimed or killed is some kind of unfortunate accident? Why do you reckon you have to pay a man to bomb the obvious enemy when there is at least a few hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's that have lost a family member due to the American occupation? You really believe that Iraqi's are only terrorist for hire and that they do not even defend their country because they are men like the one's you are sending? The lies we have to make up to demonize the enemies that we CHOSE to cluster bomb into a corner.

It's true that some fight purely for the reason that there is a foreign force in their country or for revenge, but its BS to say that everyone who is our enemy is because we're there, and they'd be just fine with us otherwise.

I think without large volumes of evidence proving that the human minds works any differently than you seem to understand you have no reason to even consider that. It's the epitome of denial and arrogance to deny one's own complicity by simply choosing to believe that your actions played no large part and that taking a different course would not have yielded differing results. Do you honestly believe in fate and that tens of thousands of Americans would have gotten killed and maimed by Iraqi's had America not invaded that country?

It's naive to believe that terrorists aren't at work over there though.

According to official Us army documents the resistance is almost entirely home grown and they are not being aided by foreigners in large part or at all. Before the war arms cache's were prepared all around Iraq for this type of warfare and the evidence that arms could be smuggled in if America chose to properly close down the borders is really thin on the ground. To stage the type of active resistance they are you need tons of explosives and ammunition daily and i refuse to believe that that is possible,in that region of the world,unless the occupying power allows it.

The average Iraqi is tired of stuff blowing up around them, and are pissed at the insurgents.

Which is why they are asking that American forces leaves. There can be no insurgency without occupiers or people attempting to control the Iraqi government trough their agents in government.

The insurgents, terrorists, etc.. have a stake in this though, as what it's really about is power. If they lose, they're out of power, and are just like everybody else at that point.

They have already lost the war and they are now just trying to win back their country? Why do you believe that it's primarily baathist forces that are resisting the brutal occupation?

That's why you have Sunnis instigating against Shia, and vice versa.

And if they catch any more American, British and Israeli agents planting bombs in cars and mosques while disguised as Iraqi's no one in Iraq will believe this media lie anymore.

Syria and Iran don't want a democracy in their neighborhood either. It'll give their populations ideas.

Their populations already had ideas back in the 70's and it took American and British intervention for these 'religious' ( i for one don't really believe in the facade but anyways) leaders to gain any ground in the respective countries. Iran and Syria are both at least as or more democratic in respect to the leaders they currently have in power.

Why do you think the Syrians keep whacking Lebanese politicians.

Just do your best to actually prove that is the case. Since when do Syrians have mini nukes to use in such throw away ways?

It's all about power, and honor. Terrorists aren't going to go away if we stop killing them. You have it bass-ackwards.

International Terrorism will always be around while they are funded and trained by the American, Israeli and British governments and given reasons to actually fight ( or turn against their former masters) in the way they were trained. Muslim 'terrorism' as we have come to see it in popular western media is almost entirely a product of Western intelligence and government agencies.

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 05:11 PM

Originally posted by BlueRaja
I disagree with the assertion that we went to Iraq, to make money.

If by money we assume control then it was in fact about money and control over important geopolitical areas and social movements.

Nobody in their right mind goes to war to get rich(at a national level, perhaps you could say a Mercenary fights for money).

People do not frequently do this when they are provided with basic alternatives ( enough food to survive is good enough for most) but governments and large institutions have every interest in getting involved as they are all about control.

Do you honestly believe that the government wouldn't have preferred the last 6yrs to be peaceful, and have an easy time in office, rather than the crap they've had to deal with day in and day out.

Well i am not sure that the Iraq thing went exactly as planned but i know that they made choices that they must have understood would result in long term violence and general upheaval in Iraq. I believe that they thought they could control the backlash better but not that they were caught off guard by the basic problems they face/faced in Iraq. Just like Vietnam and Korea it's not about 'winning' ( they won that war a few times and could have won it many more times) but about the social change you can bring about in your own country while devastating and or preventing the social change in another.

Where's the cheap oil?

Why do you assume that the intervention in Iraq was to bring more oil to the market instead of preventing it from getting to the market? Is it not obvious now that that is in fact what they are doing?

Halliburton didn't start the war.

Corporations can not declare war but they certainly have influence and Hallbuton certainl has that in Cheney and it's hard to pretend that they did not do very well by this war...

I've been in Iraq, so I am somewhat qualified to speak based on personal experience- most Iraqis just want stability

That is all ANY human being of every 'race', colour and creed wants and if someone tells you differently they are lying.

and while they may not be crazy about us being there, they're even less crazy about us leaving in a hurry, and everything going down the crapper.

So basically Iraqi's are not qualified to pick their destiny or face the consequences of their choices? Iraqi's want America out as they understand that the violence and instability are entirely due to the current occupation.

The percentage fighting us because they lost a relative is a pittance compared to the other reasons I've mentioned.

Nonsense and i can't believe you will even attempt to make this argument. Their just irrational and fight for illogical reasons unlike western folk? Do you consider the readers here ignorant fools?

Originally posted by BlueRaja
The problem with Just War amongst peaceful, sovereign nations, is that one need not worry about the peaceful nations.

All human beings are inherently uninterested in open conflict with their neighbours ( however far away or close by) as the risks of taking from someone are just far far larger than attempting to cooperate or attempt making deals. It takes national leaders and vast propaganda machines, to say nothing of creating the economic conditions with which to force people into the armed forces,
to force people into open conflict with their neighbours in other countries.

It's nations where the leader is in fact evil, and they're motivated by conquest rather than philanthropy, that make wars necessary.

How do evil leaders make it into powerful positions when the citizens of no country inherently evil or interested in war and general theft? What institutions throughout recent human history have made these events possible when almost all the participants are coerced into by one method or another? Few leaders on the current world stage are interested in philanthropy and ever less of those are allowed to act in such ways by ruling global institutions which can easily be called evil and or Satanic depending on your type of religious convictions.

What makes wars quicker and less terrible, is when the population is unified, rather than fighting itself and the enemy as well.

The enemy is normally within and when leaders convince their populations that the problems they suffer are due to forces outside their own state they are normally trying to defend themselves against a empire ( rome, Britain etc) or simply lying so they may build a empire.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
The government may have expected things to go much better in the aftermath, but they didn't allow anybody to attack.

They did as this is a well documented fact.

Unless you already have planes in the air flying CAP, and know that an attack is in fact happening, there's not a whole lot you can do to stop it.

There was in fact plenty of time to stop it had they wanted to but fighters were stood down by NORAD.

It doesn't take long to fly from Dulles to DC, or from JFK to the Trade Center. Till planes started hitting buildings there was no way to know that was their intent.

Not there as there was in fact a exercise simulating such attacks on the same morning.

Government complicity is SO obvious and one can only marvel at the efficiency of the machinery that keeps this information far away from public perception.

The 8yrs prior to Bush were a dismal failure in dealing with Al Qeada/Terrorists, and merely served to embolden them

How can you actively prevent terrorism when it is you who sponsor that terrorism?

(i.e. the USS Cole, embassies, Khobar Towers, etc...)

Well feel free to prove that they were involved in any or many of this bombings or that they operated without assistance from western intelligence agencies.

Could we have done a better job- sure. Does it sometimes take a disaster to bring into realization that a system is broken(or at least needs a complete overhaul)- the answer is yes.

That systems works very well and that is why it can act so blatantly criminality without many of us every realising the truth.

Many of the post 9/11 policies wouldn't have public approval, unless we'd been hit,

So they allow 'mistakes' to happen so that they may have a better chance of pushing trough certain bills that would have otherwise failed in congress?

so that's why there were some deficiencies in our defenses.

So i guess you are not as unaware as i thought. Glad you at least in part realise that your worse enemies are in fact in your own government.


posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 11:29 AM
Stellar, people like you just make me sick. I happen to work with soldiers every day; many of whom have served more then one tour in Iraq. 95% of them agree that we are doing what is necessary there. For us and the world. Your garbage is pathetic. With a few exceptions- there will always be a bad apple or two in every barrel- they have done a magnificent job in an incredibly difficult situation. Your problem is that you WANT us to b e evil- you WANT us to be the ones in the wrong. I am willing to be you never said a bad word about terrorists or saddam husein prior to 9/11; and frankly you sound like one of those morons that say we are to blame for it all. Hatred is always wrong- both yours and the terrorists.

posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 12:08 PM
You have voted StellarX for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month

Good job.

I like the guys comments subsequent yours. "You are pathetic!!" Well if that is all you got to shoot down stellars arguments, you should pack up your shiz and go home.

Stellar, you speak for alot of very intelegent, and progressive thinkers. By progressive, I mean people who use facts, and new information, and developments to formulate a thought, rather than beat up the same old ground when the information or intelegence is obsolete.

posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 12:10 PM

Originally posted by burmafrd
95% of them agree that we are doing what is necessary there. For us and the world.

I understand that troops are not in the business of have a political view but rather to take orders. Having said that, I don't believe you.

posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 03:31 PM

Originally posted by burmafrd
Stellar, people like you just make me sick. I happen to work with soldiers every day; many of whom have served more then one tour in Iraq.

So you work with people who enjoy getting shot at so much that they want to go back for more? One dies in DEFENSE of your country or home and if you die blowing up another guy's country or home i wont shed one single tear for you.

95% of them agree that we are doing what is necessary there.

Then they are a bunch of ignorant ciminal fools who do not have a clue what's going on in this world willing to kill innocent people who never did a thing to them. Since your lying about the 95% figure at least their not that bad.

For us and the world. Your garbage is pathetic. With a few exceptions- there will always be a bad apple or two in every barrel- they have done a magnificent job in an incredibly difficult situation.

Killing a hundred thousand or more innocent people can never be a good job when the war is over and your only facing a rag tag resistance. To suggest that the US army can do no better is another lie and to suggest that the US army leaders believe that this war is good for their country or armed forces is your third lie in so many words.

Your problem is that you WANT us to b e evil- you WANT us to be the ones in the wrong.

I don't want anyone to invade other counties based on complete lies and i certainly don't want any more evil people on this planet than we are stuck with already. I am not making the US anything it has not been for decades.

I am willing to be you never said a bad word about terrorists or saddam husein prior to 9/11;

SH is a regular old fashioned smart thug who knew that his time in office would be very limited without a outside sponsor hence his involvement with western intelligence and his multi- decade iron -fisted rule of Iraq. Without outside help he probably never would have amounted to anything and his not a patch on some of the other crazed genocidal dictators that the US has sponsored or supported in their various reigns . Some research on your side would probably help you to realise that.

and frankly you sound like one of those morons that say we are to blame for it all. Hatred is always wrong- both yours and the terrorists.

If the continental USA disappeared. they can spare Canada and Mexico , from the map tomorrow the world would be on balance a far better place for the rest of us. Does that answer your question about how i feel about US actions in the world the last few decades? Note here that i used the word 'map' while Ahmadinejad never did....


posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 04:09 PM
I heard on my BBC World Service podcast, that Poland was extending the time if would keep forces in Iraq. According to the report, The Polish government has asked the Polish president to grant this extension.

Looking at deployments around the world, I think the forces could only come from Europe. I hardly see US forces being withdrawn from South Korea.

posted on Dec, 22 2006 @ 05:18 PM
What the hell happened to this thread? I came here to have a conversation about U.S. Manpower and I get a bunch of ignorant fools on both sides of the argument fighting for the last word that has nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

Damn! There goes another perfectly good thread... I certainly don't help the case either... I'll come back later.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in