Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Are the soldiers who protect America bad?

page: 16
27
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 12:41 PM
link   
I posted on the thread Would our military personnel honor the Constitution or just follow orders? in response to some who were villifying US service members, and I think that it needs to be said here as well. For those who have expressed the opinion that our military members are 'bad' or 'evil', this is for you:


Originally posted by JaxonRoberts

...

I do however have a message to those who would slander and besmirch those who have and are wearing the uniform. It is really easy to sit behind your keyboard with complete ananimity and suggest that military personnel, both past and present, lack honor or courage. It is really easy to say they have no regard for the Constitution and would blindly turn on the American people, which means turning on their friends and family. Do you have the courage to express your opinions to the families of these soldiers?



Do you have the courage to express your opinion to soldiers like this one?



Do you have the courage to go down to your local VFW or American Legion Post and express your opinion? It would require alot less courage than it takes to volunteer to go into harm's way like those who are serving in the military.

Honor, Courage and Duty are not just words or concepts to those who wear the Uniform, they are core principles that they live by. To those in uniform the Constitution is not just a document kept under glass in Washington, it is a living, breathing entity. It outranks the President, Congress, and those in the Chain of Command. They are there to defend this country. Not the real estate, but the people and it's ideals which have been set forth in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

Those who express opinions saying things like this country is "the biggest whore this side of the Andromeda galaxy", or that those who serve (both past and present) have wasted their time, or that we lack honor, are not only spitting in my face, but spitting in the face of my father, who enlisted voluntarily on December 8, 1941, and both my grandfathers who fought during WWI and all those who have served since the signing of the Declaration of Independence. We do not want your gratitude. We do deserve your respect.




posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 

That was a hilarious post! I laughed until my guts hurt.
The bit about folks going up against their oppressors with nothing but their bodies and a willingness to die? That's not 'brave', that's suicidal! In my experience, most suicidal folks were so because they lacked the courage to face life as it comes at them.
Well, I hope you laughed just as hard @the idea of suicidal bravery which earned a country's highest honours for valour. Somehow I expect not. Tell it to independent India. Sure, there aren't many examples, but then again, there aren't many people so commited to their cause & also to doing right as well. Anyhoo, this courage thing is getting old. As you say, it doesn't make deeds right. Mongol light cavalry facing European armoured knights were brave; they still raped & pillaged across more territory than any force before or since. You know what else doesn't make something we do right? Thinking we are doing right.

To whoever it was said something along the lines of 'do I have to say this again: blame the leaders not the military' - Does anyone else have to say this again, "I was just following orders" is no defence. I wouldn't expect all military to mutiny when ordered to dishonour themselves by taking part in actions on behalf of their leaders' wealth rather than in accordance with their oaths to their nation. After all, years in the stockade is a daunting prospect. Still, refusal to re-enlist & being vocal about why would, with enough doing so, force a change of government strategy. You can't invade without boots on the ground.

Btw, nenothtu, that domino effect/same eyes stuff? Paranoid rubbish. Not everyone on earth wants (Muahahaha) world domination.



posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 
I forgot to add that no, it wasn't me who posted the vid. I & also re: flowers in gunbarrels on a battlefield? Bit late by that point, wouldn't you say? Noble sacrifice in a well organised cause is one thing, running off to get pointlessly killed without much if any chance of it inspiring anyone to resist is something else entirely; namely brave but stupid.



posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by dooper
 
I realise you're not talking to me but it's a public forum lol! In a paranoid moment I did wonder if you were talking about me? Still...

You're misidentifying the real enemy here.
Yes, even Britain's true enemy. [even?]
Whose soldiers are these?
They are government soldiers.

Whose directives are the following?
The same people who direct their government.

What are their clearly stated goals?
It hardly matters because anything stated would have come from a politician & therefore be lies. However, by their deeds shall we know them & thus their aims, stated or not, are clear: to have more of anything that's going than just about everyone else.



posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Bunken Drum
 


Sorry, you're still missing it.

The source. The real source! What is the real source of these groups we've been fighting?

Ask yourself what do the ALL have in common.

Then look around.



posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by dooper
 

Sorry, you're still missing it.
The source. The real source! What is the real source of these groups we've been fighting?
I am missing it. Who do you mean by "we" & what "groups" have they been fighting? I mean, I look around & see ignorant people. That seems to have always been a prerequisite for conflict.



posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 11:50 PM
link   
Here's the saddest thing I can point out regarding the hypocrisy of our elected officials versus our military:

Our President, Congressmen, and Federal judges all take an oath upon entering office to uphold and protect the US Constitution. Each member of the military takes the same oath when enlisting. The key point to remember here is that they are swearing allegiance to the US constitution, and not to the US president, the US congress, or the US supreme court. While US military officers are routinely court-martialed for offenses like adultery, insubordination, or even conduct unbecoming, their Commander-in-Chief or Members of Congress that take the same sacred oath are never held to account for the same standard of conduct.

I would trust any member of the US armed services before I would trust President Obama or a member of the current US Congress.



posted on Jun, 26 2009 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by riff_raff
 


That is because they are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and elected officials are subject to the same laws we are. Military Personnel are held to a higher standard.



posted on Jun, 27 2009 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunken Drum
If your country was invaded, how much care for the wounded would it take to make you forget the dead? How many schools & wells would buy-off your patriotism? Is the answer to both not, "None. No. Never. Not while I draw breath."?


I dunno, man. I'm kinda looking forward to an invasion of the US. Things are rapidly slipping sideways here, and I hope the Russians come soon to restore our freedom, or at the very least do a "regieme change" so we can have a bit more freedom here, perhaps approaching the level of freedoms they have there.

Right now, we ain't got it.



posted on Jun, 27 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunken Drum
reply to post by nenothtu
 

My big, tough, evil ass sits here typing this with tears in my eyes, not because of your opinion, but rather because of the memory of the men you malign.
Are you serious? Let me: I sit here with an itch under my foreskin, not because... oh whatever. What does it add to the discussion? Are we supposed to take your blubbing as evidence that what you say is right? Or evidence that you're so emotionally invested in your opinion that you couldn't tell right from wrong if it handed you a handkerchief? I'll get to the rest shortly...


Yeah, I'm serious, and I could give a rats ass what your smarmy opinion is.

Get back to me when you can avoid bathroom humor, and talk like an adult.

You ought to see a doctor about that itch, before it falls off.

[edit on 2009/6/27 by nenothtu]



posted on Jun, 27 2009 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunken Drum
I see. Well, in the last 60 years the USA has been without doubt the most belligerent nation on earth. If it wasn't fighting in a particular conflict, it was arming 1 or both sides & often fomented the trouble to further foreign policy.


Source, please. I lived through most of that time, clearly you didn't. Based on that, I'm gonna need a source for your "clear facts" in order to even begin to accept them.



Therefore, by your logic, the other 19 out of 20 of humans should press for vastly more military spending & enlist so that we can end the threat by keeping the USA within its' borders. Or invade perhaps? In either case, the USA would nuke us, regardless of Mutually Assured Destruction. This is the threat we "live with". Are we fools, cowards or traitors, or is trying to peacefully reign the USA in both better & since we must live with the fear of further 'full spectrum dominance' whilst persevering, braver too?


I'm mystified as to why I should care what other humans do. I don't write policy for them, and neither am I responsible for their actions. If they want to go along poking flowers into gunbarrels, instead of looking to their own defense, who am I to argue?

What country are you in, that you think the US is going to waste a nuke on you?

[edit on 2009/6/27 by nenothtu]



posted on Jun, 27 2009 @ 02:58 AM
link   
Nenothtu, this drum is bunk & i'm about to go to bed. I cant answer you right now but i just wanted to say i like you. Unlike many, you come over as real. You remind me of my mate Mark. He's a royal marine. Total c**t mind you, but not to me cos we're mates. As for the rest... dunno, I'll get back when i can.



posted on Jun, 27 2009 @ 04:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Bunken Drum
 


I can't really say I dislike you. I dislike most of your ideas, although not all of them, but that really ain't the same thing as disliking you, is it? Differences of opinion are what keep life interesting, and keep the mind sharp. Well, that and beer.

You sort of remind me of a friend I had several years ago. He lived all the way at the other end of the political spectrum from me, and we had many a lively, and at times alcohol fueled, debate on nearly everything. Hardly ever saw eye-to-eye.

But, whenever it hit the fan, we both knew the other one would be there to back us up. Some jackass called me a "murderer" once, just because he disagreed with what I had to say, and before I could even get standing, Ron was right there beside me backing that knothead down. Probably a good thing too. No one got damaged that way.

Anyhow, just because we don't necessarily dislike one another, that doesn't mean we have to get along, does it?



posted on Jun, 27 2009 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


Many of the military see their position as "doing a job" perhaps if the likes of soldiers had employment contracts like any other job in relation to Pay/ /Conditions/ Job Description etc.

Surely this would protect everyone concerned especially new recruits, whether a war is right or wrong. the individuals involved are just fulfilling their employment obligation, and if they disagree may resign at any time no different to a bricklayer.

It is far to easy for us to bad mouth soldiers and such even if they deserve it. It is "We the people" in our complacency that allow governments to mislead us into war.

I may be talking through my arse, but at least through mediums like ATS I can at least voice my opinion like many others bringing the debate out in the open.

So perhaps the future is not so bleak after all, and the sheeple may not take us hurtling into armageddon if their eyes are opened a little by joining the discussion.



posted on Jun, 27 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 
Just popped in to say i'm still drunk & so there'll be no quality service from me yet. But, you're right, we dont have to get along, we just have to get by. Doing so requires a whole spectrum of ideas, from, @1 end, mutual fear of the other's potential to do us harm & @the other, mutual respect for each other's dignity. Thus i apologise for the c**k joke. It was in response to your 'laugh til my guts bust' post. I was irked. Upon further reflection i realise, yet again (doh!), that 2 wrongs dont make a right. Also, i want to add by way of further context that whenever sh!t happened in front of me, i was in there trying to stop it getting worse. I'm a peacenik alright & I've got the scars to prove it lol!



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Bunken Drum
I see. Well, in the last 60 years the USA has been without doubt the most belligerent nation on earth. If it wasn't fighting in a particular conflict, it was arming 1 or both sides & often fomented the trouble to further foreign policy.


Source, please. I lived through most of that time, clearly you didn't. Based on that, I'm gonna need a source for your "clear facts" in order to even begin to accept them.


1945-46, 1950-53; Korea 1950-53; Guatemala 1954, 1960, 1967-69; Indonesia 1958; Cuba 1959-61; Congo 1964; Peru 1965; Laos 1964-73; Vietnam 1961-73; Cambodia 1969-70; Lebanon 1983-84; Grenada 1983; Libya 1986, El Salvador 1980s; Nicaragua 1980s; Panama 1989; Iraq 1991 to present day; Somalia 1993; Bosnia (Republic of Srpska) 1995; Sudan 1998; Yugoslavia 1999; and Afghanistan 1998, 2001-02.

However, added to this figure of 22 would be at least 18 other countries which were on the receiving end of bombing during the two World Wars, such as Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Hungary, Italy, Tunisia, Greece, Austria, Romania, Japan, Thailand, Nauru, Solomon Islands, Papua New Guinea, the Marshall Islands, Singapore, and the Phillipines.


What about Iran Contra, arming the Afghanistanis against the Russians in the 80's?

Ring any bells?

Funny how America never attacks any country with nukes.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Majestic23
 


I recall a ton of those same countries you mentioned that were freed to determine their own governments as a result of our efforts.

In fact, a lot of countries are not under the boot of the Japanese, the Soviets, or Nazi Germany.

I wouldn't apologize for a damned thing.

We got dragged into the First World War kicking and screaming because Europe couldn't handle it.

Same thing in the Second World War.

Just because at the end of that war we wound up on top of the pile and was asked time and again for "help" is not to say we desired that position.

Tell you what. All you snot-nosed, sniveling, whining-ass puddlepuffs take care of your own (fill in the blank) for a change!

Tired of pulling your bacon out of the fire again and again.

Develop your own navies. Develop your own fighters. Take care of your own backyard and give us some relief.

Not Brits. Brits have held up their end of the post the entire way, and I love 'em.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majestic23
However, added to this figure of 22 would be at least 18 other countries which were on the receiving end of bombing during the two World Wars, such as Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Hungary, Italy, Tunisia, Greece, Austria, Romania, Japan, Thailand, Nauru, Solomon Islands, Papua New Guinea, the Marshall Islands, Singapore, and the Phillipines.


You do know that the US was bombing axis targets, don't you? It's not like the 8th Air Force was on their way to Berlin and said, "Hey, you know what? I really don't like Belgium Waffles. I'm going to let them have it with a few hundred pounders!"


Originally posted by Majestic23
What about Iran Contra, arming the Afghanistanis against the Russians in the 80's?


What about the Soviets arming everyone and their brother? They were giving away AK47s at one time.


Originally posted by Majestic23
Funny how America never attacks any country with nukes.


Funny how other nuclear powers never attacked us.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by dooper
I recall a ton of those same countries you mentioned that were freed to determine their own governments as a result of our efforts.


True, Iam sure they appreciate you guys taking credit for liberating them as usual. Again its "we saved your ass in WW2". And again it was none of your business in the first place.


Originally posted by dooperIn fact, a lot of countries are not under the boot of the Japanese, the Soviets, or Nazi Germany.


How can people on a conspiracy site be so blind! Its power play, nobody saved anybody.


Originally posted by dooperI wouldn't apologize for a damned thing.


No one is asking you to, and they certainly didnt expected you to.


Originally posted by dooperWe got dragged into the First World War kicking and screaming because Europe couldn't handle it.


I know! You even had to allow the sinking of The Lustiana!


Originally posted by dooperSame thing in the Second World War.


I know! You even had to allow the bombing of Pearl Harbour!


Originally posted by dooper Just because at the end of that war we wound up on top of the pile and was asked time and again for "help" is not to say we desired that position.


Even bullies are ashamed of being bullies.


Originally posted by dooperTell you what. All you snot-nosed, sniveling, whining-ass puddlepuffs take care of your own (fill in the blank) for a change!


Have you ever seen Team America World Police?


Originally posted by dooperTired of pulling your bacon out of the fire again and again.


O


Originally posted by dooperDevelop your own navies. Develop your own fighters. Take care of your own backyard and give us some relief.


M


Originally posted by dooperNot Brits. Brits have held up their end of the post the entire way, and I love 'em.


G

I am English.

Because of that war unimaginable amounts of pain and terror were caused. Everyone, all nationalities and races and faiths fought harder than we can fathom.

If you really want to respect their memory and have some semblance of honour then dont glamorise and romanticise it. And for the sake of your soul see that war is hell and there is nothing brave or honorable about it.

You gung ho fools talk about this it like you want another one.

May god have mercy on your future generations. Lets try and learn from out mistakes yeah?

[edit on 1-7-2009 by Majestic23]



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65
You do know that the US was bombing axis targets, don't you? It's not like the 8th Air Force was on their way to Berlin and said, "Hey, you know what? I really don't like Belgium Waffles. I'm going to let them have it with a few hundred pounders!"


Yeah, of course I know that, does it discount the others mentioned?
Enough with the ad hominem.


Originally posted by jerico65 What about the Soviets arming everyone and their brother? They were giving away AK47s at one time.


What about it? Two wrongs make a right or something?


Originally posted by jerico65Funny how other nuclear powers never attacked us.


Now you are getting it.





new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join