It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Here is your war on Terrorism ! America !

page: 22
28
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by FarArcher
 


backinblack, your significant lack of knowledge of fighting in warfare - even unconventional warfare - should preclude you from asking some of the dumbest questions I've ever heard.


Lack of knowledge.?? lol
It was you that selectively quoted the Geneva Convention...

Any fool can see the US is losing the war in Afghanistan..
Funny, I agree with you that they should pull all the troops out and try another tack..
Special forces with defined targeting of the enemy leaders would have a far greater impact..
Use the thousands of troops and equipment to secure the borders and thus stop as many insurgents entering the arena...

All they are currently doing is indiscriminate killing which is simply creating more enemies..
But then maybe that's their aim..




posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 

BS!

They are NOT doing indiscriminate killing.

It's dumbass claims like this that show you don't know that in hell you're talking about.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by backinblack
 

You seem to have a problem with killing at a distance.

It's great.

You couldn't do it up close or far away, so don't bother criticizing folks who are actually doing it.

It's not like they'll man up and face us.


Why are you trying to put words in my mouth.???
I DIDN'T say I have a problem with killing from afar..
I merely said the US is far better at that than in ground assaults...
How does that equate to me having a problem,?

Way to twist words.........



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by backinblack
 

BS!

They are NOT doing indiscriminate killing.

It's dumbass claims like this that show you don't know that in hell you're talking about.


Fine, prove it...
Show me a list of US kills and how many are innocents.....

I aint the dumbass pretending all is rosy within the US military...



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sinnthia
I just have to ask when the US is going to adopt this policy? It seems admirable and you seem to be from the US. Maybe you can convince the US military to start just going where the bad guys are? You know that is not what happens currently I am sure.


Yup, I'm American - corn fed and field bred.

Now, to be honest, this is a somewhat complex issue which some try to over-complicate, and some tend to over-simplify. What it boils down to is who one sees as "the bad guys".

There are something on the order of 6.5 billion people burdening this planet. To a significant number of them, the insurgents are the "good guys", and they think it's perfectly acceptable for shiites to off a few sunni kids in a market with a bomb (if they're shiites themselves) or that it's fine for sunnis to x-out a few shiite grandmothers in the same manner (if they're sunni).

Both sunnis and shiites think it's just dandy to vaporize a few infidels women and kids now and then. The fewer opposition kids there are to grow into opposition fighters, the less they have to worry about down the road. It's a "nits grow into lice" sort of philosophy.

That's not limited to muslims, either, nor is it inclusive of all muslims. I use that as an example because that's what we're currently up to our ears in. In my day, it was socialists, communists, marxists, or whatever other "ists" were the flavor of the day. The common denominator seems to be preying on the weak and the helpless. Out of that 6.5 billion I mentioned above, I'm one of those who doesn't think that's OK, so that's who I identify as the "bad guys".

Now a problem we encounter is that these bad guys like to hide amongst their victims. What is needed is to draw them out from there, but that's not always easy to do. They sort of LIKE hiding behind skirts - it's the coward's way. So, to go where the bad guys are, we have to go where those victims are as well. We don't target the civilians, but without drawing the bad guys out (and if they just won't come out to play) then we have a problem. When that happens, we see threads like this popping up like daisies on a grave.

So, in my simplistic mind, bad guys = those who TARGET innocents, good guys = those who TARGET the bad guys. Either way, some innocents are going to die. That's the way of war, and has been since Og the cave man invented war. The alternative is to let the Bad Guys have their wicked way with ALL of us, because you can bet your sweet fanny that they won't stop where they are if they see there's no opposition to be had. Lust for power works that way. They just go after more and more if no one stands in the way. It's like an addiction.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   
We do fine in ground assaults too.

A lot of clowns on here obviously don't know the concept of combined arms.

I've seen some of the dumbest points, most uninformed assumptions, and juvenile allegations on this thread.

God help humanity.

Einstein said the Universe was finite, but the capacity for stupidity was infinite.

That guy knew what he was talking about!



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 

NO, I don't have to prove a negative.

You prove indiscriminate killing.

Let me clue you in, Sherlock. The US decides at any point to go with indiscriminate killing, within six months, there won't be enough Afghans to field a damned soccer team.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by FarArcher
We do fine in ground assaults too.

A lot of clowns on here obviously don't know the concept of combined arms.

I've seen some of the dumbest points, most uninformed assumptions, and juvenile allegations on this thread.

God help humanity.

Einstein said the Universe was finite, but the capacity for stupidity was infinite.

That guy knew what he was talking about!



This from a US soldier that admits to helping kill for a bounty to buy a new car..
Yeah sure mate..You're one of the good guys and well worth a listen to..



And let me say this: Mercenaries are as old as armed conflict, and they have their place. One of my best friend while I was serving in combat was a mercenary, and he made really good money as they were paid a bounty on non-uniformed combatants.

I discovered that these "capitalists" would pay half the total bounty to any American who would accompany them and carry a radio. Now, even in the military, you have time off, or everyone goes on R&R, and so on. When you're on your own time, you can do what you want.

When I returned, I paid cash for a new car and cash for my house.

Nothing wrong with profits in war. Actually, the prohibition against taking **** from the defeated is a very recent phenomenon.


Yep, an honest to God war hereo...
Personally I say anyone that kills for profit is nothing but scum.....


edit on 5-1-2011 by backinblack because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack


This from a US soldier that admits to helping kill for a bounty to buy a new car..
Yeah sure mate..You're one of the good guys and well worth a listen to..


Yep, an honest to God war hereo...
Personally I say anyone that kills for profit is nothing but scum.....



They don't pay soldiers where you're from?

If they do, then you're just bickering over price, and seem to only prefer a higher kill to dollar ratio.

Try "Ed's Bargain Basement Mercs" - I hear they're "reasonable".


edit on 2011/1/5 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 

Let's get this out of the way.

I'm not your mate.

Never will be.

Never happen. I have standards.

And yes, no use in the others getting all the money, when I was doing the same damned thing for military pay. They thought it worth giving me half to carry a radio, so if you don't like it - take it up with them.

We were all after the same guys.

In the military I was getting a flat rate. You have a really good day, and the paycheck is the same.

With the "boys" we were getting piece rates. I doubled my monthly Army pay in two days!



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
Now, to be honest, this is a somewhat complex issue which some try to over-complicate, and some tend to over-simplify. What it boils down to is who one sees as "the bad guys".


Yes and that would be why I asked. Back in 2001 I heard all the time about horrible world dictators that were enemies of the US. North Korea comes to mind but is hardly the only example. The US had "enemies" all over the globe. Then we were attacked by Saudies out of Afghanistan so we invaded Iraq.

I hope you can see how it might look like the US is less interested in "enemies." to an impartial observer. Why not go after the bad guys with real WMDs? Why not go after the people that attacked us on 9/11? Why not invade the wonderful villages in Africa where women are routinely raped to death with machettes?

If we are going to justify war in terms of "enemies" then the US might do well to define what makes one an "enemy."


So, in my simplistic mind, bad guys = those who TARGET innocents, good guys = those who TARGET the bad guys.


Great way to be. I applaud that. Now again, let me know when the US gets on that page with us.
edit on 5-1-2011 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 

Your mistake is in not identifying the enemy we have.

Let's see, some 9-11 attackers were Saudi to be sure, but really, what's the root of our fight here.

Islam.

Now the only permissible thing at this juncture is to go after the more fundamentalist Muslim groups who have taken action against us. At least at this point.

Muslim groups who are destabilizing in sensitive areas.

Iraq was destabilizing. Afghanistan hosted those who attacked us.

No one here gives a tinker's damn about Africa. Not long ago, there was a country named Rhodesia that was called the Pearl of Africa. Well, they wanted change, and they got it.

Other nations in Africa wanted change.

They got it.

Right in the neck.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by backinblack
 

Let's get this out of the way.

I'm not your mate.

Never will be.

Never happen. I have standards.

And yes, no use in the others getting all the money, when I was doing the same damned thing for military pay. They thought it worth giving me half to carry a radio, so if you don't like it - take it up with them.

We were all after the same guys.

In the military I was getting a flat rate. You have a really good day, and the paycheck is the same.

With the "boys" we were getting piece rates. I doubled my monthly Army pay in two days!



So what's your standard of friends, cold booded, paid killers.??
Did you get extra for women and children, grandads.???



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Yes and that would be why I asked. Back in 2001 I heard all the time about horrible world dictators that were enemies of the US. North Korea comes to mind but is hardly the only example. The US had "enemies" all over the globe. Then we were attacked by Saudies out of Afghanistan so we invaded Iraq.


No we helped the Afghan Northern alliance who were in a civil war with the Mostly non Afghan Foreign Taliban Government and kicked them to the curb. The War in Afghanistan began on October 7, 2001

Iraq happened in 2003


Get your facts straight first then you can twist them as you please.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 



They don't pay soldiers where you're from?

If they do, then you're just bickering over price, and seem to only prefer a higher kill to dollar ratio.

Try "Ed's Bargain Basement Mercs" - I hear they're "reasonable".


I know people die in wars but I don't like when some are paid by how many they kill..
Especially when they are only paid for the un-uniformed kills..
We know there are bad mercenaries so what's to stop them killing innocents and claiming the bounty??
I would gaurentee it's happened and also creates more enemies..
What a great racket..

But this guy is a US soldier who took an oath..
Pathetic. Killing for a new house and car.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 

Such idiotic statements is why you disgust me.

We were engaged in advanced pest control. Our pests were all armed.

They were the ones maiming and killing innocents, which is why we derived a certain satisfaction when we had a really good day against them.

You don't know black from white, good from bad, jack from ****.

You've never seen it, you've never faced the horror of scenes you'd come upon, and you don't have a clue.

The sad part?

Even if you saw it, you'd be incapable of taking care of the problem.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by Sinnthia
 

Your mistake is in not identifying the enemy we have.

Let's see, some 9-11 attackers were Saudi to be sure, but really, what's the root of our fight here.

Islam.


Let me see if I can help you out of this logical black hole here.
If you think we were attacked by Islam, then why are we in just two countries fighting it? I was with 2 Muslims on 9/11 who have since completely failed to threaten to kill me. Odd? The enemy is not Islam and if you think it is, then you need to explain why you would leave America to fight it.

Islam is global so no, that makes NO SENSE.


Now the only permissible thing at this juncture is to go after the more fundamentalist Muslim groups who have taken action against us. At least at this point.


From Iraq? Huh?


Muslim groups who are destabilizing in sensitive areas.


Funny because I keep hearing many of these places were quite stable until the US invaded.


Iraq was destabilizing. Afghanistan hosted those who attacked us.


So anyone that is "destablizing" is our enemy? I thought it was Islam? Was Iraw the only unstable country at the time?


No one here gives a tinker's damn about Africa.


Then you just tossed your entire argument out the window. Shame. I guess no need to play on then.


Not long ago, there was a country named Rhodesia that was called the Pearl of Africa. Well, they wanted change, and they got it.

Other nations in Africa wanted change.

They got it.

Right in the neck.




Maybe you should just let Nenot answer instead of just pounding on your keyboard.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
No we helped the Afghan Northern alliance who were in a civil war with the Mostly non Afghan Foreign Taliban Government and kicked them to the curb. The War in Afghanistan began on October 7, 2001

Iraq happened in 2003


Get your facts straight first then you can twist them as you please.


Try reading before offering "corrections." I do not see the timeline you seem to think I posted. Maybe you can show it to me. Thank you though for this. When all of you jump to answer me and pretty much kill each other's arguments, I can just watch.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


Your attempt at wit and sarcasm was noted.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 

Your ignorance of the actual teachings of Islam are your problem.

Not mine.




top topics



 
28
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join