Why This Lovely Woman Does NOT Support The Troops - Amazing Video

Originally posted by Sek82
She's a bit jaded is all. Intelligent sure, but jaded also. Look, she saw a few clips of FLIR imagery, saw some statistics on collateral damage and this is the result. And then she is placing members of the armed forces in a few of her own made up catagories - stereotyping them basically.

Some made big hay back durring the VN war with this attacking of troops. It had a majior effect at the time but the anti war folks took a lot of heat over the years for this. Anyway I look for more of this anti troop stuff to start flowing out of the cracks like the blob. And please everyone know whos really behind this. This woman is just the sort of usefull idiot they like.

And making money at war.....many have been making zillions durring the last 40 years in this country fighting a "war" on poverty and yet the continue to get away with hidding behind the do gooder thing.

I thought there would be more hate to her.
(deleted posts) but she gets a lot of support.
my’n too. she makes very good points.
people get sick of the lye’s and wars.

Originally posted by spoonbender
you agree to insight troops to treasonous acts

She did not incite the troops to anything. I suggest people don't become troops in the first place.

[color=#FF0000]The true patriot is not the man who defends[color=#FFFFFF] a corrupt government. The true patriot is the man who defends the[color=#3333FF] Constitution from that corrupt government.

Here is an interesting read for anybody that doubts the motives of the use of the US military ALL TIME (not just post WW2)

Time line of United States Military Operations

The US Military seems to spend very little time at home defending the country and a lot more time invading/eliminating potential enemies who have a lot of resources and pose virtually no threat.

The thing is, no matter what government you guys seem to have elected, according to this document, hardly a political term has gone by since the revolution without invading/attacking/performing some kind of operation on foreign soil and/or assisting foreign government prevent revolts/ assisting rebels start revolts. (please point out if its correct or not, its a very long list and i only skimmed it)

I can see her source of angst about the whole supporting the troops thing, but i do think she is quiet ignorant to the realities of being poor. The entire system is setup for war as a means to bleed tax payers money out of the public arena into private corporations coffers. So many jobs have and are being moved to India, Mexico, China, etc, leaving virtually no alternative to military service for many people. America spends more on war than every other country in the world combined, and although i appreciate the troops and ships stationed here protecting TPTB investment in my country (and also as a consequence protecting my countries prosperity), i partially agree with OP's girlfriend. But its easy for her to be pious when she's doing okay financially. She certainly doesn't look under nourish ;p quiet fit indeed!

See how much war costs us
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

@ ModernAcademia

I wouldn't characterize LibertyChickLive's (LCL) speech as excellent. Moreover I wouldn't characterize her thoughts as being comprised of non general statements/conceptualizations either. That she does not support the troops is abudantly clear, but there are pieces to her speech that betray what I would identify as excellent.

Prelimary: [~x:xx] will denote the approximate time during which a transcribed portion of her speech occurred. Additonally, I will follow-up most of these time markers with comments of my own, but not in all cases.

[~0:15]: "give alot of information in this video" LCL provides information, but much of it in the form of opinion & in some cases informal fallacy.

[~0:57]: "I reject nationalism; I reject blind patriotism" I agree with LCL to some extent on this, though not to the extent that oikophobia (as an antithesis to xenophobia) defines my regard for the nation I call home.

[~1:32]: "I don't support anything they (military servicemembers in this case) are doing" From this statement it is clear that LCL supports nothing military servicemembers do, be it good or bad. This is good information & I'm pleased that she was honest enough to share it with everyone.

[`1:97]: "many people in the military don't actually know what they're doing--they think they're protecting their country" Cause and effect in relation to a political/national response does not somehow erase from military servicemembers' minds their trained function and role--much less their personal regard and feelings on life and death matters. Beside this the statement is an obvious generalization, if only because the rhetorical device "many" is general.

[~2:05]: "they should know what they're doing & fighting for. ignroance is not going to bring someone's family member back" I'm not entirely certain what to make of this statement. I understand its context ... somewhat, but at face value I presume it is intended to convey that military servicemembers exchange fire (i.e. fight/TIC/rodeo/engage/et cetera) from a position of ignorance, which is a bogus claim to imply. In any event, it strikes me as another general statement.

[~2:27]: "not going to change the fact that we've killed over 1 million Iraqi people" Arbitrary statistic, absent context (i.e. does this number include UN sanctions against Iraq antecedent to invasion?) with no vetted source citation included.

[`3:43]: "viewed as terrorists by other nations" I'm inclined to agree, but this is not a new phenomenon.

People join the military for 1 of 3 reasons according to LCL: 1) they're dumb; 2) they're evil; 3) they're morally compromised (in case #3, I beleive LCL intends to convey that people "remain" in the military despite that they're morally compromised).

[~4:13]: "this is true, where you're given a badge of honor for, umm (eye movement to the left and right & conceptualizing an image to a response), stabbing someone to death who did nothing" This is a blatant assumption. She offers no vetted source citation to back that claim; moreover, it implies military commands reward indisciminate killing. If this is true as a generalization, then it needs to be supported with documented cases demonstrating that it is a common practice.

[~4:20]: "if you were a serial killer (related to #2 in reasons people join the military), what better job than to have a job where you chop someone's head off and get paid for it" I'm not even going to dignify that statement, other than to note it's a blatant red herring intended to justify her position.

[~5:15]: "do not support the position of servicemembers who are morally compromised" I partially agree, but the situation is much more complex than LCL admits or understands. Beyond complexities, LCL is quite unaware of the sane & courageous efforts these so-called "morally compromised servicemembers" bring to the forefront of situations that have been dealt out by political leaders. Were they not the majority then LCL can be certain indiscriminate killing would be the rule rather than the exception. Nonetheless, I doubt this point would have much influence on LCL's position.

[~6:03]: "we basically kiss these people's asses who have joined an organization that has killed over 1 million people" That's LCL's perception--the ass kissing. It's as though she perceives an expression of "thanks" as ass kissing, qualifying that with another number that lacks a vetted source citation.

[~6:38]: "I really don't care what you think about this video" Not caring what others think of your position & posting it for the world to see ... beam me up already! Of course LCL cares! It's obviously important to her & she obviously wants to "throw it out there." LCL wants her voice to be heard & she wants to have influence on this topic. Though to be fair, I'm sure she meant that she doesn't care if you "don't agree with her position." Still, by virtue of her own words, she doesn't care what you think about her video.

I stopped shortly after this point. Well, I stopped trasncribing (and I own that it is not entirely verbatim, hence the time markers). As for my own position on this topic, I support all the military branches, though I do not support current contingency operations (what they are defined as) in Iraq & Afghanistan. Nor do I support this newly labeled "kinetic action" in Libya. The justifications for armed conflict in both Afghanistan & Iraq were well defined, though the casus belli that led to these contingency ops are certainly disputable now.

One piece that LCL doesn't bother to voice in on is the obligation America incurred per the Hauge Convention of 1907. avalon.law.yale.edu... Per declaration IV (The Laws & Customs of War on Land), annex, section III, Military Authority Over The Territory of the Hostile State, the U.S. became obligated to re-establish order, commerce & security once it breached & overcame its enemy's border, military & regime. This is an international obligation of which the United States is signatory & bound to & of which all branch servicemembers must receive rudimentary training on. It probably wouldn't warrant justification for our continued presence in these theaters in terms of LCL's perspective, but it must be owned that once America undertook to invade and topple the regimes of Afghanistan & Iraq, America incurred international obligations it could not simply walk away from.

Is LCL's speech excellent? No. It's okay, but I didn't feel that it was particuarly informative, useful, or well-rehearsed. That she doesn't support military servicemembers is fine. Still, some of her accusations lack good taste & credibility.

edit on 5-7-2011 by Axebo because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by Logarock
And making money at war.....many have been making zillions durring the last 40 years in this country fighting a "war" on poverty and yet the continue to get away with hidding behind the do gooder thing.

Last I checked, the war on poverty did not kill any innocent civilians. Nor did it cause anyone to actually lose their rights and freedoms. Nor was it an excuse to torture people without charging them and bringing them to trial.

Nice deflection though. I hope you did not get any of that BS on your shoes.

reply to post by SirMike

they may think they know what they are fighting for, but they don’t”

The soldiers and proud parents............the masses, no they have no idea what they are truly fighting for. They are tools for the major corporations that now run our "government".

Read my location.

The common man is nothing more than a human pawn on a chessboard game.

We are always at war to invade and conquer another country's resources - in the name of freedom but actually for profit.

Simply follow the money $$$$$$$$ and power.

reply to post by groingrinder


Good post.

Have you read "The End of America" and "Give Me Liberty" by Naomi Wolf?

Our "Constitution" has been rewritten and altered to the point that our forefathers must be spinning in their graves.

A slave that does not realize he/she is enslaved will never rebel.

A prisioner that does not realize that he/she is imprisioned will never try to escape.

And so the illusions of liberty and freedom continue.

Originally posted by fooks
reply to post by ParanoidAmerican

 

10k iraqi military and 100k civis?

is that even remotely believable to anyone?

we crushed them in a couple weeks, does it say who actually killed them all or do we just get blamed for a fall in the bathroom too.

Actually the bathroom fall deaths are included. Young women who had a good life before the US invaded became forced into prostitution by my goverment's actions. Then they fell in the bathroom and died. If you think any of these death tolls are even remotely related to reality to the truth you are very gullible. Over a million were killed by my government on a fake humanitarian mission. Well spoken girl lacks credibility because of her good looks. We need a powerful man to tell these truths to the people.

Yesh, screw joining voluntarily like me. Have fun with the draft. I'll laugh at you all. Support the troops, even if you don't believe in freedom. They're keeping your buttocks out of a war you don't care to fight, don't care to fight against at home, and don't care to stop abroad.

Get your heads out of your keister's and realize that the government starts wars, and the people in the military have many different reasons for being there, even if they recieve 0 appreciation.

Originally posted by sbctinfantry
They're keeping your buttocks out of a war you don't care to fight

No this is untrue
The end of the Vietnam war is proof of that

has anyone else noticed this?

The ones that are always out there saying "Support the Troops!" and "Thank you for serving" are usually folks that have never/will never serve 1 day in their life?

Originally posted by groingrinder

Originally posted by Logarock
And making money at war.....many have been making zillions durring the last 40 years in this country fighting a "war" on poverty and yet the continue to get away with hidding behind the do gooder thing.

Last I checked, the war on poverty did not kill any innocent civilians. Nor did it cause anyone to actually lose their rights and freedoms. Nor was it an excuse to torture people without charging them and bringing them to trial.

Nice deflection though. I hope you did not get any of that BS on your shoes.

edit on 7-5-2011 by groingrinder because: Edited to provide stinging sarcasm.

It has though made slaves of men and government dependent. It really looks like that was a main goal of that war. Besides in a war like that you dont want to kill the the golden goose you just keep feeding her and catching those golden eggs.

And what you dont know about some the the restirctions you get with that war on poverty? And there are very few soilders in that war just victims.

reply to post by mrwupy


BS propaganda. The military fights to enforce corporate contracts and to back the investments of the IMF and World Bank. They haven't fought for anyone's liberty, freedom or right to protest since the end of WW2, and in fact -- the exact opposite is now true. For every military action taken today, there is a corresponding reduction of liberty at home.

Originally posted by ofhumandescent
reply to post by SirMike

 

they may think they know what they are fighting for, but they don’t”

We are always at war to invade and conquer another country's resources - in the name of freedom but actually for profit.

Simply follow the money $$$$$$$$ and power.

edit on 5-7-2011 by ofhumandescent because: grammar

Are you talking about China again? I see they are already diging cooper in Afganistan. And folks complain about the UN and the US lack of intrest in Africa....but hay Chinas there digging, raping resources, buying off governments whiel the US cant even build a hospital in Iraq with out its motives being questioned.

The Military Industrial Complex who runs this country now does NOT want another ANTI-WAR movement occurring and gaining support of the US population as did during the Vietnam War.

Why do you think JFK was killed ?
He didn't want to bring troops into Vietnam....and thus allowing the CIA to export the Opium out of the Golden Triangle.

Why was MLK killed ?
He was gaining momentum and support by Americans in the anti Vietnam war movement.

This entire "Support our Troops" is more social engineering and propaganda used in conditioning us to believe that it's " The Right Thing to Do".

And exactly why we hear very little from the outspoken veterans of these wars on the MSM.

Plain and Simple.

Originally posted by ParanoidAmerican
Most of the civilians died in bombings would be my guess...... and most of the Iraqi military "abandon ship" after the initial carpet bombings.

Incorrect. There was NO strategic bombing campaign conducted in Iraq. Ever. Period.

There are enough points to debate the issue without inventing things that never happened IMO.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


We are at war because it keeps the world divided. If the people of the Earth can not unite, due to racism, mysoginism and nationalist tendenices, then we can be kept subdued and docile. If the human race is purposefully kept divided, then we pose no threat to their power. United we are strong, divided we are weak.