A note to the American military

You can't handle the truth!

Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom! You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives! You don't want the truth, because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall! You need me on that wall! We use words like "honor", "code", "loyalty". We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline! I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "Thank you," and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!

I have noticed, on a fairly consistent basis, that in the exchanges between civilians and soldiers on this forum, soldiers routinely resort to (usually abridged) variants of the above speech, in an attempt to win arguments.

The name of the argument between civilians and the military on these forums can take several forms; but the central issue, is usually:-

a] That the civilian population both of America and other countries, do not feel that any legitimate defense of anyone's freedom has been accomplished by the invasions of Afghanistan or Iraq.

b] That both of these conflicts were begun, entirely unprovoked, by Presidents who were the product of the corporatocracy, and that they were commenced purely for the acquisition of resources and corporate profit.

c] That in said conflicts, the American military has essentially served as corporate mercenaries.

d] That most importantly, the central motivation behind these wars has been imperial, rather than defensive, in any sense of the word whatsoever.

As a result, I have, over a period of several years, reached the conclusion that, unlike Nicholson's quote above, it isn't actually civilians who can't handle the truth, but the soldiers.

You cannot psychologically tolerate the idea that your friends and yourselves have been maimed, psychologically shattered, and killed within conflicts that have been started and fought for no legitimately defensible moral purpose.

That you cannot tolerate this truth, is entirely understandable. I suspect that the realisation of said truth, has had a lot to do with the reason why the topic of military suicides has recently become a lot more prevalent. You struggle with it, and the resulting sense of betrayal by your government, that you have experienced, for us as civilians probably is genuinely unfathomable; but the inescapable reality is that you are not doing good things in Afghanistan or Iraq. You are not making your country safer, and you are not contributing to America maintaining or improving its' image or reputation in the world. In fact, you are doing the opposite.

This message is not intended as an attack upon you. The reason why I am pointing this out, and begging you to begin to accept the unacceptable, is because for you to do so, is the only way that we can have any hope, of beginning to make this stop.

The current threat to your country is not foreign. It is domestic. The threat has been permitted to become dire. The hour is genuinely late at this point, and your government has almost reached the final stage of the pathocratic lifecycle which, if it is permitted to run to completion, will literally take the United States of America back to Auschwitz; but not as the cavalry.

Janet Napolitano has recently spoken of her perception of the threat of "domestic terrorism." She is clearly aware of the possibility of many American soldiers realising the truth described above, and she is understandably gravely concerned by the implications.

Your country's government has been invaded and overrun by psychopaths. You can find links to scientific information about psychopaths in some of these forums. These psychopaths are not individuals who are capable of feeling love, empathy, or remorse. They will quite happily drain all of the blood from the veins of every human being on this planet, in order to achieve their own aggrandizement.

It is these psychopaths who ordered you to go and risk your lives in Afghanistan and Iraq. They exploited your loyalty, your sense of honour, and your commitment to the oath that you have taken, and they did so purely for the sake of their own profit.

Again, for you to feel uncontrollable rage in response to this, is only human. All I ask, however, is that said rage is directed at those who have truly earned it; the psychopathic, mass-murdering criminals who have subverted the government of the country that was intended to be the light of the world.

The civilians of America, and the rest of the planet, urgently require your defense from these psychopaths. This, and not the pointless, senseless commission of attrocities against civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq, is the truly critical, and genuinely honourable battle that exists before you.

Excellent post, I'm sure that I'm not the only one who has a similar view to this. Hopefully the next president will abandon the wars in the middle east.

Thank you...well said.

We need the soldiers on the side of the Americans. Just ask the Filipino people during Edsa 1..

It can't wait until they have their guns pointed as us tho.

Peace

I agree. It is a complex situation behind the scenes, discussion on the Threat Assessment to Earth can be found at www.abovetopsecret.com...

"You cannot psychologically tolerate the idea that your friends and yourselves have been maimed, psychologically shattered, and killed within conflicts that have been started and fought for no legitimately defensible moral purpose."

Couldn't have said it better myself! Another thing the soldiers tend to forget - they signed up to protect the constitution of our nation, a constitution which clearly states that we, the people, are the ones who are in charge. The soldiers work for us.

Military men are “dumb, stupid animals to be used” as pawns for foreign policy.

Henry Kissinger,
National Security Advisor to Nixon, 1973.

Well said, but it's still hard for most of those who've built their lives & persona's around these false truths.

In truth most of those in the military whom I grew up around are good people. We all have been mislead.

The only question is how or can we stop this from continuing to happen and still remain relevant enough to make a difference in the rest of the world? Or should we just take care of ourselves and hide or heads in the sand in regards to the rest of the world.

The world is being looted and people are being enslaved - doing nothing is a chosen role what role do we play?

reply to post by petrus4

"You cannot psychologically tolerate the idea that your friends and yourselves have been maimed, psychologically shattered, and killed within conflicts that have been started and fought for no legitimately defensible moral purpose."

I think that applies to 911 as well. Both sides.

Side A doesn't want to come to terms with the fact that 911, quite possibly, was a self inflicted wound to achieve political ends.

Side B doesn't want to believe that 19 guys in caves could actually have done this.

both sides face a world shattering dilemma.

reply to post by petrus4


I have no problems with a soldiers dedication . They and many circumstances have been our saviors in conflicts. All of my uncles cousins fought in WW2 and I still have a few in the military.
The only bee in my bonnet is that they fought to save all they could from attacking enemy. and personally have many losses of kin.
I am not living in the US but i did admire the fact that the downtrodden have been released from invasion.
Please mark that word.Trying to subjugate the world is not what your country needs.Your brethren are begging on street corners and for what? They fought and served and are being thrown off as garbage as they have had their use.
I am a spiritualist and I believe that what is happening is not the way to go.
If we want to grow as a race we must work together as the challenges involve our inane ability to solve situations [ that do not involve us but that help is openly required] All of us want peace , financial equality and a say in what we are laying our lives for. There a myriad of star systems with the cabal [ like the one that is trying to bind us] The fact is : what do you tell a cousin protecting poppy fields ,is the best way to save the world.
As I see it, it is insane as there are enough evil races out there that can keep us busy for the next thousand years, If you are with the creator you would see we are needed.
What is happening now is but a burp. May you be here when the real reality comes.
Peace and respect for the troops.
Love to all!

reply to post by petrus4

This is the kind of thread that I wished I had made. The truth is, it is written better than I would have been able to write.
My anger comes through and sometimes clouds my thinking and my writing.
It is tough to recognize when you have made a horrible mistake, and even tougher to deal with that reality. But, it must be done before we can begin to heal and take the power away from the evil that threatens to consume us all.

It's referred to as the Bush Doctine and its a valid National Policy. Establishing presence and influence around the world in order to prevent larger conflicts in the future and to proactively defend the country.

Bush Doctrine

Different pundits would attribute different meanings to "the Bush Doctrine", as it came to describe other elements, including the controversial policy of preventive war, which held that the United States should depose foreign regimes that represented a potential or perceived threat to the security of the United States, even if that threat was not immediate; a policy of spreading democracy around the world, especially in the Middle East, as a strategy for combating terrorism; and a willingness to unilaterally pursue U.S. military interests.[3][4][5] Some of these policies were codified in a National Security Council text entitled the National Security Strategy of the United States published on September 20, 2002.

Now the OP may say these countries and all countries of the world should be allowed to act however they want and if they attack us in the future than we should respond, but not until then.

This theory allows us to intervene and prevent things before they get to that point. Yes there is fighting and deaths involved however it is assumed that it will be far less than having to go to all out war in the future as happened in the past during ww1 and ww2.

So to say there is no reason for us to be in Iraq and Afghanistan is not correct if you assume we are following this doctrine.

reply to post by kro32

Drivel. Utter nonsense.
A "theory"allow us....what? What did you just utter?
Perhaps we should do away with the anonymous internet, we could find out who post such nonsense.

Originally posted by SirClem
reply to post by kro32

 

Drivel. Utter nonsense.
A "theory"allow us....what? What did you just utter?
Perhaps we should do away with the anonymous internet, we could find out who post such nonsense.

It's not the internet it is part of the curriculem now in college history classes.

It is an actual military doctrine the same as the other ones. You may agree with it or not but it is a policy that is now being played out.

Having read the ops statement, it is if I am reading it correctly is that the population of the US does not understand that the invasion of both Iraq and Afghanistan has nothing do deal with the preservation of our freedom, that these conflicts were not provoked and that the US military is servicing as corporate mercenaries, and that the motivation behind said conflicts is that it is fully imperial.
To begin, these are not wars, this is an error in its statement first and foremost, they are armed conflicts, no less no more, as there has been no declaration of war on the part of the Congress of the United States of America. If you disagree, please provide the date of said declaration of war, that was voted on and approved, because that is the only way that it can be considered a war. The last war declared was World War II.
The Afghanistan conflict was fully provoked by the group called Al Queda, with the approval and jurisdiction of the Taliban, which at the time was the legitimate government of the country of Afghanistan. It was a sneak attack and in short a declaration of war against the United States of America. Just like the attack on the USN Cole, and diplomatic offices in Africa and other parts of the Middle East, by Al Queda.
If there is any more of a reason to attack, then all of those events would have been more than enough reason for going into an armed conflict.
While we may not agree with the reason for going into the Middle East, the reasons for such are complicated like a knot, but the biggest reason that can be seen, is that it was a mess that was made by the US, that started this entire problem with Sadam Hussain, and ultimately we had to end it. It was the US that gave him the technology that he used against the Kurds and Iran, in the way of uncongenial weapons, as it was well documented. None of the other countries were willing to get involved, not one of the countries in the area were willing to lift a finger, and yet they all looked to the US to clean it up, so we did. Now be it as it may, it was our mess in the beginning and we are having to deal with the ramifications
So while many may not agree with such, there are questions that should be asked: How many people in the US has to die before we the people agree that such actions are called for? Is the death of 3000 by an act of war by a group not enough, would it take an act of 10000, or how about 50,000? Would that spur the population into supporting and agreeing that such was called for? After all the US declaration of War during World War II was the result of only 2,403 men during a sneak attack by the empire of Japan.
The job of the Military is to kill, that is what they are trained to do. Yet people are shocked when they do the job that they are trained and asked to do. The founding father put the leadership of the military, in the hands of the civilian government, and not under those who would misuse it to their advantage, and those who would lead must take that role seriously. Ordering people to their deaths is not easy, and those decisions must weigh heavily on the leaders who make those decisions.
The final thought must be this, the politicians that we the people vote into office hold the final responsibility for the military. Oh we may complain or ponder why the decisions are made, but in the final analysis of all of this, it is the Congress of the US that is responsible for its success and if it marches or not, as they hold the one crucial key on if the military marches or not, the purse strings. It is not right to blame the US military for its actions, rather the blame lies with the congress. They have had more than plenty of opportunities to close the purse and cut the budget, and do not. The other thing that needs to be asked about such, and considered, is if the US military is such a bad thing, then why do people still join it?

reply to post by deadmessiah


Well boss, why don't you guys get these soldiers out these damn sand boxes. I mean, they work for you right? You seem to forget that Bush had plenty of support from our civilian bosses when all this crap started.

reply to post by sdcigarpig

A lot of words, but sadly you are wrong.
It is about resources. The corporations want the resources. Al Qaeda is the boogeyman so we can go bomb people and get their stuff.
Corporations want YOU to pay to make it safe for them to steal stuff. That is the reason industry has moved out of the U.S. to third world nations, because labor is cheap. It is cheap because the people aren't free to protest working for slave wages. The U.S. has the biggest prison population in the world working for slave wages.
Coincidence? I think not.
Your government guards and protects the drug trade that destroys many of your friends and neighbors. It is all interconnected, but not all that difficult. Nothing is sacred but the truth, and you don't necessarily have right to the truth.

reply to post by SirClem


I assume you can show us what resources we are getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan and how much of it then.

I await your information.

Personally i don't think we have any business fighting other people's revolutions for them. People learn nothing when the US wins their wars for them except this, that they can start a rebellion and win because the US will come bail them out of trouble and everything will be hunky dorey afterwards. Those days have come to an end. We can no longer afford a government whose foriegn policy includes being the world's police force. All you foreign countries out there are going to have to start picking up your own slack instead of riding on the coat tails of America. We can't keep affording to bail you all out of trouble. Our Big Government has metasticsized and swollen under its own weight and will collapse soon. The wars you get into are now your own to win or lose as you see fit.

It is my hope that the US will retreat back into isolationism, we have our own concerns to tend to from now on, we should concern ourselves with protecting our own borders and our own citizens. Our soldiers are not needed 12,000 miles away anymore, they are needed in our own country. Our government needs to let our fathers, brothers,sons,daughters,wives and sisters come home, they are needed more here than abroad trying to stop the world from tearing itself apart. Let other nations defend their peoples for once.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


Isolationism is no longer a viable option with the world becoming more globalized every year. It would do far more harm than good.

reply to post by kro32

Some reading material for you kro.
It is all about the Caspian.

Pipelines through rugged terrain guarded by American troops. Poppy fields that can provide huge sums for black operations...guarded by American troops. NATO at war with much of the region...for what?

Duh,,,I think because some Saudis bombed the twin towers.....