A.T.S and the Military what is the deal?

page: 6
28
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 13 2013 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by ausername
reply to post by Frith
 


So if we end this war, everything bad just goes away, the enemies become peaceful, the world will be a perfect place, evil will vanish and everyone lives happily ever after?

Heck if that is true, we don't need a military or weapons of any kind.

Unfortunately dreams and fantasies never reflect reality.


Well last time i checked Afganistan and iraq did not have any projection capabilities that could harm the west.



North korea has enough WMD to kill millions in south korea and japan but no oil there so no invasion...

See the hypocracy?

@op i dont habour any hatred toward severing personal . I just disagree with the missions they are sent on or at least the stupid reasons if the politician came out and said we want that country for resources they would at least in ,y opion be a shred of credability .
edit on 13-5-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 13 2013 @ 05:48 PM
link   
The funny thing is, it really is madness. There are the boots on the ground, but the intelligence of the orders is a cluster of remote viewing, retrocausal insertions, and not so much humans trying to cover their own agendas.

Now, those departments, mostly trying not to blow all of this up, again, there is a lot of other stuff going on that sort of makes this damn War try to be another game, just looking like another false flag, maybe best case.

If you did not have to do it, that would be still something to be considered, in this damn War.

Boots on the ground still see things up in the air, and sense the machinery, those who walked away from that stuff, are very few.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 06:22 PM
link   
I think what irrates the Anti Iraq and Afghanitsan war people is how some vetrans seem to ebleive they are protecting our freedoms overe there and seem proud at what our country did over there. Im not saying be ashamed but unless you know something I dont then you should be angry our politician have sent you over there. Ok you cant change that you were sent over there but you can still disgree with it.

Invadeding Iraq and Afghanistan has not prvented terroism all its done is make the terroist move there training camps, go deeper into hidding and give millions of muslims even more reason to hate up.

By the way I think the politican should be picking up guns and going over there themselfs or if not able send there kids!

Least the UK royal family has sent its two princes out to the front lines which can more than said of Bush, Obama, Blair or Camroon.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Reaper2137
 


I don't think that left wingers or peaceniks are any more guilty of misreading threads, skimming over OP's etc, than those of a pro military persuasion. Everyone brings their own prejudices, misconceptions to ATS and even some of those identifiably military members of ATS are guilty of that too.

There's possibly more left wing, peacenik type people than there were a few years ago. Hardly surprising considering the scale of the colossal military failures in which our nations have participated since 2001, the costs involved & the lives lost for absolutely nothing whatever (or was that for freedom, democracy ?)

That might account for some of the discontent, that plus many of us instinctively recoil in horror at the thought that some demand our respect not for their individual or collective heroic act ... some in the military demand our respect simply because they've worn a uniform, even if it's as a payroll clerk in Alaska or some long forgotten British colonial outpost. There's an awful large number of blowhards who embellish their service histories, you know, ATS isnt immune.

Not that my mates are guilty of that, though. Scots are an awful down to earth people, they speak bluntly, they call things as they are.

Some of my Scottish mates have been mentally and physically scarred for life through their service in Iraq & Afghanistan. I help them anyway I can, we've sat long into the night talking, we've done charity walks, abseils, canoeing all to raise money for the main military charitable hospital in Scotland ... Erskine Hospital ... and it's charity week, Purple Week, the first week of June so get your wallets & checkbooks ready.

Most of them find the whole "band of brothers", "freedom & democracy" and "mission accomplished" type stuff to be absolutely risible. The army take you in, screw you over and spit you out, after that you're just forgotten about, the regiment doesn't give a toss. The statistics prove it, from post service unemployment, to homelessness, to poverty, to ill health, to early death.

But here. Have some deference & contrived respect on this bulletin board if it cheers you up.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by TheBlackHat
 


I find your "Quote" of Bush both out of context and pure garbage. I can point out numerous false statements...outright slander on Bush where he rebutted "that's my job, to protect their rights to say what they say."

As far as" with us or against us", the context were those who play both sides against the middle ie the Saudis, et al.

As far as the beacon of hope, that's fading due to internal issues, not Iraq and Afghanistan. Ask Israel about "projection of power by Saddam or "unconventional" projection of power by means of civilian airliners. etc .If you want to twist that into an suppression of free speech, spin away, anyone who has an I.Q. above room temperature knows it was addressed to actions, not "words".



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by captiva
Being an invading force in another land is wrong. Taking another life while being an invading force, because you are told to, is wrong. Protecting your country and fellow citizens on your own soil is right.......One is right the others morally wrong........


mmmhmmm, so the Allied forces going to Germany and France to stop the Nazis was an invading force not protecting millions of people???

Not to mention some guy seemed to think our fighting the German invasion of Britain was an invading force not protecting our allies.....

I don't know what kind of revisionist history on steroids people have been reading...



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok

How do you come to the END of a war on an IDEA?

You make the cost of enacting the idea so high that few rational persons would do it. Kind of like the war on slavery, which only ended after the total warfare of the Civil War and the occupation of Reconstruction. It was utterly quotidian in the antebellum US, now it is a ghastly horror and only practiced by deranged perverts like Ariel Castro. You can't eliminate ideas of action like slavery or terrorism, but once they become cultural taboos, and state-sanctioned violence against those who engage in them is expected and regular, you're no longer at war. You're enforcing law. We haven't yet reached that point with terrorism, and I don't know how feasible it is to alter the cultural affinity for terrorism among certain groups in the modern world.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ausername
reply to post by Frith
 


So if we end this war, everything bad just goes away, the enemies become peaceful, the world will be a perfect place, evil will vanish and everyone lives happily ever after?

Heck if that is true, we don't need a military or weapons of any kind.

Unfortunately dreams and fantasies never reflect reality.


Were you attempting to reply to me? I don't see any of the content of my message reflected in your post.

The reasons for the wars starting, the length of the wars without any end, and the lack of results are all working towards making all opinions on it negative. Only the most ardent supporters are left at this point.

If the USA ends the wars the wars are over. Afghanistan itself did not attack the USA and Iraq did nothing and was framed. Neither did Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, and anywhere else the USA has attacked in their most recent global war of choice. Its all pretty simple really.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Hi everyone. I was recently medically retired from the Army. I did about 9 years of Active Duty, half Navy, half Army. Now, here's my two cent on the issue, and they may be inflammatory to some.

I believe there are no "good guys" anywhere. Let me explain this a bit. When I was a kid, there were your Saturday morning cartoons. I remember watching GI Joe and thinking, as a child, that America is always the good guy, and the bad guys are always going to be there to take us down. In a sense, all storytelling gives you someone to root for, someone to identify with. In many cases, these can be directly associated with a jingoist philosophy. Is it wrong? That's not the issue.

I feel the issue is that we, as human beings, are forced to look at the world in terms of story. As such, we assign protagonists and antagonists that are in line with our own moral compasses. If you put thirty people in a room and show them a morally ambiguous scenario, you will get thirty different reactions.

The reality is that the world is chaotic. As human beings, we try to react to it in the way that best suits ourselves or whatever ideal it is that we have placed above ourselves. Some people are more persuasive than others. Some are stronger. Eventually a group story emerges that form a basis of a cultural identity. They become the "good guys" of their collective story. Does that make them right?

We see ourselves as being in the right, no matter where we fall on the continuum of this argument. At the end of the day, there are still good guys and bad guys. The reasons behind their motives are irrelevant. It's all relative.

I support what I believe in. I feel like I am right. I am by necessity the good guy. But that's not really true, is it?

I'll end with an incredibly geeky reference.

"You told me that Darth Vader betrayed and murdered my father."


"Your father was seduced by the dark side of the Force. He ceased to be Anakin Skywalker and became Darth Vader. When that happened, the good man who was your father was destroyed. So what I told you was true...from a certain point of view."



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Vonotar
 


I didn't find that inflammatory in the slightest. I thought it was an insightful and profound post. I thank you and appreciate your point of view. I agree with you about a lot, but only up to a point.

While many, I'm sure, good people are playing their perceived part of the good guy in their own personal story, there are enough of us out here who see the evil being perpetuated on the world by the "good guys" and yet we're not putting a stop to it. I'm not sure where the greater evil lies. Is it more evil to do wrong in ignorance or to watch it happen and do nothing about it?
edit on 5/13/13 by Malynn because: Spell1ng



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Malynn
 


Thanks!

I guess it all boils down to our own experiment in government with our Democratic Republic. Is war and exploitation (real or imagined) a consequence of how we allow ourselves to be ruled? Is there a system of government that will truly make a majority of people happy, or at least content? I think what we have now is a step in the right direction, but I really honestly believe that this is not the end state of enlightened government. We can get there from here, but will we recognize it when we see it?

This is not an attack in any way, shape or form against our culture or government. I just see us as a work-in-progress, is all.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by nwtrucker
 


In response to both both your posts. First of all, it is pointless and futile to attack each other. if you disagree fine...I disagree with you...but calm down.
Your point about the USA not invading Britain...of course thats true. But let me ask you. Did the British people ask for US bases to be planted in the UK? No, of course not...did the people of any country ask for US bases? No. Here is an example...Greenham Common in the UK.
On 12 December 1982, 30,000 women held hands around the 6 miles (9.7 km) perimeter of the base, in protest against the decision to site American cruise missiles there...The protest ended in the year 2000.
So no, the people do not want American bases or missiles on their land...The reality is the people have very little say over what their governments allow..because as I already stated..the American model of "democracy" is the choice of two capitalist political parties..and all western governments have the same form of false democracy..so voting makes no difference..So called democracy is as entrenched as the Communism in China, you cannot vote to change it.
Also bear in mind 30,000 women is a significant number of protesters, and most people object but do not have the will or time to protest, so think about that number of women who actually felt so angry about it that they camped at the site for almost 20 years, and yes the number fluctuated over time but the initial protests were 30,000.
The reason the USA doesn't invade every country, is simply because they don't need to. Do you think the UK population wants a listening dome in the south of England, infiltrating private phone calls and emails etc, And not because everyone has something to hide, but because it is human nature to want to have privacy..didnt the USA and the west fight communism in order to protect us from a police state and big brother...or cant you recall, east Germany and Stalin???. DUH.
No, the USA already have so much power, that no western government in their right mind would dare refuse them access.
When the God Father makes you an offer you cant refuse, you don't refuse. You obviously do not inhabit the same universe as i do.
Also when George W made his statements..they were aimed at the world but also the people. Back inthe 60's there were protests against the Vietnam war..there were musicians who sang protest songs..Notice how everyone stayed quiet over the invasions of the middle east. People stayed quiet because they were scared 5h17le55 to open their mouths and voice their opinions..that ought to tell you something pretty profound about your freedom of speech, . and that's in the land of the free, remember, the land of the free. Sure 10..15 years later maybe people speak up hear and there, but look at the difference...People were and still are afraid to say things are not right. Its safer to say " I love the military, I back them all the way 100%...I'm a true patriot..I question nothing..." its actually the smart thing to say...I don't blame people for saying it...but its about as genuine as all those North Koreans who cry when the great leader died. It's all done out of fear. Patriotism induced by fear is not patriotism...it's actually a state of perpetual fear..and its terrifying to live under a state of fear...but lets look at North Korea instead of looking in the mirror.

For what it's worth I understand governments and empire building..I get it..it's the way the world and civilizations work and have always worked..I am not a leftist...or right winger...Im a realist..and call a spade a spade...I cannot be bothered arguing with fools who think an invading army is protecting the homeland..fools who think conquered countries should be thankful for being conquered hahaha...its naive and childish to think such ridiculous things...the USA is an empire, and like all empires the nature of invading and spreading it's influence is not going to be welcomed in other countries...DUH. But if your American why should you care who likes you??? Seriously, I dont get why you care or try to insist your saving the world...Accept what you are, embrace it...but this continual denial is infantile. Its like these women on shows like Maury...they admit to sleeping with dozens of guys and when someone in the audience calls them a hoe they go ballistic.. don't call me a hoe..i ant no hoe..seriously...the kind of women who wear white on their wedding day...In denial of what they are...Your an empire..you invade to take resources and to expand...deal with it... Did Darth Vader or the emperor go around looking for approval hahahaha...The only irony is I was brought up on Starwars and American pop culture, which always portrayed a distinction between evil empires and the good guys..funny how it all turned out...IRONIC MUCH.



edit on 13-5-2013 by TheBlackHat because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 09:35 PM
link   
In my observation, the disdain comes from the deep notion that the US military is ALL about killing foreign children. No matter what else they're doing in the Middle East, there those heartless bastards are, takin' aim at the teary-eyed kids and none of them having the mind or empathy to stop and question their orders.

And if you ever side with the military on anything, you'd be the perfect soldier, because you would obviously carry out all immoral orders without compunction like a robotic sheep.

It's truly ridiculous... this narrow-minded view of things.

edit on 13-5-2013 by EllaMarina because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 10:23 PM
link   
Sorry, but I don't buy the 30,000 being a majority by any stretch. The remaining 100s of 1000s that stayed home, not out of fear, more likely perfectly content with the arrangement is a bigger testament....therefore "the people" you refer to is a generalization and spin.

As far as the American citizens remaining "quiet" watch this actual, spontaneous clip on You Tube "US national anthem drowned out at the 1991 NHL all-star game" It's only 3 minutes or so long. It was the eve of Gulf war one.. yep real quite!!

Yes there were protestors to the gulf war, but they were far drowned out by the supports of the troops.

As far as every nation is "afraid" not to comply with the U.S.'s requests/demands, name me any incident among the western nations where the U.S. took any action due to not "complying".

As far as capitalists go, every country, including the so-called communist ones use or rely on capitalism. The only alternative is communism or barter. Socialism is nothing more than a wealth redistribution system that relies utterly on capitalism to fund itself.

You may hate the U.S./capitalism all you want, yet run by honorable men it is the least worst system and country out there.

As far as the middle east goes, the mess there is a British invention, not the U.S.'s. The idiotic formation of arbitrary nations after the break-up of the Ottoman Empire is the true source of it. No one else.

Even in Egypt's recent mess, it was the Brits that led the hue and cry, not the U.S. Libya as well had, at best, lip-service "interference" from the U.S.

The U.S. bases overseas have been shrinking for decades and continue to do so. Your every country comments are outrageous and outright lies.

The U.S, military has been shrinking as well. It was half the size when Bush 43 took over from when Bush 41 left office. Internal bases are shrinking at almost the same rate. Sequestration is massively cutting the military as we speak. One Nimitz class carrier due for refueling will be parked due to a lack of funds. Air wings are on "stand-down".

Yet the Chinese, Russians, Indians et al are expanding.

The GDP spent on the military was a high water mark during Eisenhower Administration at circa 11%. It was about 4% just before 9-11.

These are facts. Painting a picture of U.S. enforcement of bases throughout the world just isn't true. The are some where the locals, Okinawa are strongly against the bases there, yet deemed the lessor of two evils. Japan would in all likelihood "nuke up" if the U.S. wasn't actively defending it's interests.

As far as spying goes, it's always been illegal for U.S. agencies to spy on it's citizens. So the Brits, Canadians and Aussies spied on the U.S. citizens and the U.S. spied on theirs and then swapped the data thereby not "breaking the law". At least now there's some oversight going on...

Panama is a perfect eg where the U.S. built the canal, have since given it back to Panama who then invited the Chinese in. Good move on the U.S.'s part, can't get a Nimitz class carrier through the canal, too narrow, and the canal is wide open to cruise missile attack and can't be defended anyways.

A slightly different picture than the one you paint, isn't it.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Hmm, why do people have problems with the US military? Let me count the ways: Pissing on corpses. Torturing prisoners. Slaughtering families in their villages, and raping girls and then burning their bodies. Burning entire families in their huts. Widespread use of depleted uranium weapons, including in urban areas. White phosphorous used as a weapon. Videos of Grunts shooting dogs, shooting passer-bys and ramming cars with civilians that get in the way. Shooting up carloads of families of check points. The sexual assault of 1/3 of all US female military personnel. The colonel in charge of such sexual assaults getting arrested for a drunken sexual assault. Continual lies in press releases about air attacks that have in fact killed many innocent civilians, but which the military say were all militants. Military press releases claiming that each and every downed helicopter in Iraq and Afghanistan have been due to mechanical failures or weather, not to enemy fire. Various and sundry warcrimes, often with video or photo evidence. Collective punishment against cities. Following illegal orders in support of illegal wars that are only meant to enrich corporate interests.

Why would people have problems with this stuff? Why did people have problems with the German army during WWI and WWII, and the Japanese army during WWII? Why did people have problems with the Soviet army in Afghanistan? Same general reason folks: people with superior firing power getting away with bloody murder and rapine.

But the richest claims by the rah-rah-military types here is the claim that the dirty, commie-pinko leftists are brainwashed. Holy cow, what organization makes brainwashing part of its official training program? It's the military. This shows just how much you military types are divorced from reality.

Know who else had a problem with the US military and its use? General Smedley Butler, in his time the most decorated and highest-ranking US marine, who also thwarted an attempted coup by captains of American industry, including Prescott Bush (W's granddaddy who financed Nazi Germany), against FDR during the 1930's. Read his little treatise, "War is a Racket" which is easily found online.

Here is the beginning of it:


War Is A Racket

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.


War is a Racket -- Major General Smedley Butler

I would imagine the good general knew a lot more about US wars, the US military and US military policy than the pro-military people that inhabit ATS.

The last soldiers who service I appreciated were WWII veterans. All members of the military since have been tools of the military/industrial/corporate complex, and have done very little to protect me, and have likely made the world more dangerous for Americans.

Have at me and my post, with your ignorant slander and ad hominem attacks, you brainwashed war mongers.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 11:13 PM
link   
My father was in the service (special forces in the 60s and 70s, served in Vietnam, was stationed in Korea for some time, etc ) My cousin is currently (he served in Afghanistan and is currently at home. He ships out again soon; not sure where.)

I am grateful for the spirit of sacrifice and service that inspires people to join the armed forces and for the good that they do (they do do good, regardless of the things that are done which I oppose; the two aren't mutually exclusive or mutually negating in my mind.) I have just as much love and compassion for soldiers as I do anyone else.

That said, I oppose armed conflict and the taking part in armed conflict. I disagree with it profoundly. That's simply part of my nature. It is my belief that every armed conflict represents a failure by our species to find another way. It is also my belief that that other way does always exist... whether we are capable of seeing and implementing it or not. That we fail to do so diminishes us in my opinion.

I do not hold any modicum of hatred or ill will toward soldiers and they go through hell because they believe what they are doing is right. I respect that. I distinguish between my disagreement with and opposition to a thing, and my feelings toward those who take part in them as human beings. Soldiers do not stop being a part of what I consider my human family just because they do things I disagree with and oppose.

This doesn't mean that I go so far as to say "oppose the war, not the soldiers," because sadly, without soldiers there would be no war (at least not until we finally transition fully over to machine warfare.) It does however mean that I hold no enmity toward soldiers, that I care about them and their wellbeing, and that I want happiness and peace for them the same as I do for everyone on our planet. And that I don't dismiss the good that they do while opposing the conflict.

I would like to think that this attitude would be more acceptable and less offensive to soldiers than some of the responses they receive.

Peace.



posted on May, 13 2013 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by Reaper2137
 


I absolutely see the trend, but I am seeing it as a two sided trend........................Let me clarify..................

First off I see that those whom seem to get their rocks off vilifying those in the military are the same ones whom parade themselves and their opinions as "supporting" the current commander in chief!

Don't get excited..................I also see another side of it where those whom are totally AGAINST our current POTUS,,,, supporting the criminalization of those whom declare they want out of the military because they don't agree with the orders they are being given!??

Bottom line, the Constitution, does not say one thing about our military being used as the "globalist police" OR "the banking army"!

I am a VET, and considering the state of the corrupt government of the US, I have a hard time condemning a person in the military for saying "screw this!".

So I guess what I am trying to say is, you either support the Constitution of the United States of America,,,,,,,,,,,,,,or you can choose to only bring it up when it suits your needs...............


People have hitched their wagons to one side or another -- and stay with that because for the most part the OTHER side is too distasteful. To me, it's that way with the Republican/Libertarian side -- but it doesn't really matter which. I say that because it's clear to me that the Democrats/Progressives could have "won" the issue, but they seem to follow the Republicans. Each wedge issue seems calculated to have SOME support from radicalized people, and to leave a 50/50 split amongst the people still voting -- everyone else becomes too disgusted and fed up to vote. It's the saner position to just quit -- but that's caving into the objective to discourage the Democratic process.

To get back to the main point for a moment -- the "unrational anger at all things military" -- I don't think it's mostly pointed at the troops, it's the frustration with this eternal war the US seems always engaged in. We have two wars now in Iraq and Afghanistan with no real purpose anyone paying attention can find. Those who dig a little deeper know that the "production sharing agreements" put the same oil companies back in Iraq that Saddam kicked out. We "stood down" as soon as they were signed. The near civil war in that country was "by design" so that rational people could not tolerate it. Some might argue this point -- but WHY would our commanders disband the Iraq military and send them all home with weapons? Why were the weapons depots merely padlocked and not destroyed? Why start the division in the proto government by vilifying the old Saddam regime and then divide it further along religious sects? Someone had to understand enough about the tensions to design it so PERFECTLY to have two balanced sides at each others throats -- they must have learned from the Republicans and Dems back home.

Anyway, I could go on about the UNOCAL pipeline to secure natural gas for India and keep them less dependent on Russia. We didn't go in for al Qaeda -- there was more terrorist training in South Florida and Germany than Afghanistan.

>> There sure are a lot of stronger opinions however, that sounds like people might be blaming the troops -- but I think it's just misdirected frustration. Combined with the "disconnection" that the web provides. There aren't many people who could sit across from an amputated vet and not say; "thank you for your service." The troops are willing to give their all for their country -- they just didn't choose the fight, and when you are stuck in an insane battle, you have to CHOOSE to believe in the cause or go crazy. Anyone spending all that time in 120 degree heat and body armor and wondering if that person is friend or foe and not being sure -- HAS to believe it's worthwhile. So I apologize for any anti-war people who put a soldier in the "collateral damage" category.

The REAL WAR that matters isn't between nations. It's between those that have and those that have not. The governments maintain the status quo. The owners of those leaders who run those governments want everyone worried about the foreign threat -- so they don't look inward and wonder how they lost control. Every nation on the US target list is not part of the World Bank -- and that's not a coincidence.

I hated George Bush's government for using torture and lying us into war. But the Obama government made what is controversial part of the status quo. We now use drones to do our dirty work. It's easy. It's cheap. And the ONLY way someone can strike back at such a remote enemy is by attacking the people - by terrorism. The drone operator is safe inside a bunker hundreds or thousands of miles away. The enemy is invisible and absent -- like our Oligarch landlords who make their fortunes and hand us the bill.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrInquisitive
Hmm, why do people have problems with the US military? Let me count the ways: Pissing on corpses. Torturing prisoners. Slaughtering families in their villages, and raping girls and then burning their bodies. Burning entire families in their huts. Widespread use of depleted uranium weapons, including in urban areas. White phosphorous used as a weapon. Videos of Grunts shooting dogs, shooting passer-bys and ramming cars with civilians that get in the way. Shooting up carloads of families of check points. The sexual assault of 1/3 of all US female military personnel. The colonel in charge of such sexual assaults getting arrested for a drunken sexual assault. Continual lies in press releases about air attacks that have in fact killed many innocent civilians, but which the military say were all militants. Military press releases claiming that each and every downed helicopter in Iraq and Afghanistan have been due to mechanical failures or weather, not to enemy fire. Various and sundry warcrimes, often with video or photo evidence. Collective punishment against cities. Following illegal orders in support of illegal wars that are only meant to enrich corporate interests.

Why would people have problems with this stuff? Why did people have problems with the German army during WWI and WWII, and the Japanese army during WWII? Why did people have problems with the Soviet army in Afghanistan? Same general reason folks: people with superior firing power getting away with bloody murder and rapine.

But the richest claims by the rah-rah-military types here is the claim that the dirty, commie-pinko leftists are brainwashed. Holy cow, what organization makes brainwashing part of its official training program? It's the military. This shows just how much you military types are divorced from reality.

Know who else had a problem with the US military and its use? General Smedley Butler, in his time the most decorated and highest-ranking US marine, who also thwarted an attempted coup by captains of American industry, including Prescott Bush (W's granddaddy who financed Nazi Germany), against FDR during the 1930's. Read his little treatise, "War is a Racket" which is easily found online.

Here is the beginning of it:


War Is A Racket

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.


War is a Racket -- Major General Smedley Butler

I would imagine the good general knew a lot more about US wars, the US military and US military policy than the pro-military people that inhabit ATS.

The last soldiers who service I appreciated were WWII veterans. All members of the military since have been tools of the military/industrial/corporate complex, and have done very little to protect me, and have likely made the world more dangerous for Americans.

Have at me and my post, with your ignorant slander and ad hominem attacks, you brainwashed war mongers.


I am not a war monger, Second, most of the top part of your respond, is true, but you ignore a-lot as well. The only reason, you have such readily available information on the currant wars due to expanding Tech. You are forgetting the past and choosing to focus on the present.

This is wrong of you or at least you don't know your history very well. Every country, every people, on this planet when they have gathered and formed countries or Tribes. Have gone to war, they have all committed War crimes. They have all made mistakes. What separates them from us is the rapid response of information, starting in Vietnam.

I don't see you bringing up, the war crimes, committed by The Americans, or British in world war two. The War crimes committed by most countries in World war one, and dating back to the dawn of man. Yet you ignore that and instead choose to attack, with your ignorant slander and ad hominem attacks using your own words back at you.

Currant soldiers do a lot to protect you, weather you choose whether or not to support this country's last few wars is irreverent. The fact of the matter is, they still protect you, and without a standing army any country with force projection would steam rolls this place.

I like what you referenced it’s a good read thank you for that, but once again you’re missing the point, and instead focusing on one group. Since man has dawned he started to war, and there where those who would profit from that, that’s a few thousand years of profit.
Lastly, while my thread focused on the military it was a call out on all subjects not just this one. So feel free to respond and have a great week buddy I enjoyed serving and protecting you.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Reaper2137
I am a disabled combat veteran, I don't blindly fallow orders, nor do I support every thing my government does, or chooses to act upon.

Better late than never... I guess.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 04:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by Reaper2137
 


Why is being anti military not denying ignorance. Why should you show a member that is military or x military any more respect than anyone else..

ATS is an international forum. A military that might be loved in one country could be hated in another.. War is organised murder.. How many died in Afghanistan and Iraq and for what. I have nothing personal against military people but I do not hold them in any esteem either...


Wow, you either missed the entire point of my thread, or choose not to read it. Being anti-military has nothing to do for this thread. I just asked across the whole board not just military to STOP, Read the OP. Read the Article, Be civil, Respectful and try to be nice.

Your inferring some thing that wasn't there.





new topics
 
28
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join