Iraq and Afghanistan War

[SubjectProphet]

@Dazzerfong

 

Off of my understanding, you just keep bashing the US military. It's not only the US at war with Iraq and Afghan here, the UK, Canada, French, Australia, all of those guys are here fighting too.

 

And to my understanding, everyone is off topic talking about guns or whatever I see here.

[HeyYou]

@Dazzerfong

 

Off of my understanding, you just keep bashing the US military. It's not only the US at war with Iraq and Afghan here, the UK, Canada, French, Australia, all of those guys are here fighting too.

 

And to my understanding, everyone is off topic talking about guns or whatever I see here.

 

While it's true, there are a selection of nations contributing to the war effort there, it was the US that pressed for the war in the first place. So, for the most part, it IS seen as an "amercian" war....... I personally don't think we should even be there..... but, that was the politicians decision, not the troops. I wholeheartedly support our men in uniform, just not the folks that ordered them in there in the first place.

[dazzerfong]

@ Subject Prophet:

 

Err, I live in Australia. I know the Coalition. If you're just singling out America from my comments, obviously you have something against America: I said EVERYBODY's wrong in some way. I'm neutral, that doesn't mean I'm bashing the US military, it means I'm bashing everyone.

 

Off of my understanding, you just bash anyone whose views are not the same as yours. Fine, you want dirt Australia? Muhamed Haneef, Indian doctor. Got detained for twelve days because he was related to a man who was a suspected terrorist. You want more? Here. British? Death of Jean Charles de Menezes. Unfortunately, I couldn't find anything with the Canadians or the French.

 

Since you're accusing me of 'bashing' the US military, find dirt on the rest of the Coalition forces. The only one that actually concerns the military in Australia regards the sexual harassment scandals, but that's not towards the enemy combatant. I mean it: if you can't, then I'll just accuse you of having a quick mouth with nothing to back it up with. But that's an insult, so I couldn't call you that, so I'll just say you're a nationalist.

 

Want to know why I 'singled' out America? Because they are the biggest players over there. It's easy to find flaws when there's stuff about them everywhere. Grow up, learn how to accept criticism and praise for your country. To many, Australia's still a land full of koalas and kangaroos (thank you, Crocodile Dundee), and think that the majority of people are still living in the outback. Even tourists who come over here sometimes voice their wonder as to 'how Australia changed so much'. I just laugh it off.

 

@ Aurelius:

 

Look, I know some people favor peace, and I won't be too surprised. If the Raufoss is legal, and I have misunderstood, it's a untrue fact, not an opinion.

Edited April 12, 2012 by dazzerfong

[SubjectProphet]

@ Subject Prophet:

 

Err, I live in Australia. I know the Coalition. If you're just singling out America from my comments, obviously you have something against America: I said EVERYBODY's wrong in some way. I'm neutral, that doesn't mean I'm bashing the US military, it means I'm bashing everyone.

 

Off of my understanding, you just bash anyone whose views are not the same as yours. Fine, you want dirt Australia? Muhamed Haneef, Indian doctor. Got detained for twelve days because he was related to a man who was a suspected terrorist. You want more? Here. British? Death of Jean Charles de Menezes. Unfortunately, I couldn't find anything with the Canadians or the French.

 

Since you're accusing me of 'bashing' the US military, find dirt on the rest of the Coalition forces. The only one that actually concerns the military in Australia regards the sexual harassment scandals, but that's not towards the enemy combatant. I mean it: if you can't, then I'll just accuse you of having a quick mouth with nothing to back it up with. But that's an insult, so I couldn't call you that, so I'll just say you're a nationalist.

 

Want to know why I 'singled' out America? Because they are the biggest players over there. It's easy to find flaws when there's stuff about them everywhere. Grow up, learn how to accept criticism and praise for your country. To many, Australia's still a land full of koalas and kangaroos (thank you, Crocodile Dundee), and think that the majority of people are still living in the outback. Even tourists who come over here sometimes voice their wonder as to 'how Australia changed so much'. I just laugh it off.

 

@ Aurelius:

 

Look, I know some people favor peace, and I won't be too surprised. If the Raufoss is legal, and I have misunderstood, it's a untrue fact, not an opinion.

 

 

Bro, you took that WAY to seriously. I drew a conclusion from my first time viewing the thread in a while, and sorry if it was wrong. I'm American, a marine in fact, on deployment right now in Afghan with a bullet wound in my hip that should've killed me. As a marine, I've served by Australians and British, and getting truths about the countries up front from people who serve them, I have no dirt on Australia or the British or anything. I understand what's going on now, so I get it, and again sorry for thinking something that isn't true, my mind isn't straight and it won't be for the next few months that I'm here.

 

On topic, I still agree we should leave this rat hole of a country. Afghan or Iran are a threat to any country, and it's wasting money and pointlessly risking lives to stay here.

[dazzerfong]

Apology accepted. And I'm also sorry for being so serious, for a moment there I thought you were attacking me.

 

Anyway, my stance towards Afghanistan is more supportive than antagonistic: Iraq, on the other hand, is another story. Though, what is the primary objective in Afghanistan for the Coalition forces right now?

[marharth]

So how do you know that everyone in gitmo is a "illegal armed combatant?" Why do you trust a government report on it over the multiple photos and other evidence that has shown the opposite?

 

Also what is the difference between a prisoner of war and a "illegal combatant?"

 

Also "I have always confined myself to the application of policy (with the tools provided) once that Rubicon is crossed and left moral justification to those that ordered it."

Am I misunderstanding that? I really can't believe you said that.

Edited April 13, 2012 by marharth

[shotgun188]

The British are only there because they are America's allies. They'll follow America into pretty much everything after America saved their arses in WW2.

[marharth]

The British are only there because they are America's allies. They'll follow America into pretty much everything after America saved their arses in WW2.

Don't even start that. The British were Americas allies before WW2.

 

Hate to break it to you but America is not the savior of the world. Churchill was hugely important in WW2 since Churchill refused to surrender, which Hitler did not expect. Hitler made a mistake and rage bombed London since Churchill refused to surrender. Churchill greatly improved the morale of his country due to his speeches and the overall way he dealt with the bombing and the war. Not only did he help with the general social issues of the war, he made it impossible for Nazi Germany to land on Britain's shore due to superior air and sea strategy. The Soviet Union under Stalin was also a huge help in WW2. Hitler attempting to invade Russia as early as he did was one of his biggest mistakes along with attempting to attack Britain. The Soviet Union was winning against Nazi Germany on the eastern front at the time America entered the war, and Britain was standing strong.

 

America supplied nations with war goods and helped a lot during Operation Overlord. That does not mean they "saved their arses." Take note that the reason Japan even allied with Germany was due to the goods America was giving out to China. Japan was fighting against China at the time and America was helping China. Japan wouldn't of even allied with Germany if America did not help China. That might of been more of a issue though, but I am still pointing that out.

 

America helped yes, but they only helped. America did not win the war, and in my opinion was not even the strongest force in the war.

 

Either way is not what this topic is for. I suggest you open a new thread if you want to debate on that.

[shotgun188]

The British are only there because they are America's allies. They'll follow America into pretty much everything after America saved their arses in WW2.

Don't even start that. The British were Americas allies before WW2.

 

Hate to break it to you but America is not the savior of the world. Churchill was hugely important in WW2 since Churchill refused to surrender, which Hitler did not expect. Hitler made a mistake and rage bombed London since Churchill refused to surrender. Churchill greatly improved the morale of his country due to his speeches and the overall way he dealt with the bombing and the war. Not only did he help with the general social issues of the war, he made it impossible for Nazi Germany to land on Britain's shore due to superior air and sea strategy. The Soviet Union under Stalin was also a huge help in WW2. Hitler attempting to invade Russia as early as he did was one of his biggest mistakes along with attempting to attack Britain. The Soviet Union was winning against Nazi Germany on the eastern front at the time America entered the war, and Britain was standing strong.

 

America supplied nations with war goods and helped a lot during Operation Overlord. That does not mean they "saved their arses." Take note that the reason Japan even allied with Germany was due to the goods America was giving out to China. Japan was fighting against China at the time and America was helping China. Japan wouldn't of even allied with Germany if America did not help China. That might of been more of a issue though, but I am still pointing that out.

 

America helped yes, but they only helped. America did not win the war, and in my opinion was not even the strongest force in the war.

 

Either way is not what this topic is for. I suggest you open a new thread if you want to debate on that.

My post was meant to be replying to the US soldier talking about all the British soldiers in there. Also, if they were allies before WW2, how come it took the Americans so long to join? They refused to give Britain supplies for a while too.

Edited April 13, 2012 by shotgun188

[dazzerfong]

@ shotgun188:

 

You should really get your history correct: guess why the U-boat line was formed? To prevent US supplies from reaching the UK. Everyone was crucial in WWII: not one faction contributed significantly more than other nations.

 

And no, the British does not follow America in 'pretty much everything'. The 1992 Mogadishu Incident and 1989 Panama Invsaion did not have the British in it (officially).

 

Why did it take the US so long? Because they have nothing to gain from another war: they were not getting attacked, after all.

Edited April 13, 2012 by dazzerfong