You don't support the troops? Well FUCK YOU then.

[msmith537]

Here's my stance. You may not like the war (or any war). You may not like the administration that sends them to war. But you DO have to respect people who willingly risk their lives to protect what they believe in.

When people say bonehead shit like:

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=172734
Originally posted by Dangerosa
You do realize, Rick, that if the German citizen's had refused to go into the business of "state mandated killing" there would have been no reason for Britian to take up arms in WWII.
[/B]

or

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=172222&pagenumber=2
Originally posted by Latro
How about: I want a lot of American soldiers to die because... a lot more of them won't die in the wars, that would otherwise be yet to come.
[/B]

or

Originally posted by Dinsdale
I feel it is almost desirable that we incur some sizeable casualties - in order for the public to be forced to acknowledge the enormity of this undertaking, and to prevent the administration that initiated it from deflecting justified criticism in the popular glow following a fast, relatively painless victory. [/B]


I have to say to myself: what kind of antisocial misfit loser must this person be to not have any connections to someone in our military? This person does not know a single soldier, sailor or airman? They never had a relative serve in the military or a college buddy who was in ROTC or some friends brother who is in the Marines? How does this person go through life believing that they are somehow removed from the events of the world? That the people who defend us are some fringe element of society gleefully going off to war so they can go punch an Iraq in the head? Obviously if they knew anyone in the military who they even half-way cared about they would never say something so ridiculous.

Then of course I look at SOME* of the losers out joining the peace marches just because they think they can get away with being a jerk and then hiding in the crowd.

People who join the military do so for a number of reasons but all of them realize that they may be called upon to kill or die defending our country. What was the last thing you were willing to risk your life doing?

So unless you are willing to do more than simply wave a stupid banner around while marching in the safety of the USA don't deride the very people who provide the very blanket of protection that allows you to be a jerk.

[Sterra]

I agree. Your arguement is exactly why I support the US armed forces and the Iraqi republican guard.

[erislover]

When I play chess I hate every second of it because I can't tell who to hate more... after all, they are all 'chess pieces' aren't they? And thus I should hate my own as much as I hate theirs.

Or is it that I should support theirs as much as I support my own?

I get so confused! If only I could think about the issue with less depth...

[Speaker for the Dead]

Originally posted by Sterra
I agree. Your arguement is exactly why I support the US armed forces and the Iraqi republican guard.

Well said.

[glee]

Originally posted by msmith537
Here's my stance. You may not like the war (or any war). You may not like the administration that sends them to war. But you DO have to respect people who willingly risk their lives to protect what they believe in.


Of course I am grateful to soldiers who are basically prepared to die to protect me (and democracy).

Nevertheless:

Do all the US troops know why they are in Iraq?
(Do they believe everything Bush tells them?)

What % of our casualties are friendly fire?
(How do you feel as a soldier when that happens?)

And as usual, what about the civilians?

[msmith537]

Originally posted by Sterra
I agree. Your arguement is exactly why I support the US armed forces and the Iraqi republican guard. [/B]

No. More likely you are equally indiferent to both the US Military and the Iraqi Republican Guard.

[Ben Hicks]

I support the troops to the extent that I want as many of them to come back as possible. I do not support their actions. Good enough?

[MrVisible]

I'm curious.

Let's say I say "I support the US troops in Iraq."

What the hell difference does it make?

Does some poor guy getting shot at in godforsakendesertland suddenly look up to the heavens and smile, and think "Well, at least I have MrVisible's intangible support. That makes this all worthwhile."

I think the "I support the troops" mentality is an amazingly self-centered, egotistical and ridiculous position.

[Giraffe]

The best part about "supporting the troops" is that apparently the only way you can do it is to lie on the couch. If you try to have a say in the policy-making that decides whether or not the troops get sent across the world to shoot people and get shot at, you're not supporting them. If you are publicly unhappy with the president for putting them at risk unnecessarily, you're not supporting them.

Ah, couch potatoes -- the last true American patriots.

[Essured]

Here's my stance. You may not like the war (or any war). You may not like the administration that sends them to war. But you DO have to respect people who willingly risk their lives to protect what they believe in.

Here's my stance. I don't have to respect anyone. I can choose who I respect and who I don't. Your opinions have zero influence on who I respect, I alone decide that.

And you telling me that I have to respect a certain group of people results in a huge sarcastic laugh from me.

Seriously, since we have to respect this group of people, how are you going to ensure that everyone does ?

Tell you what, you don't tell me who I have to respect and I won't tell you who you have to respect. Deal ?

[Biggirl]

I support the troops whole-heartedly. I'm looking into a pen-pal program so that at least one of those guys will know that their name will be called during mail call.

I worry that many will die in this bullheaded show of political testosterone. I fear that many more will spend countless years trying to patch up the forgein policy mess this administration will leave behind in the Middle East. I'm upset that many of those young men and women will have to make morally repugnant choices because of the dirty tricks of a madman who has nothing to fight with except dirty tricks.

This war will leave a boiling cauldron of hatred which our troops will be standing in for many years to come. I support my troops by opposing this war.

[Princhester]

Originally posted by msmith537
People who join the military do so for a number of reasons but all of them realize that they may be called upon to kill or die defending our country. What was the last thing you were willing to risk your life doing?

I have done a few things that have risked my life. I chose to do those things, just as people who join the military chose to do what they do. I was aware of the risks, as you acknowledge (thanks for that) those who join the military do.

I did not expect anyone to support me in taking those risks except to the extent I was taking those risks for the benefit of those people. To the extent that people did not support my goals or indeed thought my efforts were counter productive or positively endangering their safety, I certainly did not expect them to respect what I was doing.

So unless you are willing to do more than simply wave a stupid banner around while marching in the safety of the USA don't deride the very people who provide the very blanket of protection that allows you to be a jerk.

You need to appreciate that there are very many who have what they believe to be good reasons for thinking that the current war is significantly endangering the safety of the west. You think that (despite this) such people should support the war and those who fight it.

If you want to debate whether or not the war is a good idea, fine. But stop pretending that regardless of whether it is a good idea, it is logical for those who think it is not to support it and those that fight it regardless.

[Tripler]

Originally posted by Goo
Here's my stance. I don't have to respect anyone. I can choose who I respect and who I don't. Your opinions have zero influence on who I respect, I alone decide that.

And you telling me that I have to respect a certain group of people results in a huge sarcastic laugh from me.

Seriously, since we have to respect this group of people, how are you going to ensure that everyone does ?

Tell you what, you don't tell me who I have to respect and I won't tell you who you have to respect. Deal ?

And the blood of millions of soldiers on our side over many, many years allows you to say this freely.

Remember that.

Tripler
Thus, the entire point of the OP.

[Princhester]

All of it, Tripler? Or did some of it go towards supporting oppression? The US has never used it's soldiers in an unjust way? Do you really want to place yourself in a position where you have to argue for that?

[Essured]

Tripler, what you are talking about is the freedom to say something. What I was talking about was my ability to choose who I respect.

No one granted me the right to my own thoughts and no one can tell me what those thoughts should be... It sounded to me that the entire point of the OP was to try and force people to think his way, which is what made me laugh, because you just can not make people think a certain way, or enforce thoughts. I said nothing about the freedoms to voice said thoughts, my post was only concerning the 'enforced thought' aspect of the OP.

[CrazyCatLady]

Damn near every male relative I have has been in the military at some point or another, and that's exactly why I think stuff like the OP is unspeakably stupid. War is serious business, far too serious to be entered into in a show of political penis waving. For some reason, though, it seems to take heavy casualties to get people to give the matter the serious consideration it deserves. That means that somebody's dad, somebody's husband, somebody's big brother has to die before we stop sending other fathers, husbands, and brothers into unnecessary danger.

I support our troops, and I support the families waiting with their hearts in their throats for a loved one to get called up. That's why I only want them deployed when there are no other options. That's why I support the peace movement.

So, mssmith, FUCK YOU!

[msmith537]

Originally posted by Ben Hicks
I support the troops to the extent that I want as many of them to come back as possible. I do not support their actions. Good enough? [/B]

That's perfectly fine.


Originally posted by CrazyCatLady
I support our troops, and I support the families waiting with their hearts in their throats for a loved one to get called up. That's why I only want them deployed when there are no other options. That's why I support the peace movement.

So, mssmith, FUCK YOU!


Chill bitch! I'm on your side!

I don't want to get into whether or not we should be in Iraq. That debate is sufficiently covered by many other threads. I think it's entirely possible to support the troops while being against the war. (To be fair and honest, I still haven't decided if this is a war we should fight, I just would like it over quickly and painlessly as possible)

I am expressing anger over comments made in other threads. I don't believe soldiers hould be referred to as "state mandated killers" or that people should wish for high casualties in order to prove a political point or people should throw rocks at Guardsmen because they are angry about the war. If you still disagree with that, please let me know.

[Sterra]

Originally posted by msmith537
No. More likely you are equally indiferent to both the US Military and the Iraqi Republican Guard.
I suppose it would be better to say that I care about Americans and Iraqis.

I can also understand deciding against supporting our troops. It is very important that we don't just always assume that they are fighting for our freedom or that they are in the right. Otherwise we would be like all the Iraqis who support Saddam because it is wartime and they are being invaded.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I don't want American soldiers to to get killed and I don't want them to kill anybody else. I hope they come back soon to their families. I hope they treat the Iraqi people with respect and dignity, and I hope the Iraqi military just surrenders without any more resistance. I felt truly awful about those images on al Jazeera, but I felt like the blood was on Bush's hands as much as Huseein's. I wish the best for our troops as people, but I don't support their mission. I feel grateful that they are willing to fight to protect the US, but I don't believe for a second that this particular war has anything to do with protecting the US.

[MrVisible]

I sense a problem of definition lying at the heart of this argument, so I will ask the OP...

msmith537, would you please define what you mean by "support the troops"? What would differentiate someone who supports the troops from someone who does not? In terms of tangible actions, if you would.

[Tripler]

Originally posted by Princhester
All of it, Tripler? Or did some of it go towards supporting oppression? The US has never used it's soldiers in an unjust way? Do you really want to place yourself in a position where you have to argue for that?

Sure. Sure I will.

You and Goo are from Australia, no? Didn't you, the British, America, and other nations lend help in fighting the Japanese in WWII? Didn't the Australian government authorize it's troops' use in Iraq now? Last I heard they did. . . Has the US ever used force in an unjust way? I'm not debating that.

My point: You are damned right that you don't have to respect anyone. Just remember that you have that God-given, blood-enforced right to think and feel what you want to, because someone else did what they had to do to preserve that right.

Quoth Goo
Tripler, what you are talking about is the freedom to say something. What I was talking about was my ability to choose who I respect.

No one granted me the right to my own thoughts and no one can tell me what those thoughts should be... It sounded to me that the entire point of the OP was to try and force people to think his way, which is what made me laugh, because you just can not make people think a certain way, or enforce thoughts. I said nothing about the freedoms to voice said thoughts, my post was only concerning the 'enforced thought' aspect of the OP.

Maybe I read it too quickly, but I took the OP as a stance of lending some credibility to those poor saps that have to slog it out with the Iraqis in this conflict. You're absolutely right: nobody granted your the right to your own thoughts except Mother Nature herself, but I will say that your first two sentences go hand in hand: you can think what you like freely, but to say it openly is also dependent on an openly 'freely thinking' society.

Tripler
Now we're getting into US Revolutionary thought. Where's Thomas Paine when you need him?

[CrazyCatLady]

Originally posted by msmith537
I am expressing anger over comments made in other threads. I don't believe soldiers hould be referred to as "state mandated killers" or that people should wish for high casualties in order to prove a political point or people should throw rocks at Guardsmen because they are angry about the war. If you still disagree with that, please let me know.

Well, yes, I do still disagree with you. Fighting in a war, where you kill people because the government told you to, is indeed state-mandated killing. I don't know any soldier who would disagree with that. It may also be protecting our freedom. The two are not always mutually exclusive, you know. If I punch someone in the mouth for kicking my dog, I'm defending the weak and innocent, but I'm also punching someone in the mouth, am I not?

Secondly, people aren't hoping for a high body count to prove a point. They're realistic enough to realize that if our losses are fairly low, politicians will downplay the risk in future situations. That means our troops will get put in the line of fire with less cause next time. If the cost is high now, maybe we'll be more cautious from here on in. I wish anti-war protesters didn't have to have huge casualty lists behind them to be taken seriously by the government, but that's how it seems to work.

If I had to lose my dad, or my uncles, or my big brother, or any of the the other men in my life who had enlisted over the years to make people take this as seriously as they should, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Finally, I don't see anyone talking about throwing rocks at Guardsmen. Your OP was about people marching and waving signs, and calling it like they see it. Your posts in this thread come off mindlessly jingoistic, not to mention pointlessly insulting to anti-war protesters.

So, if it's all the same to you, I think I won't chill, and will instead continue to be a bitch.

[erislover]

Fighting in a war, where you kill people because the government told you to, is indeed state-mandated killing. I don't know any soldier who would disagree with that. It may also be protecting our freedom.I don't think anyone that speaks English would disagree with that. Seems a strange way to say it, unless you are only trying to emphasize the not-often lost point that human beings die in wars.

I dare say that is mostly the reason they are fought.
Secondly, people aren't hoping for a high body count to prove a point. They're realistic enough to realize that if our losses are fairly low, politicians will downplay the risk in future situations. That means our troops will get put in the line of fire with less cause next time. If the cost is high now, maybe we'll be more cautious from here on in. I wish anti-war protesters didn't have to have huge casualty lists behind them to be taken seriously by the government, but that's how it seems to work.I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say, or what you are using to weigh this situation out, but it seems to me like you are saying that more death now would be ok because it would mean less death later, which is, of course, another big reason people fight wars, or at least some want this war to be fought. The skeptical question is just whether or not it will work.

For your case: people have been fighting wars since (presumably) before recorded history. Nations ravaged by war have been rebuilt and become friendly economic powerhouses. I have an idea which one is the crapshoot here.

[Unless I read your comment wrong, in which case forget the previous text]

[Honey]

Originally posted by Biggirl
I support the troops whole-heartedly. I'm looking into a pen-pal program so that at least one of those guys will know that their name will be called during mail call.

You can send an e-mail to a serviceman/woman here (http://anyservicemember.navy.mil/).

Or, send a simple thank you, here (http://www.defendamerica.mil/nmam.html).

Or, request a penpal here (http://www.uso.org/pubs/8_27_216.cfm).

As Biggirl said, agreeing/disagreeing about the war and showing our troops that we are proud and grateful are 2 completely different things.

[Shodan]

Secondly, people aren't hoping for a high body count to prove a point. False statement.

Read the linked threads. This is exactly what they are wishing.

The logic runs like this:
The war in Iraq is bad.
If enough US and allied troops die, it will become clear to everyone that the war in Iraq is bad
Therefore, in some sense I am hoping that Saddam Hussein kills, wounds, and tortures lots of US and allied troops, and remains in power, so it is absolutely clear that war is always wrong.

Saying, "I oppose the war, and I hope all the US and allied troops come home safely" is supporting the troops.

Saying, "I oppose the war, and I hope all the US and allied troops come home in body bags so I can say 'I told you so'" is not supporting the troops.

I can respect those who believe the first. Those who believe the second should be ashamed to waste bandwidth with their filth.

[World Eater]

Originally posted by Honey
You can send an e-mail to a serviceman/woman here (http://anyservicemember.navy.mil/).

Or, send a simple thank you, here (http://www.defendamerica.mil/nmam.html).

Or, request a penpal here (http://www.uso.org/pubs/8_27_216.cfm).

As Biggirl said, agreeing/disagreeing about the war and showing our troops that we are proud and grateful are 2 completely different things.

Thanks, I just sent a note. Support the war or not, support our troops.

[Estilicon]

I am from Latin America so that bullshit that your troops are the bulkward of the free world is not going to convince me. I am against this war and I don't support your troops.

I would really like too but I have more sympathy for the Irakies they are the inva... I mean the liberated.

[deball]

Originally posted by glee
Do all the US troops know why they are in Iraq?
(Do they believe everything Bush tells them?)

The military's job is to put into action the policies enacted by the administration, many of whom were elected into office (not withstanding appointed officials). I imagine most are going with the idea that the majority of Americans think this is the right thing to do.

Regarding civilian casualties:

(How do you feel as a soldier when that happens?)



As ex-military, horrible... Just like I did in every war and terrorist attack that I've been alive to witness. In a perfect war we would do the fighting with cotton bullets in some desolated patch of land, far away from any civilian. But warfare throughout history has never been a pretty thing for anyone involved. The only thing you can do when in a war is try to minimize the impact on civilians.

[Debaser]

When I listen to talk radio, some of the ultra-conservative talk show hosts go so far to say that liberals hate America. That they want US troops to die because it will prove them right and Bush wrong in some sick sense. That the liberals value the lives of our enemy more than they value the lives of our soldiers without whom we would have no freedom. That liberals are so convinced that their ideas are what's best that any cost, even wishing for the deaths of US servicemen and women are worth it for them to get their way.

I always thought these ideas to be false. That liberals just have different viewpoints from conservatives, but don't harbor these awful, sick, twisted and sad views.

Despite the fucking pathetic jackasses who have expressed their ill-will to the troops here and in the linked threads, I will continue to try and remember that you are a minority. That most liberals don't think this way.

Fucking A! Even Diogenes gets it. You don't get more liberal or anti-war than him, yet he manages to do it without wishing for US troops to fucking die.

All you sick, ungrateful losers fucking suck. You are against the war one minute because of your peace and love, hippie, doesn't belong in the real world, idealistic bullshit. The next minute you are actively hoping for the war to go badly and for US troops to die so that you will win a fucking academic argument.

If you don't understand the difference between a US marine doing his job trying to free the people of Iraq while minimizing civilian casualties, and an Iraqi Fedayeen Saddam member terrorizing his own people then you have fucking shit for brains. I refuse to believe that any fuckstick on this board could actually be so stupid not to understand which one they should be rooting for. If you can honestly tell me that you don't know which one you would rather have die, then you need to take a long look at yourself in the mirror.

[clayton_e]

I support my troops by trying to get them home in something other than a body bag.

[nswgru1]

Amen Debaser

And for all you fucksticks wishing for large US casualties why don't you fucking do us all a favor and put your shit for brains ass where your big fucking piehole mouth is and help causing some of those massive casualties you wish for.

NSWGRU1

[CrazyCatLady]

eris, I was responding to the OP's assertion that soldiers shouldn't be called "state mandated killers" when that is, in point of fact, what they are. The use of the phrase as quoted in the OP is nothing but a statement of fact, and not worth a Pitting. (Hey, she asked if I still disagreed with her.)

I was also responding to her implication that the people who were wanting a high body count are just looking for a chance to dance around singing "Told you so, told you so! Neener, neener, neener!" It's just that sometimes it takes a lot of corpses for people to back up and ask, "Are we really sure this is a good idea?" If the back up and reconsider point came, oh say, before we deployed troops, it would be absolutely fabulous by me. Unfortunately, it only seems to come when we've had really heavy losses. Life sucks that way sometimes.

Oh, and Debaser, can you please explain the difference between a Marine and an Iraqi soldie? I have shit for brains and can't see the difference between two men who have agreed to risk their lives to make sure a country gets run the way they think it ought to be run. Oh, wait, our way is the right way. Never mind.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

I'll say this: although I've disagreed vehemently with Dinsdale et al in the linked thread, there's something else to look at:

While I hope as few people as possible die in this conflict, I prioritize Iraqi civilian lives over the lives of anyone in a volunteer army. I prioritize conscripted soldiers' lives over the lives of folks in a volunteer army. I prioritize members of the US and British volunteer army over those in the Iraqi volunteer armed forces. Inasmuch as antiwar protests keep the pressure on the administration not to devalue civilian lives (e.g., allowing soldiers to target hospitals etc. with heavy weaponry when guerillas are using them as cover and blaming Hussein for any civilian casualties), I think that's a positive thing.

And though I sincerely hope no more US/British soldiers die, if their deaths can impress on people the fact that this is a bad war fought for bad reasons, then I will think that's a positive effect from an otherwise tragic situation.

Daniel

[Otto]

Originally posted by nswgru1
Amen Debaser

And for all you fucksticks wishing for large US casualties why don't you fucking do us all a favor and put your shit for brains ass where your big fucking piehole mouth is and help causing some of those massive casualties you wish for.

NSWGRU1 Suggesting that Americans take up arms against other Americans? Sounds to me like you're a traitor. Or maybe a terrorist.

[Debaser]

Originally posted by CrazyCatLady
Oh, and Debaser, can you please explain the difference between a Marine and an Iraqi soldie? I have shit for brains and can't see the difference between two men who have agreed to risk their lives to make sure a country gets run the way they think it ought to be run. Oh, wait, our way is the right way. Never mind.

Marines are avoiding civilian casualties as carefully as they can, even at the cost of thier own lives. Today Iraqi Fedayeen troops deliberately fired on 1,000 fleeing civilians.

Cite (http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/breaking_news/5502292.htm)


Iraqi paramilitary forces in Basra fired mortars and machine guns Friday on about 1,000 Iraqi civilians trying to leave the besieged city, forcing them to retreat, British military officials and witnesses said.

Britain's 7th Armored Brigade apparently tried to fire back, but stopped out of fear that civilians would be wounded, said Lt. Cmdr. Emma Thomas, a spokeswoman for British forces in the Persian Gulf.


Marines follow the geneva convention rules of war. Saddam's feydayeen ingnores them completely. Like pretending to attmempt to surrender to initiate a surprise attack.

cite (http://www.iht.com/articles/91346.html)

Feydayeen have also..


Brooks said the Fedayeen have changed into and out of uniform; used civilians, including women and children, as human shields; and threatened to execute entire families if the men did not fight coalition forces.


cite (http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/28/sprj.irq.controversy/index.html)

(this cite also refers to the 1,000 fleeing civilians they shot at.)

All of these articles were things I grabbed from current headlines. This isn't going back 10 years and looking for every bad act. This is the things that they have done today or very recently.

If you want to get into the history of these terrorizing motherfuckers we could start talking about rape rooms, killing children in front of watching parents, lowering political prisoners into a plastic shredder, etc.

So, it's not a simple matter of they, like the marines risking thier lives to "make sure a country gets run the way they think it ought to be run." You dumb fucking cunt.

Comparing the Feydayeen to the US Marines would make sense if the Marines went to your house and gang-raped you for the political opinions of your husband.

If you seriously can't tell the difference between these two groups then you do have shit for brains.

[BF]

Estilicon wrote:
I am from Latin America so that bullshit that your troops are the bulkward of the free world is not going to convince me. I am against this war and I don't support your troops.I've really tried to ignore a lot of the shit that you spew, but I just couldn't let this one go by. Dude, blow it out your ass, banana republic boy, your waaah's over latin america, etc., are a fart in a hurricane. With relatives in Panama and Colombia, and a couple of dove hunting trips in your backyard, I've gotten a look of how the US is viewed in S.A., and your petty-assed pipsqueaking is pathetic. Pull your head out of your ass, Che-wannabe, and get a job.

{sorry for the hi-jack}

[Eclectic Skeptic]

You have to look at the big picture. If the US wins this war quickly with few casualties, it will boost Bush's chances of winning in 2004. That would be a disaster for our country. Therefore, the best outcome is for the US to lose this war and suffer heavy casualties. Then most likely, Bush will lose the election and we can restore democracy in America. In this scenario, the US soldiers are still dying to defend freedom in America. The greatest proven threat to freedom in America is the Bush/Ashcroft/Rumsfeld/Cheney axis of evil.

[Eclectic Skeptic]

Originally posted by BF
Estilicon wrote:
I've really tried to ignore a lot of the shit that you spew, but I just couldn't let this one go by. Dude, blow it out your ass, banana republic boy, your waaah's over latin america, etc., are a fart in a hurricane. With relatives in Panama and Colombia, and a couple of dove hunting trips in your backyard, I've gotten a look of how the US is viewed in S.A., and your petty-assed pipsqueaking is pathetic. Pull your head out of your ass, Che-wannabe, and get a job.

{sorry for the hi-jack}

BF stands for buttfuck which is probably what you enjoy the most. You are a total embarassment to real Americans, who know how much we have fucked over Central and South America to enable our criminal corporations to rob and exploit them. Read so fucking history, asswipe.

Estilicon, Patagonia sin fronteras!

[Sinful]

Our founding fathers would have loved it if we had the right to dissent and that is what we are doing in opposition of this war. What, you don't want us to come out and carry our banners anymore? Anybody in any regime can kiss the king's ring and that's not worth anyone's dying for, not is it patriotic.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

Originally posted by Eclectic Skeptic
BF stands for buttfuck which is probably what you enjoy the most.

Please don't open up us antiwar folks to charges of homophobia, bud. We got enough on our plates.

Daniel

[Eclectic Skeptic]

Sorry. I apologize profusely to the homosexual community for any slander I may have caused them with this insensitive remark.

[gobear]

Estilicon, Patagonia sin fronteras!

I'm curious why a poster named Eclectic Skeptic is signing his posts with the name of another poster, Estilicon. Did we forget which sock we are posting under?

[scablet]

I think that might have been a comment directed towards Estilicon rather than a signature.

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

In Latin, it's called the dative form.

Gobear, do you think I'm signing your name to this post?

[Left Hand of Dorkness]

(damn my eyes for forgetting my Latin -- it's the vocative, not the dative!)

Daniel, who's using some non-vocative form for the last sentence of this post

[gobear]

Ah, my apologies. I misunderstood.

[Giraffe]

Originally posted by Eclectic Skeptic
You have to look at the big picture. If the US wins this war quickly with few casualties, it will boost Bush's chances of winning in 2004. That would be a disaster for our country. Therefore, the best outcome is for the US to lose this war and suffer heavy casualties.As someone who is both very liberal and very much opposed to this war, you're a fucking idiot. Wishing for the deaths of U.S. soldiers is monstrous. Incidentally, it is also incredibly detritimental to those of us who have legitimate reasons to oppose this war.

If this war is quick and there are few casualties, that is a good thing. Most of the people I know who oppose the war do so because they feel Bush is behaving recklessly and needlessly risking many lives by his actions. If we are lucky and few lives are lost, that doesn't automatically make Bush's decision right -- he shouldn't be unnecessarily risking American and Iraqi lives. And even if it did, there are more important things than your side being proven right.

Want to help re-elect Bush in 2004? Keep acting like a dipshit asshole. You would do far more good by just shutting the fuck up.

[Sinful]

So unless you are willing to do more than simply wave a stupid banner around while marching in the safety of the USA don't deride the very people who provide the very blanket of protection that allows you to be a jerk.

Troops don't deserve to be disrespected, but that doesn't mean we'll agree with their actions, hence we'll continue protesting.

[BF]

Eclectic Skeptic wrote:
You are a total embarassment to real Americans, who know how much we have fucked over Central and South America to enable our criminal corporations to rob and exploit them.Oh fucking cry me a river, pinhead. For your information, real Americans are getting shot at while trying not to shoot civilians in that pisshole of a "sovereignty" you feel existed quite well under Saddam's bootheel. If you and the other asshat wanna quote Marxist dogma, please, exercise your constitutional right. Oh wait, Estilicon might be able to blabber about anti-US shit, but what if he started dissing the Argentinian government in the streets? Hmmm, makes ya kinda wonder.

[jacksen9]

Originally posted by Estilicon
I am from Latin America so that bullshit that your troops are the bulkward of the free world is not going to convince me. I am against this war and I don't support your troops.


FUCK YOU

[Eclectic Skeptic]

Hey, if those soldiers don't want to die for their country, why did they join the military in the first place? The US aggression in Iraq is illegal and puts us up their with Nazi Germany. Those soldiers deserve to die for blindly following orders. If we have a Nuremberg trial, they could all be hanged. I wish for the deaths of all soldiers everywhere. The military consciousness is satanic and has no place on Earth. Why don't you shut the fuck up, Giraffe?

[Eclectic Skeptic]

Originally posted by BF
Eclectic Skeptic wrote:
Oh fucking cry me a river, pinhead. For your information, real Americans are getting shot at while trying not to shoot civilians in that pisshole of a "sovereignty" you feel existed quite well under Saddam's bootheel. If you and the other asshat wanna quote Marxist dogma, please, exercise your constitutional right. Oh wait, Estilicon might be able to blabber about anti-US shit, but what if he started dissing the Argentinian government in the streets? Hmmm, makes ya kinda wonder.

For your information, moron, there were huge public demonstrations against the government in the streets of BUenos Aires recently. In fact, they forced the president to resign. That's more than I can say for America right now.

[jacksen9]

Originally posted by Eclectic Skeptic
Hey, if those soldiers don't want to die for their country, why did they join the military in the first place? The US aggression in Iraq is illegal and puts us up their with Nazi Germany. Those soldiers deserve to die for blindly following orders. If we have a Nuremberg trial, they could all be hanged. I wish for the deaths of all soldiers everywhere. The military consciousness is satanic and has no place on Earth. Why don't you shut the fuck up, Giraffe?

Please read the stickey posted at the top of this forum. Oh and, fuck you.

[Eclectic Skeptic]

Originally posted by jacksen9
Please read the stickey posted at the top of this forum. Oh and, fuck you.

That sticky only applies to wishing death upon another poster, like if I told you to drop dead, which I won't because I enjoy arguing with you and all the other america love it or leave it types in this thread. Oh yeah, and you are a silly goose.

[Giraffe]

Originally posted by Eclectic Skeptic
Hey, if those soldiers don't want to die for their country, why did they join the military in the first place? The US aggression in Iraq is illegal and puts us up their with Nazi Germany. Those soldiers deserve to die for blindly following orders. If we have a Nuremberg trial, they could all be hanged. I wish for the deaths of all soldiers everywhere. The military consciousness is satanic and has no place on Earth. Why don't you shut the fuck up, Giraffe? Listen to me: you honestly couldn't be a more effective agent for the pro-war agenda if you were cheering at a Bush rally. You are worse than useless, you are actively counter-productive. If you truly cared about making the world a better place, you would focus on making a difference and actually convincing people, rather than basking in your own self-righteous anger.

[Eclectic Skeptic]

Look, dipshit, this is the BBQ pit not the Unitarian Church. When I want the world to be a better place I write letters to my congressmen. When I want to vent my rage and self-righteous anger, I bask in the pit where it is balmy and warm.

[Estilicon]

I'm curious why a poster named Eclectic Skeptic is signing his posts with the name of another poster, Estilicon. Did we forget which sock we are posting under?

Gobear I used all my skills in english to compose a beautifull rant about yourself in the form of a rather long poem. Not an small accompishment taking into account:
a) My already mentioned troublesome english.
b) my lack of imagination.
c) the fact that gobear doesn't really rhyme with fucking moron.

And then you apologized, that work of art is now a bunch of scattered electrons, what a waste. I accept those apologies but please be more carefull next time, accusing a good doper like myself of such an horrible violation of the rules is no small issue :)

Eclectic Skeptic, though, can have an issue with you , not because you accused him to be my alter ego (that is actually a compliment) but because you are comparing his english with mine. If he is a native speaker your ass is in the pit. :)

Oh wait, Estilicon might be able to blabber about anti-US shit, but what if he started dissing the Argentinian government in the streets? Hmmm, makes ya kinda wonder

For your information, not that you care you seem to be a jingonistic illeterate, Argentina happens to be a democracy and believe me nothing I ever said about dubya can be compared with what we usually say about our president. Granted our democracy is still far from perfect but who can cast the first stone in this gloomy 2003?

Anyway, the last couple of days have been really hard for me, so many of my comments specially the one that started this whole controversy were way out of line. I would like to aplogize. It seems this war has turned me into an extremist I don't like that, so I am placing myself under a moratorium, I won't be participating in any other irak related thread for a couple of days I need to calm down.

Before closing the issue I will like to make a final statement, I don't hate America (this is for you BF), I hate bush and everything he represents. In fact I have such an strong reaction to this war because I consider that america has betrayed itself once again. The land of Copland, Gershwin, Twain, Bierce, Berntein, Barber or Heinlem (to name only a few) does not deserve a maniac for president and neither do the rest of us (your president our leader). Ok I am off to take a cold shower.

[BF]

Well, Estilicon has decided to chill, and so will I. However, Eclectic dyspeptic wrote:Hey, if those soldiers don't want to die for their country, why did they join the military in the first place? The US aggression in Iraq is illegal and puts us up their with Nazi Germany. Those soldiers deserve to die for blindly following orders. If we have a Nuremberg trial, they could all be hanged. I wish for the deaths of all soldiers everywhere. The military consciousness is satanic and has no place on Earth. [Dr. Huxtable] That's the most stupidest thing I've ever heard of in my life[/Dr. H]
Can't wait 'til spring break's over....

[msmith537]

Originally posted by MrVisible
msmith537, would you please define what you mean by "support the troops"? What would differentiate someone who supports the troops from someone who does not? In terms of
tangible actions, if you would. [/B]


Fair enough. Perhaps "support" is not the right word since it implies a more proactive action. Everyone has the right to be ambivalent.

I guess by "support" I mean not treating our soldiers like they are jackbooted Nazi thugs.


Originally posted by CrazyCatLady
If I had to lose my dad, or my uncles, or my big brother, or any of the the other men in my life who had enlisted over the years to make people take this as seriously as they should, I'd do it in a heartbeat.


I'm sorry but you sound insane. You think high casualties now will make anyone stop and think about starting the next war? I have seen nothing in history to indicate that high casualties now will result in anything other than a lot of death and suffering.

[AHunter3]

If anyone would care to lay out a tenable and easily enunciated position by which I can publicly wish for and hope for an unsuccessful American war against Iraq, one that plays badly at home, provides little encouragement for following it up with another one of the same sort, and humiliates, as much as possible, the dangerously stupid US administration responsible for conducting it in this manner, while at the same time expressing my support and sympathy for our troops... Sterra:
...Your arguement is exactly why I support the US armed forces and the Iraqi republican guard. ...and, yeah, following Sterra's lead, their troops, too, then I'll happily make use of it and give you credit for the elegant expression of same.

[Princhester]

Originally posted by nswgru1
Amen Debaser

And for all you fucksticks wishing for large US casualties why don't you fucking do us all a favor and put your shit for brains ass where your big fucking piehole mouth is and help causing some of those massive casualties you wish for.

NSWGRU1

You got any reasonable thing to say or can I take it this post is indicative of your intelligence level and debating skills?

[msmith537]

Actually, I'm curious how people can justify wishing for casualties in order to prevent future wars but are not willing to suffer casualties to overthrow a dictator like Sadam.

[Estilicon]

msmith537, I was one of those people.

I took my own advice and spent the last couple of days not watching news and not participating in any Irak related thread. In fact I don't know right now what is happening in Irak (but if you want me to spoil "Barchester Tower" to you, I'll be glad to do so).


I am a voracius reader and if I don't have anything else to do I read till my eyes can't take it anymore, today was one of those magic days. All day I've been reading the above mentioned book, boy I was so happy that I was almost ashamed of myself. I took a break of my reading and started doing my second favourite activity (no it is not sex, that I do so infrequently that I don't count it as an activity) it is zapping. They were showing once again the images of captured american soldiers. And for the first time I really looked at them.

One of the POWS was a black, rather fat woman, and she was terrified. Funny I didn't notice it the first time I watched the images, at that time all I could think was " it's her fault, she is the invader". This time it was different.

So today I am not very proud of this (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=172222&perpage=20&pagenumber=2) don't take me wrong I am still against this war or any other unnecessary war, I don't want anybody to die not an Irakie, not an american, not a civilian and not a soldier.

I am pacifist and I want peace and fuck everyone that can justify the murdering of innocent people. If Bush can get Saddam cleanly he can do so with my blessing, otherwise the price is just to great.

[jacksen9]

Estilicon,
I apologize for my rude remarks in this thread. Sorry.
Peace,
jacksen9

[Wabbit]

I'll tell you what--I'll respect the Republican Guard as soon as I see proof that they're doing as much as they can to avoid civilian casualties. Oh wait, they're not. Guess that makes you an idiot Sterra and co.

I'm not pro Bush--the guy has got to be one of the most moronic Presidents we've had in recent memory--but that doesn't mean that I think he's worse than Saddam. Bush is an arrogant, sheltered idiot; Saddam is a psychopath and quite frankly the human race doesn't deserve either of them. But if I had to chose one of them to lead my country it'd have to be Bush. Who would you choose?

And I have a lot of emphathy for our troops. They've been sent in harms way by incompetent civilian leadership and now the only way out for all of us is through Baghdad. They're the only ones that can get us out of this mess; I just hope they don't have to pay too stiff a price to do it.

[kaylasdad99]

Originally posted by Wabbit
But if I had to chose one of them to lead my country it'd have to be Bush. Who would you choose?To simply exist in a universe where such a set of alternatives is truly forced upon me would be such a surreal nightmare that I would either slip into a state of cognitive-dissonance-induced catatonia or make a wish and magically transform them both into lavender-scented balloon animals that would float away to some place where we could all be free of them both.

[erislover]

Originally posted by CrazyCatLady
It's just that sometimes it takes a lot of corpses for people to back up and ask, "Are we really sure this is a good idea?" If the back up and reconsider point came, oh say, before we deployed troops, it would be absolutely fabulous by me. Unfortunately, it only seems to come when we've had really heavy losses. Life sucks that way sometimes.I believe in popular terminology this is called "giving up", "retreating", or "surrendering".
Oh, and Debaser, can you please explain the difference between a Marine and an Iraqi soldie? I have shit for brains and can't see the difference between two men who have agreed to risk their lives to make sure a country gets run the way they think it ought to be run. Oh, wait, our way is the right way. Never mind.Obviously if you ignore color and fabric composition most t-shirts are exactly the same, too. "You see what you want to see", I suppose.