I don’t see how you can compare the two governments. The South Vietnamese government had many faults, but it wasn’t anywhere near as evil as the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein and the Ba’ath Party.
I was just trying to be polite. I was on my way to work and did not have time, nor the inclination, to fully express my views on the war lest I be late.
Yeah, that’s why there are Iraqi police acting as death squads, and why the US backed government has been torturing people. :rolleyes: Do you have any actual evidence that they are better than Saddam, instead of just being weaker ? If anything they are worse; just as brutal, less competent, and even more repressive.
As opposed to ARVN troops uprooting entire villages and areas, burning them down, and forcing the people to live in fortified camps. Err, yeah. :rolleyes:
None of what you says makes the Iraqi Government worse than the Vietnamese one.
If ‘they’ are more repressive, then I’d like to see why in 30 years, Saigons government never changed, where as Iraqs Government has to change continuously to placate different ethnic groups.
Hey of course, what I sayin though, is that RVN was a government rejected from the bottom up, where in Iraq, although fractured, its Government is stronger because it’s been elected and represents a fair amount of the political parties in Iraq.
I would thank them for volunteering and then doing what they’re told. But they also should tell the public what’s really happening. I think they’re not supposed to talk about things, but they should, anyway. Then the public knows that it was a mistake, first hand.
You’re not alone. I feel much the same way you do-we must have a military for defense, and I admire people who are willing to risk their lives for others. I hate the way “they’re defending our freedoms!” is whipped out as a way of stifling debate about Iraq or, more broadly, anything that could be construed as critical to the military.
I expect you are familiar with the USA’s support of death squads in El Salvador? I have been there and witnessed first hand the places where villages were wiped out and the rooms where torture was levied.
It makes my heart sink to hear that we are using the “El Salvador Solution”. Everyone here may not know what that means, but I think you will.
But we are torturing and killing for freedom and justice, right? Aren’t we still the good guys? 
You’re making a mighty big leap there, that the U.S. was EVER the good guys.
http://afamilyinbaghdad.blogspot.com/ This site is by a woman Iraqi. She was an engineer in Saddam’s time. She says over half the students in college were women. They wore western clothes if they wanted to. They had museums and sidewalk cafe.
She felt like an Iraqi first . Let her describe what it has become.
You were in trouble if you crossed Saddams government .Now you can not walk the streets without John McCain.
Let’s be fair: WWI and WWII. After that, not so much.
I’m not saying the U.S. was or wasn’t good guys, just that I wouldn’t assume that they are. A little introspection goes a long way. Hey, perfect time for my sig.
Back to the OP. As I’ve mentioned before, most military people, especially NCO’s and more senior officers, tend to be socially conservative and those military members who disagree w/ leadership tend to keep their opinions to themselves. It’s unlikely that your going to get an objective view from an individual military member.
I think the press, in general, is giving a fairly balanced picture, but many of them have had their access severely restricted by increasing sectarian violence.
I can recall my own criticism of the press during VN. I did tree tours and after each I was very vocal about the skewed reports in the news at home. The press in VN was manipulated, to a much greater degree, than is the case in Iraq.
[QUOTE=DMark]
But Iraq is a major fuck-up from the get-go and the poor schmucks doing duty, or second round of duty, or third - most did not sign up for this crap. This whole war makes Vietnam seem like a success in comparison…
The soldiers signed up to fight wherever their elected political leaders decide they fight for how ever long those leaders tell them to ,for as many tours as is required and how ever well or badly the operation is,or appears to be in their eyes to be doing.
They do not decide if a war is legal or not,the politicians do that and if they re wrong
the error devolves to them not the squaddies.
It is not within their rights to say that they only thought that they d do X amount of tours and they ve done their share.
They are entitled to hold an opinion but are not entitled to offer up that opinion up the rank scale or even always to spread it around amongst their mates if its undermining unit morale .
Its nothing to do with any government coverup men with poor morale tend to switch off,become careless and apathetic and their mates start getting killed as a result of it and often themselves.
To address the reason why the public should feel grateful to the people who volunteer for the armed forces is if too many of them decided they couldnt be bothered to join up then I think you ll find it wouldnt be long before some sort of conscription was reintroduced .
Before some of you say well Im too old for that now,(which might be construed as a little bit selfish by some) some of your friends ,neighbours and family may not be too old .
On top of that considerably older people can also be called up.
They may not be going overseas to fight the bad guys but quite a few I would think wouldnt be over the moon to be serving under Sgt. Bilko in a motor pool somewhere in the middle of Kansas instead of having the comparative freedom of their present jobs.
And if for nothing else THATS why we should all be grateful ,very grateful.
[QUOTE=Lust4Life]
It is blind, unquestioning faith in our leaders that got us in the mess we’re in today. We should thank the troops for being the mindless puppets of an oppressive regime…? I don’t know. For comparison’s sake, that seems as strange to me as thanking Nazi troops. They’re not entirely unlike US soldiers – ordinary people duty-bound to serve leaders with (what I believe are) misguided visions.
The choice to fight or not fight for a cause one doesn’t believe in lies in every individual US soldier and I believe those choosing to participate in the Iraq war against their own beliefs – even if not doing so meant prison or worse – are mistaken.
They don’t decide if a war if legal is not, but they can choose whether to participate in an illegal (or ethically wrong) war, the same way they can choose whether to participate in genocide, secret police activities, torture, etc., etc. They’re not slaves, they’re “free” US citizens and their duty to their country and to their own moral code should rank above their duty to the military and its leaders.
And if they did delay a draft, that’s convenient for the rest of us, but that still doesn’t justify their actions. For the sake of argument, assuming the administration is evil, the troops are acting as enablers and this war wouldn’t have been possible without their compliance.
I would thank them for their desire to protect this country, but I would not thank them for the way in which they choose to express that desire (by fighting), because I think that’s a misguided, ultimately detrimental action. In other words, “Thanks for caring, but that really doesn’t help.”
Apart from the fact that the majority of the electorate in every country in the world would disagree with you.
And the U.S.A. was a democracy when I last looked with freedom of movement,freedom of speech ,freedom of worship,Miranda rights and trial by jury so the U.S. is NOT an oppressive country in any sense of the word ,and you deeply insult the poor sods who genuinly have no choice but to live in one,so unless your views take precedence over the will of the majority for some reason you cant arrogate to yourself the moral right to claim to be the American populations voice of the people.
The fact that you are safe to state your somewhat unusual views at all was earned by the people whos sacrifices you somewhat patronisingly brush off.
I dont think any of them chose to die or be maimed protecting people like yourself or anyone at all for that matter.
If fighting is detrimental what would you suggest as a viable replacement?.
Anger management classes for the third Reich?
A vicious T shirt campaign against the Soviet Union?
Maybe if we just sat down with Al quida over a nice cup of tea we could tell them to stop being such silly billies with all this atrocity business that they insist on doing .
I ll bet they re pretty decent chaps at heart and just as soon as they realise that some of their tactics are just a little bit frowned on by others in the world they ll stop it this instant nodoubt wearing a wry grin and then everyone can forget all about it!
Most soldiers are not qualified to make judgements on some of the more esoteric laws of international conflict and even if they were they would be likely rationalise themselves into the decision they wanted .
Im bored,scared,tired and missing my family .
If this wars illegal we re going home .Yep !I reckon its illegal alright.
The troops DO NOT have the right to decide if a war is ethical or not ,whatever thats supposed to mean in International law and as far as I know never ,ever have done
Troops are given training on the conventions of war as it will be affected by their own personal actions.
ie.treatment of P.O.W.s,civilians, when killing is not lawful and so on and yes they do know a war crime from a legal act and they will refuse to carry out mass murders and other atrocities and rightly so.
As I said before major decisions that are way beyond ther legal competency of the average soldier to make a qualified decision on are taken way up the totem pole long before they even ship out,the legality of the war being one of them and decided upon by people who are much more qualified to take the decision.
The decision could well be wrong but the democratically elected politicians are the ones held responsible for any fault not the squaddies.
And it is a crime for the squaddies to try and second guess the political decision.
When troops start disputing orders or only obeying those they agree with or having nice cosy little discussions just like the chaps safe at home in the students Union Debating society before they carry them out you have anarchy and inaction .And people die.
Not only is that mutiny but its also disobeying the wishes of the electorate as expressed by their democratically appointed leaders,not a million miles away from treason.
Soldiers arent slaves but they have surrendered voluntarly and in full knowledge some of the rights the rest of us take for granted,( for a period of time.)
They cant just quit when they feel like it,go on strike ,demand fixed hours or a fixed place of work .
They are given orders ,not requests and can be made to go into situations where
their personal safety is at risk and against their own personal inclinations.
I notice that Liberals always assume that if troops disobeyed orders on the basis of conscience they would automatically follow the liberals take on the situation.
The left would be the first group screaming about dictatorial ,Nazi troops usurping
legitimate authority if they followed a different course from the Wets.
I’m aware of all that. History does repeat itself sometimes. I expect that we are going to be discovering new atrocities we’ve committed in Iraq for many years. And we’re not done yet.
That might be true. And I want to know why.
I’ll be the first to admit that I have unusual views, and I’m sorry if I came off as condescending. I’m not the voice of anyone but myself and I speak only for myself.
I agree that we don’t seem to oppress our own citizens very much (at all). I love this country and the freedoms it affords me and I would thank God for it every day if I believed in God. I would fight for it and I would die for it. There are people out there fighting and dying for assholes like me right now so that assholes like me can say what we want to say, and I’ll be damned if I’m going to trivialize their sacrifices by saying only what my countrymen want to hear and not what I feel I need to say.
Unfortunately, I cannot help but feel troubled by some of the things I’ve seen my country do recently. More and more, it feels like our freedoms are kept available through the oppression of other countries, that we’re living with kings’ luxuries because our overwhelming might allows us to trample over the rest of the world as we see fit. We disregarded the pleadings of our allies, we disregarded facts, our leaders lied to us, and we ignored the will of the entire rest of the world to invade a country… and we can’t even explain why. If that isn’t oppressive bullying, I don’t know what is.
What scares me is that I don’t believe our superpower status can last indefinitely, and if we make too many short-sighted, unilateral choices now, they’ll come back to haunt us decades from now.
And I believe the only real solution is for each member of the electorate – servicemember or not – to continually educate himself or herself as to the events of the world and to realize that their collective choices add up to real consequences. Those who aren’t serving in the armed forces should question the leadership (and also themselves); those who are serving should follow their orders until and unless they start to see something wrong in those orders, and at that point, they should weigh their dual duties as soldiers and as citizens and at least start to think of whether other solutions exist. That’s all.
If I knew the solution, don’t you think I would’ve done something about it by now?
But what do you suggest? That we just keep fighting random Middle-Eastern nations and expanding the Axis of Evil as we see fit?
Maybe we should reflect on some of our own actions too. Things are rarely black and white. Is it possible that some of our enemies’ gripes against us are valid, just like some of ours towards them are? On our part, chest-thumping patriotism and the relentless exercising of our military muscle might feel good, sure, especially after we were bitchslapped by two teeny little planes, but this course of action isn’t necessarily in our best long-term interests.
And what the hell does Al-Qaeida have to do with Iraq? The one thing that bugs me most about this series of wars is that nobody can tell me why the fuck we’re fighting them. And if that question can’t be satisfactorily answered, is it possible that we are the bad guys for once and that blind denial of our mistakes will only serve to further incite force against us?
The same could probably be said of most people, soldiers or not, Americans or not. Very few people have the capability to truly see the “big picture”, and fewer still try.
The problem is… if we want to believe in a democracy or even a republic, we have to assume that it’s at least theoretically possible for Joe Citizen to learn enough to aid in the decision-making process. Otherwise, we’re just kidding ourselves with this government and what we’re really hoping for is a benevolent dictatorship.
I still have some faith left in the system and I want to at least try before giving up.
Then who does?! Bush? Bush, the elected voice of… the very same American public that the troops came from…? If you really believe that troops don’t have the right or ability to decide for themselves, then what the hell are they doing participating in a democratic system?
International law is nothing but the consensus of nations, of people, and unless you think these rules are divinely ordained, it IS these very people that have the right to decide.
Legality and ethics are not the same thing, though, and the tragic belief that “If it’s legal, it must be okay” is just that… tragic.
No! In a democracy, we ALL share responsibility. Even in a republic, though more indirectly. Our politics are not a fire-and-forget thing; we don’t just color in a little dot every four years and then forget about it. It’s a daily part of our lives and we owe it to ourselves to be involved instead of simply delegating it to others.
Then maybe it shouldn’t be a crime. Force has its uses, but so does discussion. If you fight, people die; if you don’t fight, people still die. I can only hope that we fight when we need to fight and we talk when we need to talk.
I’m not a liberal or a conservative, really. I have my own views and I think both sides hate me for them equally…
The only thing I ask of the troops is: When there’s a pause in the fighting, stop and think for a while. I respect you. I owe a lot to you. And I don’t like it that you’re out there dying for something that may not ultimately serve either of us.
I don’t know if I’m right. I don’t know if you’re right or if Bush or Al-Qaeda is right… I only ask that we at least try to find out who is before we keep start throwing nukes at each other.
What?
**REPLY
A few clarifications for you from my point of view.
All democratic countrys over the size of a postage stamp have some sort of armed forces.
If the majority of people were against that or even if there was a viable alternative this wouldnt be the case.
You take my stance that soldiers must not question orders as being a result of my blind faith in our Western leaders .
Soldiers should not debate their orders once they are on the ground it is too late for that.
Actually I think that we SHOULDNT have gone into Iraq,that we were lied to by our governments about W.M.D. and I also believe that we shouldnt go into Iran.
Not out of any fluffy motives like love and peace and lets hug a few trees man but on purely practical grounds.
Though I love the Yanks dearly, their administrations have a record of not only messing up but of actually making situations one hell of a lot worse with their international interventions.
I disagree with the U.S. acting as World policeman.
The liberal democracies cant sort out every single nation in the worlds problems and shouldnt try to do so.
Ironically its often the result of naive Western liberals being offended by one party states or
to them cruel and unusual punishments or whatever!
Basically a system different to their own .
Some American hack adopts it as his cause celebre’ or as we might say ,his self publicity vehicle and bandwagoning by the other media brings pressure on the POTUS to DO something and so it starts .
I fully agree that if a nation is causing harm to the international community by for example exporting weapons/technology,weapons grade nuclear fuel,terrorism or drug trading then we SHOULD do something over and above sanctions and political hot air to remove the threat but not necessarily by a full blown military intervention which can be likened to using a sledge hammer to crack a nut.
“Wets” is a Brit. term for those of a liberal persuasion.
There is one thing we should thank Iraq vets- volunteering to serve, lest there be a draft.
I can sum it up in a few sentences.
To stop them doing another series of 9/11 style attacks, stop them from toppling Middle Eastern regimes and not to mention destablising the whole Islamic world, which would also threaten Western and Global security. On a smaller scale, we have to defeat them in order to ensure the Sunni population in Iraq doesn’t become Talibanised to the point rescue is impossible.
All of which can be accomplished if we gather enough allies to defeat them in Iraq.