March on D.C.Follow

And btw, we didn't invade a country, we attacked and removed a regime: WORDS HAVE MEANINGS. We enforced the United Nation's Resolution to keep UN weapons inspectors in Iraq. Saddam decided to block the inspections time and again for more than 10 years. After 9/11 WE voted to go in Iraq on (what seemed at the time to be) credible information to remove Saddam's Batthist regime. The "blowback" from that action brought many terrorists to Iraq from other countries. We are not fighting Iraqis. We are trying to support Iraqis in rebuilding their country ala Post-Saddam. We are, however, fighting terrorists and insurgents from other nearby countries who do not want to see democracy stood up anywhere in the Middle East. I understand the civilian populace is misled by mass media and they quickly forget fundamental truths while spellbound by graphics on CNN, but as a Soldier, you gotta wake up and follow the facts. Signed, A believer.

Edited, Mon Sep 26 15:25:02 2005 by jarrodlampier

Easy boy, those grouse have nothing but fat and bones. Not worth your time. *That's a good boy* /rubs ears

holy ****, how could i be so blind. you guys are all right

the war is justified and correct

bush is an amazing leader who took us to war for good reasons

its the grunts faults for dying

its the iraqi's fault for becoming a terrorist state after we invaded(oops, i mean liberated them)

and no one in the military should ever stop and ask if what they are doing is right and moral.

wow, thankyou all for reminding me i signed a peice of paper and that all in all i am just an ******* who was stupid enough to ask why.

Actually, if you were actually in the army, then you're a stupid piece of shi[b][/b]t who never realized it's not your place to question. Actual military commanders have an awesome responsibility, and they don't have time to explain their orders to a grunt like you.

Give it up jackass. Nobody's buying into your pathetic arguments.

Katie,

Sheehan got arrested today ;)

Also it was a right wing crazy conservative religious group that was protesting the soldiers funerals. Not the left wing liberal nut jobs.

nicely put

and to katie:

The reason i turned down my commision is because i beleived the war was wrong but if put in the situation would always choose the action to defend my troops. Thus by waiting till i go back over seas to make that decision neglects the decision entirely. i realize the military's need for non-questioning nature and i know that no commander can lead if his soldiers dont think he beleives the orders he is given. This is the very reason i gave up my career. And as stated before i support the troops not the war. If it makes you feel better to belittle the work i have done and call me a ******* ******* who is just pissing on the graves of the brave soldiers who gave their lives for our country then by all means. But the truth is i value these people lives so greatly that if put in that situation i wouldnt hesistate to blow the brains out of that little 8 year old girl carrying th grenage towards my unit, which is why i am trying to not be put in that position int he first place. No i dont agree with it, yes that means i shouldnt lead, so the appropriate action was for me to turn it down. No i didnt get shot at on my first tour of duty, but i didnt realize that meant my efforts were worthless. Will you think your husband's efforts were worthless over there unless he gets shot down?

Is that how its done pottymouth? I assume replying with well thoughtout answers to this debate is beyond your level of ability and you must resort to simple name calling.

Ok. Great. But then what the heck did you think you were signing up for when you joined? You seem to be aware that you might have to blow away that 8 y/o with the grenade to protect your men, and accept that you *would* do that if needed, but you personally don't want to, so you refused commision.

Great! But. Given those facts, why do you then critisize other soldiers who decided that they would take that risk and that responsibility? It's all well and good to hide behind the old standy "I support the troops, but not the war", but so far every single thing you've mentioned as something you don't like about the war, is in fact, something that the troops may have to do as a matter of course within "war".

In war. Sometimes you end up killing innnocent people. It happens. It's *always* happened. Part of what you accept when you sign on is that the results of your actions might be the death of innocent people. As an officer you accept that you may have to order actions that may result in the death of innocent people. That's simply part of the deal.

I guess my problem is that you seemed ok with that right up until it was time to actually have to do it, and then you backed out. Why? What exactly about this war is any different then any other? You've stated a couple times that it was "illegal" and "immoral". In what ways? Aside from rhetoric, what do you have to support those statements? The war was authorized by Congress. By definition then, it's "legal". That leaves us with immoral. Yet, sofar, you've yet to point out any action you might have had to take or order others to take that is any more or less immoral then any other war.

It just seems like by the definitions you're trying to use, no war ever would be justified. Now, you are welcome to hold that opinion, but then one wonders what the heck you were doing in the military in the first place...

Mooching.

Since when did morality have anything to do with war? If your constrasting war in the guidlines of what is right and wrong within society, then all war would be immoral(I mean the idea IS to kill the other guy, after all); not just the current campaign against Iraq. EP these claims you make are very trite, very sensationalistic, and full of enough propraganda and rhetric to make Adolf Hitler blush.