bobthemothafuckinbuilder Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 I'm back from Iraq. Sarifs makes numerous good points. The video is complete bullshit. #1 WP is not banned since it is not a chemical weapon. The people in the video were clearly killed by shrapnel and/or incindenary bruns. Ok now, with the guy talking about shooting civilians. As usual this video is made for someones benefit such as some democrat etc. So. Yes, snipers did shoot unarmed civilians. sounds bad right? no. your "unarmed" civilians were actually combatants who figured out that the stupid americans would not fire on you if you had a white flag... (1st couple of times we didn't) THEn we got ambushed by these motherfucks. SO NOW.... white flag... walk towards me... you die. Killing kids? Fuckin' right. Those little fucks would point out our positions to the insurgents thinking we wouldn't shoot.... wrong. Sounds pretty bad right? Well it is... but it's war... they're fighting for political gain which is fucked up. Wanna talk about fucking rules of warfare? #1 you are not allowed to mix yourself with the civilian population. #2 using kids for combat is also outlawed.... 12-13 year old kids shooting AKs at me won't get some kind of fucking glory treatment from me, you will die like the rest of the fucks who shoot their rounds at me. Look at all this shit from different perspectives instead of your typical far left sided ones. As to arguing with troops about the war. We didn't fucking start it. You driving around in your fucking SUV did. Know something about duty. One stupid 20 something year old fuck decided to read a newspaper outloud "5 soldiers killed when helicopter shot down" then he decides to add "good those military fucks got what they deserved". Hearing that led to what that stupid fuck deserved... a knock in his fucking face for being so fucking stupid. Oh yea and that ending video... download the full original version on thenausea.com.... they had RPGS and they were running to dump the weapons... then they got lit up like they were supposed to. -bobthebuildaaaa USMC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Birch Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 ^^^ bob your pathetic...another person brainwashed by the military... I know plenty of people who have been in iraq and wouldn't agree with you. from what I understand, we are not at war. Congress authorized the president to use force if neccessary to force saddam from office. period. and btw the so-called insurgents are citizens of their country. they have a right to defend themselves against the invaders claiming to be liberators. and i don't think the US is a good example of following the rules of war...Our country has a track record of murdering innocent civilians for political motives for example: revoluntionary war: murder of american suporters of the british the US civil war the filipno insurgency: 1 million dead WWII: german and japanese and filipino civilain deaths korea vietnam numerous central america incidents * but also let me point you don't represent the view point of all conservatives, such as myself...hence this war is such a waste of money most importantly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereotype V.001 Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 Originally posted by John Birch@Jan 24 2006, 01:16 AM and btw the so-called insurgents are citizens of their country. they have a right to defend themselves against the invaders claiming to be liberators. Quoted post Oh yea, all of the foreign fighters from Chechnya, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Southern Asia, ect are really true Iraqi citizens. And murdering thousands of innocent civilians in suicide attacks (mostly Shiites), cutting off the heads of people trying to do humanitarian work, and all of the other "freedom fighter's" noble pursuits are certainly "defending themselves." And its easy to overlook their actions when the cold, iron grip of the evil imperial empire your college professor told you about is out there, right? Who are you calling brainwashed again? I think its funny that everyone's buddy, or friend's friend was right there when it all went down, stabbing guys in the head with their rambo knife and mowing down civilians. But when people who were actually there give a first hand perspective that doesn't agree with your well informed opinion, they are obviously wrong and brainwashed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Birch Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 my college professor? lol... my point is, generally speaking, is that you have to look at things from their side. if some country invaded the US, I and hopefully you, would be the first to join the insurgency, and believe me, I wouldn't mind if some mexicans or irishmen or canadians joined me. and also any people that I considered sympathetic to the invaders, including and especially civilians, would be first on my list for death...thats the game...americans sympathetic to the british during the US revolution were targeted and murdered too, so there is precedent... and fuck humanitarian workers...yes they feel that maybe their "helping" but all they are is tools of the administration (any admin)...with is why, as much as it interested me, I never joined the peace corp after college etc... a tool of US hegomony Alot of my thinking on insurgency tactics I get out the playbook the russians employed against the ukrainians in WWII... in the big pictures, hundreds of yeas from now, the insurgents will be considered heros of iraq, whether or not we personally agree...and thats my point basically. our opinions and discussions are esentially semantics... edit* damn I'm a shitty typer, edited for spelling... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Birch Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 I think its funny that everyone's buddy, or friend's friend was right there when it all went down, stabbing guys in the head with their rambo knife and mowing down civilians. But when people who were actually there give a first hand perspective that doesn't agree with your well informed opinion, they are obviously wrong and brainwashed. I agree with you somewhat, but as I know only 1 person who was over there, who is pretty much a right-winger type, I think I got a rather objective report of what was going down in iraq...plus I was able to talk to my buddy at least twice or 3 times a week over the last year via aol IM and e-mail...when he was still over there, I made him watch the falluja video (he's a writer and read 12oz, even in iraq)... he said the video was kinda liberal propaganda etc and some of WP shit was wrong, but at the same time, he told me how they were instrcuted to run down children, how they used depleted uranium for bombs, how a suicide bomber ran into his compound and scattered brain matter all over his bedroom... or how he was sick the whole time while over there....all the medical tests he had to get...the brain tumor he got or how since he got back he has a severe case of asthsma (and he's a mountain climber)... I know I like to be polemic..thats my nature I am of Irish heritage, lol.. but that doesn't invalidate my point or make me some sheltered liberal driving a bmer... anyway my afternoon rant..back to work... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereotype V.001 Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 I'm sorry to hear about your friend, that post was more in reference to people making somewhat outlandish claims earlier in the thread ("my friend's friend stabbed some guy in the neck during fallujah, yea he was with the delta force ninja cook detachment"). As far as the insurgency goes, I understand where you’re coming from to a certain extent, but I think the US revolution comparison holds no water. We aren’t trying to take over Iraq permanently like the UK were with the colonies, we are setting up a government that is already and quickly becoming a subsidiary of Iran (not exactly our number one ally) and trying to get the fuck out instead of holding on to full control. The American revolutionaries didn’t kill the majority of their prisoners, cut every person’s head off they could in the most public way, or specifically target young children or woman even if they were loyalists. The Shiites who I was referring to aren’t all sympathizers with the new government either, they are killed by somewhat-random acts of violence. I doubt a 2 year old child or younger has much concept of what’s going on to sympathize with the “coalition�, and the suicide bombers don’t differentiate between a grown man and infant (there have been several occasions where children have been specifically targeted, and atleast once a children’s hospital). If you can name one incident where the continental army detonated themselves next to a family of sympathizers, let alone dozens of times, I would be inclined to agree with you. And most Humanitarian organizations, like amnesty int. and the red cross are seen more as a detriment to the US government than a branch of it, and usually consist of very idealistic people trying to help Iraqis. Not too bright, but still. And taking your advice, looking at things from the insurgency’s perspective, they are fighting a holy war, not to liberate Iraq. If they were truly concerned with Iraq’s sovereignty, where were they when a Muslim leader (albeit a secularist but at least he wasn’t an damn infidel) was systematically torturing and executing large portions of the population? They aren’t trying to free the country from the Americans, they want to install Sharia. If they wanted us gone they could stop attacking us for a few months and we would have no reasonable excuse to keep us there. The Sunnis, a minority, don’t want the majority Shiite population that has been oppressed by them for quite some time to turn the tables with Iran’s weapons and money. The foreign fighters especially take deliberate steps to stay in Iraq, because it has been said several times that when the war is over they get the boot, and with it goes their notoriety, cause, and shot at martyrdom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Birch Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 good point, but there is one fundamnetal asumption you make: that the US actually plans to leave Iraq... I don't think ( as I have no proof, but I usta study neo-con ideology) our governemnet is looking to bounce. they ultimately want Iraq to be like south korea or germany, what with thousands of troops stationed permenantly and to check SA and Iran and eventually central asian former soviet republics...and even china's potential expansion west... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobthemothafuckinbuilder Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 WE didn't "invade" their homeland. You're assuming that Iraq is a nation-state... it is only a state. You have 3 ethnic groups. More than 4/5 of the people in Iraq wanted us to kick Saddam out and have no problem with us to this day, they continue to fill the ranks of the ING... If the insurgents would not fight us, we would have rebuilt the country into a global power... as we did with Japan. Let me give you a recap on the wars... the last time this country legally went to war was in WW2. During WW2 30% of the people were voulenteers and 70% were draftees. During vietnam.. where there is a huge misconception with this... rougly 80-85% of the people who fought in vietnam were VOULENTEERS only 20% or so were draftees. You cannot stop fighting because you drop a bomb and kill civilians. Did you hear what happened in Pakistan? We shot a missle to kill al-qeida officers and we ended up killing many civlians. People are bitching about it. Reports confirm that we have indeed killed the terrorist targets we were aiming for. Lesson? Don't support terrorism and your family won't get blown up.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobthemothafuckinbuilder Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Also I have to add when dealing with issues of wars such as these you cannot look at them from any political perspective liberal/conservative etc. You assume that this whole war is because of George Bush... democrats are also the ones who gave him power to go ahead and send troops into Iraq. You problably don't even know the type of overseas shit was done when clinton was in office... And just for the records republicans and democrats are exactly the same thing. They are both extremley rich white guys trying to profit from the U.S. people. e-z. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobthemothafuckinbuilder Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Originally posted by John Birch@Jan 24 2006, 07:42 PM good point, but there is one fundamnetal asumption you make: that the US actually plans to leave Iraq... I don't think ( as I have no proof, but I usta study neo-con ideology) our governemnet is looking to bounce. they ultimately want Iraq to be like south korea or germany, what with thousands of troops stationed permenantly and to check SA and Iran and eventually central asian former soviet republics...and even china's potential expansion west... Quoted post Don't throw out stupid ideas like that. Think about it like this: China as well as Iran both have nuclear capabilities. Do I want to place 130,00 or more troops within an armslength of the enemy's nuclear capabilities? no. We will continue to be involved politically but our troops will not stay. That's not to say that we will not use Iraq in the future to invade Iran (Iran is surrounded by the gulf, iraq, afghanistan...get the picture?) Our military instalments are doing just fine in Saudi. Another thing to add.... in 100 years, Iraq along with the rest of the middle east will be forgotten. As soon as those countries run out of oil they will become the next sub-saharan Africa... EDIT* By invade Iran I mean bomb the shit out of every military installation start a revolt and never set a foot in the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobthemothafuckinbuilder Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Originally posted by Stereotype V.001@Jan 24 2006, 07:29 PM I'm sorry to hear about your friend, that post was more in reference to people making somewhat outlandish claims earlier in the thread ("my friend's friend stabbed some guy in the neck during fallujah, yea he was with the delta force ninja cook detachment"). As far as the insurgency goes, I understand where you’re coming from to a certain extent, but I think the US revolution comparison holds no water. We aren’t trying to take over Iraq permanently like the UK were with the colonies, we are setting up a government that is already and quickly becoming a subsidiary of Iran (not exactly our number one ally) and trying to get the fuck out instead of holding on to full control. The American revolutionaries didn’t kill the majority of their prisoners, cut every person’s head off they could in the most public way, or specifically target young children or woman even if they were loyalists. The Shiites who I was referring to aren’t all sympathizers with the new government either, they are killed by somewhat-random acts of violence. I doubt a 2 year old child or younger has much concept of what’s going on to sympathize with the “coalition�, and the suicide bombers don’t differentiate between a grown man and infant (there have been several occasions where children have been specifically targeted, and atleast once a children’s hospital). If you can name one incident where the continental army detonated themselves next to a family of sympathizers, let alone dozens of times, I would be inclined to agree with you. And most Humanitarian organizations, like amnesty int. and the red cross are seen more as a detriment to the US government than a branch of it, and usually consist of very idealistic people trying to help Iraqis. Not too bright, but still. And taking your advice, looking at things from the insurgency’s perspective, they are fighting a holy war, not to liberate Iraq. If they were truly concerned with Iraq’s sovereignty, where were they when a Muslim leader (albeit a secularist but at least he wasn’t an damn infidel) was systematically torturing and executing large portions of the population? They aren’t trying to free the country from the Americans, they want to install Sharia. If they wanted us gone they could stop attacking us for a few months and we would have no reasonable excuse to keep us there. The Sunnis, a minority, don’t want the majority Shiite population that has been oppressed by them for quite some time to turn the tables with Iran’s weapons and money. The foreign fighters especially take deliberate steps to stay in Iraq, because it has been said several times that when the war is over they get the boot, and with it goes their notoriety, cause, and shot at martyrdom. Quoted post Very knowledgable post... did you serve in Iraq? Or are you studying IR? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Birch Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 throw out stupid ideas? hmmm. Very presumputious of you, lol Time will tell though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereotype V.001 Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Originally posted by bobthemothafuckinbuilder@Jan 24 2006, 09:19 PM Very knowledgable post... did you serve in Iraq? Or are you studying IR? Nope, I just read the newspaper very occasionally. John- Assuming the insurgency did stop attacks long enough for us to leave, if we tried to set up permanent bases they would certainly resume attacks. Bases like the ones in Germany and Okinawa wouldn't be feasible if they are getting hit by carbombs and mortars everyday, plus we already have bases in Afghanistan now. Thats not to say it didn't grease the wheels a bit for the invasion but I doubt it was the only reason. Not possible now either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawood Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawood Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 Originally posted by bobthemothafuckinbuilder@Jan 24 2006, 03:42 AM As to arguing with troops about the war. We didn't fucking start it. You driving around in your fucking SUV did. straight from .. -bobthebuildaaaa USMC Quoted post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salafi_Zahrah Posted January 29, 2006 Share Posted January 29, 2006 Originally posted by John Birch@Jan 24 2006, 08:20 PM I think its funny that everyone's buddy, or friend's friend was right there when it all went down, stabbing guys in the head with their rambo knife and mowing down civilians. But when people who were actually there give a first hand perspective that doesn't agree with your well informed opinion, they are obviously wrong and brainwashed. I agree with you somewhat, but as I know only 1 person who was over there, who is pretty much a right-winger type, I think I got a rather objective report of what was going down in iraq...plus I was able to talk to my buddy at least twice or 3 times a week over the last year via aol IM and e-mail...when he was still over there, I made him watch the falluja video (he's a writer and read 12oz, even in iraq)... he said the video was kinda liberal propaganda etc and some of WP shit was wrong, but at the same time, he told me how they were instrcuted to run down children, how they used depleted uranium for bombs, how a suicide bomber ran into his compound and scattered brain matter all over his bedroom... or how he was sick the whole time while over there....all the medical tests he had to get...the brain tumor he got or how since he got back he has a severe case of asthsma (and he's a mountain climber)... I know I like to be polemic..thats my nature I am of Irish heritage, lol.. but that doesn't invalidate my point or make me some sheltered liberal driving a bmer... anyway my afternoon rant..back to work... Quoted post Your post hit very close to home. My ex-husband is a retired military police man suffers from effects of depleted uranium. It is causing his nervous system deteriorate. (I still remember tell me hoe he could move most of his limbs but he hardly feel them. And seeing the much pain he was in before he started losing the feeling.) His came from the first Gulf war and during the UN sanctions where he was ordered to shoot, bomb, or run down women and children to basicly put the fear in them. If your wondering why he's my ex-husband well the depleted uranium also called him to be completely sterile and me being such a young age felt it would be unfair to keep children out of my future so he divorced me in kindness no matter how much I wanted to stay. There are so many other things he told me about even things that lead up to this war that if I told them I would probably come up missing. Now I'll do my disappearing act again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereotype V.001 Posted January 29, 2006 Share Posted January 29, 2006 Originally posted by Salafi_Zahrah@Jan 29 2006, 01:18 AM Your post hit very close to home. My ex-husband is a retired military police man suffers from effects of depleted uranium. It is causing his nervous system deteriorate. (I still remember tell me hoe he could move most of his limbs but he hardly feel them. And seeing the much pain he was in before he started losing the feeling.) His came from the first Gulf war and during the UN sanctions where he was ordered to shoot, bomb, or run down women and children to basicly put the fear in them. If your wondering why he's my ex-husband well the depleted uranium also called him to be completely sterile and me being such a young age felt it would be unfair to keep children out of my future so he divorced me in kindness no matter how much I wanted to stay. There are so many other things he told me about even things that lead up to this war that if I told them I would probably come up missing. Now I'll do my disappearing act again. Quoted post Very interesting post. An MP's primary duty is to guard bases ect, and the bases of gulf war v.001 were thousands of miles away from any population center. But I'm sure there were tons of women and children running around for him to "bomb" in the middle of the desert. Another interesting part of your post, you claim your husband is suffering from exposure to depleted uranium. Depleted uranium is put in bullets to give them more heft. It was a war fought with tanks and the air force, and conventional troops saw basically no action. I doubt he fired his weapon at all during those horrible few days. But it was a nice story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobthemothafuckinbuilder Posted January 30, 2006 Share Posted January 30, 2006 Originally posted by Stereotype V.001+Jan 29 2006, 06:11 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Stereotype V.001 - Jan 29 2006, 06:11 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Salafi_Zahrah@Jan 29 2006, 01:18 AM Your post hit very close to home. My ex-husband is a retired military police man suffers from effects of depleted uranium. It is causing his nervous system deteriorate. (I still remember tell me hoe he could move most of his limbs but he hardly feel them. And seeing the much pain he was in before he started losing the feeling.) His came from the first Gulf war and during the UN sanctions where he was ordered to shoot, bomb, or run down women and children to basicly put the fear in them. If your wondering why he's my ex-husband well the depleted uranium also called him to be completely sterile and me being such a young age felt it would be unfair to keep children out of my future so he divorced me in kindness no matter how much I wanted to stay. There are so many other things he told me about even things that lead up to this war that if I told them I would probably come up missing. Now I'll do my disappearing act again. Quoted post Very interesting post. An MP's primary duty is to guard bases ect, and the bases of gulf war v.001 were thousands of miles away from any population center. But I'm sure there were tons of women and children running around for him to "bomb" in the middle of the desert. Another interesting part of your post, you claim your husband is suffering from exposure to depleted uranium. Depleted uranium is put in bullets to give them more heft. It was a war fought with tanks and the air force, and conventional troops saw basically no action. I doubt he fired his weapon at all during those horrible few days. But it was a nice story. Quoted post [/b] Seriously. ANyways DU is a bitch. Last year the 10000th GULF War 1 vet died from exposure to the shit. DU is not used for bullets. Only artillery tank shells and other sorts of large caliber shit to penetrate armor. After tanks get blown up with the shit... fucking around the tank will expose you to DU. Same thing for other objects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salafi_Zahrah Posted January 30, 2006 Share Posted January 30, 2006 Originally posted by Stereotype V.001@Jan 29 2006, 07:11 PM Very interesting post. An MP's primary duty is to guard bases ect, and the bases of gulf war v.001 were thousands of miles away from any population center. Yes the primary duty of an Air Force MP is to bases but skills required to function as a military policeman, to include battlefield circulation control, area security, EPW operations, law and order operations. Other topics include: Patrolling areas on foot, by car or by boat, arresting and charging criminal suspects, combat support, testifying in court, and guarding entrances and directing traffic. So he saw and was in quite a bit of action. Nice try, good bye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobthemothafuckinbuilder Posted January 30, 2006 Share Posted January 30, 2006 UMMM.... no, lol. The duties you listed were not part of the curiculum in the 90's. Secondly... what was your husband patrolling? The inside of blown up tanks? Like I said before DU is not used in small arms. If you're not lying, your husband was probably fucked by the fumes of the burning oil wells. I'm glad that "he saw a lot of action" because while I was there with an Marine Expeditionary Force on the "front lines" and afterwards I bearly saw any combat... maybe he was part of the supder duper airforce delta force seal team 6 superman force where he was involved in some heavy combat. Tanks and helis did most of the job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobthemothafuckinbuilder Posted January 30, 2006 Share Posted January 30, 2006 And by the way.... there is no such thing as an "MP" in the Air Force. If you're refering to anything it must be Air Force Security Forces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
!@#$% Posted January 30, 2006 Share Posted January 30, 2006 Originally posted by bobthemothafuckinbuilder@Jan 24 2006, 09:06 PM WE didn't "invade" their homeland. You're assuming that Iraq is a nation-state... it is only a state. You have 3 ethnic groups. More than 4/5 of the people in Iraq wanted us to kick Saddam out and have no problem with us to this day, they continue to fill the ranks of the ING... If the insurgents would not fight us, we would have rebuilt the country into a global power... as we did with Japan. Let me give you a recap on the wars... the last time this country legally went to war was in WW2. During WW2 30% of the people were voulenteers and 70% were draftees. During vietnam.. where there is a huge misconception with this... rougly 80-85% of the people who fought in vietnam were VOULENTEERS only 20% or so were draftees. You cannot stop fighting because you drop a bomb and kill civilians. Did you hear what happened in Pakistan? We shot a missle to kill al-qeida officers and we ended up killing many civlians. People are bitching about it. Reports confirm that we have indeed killed the terrorist targets we were aiming for. Lesson? Don't support terrorism and your family won't get blown up.... Quoted post well, we also destroyed two japanese cities completely with nuclear weapons it's kind of hard to draw a parallel here i think since most world powers were engaged in this conflict and the allies were basically able to bomb them into submission (isn't this what you claim can not be done?...and after many years of brutal warfare, mind you) i don't know what you are using as a legal definition of war, but to say korea was not a war is idiotic.. you sound like my high school history teacher saying korean and vietnam conflicts. so if those do not fit your legality definition, most certainly gulf war ONE would. did you seriously fucking forget that? haha we really dropped the ball on that one didn't we. and for your vietnam statistics: Of the 58,152 Americans who gave their lives in Vietnam 20,352 of them were draftees. ....the draft was specifically intended to trigger volunteers. Faced with the certainty of a future draft call, many young men chose to "volunteer" because then they could select which branch of the service they preferred and, if qualified, the specialized training they desired. ...... During the Vietnam War 27 million men were eligible for the draft. Some 2.2 million men were drafted and 8.7 million voluntarily enlisted. and for the pakistan shit: a DRONE shot those people, not a person ..you may also want to broaden your warning: don't live in any area the u.s. thinks might have terrorists in it, because you might get killed by accident Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salafi_Zahrah Posted January 30, 2006 Share Posted January 30, 2006 Originally posted by bobthemothafuckinbuilder@Jan 30 2006, 02:24 PM And by the way.... there is no such thing as an "MP" in the Air Force. If you're refering to anything it must be Air Force Security Forces. Quoted post Aka Air Force security policemen, I should have mention he was in the military from the late 80's to early 90's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobthemothafuckinbuilder Posted January 30, 2006 Share Posted January 30, 2006 Originally posted by symbols+Jan 30 2006, 01:59 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (symbols - Jan 30 2006, 01:59 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-bobthemothafuckinbuilder@Jan 24 2006, 09:06 PM WE didn't "invade" their homeland. You're assuming that Iraq is a nation-state... it is only a state. You have 3 ethnic groups. More than 4/5 of the people in Iraq wanted us to kick Saddam out and have no problem with us to this day, they continue to fill the ranks of the ING... If the insurgents would not fight us, we would have rebuilt the country into a global power... as we did with Japan. Let me give you a recap on the wars... the last time this country legally went to war was in WW2. During WW2 30% of the people were voulenteers and 70% were draftees. During vietnam.. where there is a huge misconception with this... rougly 80-85% of the people who fought in vietnam were VOULENTEERS only 20% or so were draftees. You cannot stop fighting because you drop a bomb and kill civilians. Did you hear what happened in Pakistan? We shot a missle to kill al-qeida officers and we ended up killing many civlians. People are bitching about it. Reports confirm that we have indeed killed the terrorist targets we were aiming for. Lesson? Don't support terrorism and your family won't get blown up.... Quoted post well, we also destroyed two japanese cities completely with nuclear weapons it's kind of hard to draw a parallel here i think since most world powers were engaged in this conflict and the allies were basically able to bomb them into submission (isn't this what you claim can not be done?...and after many years of brutal warfare, mind you) i don't know what you are using as a legal definition of war, but to say korea was not a war is idiotic.. you sound like my high school history teacher saying korean and vietnam conflicts. so if those do not fit your legality definition, most certainly gulf war ONE would. did you seriously fucking forget that? haha we really dropped the ball on that one didn't we. and for your vietnam statistics: Of the 58,152 Americans who gave their lives in Vietnam 20,352 of them were draftees. ....the draft was specifically intended to trigger volunteers. Faced with the certainty of a future draft call, many young men chose to "volunteer" because then they could select which branch of the service they preferred and, if qualified, the specialized training they desired. ...... During the Vietnam War 27 million men were eligible for the draft. Some 2.2 million men were drafted and 8.7 million voluntarily enlisted. and for the pakistan shit: a DRONE shot those people, not a person ..you may also want to broaden your warning: don't live in any area the u.s. thinks might have terrorists in it, because you might get killed by accident Quoted post [/b] The drone didn't shoot anybody. The UAV is a reconissance drone. The missle was fired from a distant location. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereotype V.001 Posted January 30, 2006 Share Posted January 30, 2006 Well, there are some high speed AF security forces out there. He must have seen a shitload of action at the bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. I bet he was in the task force dagger devgru chuck norris "gorilla" fighting contingent, they judo chopped t70s in half and shit. Anyways, they didn't use small amounts of depleted uranium in certain rounds for increased accuracy? And I'm pretty sure the Pakistani air strikes were with hellfire missile(s) from a predator drone. Atleast thats what it said in the newspaper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobthemothafuckinbuilder Posted January 31, 2006 Share Posted January 31, 2006 Originally posted by Stereotype V.001@Jan 30 2006, 04:54 PM Well, there are some high speed AF security forces out there. He must have seen a shitload of action at the bases in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. I bet he was in the task force dagger devgru chuck norris "gorilla" fighting contingent, they judo chopped t70s in half and shit. Anyways, they didn't use small amounts of depleted uranium in certain rounds for increased accuracy? And I'm pretty sure the Pakistani air strikes were with hellfire missile(s) from a predator drone. Atleast thats what it said in the newspaper. Quoted post DU has 2x mass as lead. That's why it's used as a large caliber AP round. It fucks tanks and shit like that up. Ak-47s use 7.62mm (heavier and bigger bullets) than our m-16s with the 5.56mm yet our m-16s are much more accurate. Weighing down your regular bullets becomes problematic... I know that they were field testing some DU rounds for the SAW but it wasn't a wide scale thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.