Everybody wants peace but at what price and can we trust the offering of peace

fmw · Jun 21, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

Oozlefinch said:
This largely does not matter, these groups work with their own logic and mindset. We have even had attacks because to some we have not gotten ourselves involved enough.

We even got attacked in 1983 when we were in Lebanon enforcing the Cease Fire to keep Israel and Christian Militia groups from attacking Muslims. But still it was an Islamic group that attacked us. These groups thrive on the noteriety of their attacks. Do something they do not like, they will attack you. Do not do something they like, they will attack you. This is really a catch-22 situation, and leaving is absolutely no guarantee that any attacks would stop.

It should quickly become obvious in forums like this that there is absolutely no reason with radical fundamentalists. Their mindset and world view is so far outside of the norm that they literally live in their own little worlds. And to them any action is justified through this mindset. Twice attacking the same office building complex in the hopes of destroying them, trying to blow up a US airport, shooting an old man in a wheelchair and throwing him over the back of a ship, or any of the other incidents generally make no sense other then to those involved, or their apologists.

To me, you might as well be saying that if the wife did not burn dinner, the beatings would stop. So instead of punishing the beater, you simply encourage the wife to not burn dinner.

And as an aside, how many nations have the Philippines been involved with militarily? Well, none that I can think of either, yet they have also been an almost constant target of attacks by Islamic groups. They will attack anybody they want, for any reason, because they twise The Book to their cause.

I understand what you're saying and I don't disagree with it. Nevertheless, if we have to spend money and lives on it, I'd rather spend them in defense of Americans, not Afghans. I understand why we went to Afghanistan. We went to punish the perpetrators of 9/11. I support that. We punished them, removed the Taliban from power and even killed the head perpetrator. I'm not entirely sure why we are still there. I realize the terrorists are still a threat but I'd rather deal with the threat to Americans rather than the threat to Afghans. If we were to save Afghanistan from terrorism, we'd simply have to move next door to Pakistan and deal with them there.

presluc · Jun 21, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

Oozlefinch said:
And Spain. And the Netherlands. And Russia. And the League of Armed Neutrality. And Morocco. France gave us the most support, but it was not the only nation to help. In addition help came from Germany and Austria, as any NCO can tell you, with individuals like Baron Friedrich Wilhelm August Heinrich Ferdinand von Steuben.

In the War of 1812, most of the world was already involved in a conflict at that time. Just be glad they did not take our Declaration of War against the UK as a declaration against the rest of the League that was fighting Napoleon and go after us as well.

Several nations (including France and the UK) did get involved in the Civil War, just on the other side. But our Civil War is somewhat unique, being largely regional and restrained, primarily involving the organized militaries of each faction, and not bloody wholesale slaughter of civilians on both sides. Most people have no idea how lucky the US was in that, we really did have what was probably one of the most "civil" Civil Wars. If that had not been the case, I think European nations would have jumped in, simply to help carve up the country amongst themselves.

In WWII, many nations helped us as well. England with ports, bases and staging areas as well as assistance. Australia with the same thing, we could not have fought most of the battles in the Pacific without Australia.

And Korea was a UN operation, with nations from all over the world fighting alongside us. The same with Vietnam, Gulf War I and II, Afghanistan, etc.

We could not have done any of those wars in the last century by ourselves. And anybody who thinks otherwise has no concept of what military actions involve.

Well first of all Hessian's fought with England in the revolutionary war , I'll let you look up where they came from.

In 1812 England declared War on the U.S. not the other way round .

In the civil war it is true , but it is as you say the other nations would have waited and carved up the country divide and conquer is a military strategy is it not.

You are forgetting something I think, before America was in World War 2, America was sending goods to England;remember this phrase by Churchill "YOU GIVE US THE PARTS WE'LL DO THE JOB"?
Of course aid was also sent to Russia and France as well as other countries from America , how much aid was sent to America? none.

Unless I'm mistaken America is part of the U.N. and can vote down any violent act of War, or can choose to stay or go Bush proved that in the invasion of Iraq.
As for Vietnam the French fought the Viet cong and lost so America went in because of the communist threat, but America left, so where is the communist threat of Vietnam today?

Well first you have Desert Storm America was called to declare war on a dictator for invading another country , but after peace was declared the Dictator was back in power again.
To me that is not good military strategy that's like if peace were declared in Germany and then turning Germany back over to Hitler

Then you have an attack by a terrorist group out of Afghanistan America declares war on terror then attacks Iraq based on bad intelligence.
Then after that have the gall to stand under a banner saying "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED" MAKING SPEECHES WHILE YOU KNOW MILITARY PERSONAL ARE STILL FIGHTING AND DIEING IN THE PLACE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.
This is not good strategy on any issue..

I don't expect America the nation to lay down for anybody but America can not clean every country in the world and leave their own dirty.
Let America be responsible for America and Americans , any other country wants to start something they know where we are.
We've been trying the carrot since the Cold War and Vietnam maybe it's time America tried the stickeace

presluc · Jun 21, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

fmw said:
Absolutely. We have to stop acting as the planetary police force. We can't afford it and these backwater countries aren't worth the lives of our service people. You want to go fight in Afghanista? Knock your socks off.

America has it's own problems without being policemen of the world.

Besides there is one weapon that is overlooked in this violent age , well two avctually.

1 CUT OFF FREE TRADE BRING BACK TARRIFFS
2 DEPORTATION TO ALL ILLEGALS IN AMERICA NO GREEN CARDS NO VISAS NO RESIDENCE. DEPORTATION FROM THE COUNTRY YOU CAME FROM NO POLITICAL ASYLM:

jUST THESE TWO WOULD MAKE A LOT OF COUNTRIES BE A LOT MORE FRIENDLYpeace

Oozlefinch · Jun 21, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

fmw said:
We went to punish the perpetrators of 9/11. I support that. We punished them, removed the Taliban from power and even killed the head perpetrator. I'm not entirely sure why we are still there. I realize the terrorists are still a threat but I'd rather deal with the threat to Americans rather than the threat to Afghans.

And I would rather deal with such threats overseas in their country, then here in mine. If we leave before the Afghan government is stable, it will simply descend back into anarchy and the groups and camps will se up once again and export more of their actions to other nations.

Personally, I do not care a lot about Afghanistan, but better fighting there then fighting here.

******

Now this one. Wow, so much fail, where to begin?

presluc said:
Well first of all Hessian's fought with England in the revolutionary war , I'll let you look up where they came from.

And I never said "Hessians", I said "Germans". As groups, the mercenaries from Germany were known as Hessians, and fought for the British. Individuals however by the scores came to fight for the colonies, not as soldiers but as advisors.

presluc said:
In 1812 England declared War on the U.S. not the other way round .

Errr, wrong. On 19 June 1812 the US declared war against Britan, the first time the new nation had ever done so formally. The closest the UK ever did during this conflict was sending a "notification of war" to Nova Scotia and the rest of the Canadian Provinces.

But England did not declare war against the US. Sorry bub,

presluc said:
You are forgetting something I think, before America was in World War 2, America was sending goods to England;remember this phrase by Churchill "YOU GIVE US THE PARTS WE'LL DO THE JOB"?
Of course aid was also sent to Russia and France as well as other countries from America , how much aid was sent to America? none.

We were not in a war yet, so how much aid did we need? It is not like we were undergoing a Blitz like England was, or an invasion like the Soviets were. So sorry, I fail to see your point here.

presluc said:
Unless I'm mistaken America is part of the U.N. and can vote down any violent act of War, or can choose to stay or go Bush proved that in the invasion of Iraq.

Oh yes, and we have seen how effective that "voting down any violent act of War" has been, have we not? From Korea to Lebanon and Somalia and Iraq. Those votes in the UN really have put an end to war, have they not?

"You had better leave them alone - or we will launch a Sanction at you!"

presluc said:
As for Vietnam the French fought the Viet cong and lost so America went in because of the communist threat, but America left, so where is the communist threat of Vietnam today?

Oh wow, just wow.

No, the French fought the Viet Minh, not the Viet Cong!

Talk about a complete and total lack of any kind of understanding of that conflict!

And no, the US went in as part of the agreement made between the Viet Minh and France as part of the Geneva Conference which ended the Indochina War. The region was partitioned, with the Soviet Union assisting North Vietnam, and the US assisting South Vietnam.

Are you even aware of the Indochina War?

presluc said:
Well first you have Desert Storm America was called to declare war on a dictator for invading another country , but after peace was declared the Dictator was back in power again.
To me that is not good military strategy that's like if peace were declared in Germany and then turning Germany back over to Hitler

Now that makes little sense, but let me fix one major problem here.

Kuwait is not a Dictatorship. It is a Constitutional Monarchy, set up along the lines of the England (which is only logical - the nation was founded by the British). It has a Constitution, a Parlaiment, and a Prime Minister.

If to you Kuwait is a "Dictatorship", then I guess you would have to consider England to be one as well, right?

And I have never heard of Kuwait refered to in terms anything like what Hitler was described as. I actually found the people there to be very nice. No idea where your bad information is coming from, but it really is wrong.

presluc said:
Then you have an attack by a terrorist group out of Afghanistan America declares war on terror then attacks Iraq based on bad intelligence.

And more of the distortions and simply wrong information.

Sorry, but forgive me if I say you apparently have no idea what in the hell you are talking about. I went through and fixed so many bad statements that I really am depressed as to the state of education in this country today.

To make so many basic and simple mistakes as you have done, all in a row, simply confirms why most of what you say should be discarded from any future consideration.

fmw · Jun 22, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

Oozlefinch said:
And I would rather deal with such threats overseas in their country, then here in mine. If we leave before the Afghan government is stable, it will simply descend back into anarchy and the groups and camps will se up once again and export more of their actions to other nations.

Personally, I do not care a lot about Afghanistan, but better fighting there then fighting here.

Yes, if we were actually fixing a problem.

presluc · Jun 22, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

Oozlefinch said:
And I would rather deal with such threats overseas in their country, then here in mine. If we leave before the Afghan government is stable, it will simply descend back into anarchy and the groups and camps will se up once again and export more of their actions to other nations.

Personally, I do not care a lot about Afghanistan, but better fighting there then fighting here.

******

Now this one. Wow, so much fail, where to begin?

And I never said "Hessians", I said "Germans". As groups, the mercenaries from Germany were known as Hessians, and fought for the British. Individuals however by the scores came to fight for the colonies, not as soldiers but as advisors.

Errr, wrong. On 19 June 1812 the US declared war against Britan, the first time the new nation had ever done so formally. The closest the UK ever did during this conflict was sending a "notification of war" to Nova Scotia and the rest of the Canadian Provinces.

But England did not declare war against the US. Sorry bub,

We were not in a war yet, so how much aid did we need? It is not like we were undergoing a Blitz like England was, or an invasion like the Soviets were. So sorry, I fail to see your point here.

Oh yes, and we have seen how effective that "voting down any violent act of War" has been, have we not? From Korea to Lebanon and Somalia and Iraq. Those votes in the UN really have put an end to war, have they not?

"You had better leave them alone - or we will launch a Sanction at you!"

Oh wow, just wow.

No, the French fought the Viet Minh, not the Viet Cong!

Talk about a complete and total lack of any kind of understanding of that conflict!

And no, the US went in as part of the agreement made between the Viet Minh and France as part of the Geneva Conference which ended the Indochina War. The region was partitioned, with the Soviet Union assisting North Vietnam, and the US assisting South Vietnam.

Are you even aware of the Indochina War?

Now that makes little sense, but let me fix one major problem here.

Kuwait is not a Dictatorship. It is a Constitutional Monarchy, set up along the lines of the England (which is only logical - the nation was founded by the British). It has a Constitution, a Parlaiment, and a Prime Minister.

If to you Kuwait is a "Dictatorship", then I guess you would have to consider England to be one as well, right?

And I have never heard of Kuwait refered to in terms anything like what Hitler was described as. I actually found the people there to be very nice. No idea where your bad information is coming from, but it really is wrong.

And more of the distortions and simply wrong information.

Sorry, but forgive me if I say you apparently have no idea what in the hell you are talking about. I went through and fixed so many bad statements that I really am depressed as to the state of education in this country today.

To make so many basic and simple mistakes as you have done, all in a row, simply confirms why most of what you say should be discarded from any future consideration.

.
1. So Germany was unaware of it's own people becoming mercenaries ? that's a bit thin. especially when after the war was over they got to go back to Germany..

2. Canada is pretty close to America is it not, then there is the fact that right after America declared war on Japan, Germany declared war on America plus at that time England was an Empire..

3. my point is simple America was not prepared for world War the attack on Pearl Harbor wiped out most of the Battleships we gave aid before we were in a war nobody helped us after we got in it.

4. Well we didn't leave Korea alone , we didn't leave Vietnam alone, we didn't leave Iraq alone. So how are these working out today?
Korea experiments with nuclear weapons , Vietnam just wants more foreign aid, and Iraq WELL?

5 I am aware that me and a lot of other draftees were told we were there to stop the communist threat, now on paper this reason or that reason for going to war may look logical , but IN COMBAT IT IS A DIFFERENT STORY. It is illogical and stupid

Your mistake not mine for anybody that would actually want to go to another country to fight for a cause that is not theirs is illogical and mentally unstable..
If you want to fix the world why didn't you lead the forces in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq , I haven't seen too many yuppies or politicians sons in the company I was in., not too many yale grads or rich men's son's.

Oh and FYI no Kuwait is not a dictatorship. Before desert Storm Iraq was,some guy name of Saddam Hussien" maybe you've heard of him" the odd thing is after America had won AND kUWAIT WAS FREE guess who was still a dictator in Iraq , that's right Saddam Hussien the same one??eace

presluc · Jun 22, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

Oozlefinch said:
Dude, I would much rather be fighting them over there, instead of trying to respond when they send over another group of "not so smart bombs" to conduct their attacks here in the US.And as an FYI, I am in the military. Sitting here in my ACUs during a break. So don't even try to lay that kind of "guilt trip" against me. I have raised my hand now 5 times in order to "take the King's shilling" (I am obviously not a Brit, but I always loved that phrase).

I keep hearing that a lot "FIGHT THEM OVER THERE SO WE WON'T HAVE TO FIGHT THEM OVER HERE"

Has anybody noticed Iraq is a land locked country, or has anybody noticed the size of Afghanistan's navy or air force?

Another question can not America protect itself from foreign invaders?

IS AMERICA TO CONSTANTLY LIVE IN FEAR?

FEAR IS THE ENEMY OF COURAGE AND COMMON SENSE.eace

ARCHITEKT · Jun 22, 2013

Heres a good take on the subject.. i recommend everybody watch this.. whats the nature of war? - YouTube

Oozlefinch · Jun 23, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

Wow, I can't believe things have gotten any worse, but they have.

presluc said:
1. So Germany was unaware of it's own people becoming mercenaries ? that's a bit thin. especially when after the war was over they got to go back to Germany..

Are you aware that the King of England was Commonly called "German George", and not only was his mother German, but he was King of one of the German states?

BTW, I was trying not to get into to much mineutia, but there was really no "Germany" at that time, it was a loose confederation of quasi-independent states. The "Hessians" came from the state known as Hesse. Quite a few from another region known as "Prussia" came to the Colonies as advisors. And yes, their people knew they were going to the US, much like Switzerland of the time, Germany was a major source of Mercenaries around Europe. Maybe if you knew a bit more about history, you might actually know that.

presluc said:
2. Canada is pretty close to America is it not, then there is the fact that right after America declared war on Japan, Germany declared war on America plus at that time England was an Empire..

OK, now what this has to do with the discussion at all, I have not a ****ing clue I must admit. Put the pipe down and stick to a single issue instead of bouncing all over the place, will you?

presluc said:
3. my point is simple America was not prepared for world War the attack on Pearl Harbor wiped out most of the Battleships we gave aid before we were in a war nobody helped us after we got in it.

Actually, we had already been involved in a major mobilization for over 2 years prior to Pearl Harbor. And we were already pulling forces from less important postings (Shanghai), and moving them to more important locations (Philippines). That for example is why the 4th Marine Regiment was not captured in China, but in the Philippines.

And what aid should they have given us that you think we deserved? We got a lot of aid, not only logistical and other supplies (Australia provided a lot of food and ammunition to our forces fighting in the Pacific), but also bases and other assistance in both theatres during the war.

Please do not tell me you are one of those that honestly believes the US won WWII by itself, are you?

presluc said:
4. Well we didn't leave Korea alone , we didn't leave Vietnam alone, we didn't leave Iraq alone. So how are these working out today?
Korea experiments with nuclear weapons , Vietnam just wants more foreign aid, and Iraq WELL?

Well, considering North Korea without provocation invaded South Korea, I am rather glad we did not "leave them alone". And that is North Korea with nukes, not our ally, South Korea. And that alone gives backing to my statement on how worthless the UN is. How much good has the UN been against North Korea?

As for Iraq, I really have no idea what you are trying to say. We never took down Saddam Hussein after the Gulf War, so your rant there made absolutely no sense. And we did not take him out then because it was not in the UN sanction.

presluc said:
5 I am aware that me and a lot of other draftees were told we were there to stop the communist threat, now on paper this reason or that reason for going to war may look logical , but IN COMBAT IT IS A DIFFERENT STORY. It is illogical and stupid

And as a 10 year Infantryman, my heart just bleeds for you. Not.

presluc said:
Your mistake not mine for anybody that would actually want to go to another country to fight for a cause that is not theirs is illogical and mentally unstable..
If you want to fix the world why didn't you lead the forces in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq , I haven't seen too many yuppies or politicians sons in the company I was in., not too many yale grads or rich men's son's.

OK, thank you for the nice Marxist rant, filed where appropriate.

Excuse me, as I go and listen to some Lynyrd Skynyrd.

presluc said:
Oh and FYI no Kuwait is not a dictatorship. Before desert Storm Iraq was,some guy name of Saddam Hussien" maybe you've heard of him" the odd thing is after America had won AND kUWAIT WAS FREE guess who was still a dictator in Iraq , that's right Saddam Hussien the same one??eace

Already addressed. If the 1990 UN Resolution had authorized a punitive invasion, Saddam would not have lasted 6 months. But it only authorized the liberation of Kuwait, so that is where we stopped.

And please, make up your frigging mind. One moment you are saying we should not be involved in any nation anywhere, then you turn right around and complain because another nation was not taken down earlier. I can see consistancy is not your strong point, is it?

Sorry, but your credability is pretty much gone when you condemn one thing, then turn right around and condemn the opposite a few lines later.

Oozlefinch · Jun 23, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

presluc said:
I keep hearing that a lot "FIGHT THEM OVER THERE SO WE WON'T HAVE TO FIGHT THEM OVER HERE"

Has anybody noticed Iraq is a land locked country, or has anybody noticed the size of Afghanistan's navy or air force?

Wow, Iraq is landlocked? Really?

Basra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Umm Qasr - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Actually, the state of Basra is full of a great many port cities.

So please tell me again how Iraq is land locked, will you?

In fact, they even have a Navy.

Iraqi Navy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kinda hard to have a Navy if you got no ports, right?

The Afghan Air Force is composed of around 120 aircraft today, and still growing. They actually had over 400 aircraft at the time of the Soviet Invasion. But yes, Afghanistan is indeed land-locked, so has no Navy.

No idea where you are going with this though. But try some better research next time, eh?

presluc · Jun 24, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

Oozlefinch said:
Wow, I can't believe things have gotten any worse, but they have.

Are you aware that the King of England was Commonly called "German George", and not only was his mother German, but he was King of one of the German states?

BTW, I was trying not to get into to much mineutia, but there was really no "Germany" at that time, it was a loose confederation of quasi-independent states. The "Hessians" came from the state known as Hesse. Quite a few from another region known as "Prussia" came to the Colonies as advisors. And yes, their people knew they were going to the US, much like Switzerland of the time, Germany was a major source of Mercenaries around Europe. Maybe if you knew a bit more about history, you might actually know that.

OK, now what this has to do with the discussion at all, I have not a ****ing clue I must admit. Put the pipe down and stick to a single issue instead of bouncing all over the place, will you?

Actually, we had already been involved in a major mobilization for over 2 years prior to Pearl Harbor. And we were already pulling forces from less important postings (Shanghai), and moving them to more important locations (Philippines). That for example is why the 4th Marine Regiment was not captured in China, but in the Philippines.

And what aid should they have given us that you think we deserved? We got a lot of aid, not only logistical and other supplies (Australia provided a lot of food and ammunition to our forces fighting in the Pacific), but also bases and other assistance in both theatres during the war.

Please do not tell me you are one of those that honestly believes the US won WWII by itself, are you?

Well, considering North Korea without provocation invaded South Korea, I am rather glad we did not "leave them alone". And that is North Korea with nukes, not our ally, South Korea. And that alone gives backing to my statement on how worthless the UN is. How much good has the UN been against North Korea?

As for Iraq, I really have no idea what you are trying to say. We never took down Saddam Hussein after the Gulf War, so your rant there made absolutely no sense. And we did not take him out then because it was not in the UN sanction.

And as a 10 year Infantryman, my heart just bleeds for you. Not.

OK, thank you for the nice Marxist rant, filed where appropriate.

Excuse me, as I go and listen to some Lynyrd Skynyrd.

Already addressed. If the 1990 UN Resolution had authorized a punitive invasion, Saddam would not have lasted 6 months. But it only authorized the liberation of Kuwait, so that is where we stopped.

And please, make up your frigging mind. One moment you are saying we should not be involved in any nation anywhere, then you turn right around and complain because another nation was not taken down earlier. I can see consistancy is not your strong point, is it?

Sorry, but your credability is pretty much gone when you condemn one thing, then turn right around and condemn the opposite a few lines later.

Sorry but it is your credibility I question.

No matter how many excuses you make for going to war there is only one that is a good one DEFENSE, all others are just what they are excuses..

History does not lie each time Americans were called to defend America ; America won, each time we went for a different cause what happened?.

Which leaves America the once superpower paying foreign aid to nations so they won't get angry at us. protection money you might as well call it.

After that just to keep other nations happy America gives their people jobs,free trade, amnsety

America super power is now dependent on other nations for the following
Energy
Labor
Products
Rides to an American space station.

WHO BENEFITS FROM ALL THIS?
The unskilled workers NO
The middle class NO
The working poor NO
The unemployed NO
The economic system of America NO
More tax revenue NO
America's debt paid off NO
The government NO

SO WHO BENEFITS? WHO GET'S RICHER?

This Nation building isn't a peace deal , it's A BUSINESS DEAL.eace

presluc · Jun 24, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

Oozlefinch said:
Wow, Iraq is landlocked? Really?

Basra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Umm Qasr - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Actually, the state of Basra is full of a great many port cities.

So please tell me again how Iraq is land locked, will you?

In fact, they even have a Navy.

Iraqi Navy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kinda hard to have a Navy if you got no ports, right?

The Afghan Air Force is composed of around 120 aircraft today, and still growing. They actually had over 400 aircraft at the time of the Soviet Invasion. But yes, Afghanistan is indeed land-locked, so has no Navy.

No idea where you are going with this though. But try some better research next time, eh?[/QUOT

BIG DEAL HOW BIG IS THEIR NAVY, HOW MANY PLANES THEY GOT TO GET HERE FROM IRAQ?

Still that does not change the fact that has much money has spent on the defense of America we better be defended.

Also the last attack on America was 9/11 flown by planes made in America and piloted by people Americans taught how to fly..
Now I could bring up some old pictures of certain politicians shaking hands and being buddy buddy with later became enemies but that's been done.
There was America's demand for free elections in Palestine, so who do they vote into government HAMAS A KNOWN TERRORIST ORGANIZATION WHO HAS NO LOVE FOR aMEWRICA OR IT'S PEOPLE.

So if you want to help the nations of the world send them your money, I prefer to spend mine on Americaeace

Oozlefinch · Jun 25, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

presluc said:
Sorry but it is your credibility I question.

I systematically destroy every claim you make, yet you question my credability? YOu do not even know the basics of history, and you question my credability?

presluc · Jun 25, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

Oozlefinch said:
I systematically destroy every claim you make, yet you question my credability? YOu do not even know the basics of history, and you question my credability?

I not only question your credibility but also your meathods.

It is easy for some politician or party line walker to stay in America and send others to be the world police to go into other countries to clean up the mess through war.

However if they say this is what should be done and that all nations need America's help let them lead put them on the front lines, let them go take the point.

I keep hearing "we should clean up the world " or "we should spread democracy" but in combat it's not "WE" anymore because all those that said "WE is not there they are here safe and sound.

How much money has this "WE" sent to other nations, how much money was spent on vets coming home to have a job?

It just seems like this "WE" you keep talking about gets smaller and smaller.What are you a war profiteer or something??

As far as being a pacifist I don't start no trouble don't look for trouble , but I lay down for nobody NOBODY .

Is it not enough we have enemies that should be watched, we have to be the world's policeman to make more.

Has far as history I stand by what I said "WITH AS MUCH TAXPAYER MONEY GOING INTO THE DEFENSE OF AMERICA IF AMERICA CAN'T BE PROTECTED Y FOREIGN INVASION THE LEADERS AT THE PENTAGON SHOULD BE SHOT THEN HANGED."

I need no clever pictures to pick a part a guy that prefers WAR TO PEACE.eace

Oozlefinch · Jun 26, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

presluc said:
As far as being a pacifist I don't start no trouble don't look for trouble , but I lay down for nobody NOBODY .

Is it not enough we have enemies that should be watched, we have to be the world's policeman to make more.

I need no clever pictures to pick a part a guy that prefers WAR TO PEACE.eace

Which I find particularly funny, because you so obviously do not know a thing about me.

I am a pacifist, always have been. I strongly oppose war, and feel that if it must be conducted, it should be as short and violent as possible, in order to prevent anybody else from trying that way to resolve a problem in the future.

You are one of those that feels different it seems, that there should be no fighting. Well, be happy in your fantasy world, but also you have to accept anything thrown at you. As for "World's Policeman", that is the phrase of the self-obsessed, who cares for nothing but their own wants and needs. People are being slaughtered in another county? Not my problem. People are suffering because of a natural disaster, not my problem.

Yet when something happens here, the entire world had better respond, right? You already made that obvious, which I find rather disgusting.

presluc · Jun 27, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

Oozlefinch said:
Which I find particularly funny, because you so obviously do not know a thing about me.

I am a pacifist, always have been. I strongly oppose war, and feel that if it must be conducted, it should be as short and violent as possible, in order to prevent anybody else from trying that way to resolve a problem in the future.

You are one of those that feels different it seems, that there should be no fighting. Well, be happy in your fantasy world, but also you have to accept anything thrown at you. As for "World's Policeman", that is the phrase of the self-obsessed, who cares for nothing but their own wants and needs. People are being slaughtered in another county? Not my problem. People are suffering because of a natural disaster, not my problem.

Yet when something happens here, the entire world had better respond, right? You already made that obvious, which I find rather disgusting.

Wrong, I feel the best offence is a good strong defense.
Every time America has been attacked we retailated, we won Independence day, VE DAY, VJ DAY. and many others.
Each time we interfere we are left with ****, Korea= draw, Vietnam = loss, Bonia=? , Desert Storm = TO OVERTHROW A DICTATOR THEN GIVE HIS NATION BACK TO HIM , Iraq 2 = bad intelligence, so what now?????

So you think America should be the worlds policemen while you stay a pacifist ha, AND THEY MAKE FUN OF ME CAUSE i WAS A HIPPIE??
At least when I got my draft notice I served..
I wander if you would be so anxious to be the worlds policemen ;if you were sent to some **** hole with bullets flying around your head.eace

Oozlefinch · Jun 27, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

presluc said:
Wrong, I feel the best offence is a good strong defense.
Every time America has been attacked we retailated, we won Independence day, VE DAY, VJ DAY. and many others.

I wander if you would be so anxious to be the worlds policemen ;if you were sent to some **** hole with bullets flying around your head.

So I take it that you think peace is priceless, and we should do absolutely anything to ensure it.

Including kissing the ass of butchers, and letting them kill anybody they like, as long as it is not us.

And I am not sure why you keep throwing that "would you" crap at me over and over again. Let me say this one more time...

I am in the military now, have done my downrange deployment (and am currently trying to go on another one to Afghanistan), and have worn the uniform of my nation for over 15 years. The first 10 years of that as a Marine Corps Infantry Rifleman. So kindly knock that silly crap off, if I was not willing to take that risk, I would not be doing what I am doing now.

At an age when most people are starting to plan their retirement. Most of my family still thinks I am absolutely insane for quitting my civilian job in 2007 and going back into the military. And while you try to imply that I am some kind of "chickenhawk" or some other such thing, I have raised my hand and retaken my oath of enlistment 3 times since 2007 (returned to active duty in 2007, re-enlisted in 2010, and again in 2012) And I intend on staying in if at all possible until I hit the mandatory retirement age of 62.

So knock off the damned veiled insults and inuendo already, will ya? All they are doing is showing that you apparently have zero retention, since I have clearly said I am still in the military several times.

presluc · Jun 29, 2013

Re: Everybody wants peace

Oozlefinch said:
So I take it that you think peace is priceless, and we should do absolutely anything to ensure it.

Including kissing the ass of butchers, and letting them kill anybody they like, as long as it is not us.

And I am not sure why you keep throwing that "would you" crap at me over and over again. Let me say this one more time...

I am in the military now, have done my downrange deployment (and am currently trying to go on another one to Afghanistan), and have worn the uniform of my nation for over 15 years. The first 10 years of that as a Marine Corps Infantry Rifleman. So kindly knock that silly crap off, if I was not willing to take that risk, I would not be doing what I am doing now.

At an age when most people are starting to plan their retirement. Most of my family still thinks I am absolutely insane for quitting my civilian job in 2007 and going back into the military. And while you try to imply that I am some kind of "chickenhawk" or some other such thing, I have raised my hand and retaken my oath of enlistment 3 times since 2007 (returned to active duty in 2007, re-enlisted in 2010, and again in 2012) And I intend on staying in if at all possible until I hit the mandatory retirement age of 62.

So knock off the damned veiled insults and inuendo already, will ya? All they are doing is showing that you apparently have zero retention, since I have clearly said I am still in the military several times.

Wrong again America should have to bow before no nation or kiss anybody's ass, but what is foreign aid but here's some free stuff from America now well you be America's friend , sounds like kissing ass to me .

Very well I have now and willl always support America's military.
However if you know the Marines this phrase should be familiar "YOU WANT PEACE PREPARE FOR WAR", keyword "PREPARE " not go looking for war but PREPARE FOR WAR.

"I AM A PACIFIST" these are your words are they not?
A pacifist does not usually fight in combat zones.

There are many ways to serve in the military, I was a grunt, bottom of the food chain except for tunnel rats.

I too have family in the military 1 on a ship in the middle east the other in Afghanistan
And one getting ready to go to Iraq. 2 infantry 1 on a flatop.

Afghanistan until the situation is resolved I understand after all the terrorist that hit on 9/11 came from there, but to search the world to see if there might be a problem in any nation to send in troops that I do not comprehend it is not logical to look for war to have an excuse to send young Americans to die.eace

Everybody wants peace but at what price and can we trust the offering of peace

New member

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency