I never lie. I didn't say you made them hate us, I said you angered them and that's a simple fact. Aside from a tiny minority, Muslims were angered by our invasion and the accompanying slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocent bystanders. Pretend it's not true if that makes you feel better. As for whether it was 100,000 or hundreds of thousands, it's all in who you believe. Pick whatever number seems like a good acceptable christian number to you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War#Iraqi_civilian_casualties It's an all-volunteer military. The choice they made is the same one I made when I decided to start a new career as a Realtor. I chose less compensation/benefits for a career where I retain 100% personal responsibility for my actions. They opted for more compensation/benefits in exchange for letting others use them as killing machines. It has nothing to do with who voted for who or what wars the US wage. They could have been Realtors or dentists or rabbis or Peace Corps teachers or EMTs or sold tiny classified ads in newspapers. They chose to sell their soul to those who wage war. Don't expect me to feel sorry for them if they are asked to fulfill their contract. The "choice" I had when I was young was register for the draft or do real hard time in prison. If drafted, the choice became kill for Standard Oil/die trying, willingly go to prison giving up my 2nd Amendment rights, right to vote..., lie and get a religious deferment, or move to another country to live as a fugitive. As for my vulnerablility? I had little to worry about a decade ago. I live in a country so vast with the best armed civilian population on Earth. No country has a prayer of ever occupying it with or without our military. But suddenly in the stroke of a pen the other day all my rights have been signed away. The one and only true threat to my country's existence, a military coup, has begun. So that's my vulnerablility. My government has been overthrown but most of the dumbed-down-by-the-media populace won't realize it until they've been interned in a camp or simply interred.
There's bias right there. "Military Involvement", including "killing of people" if it's required, are not crimes b/c they're done at the behest of you, by your representatives. Don't lump me in with the consequences of your decision-making or its non-reflection of the rest of society. The fact that you remain unconvinced/ignorant about why the citizens of the US and your representatives send people overseas has little bearing on how I do my job. But something that neither 13y/o gangbangers or, as it seems, realtors in Central Oregon can do is be sent by their government overseas to do the bidding of the elected representatives of said gangbangers and realtors. There's a reason that a) they're called "orders", and b) I can't just pick up an M16 and go shoot strangers. I'm sorry that you feel threatened by one of the few civic duties you have, but the fact remains that no one in the military can do a single thing (including get paid, much less killing strangers) without you and your representatives approving it. It's not difficult at all. The vast majority of the populace does so. What carries more honor than that is to sacrifice a bit of selfishness and narcissism to serve and attempt to earn some of those privileges that others waste. I apologize if you've answered this before, but what's your take on our intervention in Europe in December 1941?
So, when on Al-Jazeera I watched people all summer begging for US intervention in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Iran (after the "elections" in 2009), etc...do those people just not count? Or is it that they're probably going to die, b/c they don't have anyone to protect those rights that you say all men have but bad people try to take away? I understand if you say that we shouldn't protect those people b/c they weren't born inside some lines on a map we call the US, but to say that we anger 1.2B people just by having a uniform and a gun and a different name for God on the ground outside our borders is inaccurate.
Lots of people are on Al-Jazeera, they're not all muslims. And it wasn't just muslims overthrowing governments right and left with our illegal military support and years of CIA covert planning and encouragement. And if they are a majority they won't need any more help and if they're not a majority they shouldn't succeed anyway. That's democracy in action. Bottom line is it's not why we have a military and it amply demonstrates the god complex most military and law enforcement people always seem to acquire. I think you've forgotten who you work for, who pays for your wife's wardrobe and your kid's video games, who you swore to protect and serve or whatever. Here's a hint: You're on the wrong side of the Earth. When are you going to step up and save us from the coup at home?
I could list the endless string of illegal and secret wars waged without the approval or even knowledge of Congress just in my lifetime, but it's irrelevant to my position. I have openly and actively opposed US military aggression outside our borders since I was 6. I have marched, I have written letters, I have cast votes for whomever I perceived to be the lesser evil of each election's twin puppets. And it has mattered not who was President or who ruled Congress or how many times I wrote my representatives. They have all waged war. It's all a dog and pony show. They don't serve the voters, or even give a rat's ass about them. They serve the MIC, just as you do. I have clearly established beyond any doubt in my mind that our system is a fraud, a puppet regime of the military industrial complex, and is in the late stages of completely erasing The Constitution and The Bill of Rights. So again, quit saying I told you to kill people. I can't be any clearer. STOP WAGING WARS IN MY NAME. IT'S PISSING ME OFF, IT'S DECEITFUL, IT'S COWARDLY, AND YOU'RE REAL LUCKY THERE'S NOT REALLY A GOD TO JUDGE YOU FOR IT. BTW, if it will help any you have my permission to pass on to any of your bosses or Congress that I said so. As for WWll, my father lied about his age to serve and wound up as Sergeant of General Eisenhower's Honor Guard accompanying him liberating the concentration camps. They shared a love of fishing the NW and had similar reservations way back then about industry's huge influence on how and where and when wars were waged. I myself remember vividly Ike's speech in '61 and became politically active that year. It's the first non-entertainment TV viewing I remember as a child. So maybe that's a clue for you where my views on this matter developed from. Comparing our rescue of the "free world" back then to the despicable contract hits we now perform for the MIC is blasphemous, IMO.
For all that rhetoric, you still can't answer the question of who gives me orders. I can't shoot anyone without permission. Hell, I can't fly to Kabul without permission. And if you are a US citizen, wars are being waged because your country and representatives vote for it. If you get so pissed off by it, do something other than attack people who have a conscience and want to protect others' freedoms, rights and lives. And who are you to say that some Kurd slaughtered by Saddam isn't as worthwhile to fight for than a Jew in 1941? Who are you to say that a militaristic puppet government who threatens regional peace and trade is not worth stopping in 2012, but it was in 1941? Who are you to say that we should just sit back and a) not honor our alliances and treaties, b) hoard our wealth (which you seem to think goes straight to some vague concept of 1%ers and corporations) and c) not help those who can't help themselves, like tsunami and flood and earthquake victims and people who just need some medicine? I mean, sure it's a valid opinion, but there's an entire country that says differently. Honestly, I don't know where your utopia of isolationism, the rights offered to you by your country, and your ability to survive on your own can be found on earth. If you don't want "interventionism", don't go here: NATO: A contingent of around 150 advisers under the separate command NATO Training Mission - Iraq-(withdrawn 12/11) United States: 150,000 invasion 165,000 peak-(withdrawn 12/11) United Kingdom: 46,000 invasion (withdrawn 5/11) Australia: 2,000 invasion (withdrawn 7/09) Romania: 730 peak (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 7/09) El Salvador: 380 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 1/09) Estonia: 40 troops (deployed 6/05-withdrawn 1/09) Bulgaria: 485 peak (deployed 5/03-withdrawn 12/08) Moldova: 24 peak (deployed 9/03-withdrawn 12/08) Albania: 240 troops (deployed 4/03-withdrawn 12/08) Ukraine: 1,650 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 12/08) Denmark: 545 peak (deployed 4/03-withdrawn 12/08) Czech Republic: 300 peak (deployed 12/03-withdrawn 12/08) South Korea: 3,600 peak (deployed 5/03-withdrawn 12/08) Japan: 600 troops (deployed 1/04-withdrawn 12/08) Tonga: 55 troops (deployed 7/04-withdrawn 12/08) Azerbaijan: 250 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 12/08) Singapore: 175 offshore (deployed 12/03-withdrawn 12/08) Bosnia and Herzegovina: 85 peak (deployed 6/05-withdrawn 11/08) Macedonia: 77 peak (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 11/08) Latvia: 136 peak (deployed 5/03-withdrawn 11/08) Poland: 200 invasion—2,500 peak (withdrawn 10/08) Kazakhstan: 29 troops (deployed 9/03-withdrawn 10/08) Armenia: 46 troops (deployed 1/05-withdrawn 10/08) Mongolia: 180 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 09/08) Georgia: 2,000 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 8/08) Slovakia: 110 peak (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 12/07) Lithuania: 120 peak (deployed 6/03-withdrawn 08/07) Italy: 3,200 peak (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 11/06) Norway: 150 troops (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 8/06) Hungary: 300 troops (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 3/05) Netherlands: 1,345 troops (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 3/05) Portugal: 128 troops (deployed 11/03-withdrawn 2/05) New Zealand: 61 troops (deployed 9/03-withdrawn 9/04) Thailand: 423 troops (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 8/04) Philippines: 51 troops (deployed 7/03-withdrawn 7/04) Honduras: 368 troops (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 5/04) Dominican Republic: 302 troops (deployed 8/03-withdrawn 5/04) Spain: 1,300 troops (deployed 4/03-withdrawn 4/04) Nicaragua: 230 troops (deployed 9/03-withdrawn 2/04) Iceland: 2 troops or in OEF 1 Afghanistan 2 Armenia 3 Azerbaijan 4 Bahrain 5 Bangladesh 6 Bulgaria 7 Belgium 8 Canada 9 China 10 Congo 11 Cyprus 12 Czech Republic 13 Denmark 14 Egypt 15 Estonia 16 France 17 Georgia 18 Germany 19 Greece 20 Hungary 21 India 22 Ireland 23 Italy 24 Japan 25 Kuwait 26 Kyrgyzstan 27 Latvia 28 Lithuania 29 Macedonia 30 Malaysia 31 Montenegro 32 New Zealand 33 Norway 34 Netherlands 35 Oman 36 Pakistan 37 Poland 38 Portugal 39 Qatar 40 Romania 41 Russia 42 Slovakia 43 Slovenia 44 South Korea 45 Spain 46 Sudan 47 Sweden 48 Switzerland 49 Tajikistan 50 Thailand 51 Turkey 52 Turkmenistan 53 United Arab Emirates 54 Ukraine 55 United Kingdom 56 United States 57 Uzbekistan and if you toss in "peacekeeping"... Is that Nepalese Military-Industrial Complex running the show against the 99%ers? How about those darn Icelandese...thinking they can just put troops in Iraq willy-nilly? Tonga and Bangladesh are bad, baaaad countries, huh? Or the other explanation, which you don't seem to buy into...that people all over the world recognize that there are people who need to be protected from other bad people. In the US we do a decent job of that, and allow you to supplement that with your own protection (though even that seems to be eroding). That's why you don't seem to care about anyone outside your home, which is fine. But other people have a global conscience, and have no problem killing bad guys if they're trying to kill or oppress others. I signed up to protect people, and if I'm ordered to protect people in Congo or Tonga or Iraq, then that's what the orders say. You didn't sign up for anything other than personal responsibility, and good for you. I hope you never have to rely on the protection of others. But to spout that no one else should have to worry about it is folly.
No. SCUDs, AK47s, MIGs, etc., are not US weapons. They're Russian or Chinese. In fact, when we first went into Iraq in 2003, there were reports they fired (Chinese) Silkworm missiles at us.
Mostly yes, it's accurate. Note that they used GAS on the Kurds and we supplied them with biological agents. The gas was analyzed by a group like Doctors Without Borders from soil samples and they found it was manufactured using techniques used by the Germans and Russians. We really helped Iraq win the Iraq-Iran war, but it was with satellite intel, not with weapons support. We basically told them where all the Iranian tanks were...
not that i believe this but... we chose to militarily back the same side as russia? during the cold war?
Neither Iraq nor Iran were our allies. It was better for us back then to basically watch them fight each other. As your own posted material points out, we did Iran-Contra and provided intel to Iraq.
One of my counterparts just sold windows to the author of this book. Ever heard of him? http://www.mediasanctuary.org/node/3146
It is called non-interventionism, not "isolationism". This is the difference between Switzerland and North Korea, so please educate yourselves and use the right word. Also the US constitution is based on preventing something known as "Tyranny of the Majority". So it doesn't matter if 90% of the country wants to break the constitution and go to war illegally.
Help educate me, HK. What is one hypothetical, practical example of being non-interventionist, but also non-isolationist? My guess is that any military action you propose I can claim intervenes somewhere. But maybe your particular brand of education has another connotation to it? For the record, Switzerland is neutral, not non-interventionist. They've sent armed troops to Kosovo, and conduct military exercises to other countries. Try again, please.
Switzerland is indeed neutral, and also known as non-interventionist. You have some reading comprehension problems. Take for example 19th Century China vs Switzerland, what do you think the difference is? One nation is "isolationist", and the other is a sophisticated non-interventionist state. Relax dude you're not that slick. Gary Johnson is a Libertarian with a slightly interventionist foreign policy, I still refer to him as Libertarian and non-interventionist. Stop bitching about Switzerland you know what their overall foreign policy is, not all countries or candidates are perfect.
Non-intervention means you don't go to war with a country over its own internal affairs. The purpose of the military is to protect us when some foreign country invades our land. Or protect our merchant vessels from pirates. You can refuse to intervene but still carry on trade, welcome foreigners who travel here, etc. to refuse to do even trade is isolationist. Buy America only! You can intervene via trade policies as well. We'll embargo country X's goods until they satisfy our human rights demands. Non-intervention means non-intervention.
Edit: Oh please that was just a typo. That specific quote isn't in the constitution but similar phrases are used instead, Mr. Lawyer. Nice try, bruh.
