American hate...

Jokerman

Well-Known Member
#21
The.Menace said:
I can respect that. I ain't for the war but if someone else is, ok, we can discuss. But I don't like the peeps that are against the war but feel like we have to support the troops now. When Kerry said he's against the war then anyone hated on him.....he ain't supportin the troops, he wants to see Americans die. That's bullshit. Choose one side, you're pro war or against it, that's the cause, the idea and the troops are the way to convert this idea. So eigther you are for the idea or not, but you can't be against the war and yet support the ones that fight for an idea that you dislike. That's bullshit and I hate it when people come up with it.
Yeah, i know what your saying. But what they mean when they say they support the troops is that they don't want them dying just because their country put them in that wrong situation. They might not support the troop's military aims, but they want them all to come back alive.
 
#22
I agree with CalcuoCuchicheo, to believe people have negative feelings for America simply on the Iraq issue is to ignore all, and i do mean all your modern forgine policy history, from pretty much 1939 onwards (Other than those couple of years you joined the war).

And Iraq is an unfair example anyway, we cant blame Americans for voting Bush in simply on the issue of Iraq, Blair will probebly be re-elected even though most here venemously dissagreed with the war, it was not a one issue election. You actually voted the shit head in on all his other policies as well, which actually makes it worse again in my eyes.

But the point is we dont hate american people, only your government, we dont ask you to defend her!
peace
MX!
 

The.Menace

Well-Known Member
Staff member
#23
Anyone wants their people to come back alive. I don't want noone to die, no soldier, no Iraqi. I think that "support the troops" bullshit goes way beyond "they want there soldiers to come back alive". Like I mentioned Kerry. Whenever you say you're against the war, the through this "you don't support the troops" argument in there and the discussion is over. He won, you're bad, you don't support the troops. I hate that. That's what they did to Kerry, it's just a bullshit argument cause it ain't one. Just because I'm against the war doesn't mean I want the boys to die.
 
#24
Jokerman said:
I just support the cause, not the troops.
I'm the same, I dont support the war but i do support our troops.

Also i dont think we should pull out, we created all this mess it is our duty to put it right the best we can!
peace
MX!
 
#26
Zero Cool said:
Tell that to the terrorists.
Zero, who are you talking about?

I realize the difference between terrorists & freedom fighters is almost always a matter of perception but you could be over-stepping the mark here but I will wait for your reply before I jump to conclusions.


Btw, am I the only one here who thought Jokerman was joking?
 
#27
CalcuoCuchicheo said:
Zero, who are you talking about?

I realize the difference between terrorists & freedom fighters is almost always a matter of perception but you could be over-stepping the mark here but I will wait for your reply before I jump to conclusions.
I'm talking about the scum who are setting off car-bombs outside mosques and abducting innocent people to hold them to ransom for their own gain. These people don't want a "free Iraq" or anything of the kind.
 

Jokerman

Well-Known Member
#28
CalcuoCuchicheo said:
Btw, am I the only one here who thought Jokerman was joking?
Apparently. MX misread it and Menace thought i meant it. How can u support the cause and not the troops? :p

I'd like to win a music award or something on TV and then make this statement: "I support Bush and the war, but not the troops. I want them dead now. Die muthafuka die."

At least half the viewing audience would take me seriously and send death threats.
 

The.Menace

Well-Known Member
Staff member
#29
of course if you are pro war you gonna support the troops but I saw your post as a reply to this dude who doesn't support the war but the troops. For me it ain't about supportin the troops. anyone supports the troops, what is the point in discussin that? It's all about the cause and if you are pro war or against it.
 
#30
Zero Cool said:
I'm talking about the scum who are setting off car-bombs outside mosques and abducting innocent people to hold them to ransom for their own gain. These people don't want a "free Iraq" or anything of the kind.
Tell me, would these car-bombs be maiming foreign troops?

Would these abductions carry demands of foreign troops leaving Iraq?

And even if they were to carry a demand for money, who says that isn't to fund organisations which are attempting to oust the foreign troops?

While I don't really condone these acts - particularly the abduction of aid workers - I can sympathize. For instance, if it's a construction boss working in Iraq who is abducted then I feel little pity as that man is an agent of imperialism - whether he wanted to be there or not. And if the bombs are attacks on foreign troops - possibly illegally & definately immorally occupying their land - then I feel in most cases that these attacks would be acts of freedom fighters.
 
#31
CalcuoCuchicheo said:
Tell me, would these car-bombs be maiming foreign troops?

Would these abductions carry demands of foreign troops leaving Iraq?

And even if they were to carry a demand for money, who says that isn't to fund organisations which are attempting to oust the foreign troops?

While I don't really condone these acts - particularly the abduction of aid workers - I can sympathize. For instance, if it's a construction boss working in Iraq who is abducted then I feel little pity as that man is an agent of imperialism - whether he wanted to be there or not. And if the bombs are attacks on foreign troops - possibly illegally & definately immorally occupying their land - then I feel in most cases that these attacks would be acts of freedom fighters.
great fucking post :thumb:

i just gained awhole new respect for you
 
#33
CalcuoCuchicheo said:
Tell me, would these car-bombs be maiming foreign troops?

Would these abductions carry demands of foreign troops leaving Iraq?

And even if they were to carry a demand for money, who says that isn't to fund organisations which are attempting to oust the foreign troops?

While I don't really condone these acts - particularly the abduction of aid workers - I can sympathize. For instance, if it's a construction boss working in Iraq who is abducted then I feel little pity as that man is an agent of imperialism - whether he wanted to be there or not. And if the bombs are attacks on foreign troops - possibly illegally & definately immorally occupying their land - then I feel in most cases that these attacks would be acts of freedom fighters.
These car bombs on the whole have a minimal effect on foreign troops. If you place a car bomb outside a Shia mosque before Friday prayers however can you honestly tell me that that's a legitimate act of resistance? These terrorists have little regard for human freedom or the good of Iraq. They want a Talibanesque regime where they can extort, terrorize and rule for their own gain. It's no coincidence that axis states like Iran and Syria are helping to fund the "insurgency".

Secondly this "imperialist agent" bullshit needs to stop, now. We're not living in 1850. The U.S. is there to implant democracy in the region and create a suitable climate for prosperity which is good for both sides. The aim is not to make Iraq British India. To try and compare the U.S. invasion of Iraq to an imperial expansion policy (although often done) is wholly misguided.
 
#34
Lockheed Martin alone making 17 billion dollars off the war on iraq isnt for the democracy of iraq

giving re-building contracts to american companys instead of iraqi's isn't helping them, its just swarming in and destroying everything then rebuilding it for youre own profit

if they were really there for democracy they would leave, because thats what the people want

obviously there are some real wackos, but at the same time the majority of people are just defending their land
 
#35
Zero, I know there are those who would wish to do such deeds for their own selfish gain, which is why I started with 'Tell me...'. Obviously, I will not condone these acts & nor will I sympathize with them. BUT, when the aim is obviously to free their occupied land - via killing foreign troops - then my sympathy lies with the freedom fighters.

Imperiliasm can be economic - raping a country's economy for your own gain ie. stealing their natural resources.

It can also be political. So America are trying to integrate democracy? You know that only an American-backed regime can get into power at this time. Regardless of what's said, at this time America will not allow any regime to take power who doesn't subscribe to certain parts of the American agenda.
 

TecK NeeX

On Probation: Please report break in guidelines to
#36
I'm talking about the scum who are setting off car-bombs
These car-bombings you speak of were non existent prior to the invasion of iraq, so if there is anyone to blame for such attacks its your own blood thirsty troops or the people who ordered them to go in there.

These people don't want a "free Iraq" or anything of the kind.
You are right they dont want a free Iraq, they want an 'American free Iraq'

The U.S. is there to implant democracy in the region and create a suitable climate for prosperity which is good for both sides. The aim is not to make Iraq British India. To try and compare the U.S. invasion of Iraq to an imperial expansion policy (although often done) is wholly misguided.
No the U.S went in there to remove an enemy that posed a major threat to Israel, so are Syria and Iran which are constantly being threatened by the U.S on a daily bases.. since 1991 Iraq under Saddam Hussein did not pose a threat to the United States, but it did to Israel, which is why the u.s invaded the Arab country. The bush administration has made that publicly clear to everyone on many occasions.
 

Duke

Well-Known Member
Staff member
#37
Zero Cool said:
We're not living in 1850. The U.S. is there to implant democracy in the region and create a suitable climate for prosperity which is good for both sides.
But a bit better for the US than for anyone else.

It's still imperialism, homie, they're just more adept at hiding it.
 
#38
Jokerman said:
Apparently. MX misread it and Menace thought i meant it. How can u support the cause and not the troops? :p

I'd like to win a music award or something on TV and then make this statement: "I support Bush and the war, but not the troops. I want them dead now. Die muthafuka die."

At least half the viewing audience would take me seriously and send death threats.

i knew it was a joke too! i seen that on a bumper sticker, or tv or some shit. i laughed out loud when i read it, but then people were taking it serious and i thought that i misread it. than mx sed he agreed and i didnt kno wtf to think
 

ARon

Well-Known Member
#40
Please be quiet about us supporting our troops and not supporting the war. I dont agree with the reasons of the war, frankly i want all our troops out of their and so forth. But since i have friends and family in Iraq right now and i wish for their safe return and hope that none get injured that is wrong? You can't be serious.
 

Latest posts

Donate

Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.

Members online

No members online now.
Top