'A dead Iraqi is just another dead Iraqi... You know, so what?'

[Baculus]

Are soldiers all great people that are never going to do wrong? They are in some nationalism soaked outlook on war that had no interest in truth. In reality however they are human, braver then most and perhaps with a greater sense of patriotism and responsibility to country, but they are subject to the same flaws as the rest. Some will do horrible things in horrible situations, most will be some mix of good and bad, and some will be the heroes books are written about.

Exactly. Again, War is hell. A lot of soldiers go through some ugly stuff, and sometimes they have to tell someone. If it was up to some folks, they would never be able to do this, because it doesn't support the war effort.

"Keep quiet, soldier! Or you're a traitor!"

Yeah, you guys sure do support your troops through thick and thin, right? Except, you only support them when they say and do what you want them to do, not when they have stories and feelings that are contrary to what you believe, right?

There are two sides to this deal: There are a lot of places where things are improving and going well. This side needs to be told, and the folks on the Left who say "This is only propaganda!" are being dishonest, because the whole story has to be told. At the same time, when ugly stuff happens, I believe those stories need to be told, too, and it is equally dishonest for the Right to deny these events. For, unless we have a "gloves off" strategy, then we do have to make sure these events don't happen, or, they are minimized.

[The Sisko]

I doubt these types of things are the rule but they're probably happening more often than they should. Whenever something like this happens we're only screwing ourselves as it drives the populace even more toward supporting the insurgents.

However, at some point we've got to start asking ourselves how much of the insurgency we're causing just by being there. That is, after taking out Saddam we were viewed as liberators. The longer we stayed the more the average Iraqi probably became suspicious of our motives. Eventually, he takes up arms in an effort to expel what appears to him an illegal occupying force. When that happens, is this guy a "terrorist"? What about the fellow/groups merely trying to position themselves for the civil war that will almost inevitably ensue on the day we leave?

We quickly won the war and managed to royally screw the pooch on winning the peace that followed.

[jpillian]

On it's face what you say is BS. Why? Becuase in every large group of people many are going to be less then spectacular humans. This is the same damn story I hear from police officers always claiming they really are as great as their advocates claim them to be... well that's until you talk to someone NOT a cop or one of their fans. It's war and troops are humans, I'd say that it's damn near a sure thing that a ton of crazy **** goes down. Are most bad? Hell no. In fact I'd argue that many of those that do engage is some less the honorable behavior aren't "bad" but more likely caught up in the situation.

But to make it seem like any abuse is as rare as a 4 pound diamond, and even then not so bad... sorry but that's a load of crap I'm not buying.

Ah nothing like calling another person's first hand experience and perspective BS to keep things above board. Right back at ya, Destino-- I think your position is utter BS.

The stuff in these interviews, from my experience, is rare. This guy is trying to paint it as common place. The point of the article is that these interviews "paint a pattern" and are representative of the common soldier. If you want to buy it, that's fine. I'm just trying to enlighten you that you don't have to feel obligated to buy-in to our Occidental burden of constant self-loathing. You really can cheer for the good guys once in a while. Every so often, you can even question the journalists who spoon-feed you everything you know about the wider world!

[AsburySkinsFan]

... and by the way... I watched on TV as desperate people trapped in the twin towers jumped down... and I watched both of those towers collapse down on ~3,000 people... all in a span of 2 hours. We know who started this war... and most of us and our troops would rather not be over there.

OMGness you are serious aren't you!? Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11 this has been proved over and over and over and over and over again, when will you get it. We started the Iraq war, us. Garbage like this infuriates me.:mad:

[NickGiaquinto1]

We quickly won the war and managed to royally screw the pooch on winning the peace that followed.

that is the Truth!

We won too quickly there and before anyone knew it, it was a freaking disaster.

I am not a soldier but I know at least a dozen and more than half have served in Iraq within the last year or so. To a man, all of them support the goal of winning this thing.

The guy who built my home did two tours - he is an engineer and did time in the Baghdad region and some of the hot spots. A great guy.

I asked him, can it be won or at least brought to a point where Iraq can deal with it?

He said he truly thought it could be won if they were allowed to do their jobs without politics getting involved. He said every time a peace march happened or some politician made a big anti-war statement, while he was there, it is played up big by the insurgents and more bombings and killings went on.

Anyway - I read this thing and its not journalism. Anytime I see a .uk in the address, you know its bogus.

I say that because I could go write an article with the soldiers I know who did their time and support the war. I could easily ignore any info I didnt want to include that would make it a balanced piece of journalism.

[AsburySkinsFan]

but this shouldn't be written about until after the war is over..

Why? So these crimes can continue on without anyone knowing about it and so you can sleep in your bed thinking that this war is somehow just without ever having to think that maybe there is indeed a two year old child laying over their with one of OUR bullets in her. Hearing the truth 20 years from now only lets the atrocities continue today.

[sacase]

Ah nothing like calling another person's first hand experience and perspective BS to keep things above board. Right back at ya, Destino-- I think your position is utter BS.

The stuff in these interviews, from my experience, is rare. This guy is trying to paint it as common place. The point of the article is that these interviews "paint a pattern" and are representative of the common soldier. If you want to buy it, that's fine. I'm just trying to enlighten you that you don't have to feel obligated to buy-in to our Occidental burden of constant self-loathing. You really can cheer for the good guys once in a while. Every so often, you can even question the journalists who spoon-feed you everything you know about the wider world!

Jpillian is exactly right. This is not something that is common place. We have a lot of good officers and NCO's who wouldn't tolerate this kind of crap. They would have no problem nipping this kind of behavior in the bud as soon as they saw it or found out about it.

Yes there are things that happen occasionally to deny it would be just as stupid to think that it happend all the time or that it was the norm.

The whole problem I have with the article besides its slant is that a majority of the people in the article lack moral courage. Many of those soldiers are NCO's and even one officer. They are the LEADERS in the military and frankly as a former NCO I am insulted that they could not remember the NCO creed that they were supposed to memorize. (Then again some of them might not have attended PLDC)

"I will not compromise my integrity, nor my moral courage. I will not forget, nor will I allow my comrades to forget that we are professionals, Noncommissioned Officers, leaders!" ~taken from the US Army NCO Creed

If you cannot abide by the NCO creed why should I belive you otherwise?

[Skins24]

Yeah! It was those ... muslims!! Lump em all together and ... and ... shoot em!! :doh:

Isn't that what the article is doing to our soldiers? :whoknows:

[AJ_Skins]

All I've got to say is, keep it up, libs. There is nothing better you can do to keep yourselves from winning elections than to go down this road. So please, continue.

[Fergasun]

All this piece does is make thousands of people across the Middle East more angry because when they read these articles they think it is characteristic of the whole American military. Hence, it is dangerous to publish while the war is still going on. Am I wrong?

Bottom line is that this country doesn't really want to fight any wars, but if needed we will. It's easy to armchair away your support for the war 4 years after it begun and when things have gone pretty south... maybe you were against the war from the beginning... but the Iraq invasion was pretty popular in 2003.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Isn't that what the article is doing to our soldiers? :whoknows:

Hardly, the article is showing the side that is being actively hidden by other "journalists" because some people don't like the idea of thinking that our Boy Scouts can be pretty brutal too.

And, people wonder why I'm a pacifist.

[AJ_Skins]

75% supported the war beforehand. Anyone who falls into that category and now wants to jump ship is more of a traitor than the left wing extremists who opposed it from the beginning.

[headexplode]

Every so often, you can even question the journalists who spoon-feed you everything you know about the wider world!

As opposed to the soldier, who isn't spoon-fed anything, but is encouraged to question his superiors and think for himself.

Now, I don't believe this article is representative of all the troops, but soldiers are not above reproach, either. Granted, my experience with military personnel is limited, and to be quite honest, they make me uncomfortable (just like cops). I have met a few, though, who joined because they truly believe that it is the right and honorable thing to defend their country and its principles. I've also met those who joined because they didn't know what to do with their lives. Then I've met a couple who joined because they "wanted to shoot some ****in sand******s."

The other thing I wanted to point out, because it's not mentioned often, but soldiers essentially serve their commanders, and they've been dispatched at times in our history against the citizenry, to quell slave rebellions with whatever means necessary, to limit workers' rights at the height of the industrial age, to contain war protesters and civil rights marchers in the mid-twentieth century.

This not to say they are bad people or to make some kind of moral judgement against them, but our military has been used at times to restrict our freedoms rather than defend them, against our citizens rather than for them.

[AsburySkinsFan]

All I've got to say is, keep it up, libs. There is nothing better you can do to keep yourselves from winning elections than to go down this road. So please, continue.

If history is any proof then sir you are wrong. Bush has already lost the 2008 election for any Republican, the only question is which Democrat wins the election.

[AsburySkinsFan]

75% supported the war beforehand. Anyone who falls into that category and now wants to jump ship is more of a traitor than the left wing extremists who opposed it from the beginning.

Dude you are gonzo.

[AJ_Skins]

If history is any proof then sir you are wrong. Bush has already lost the 2008 election for any Republican, the only question is which Democrat wins the election.

Like I said, keep it up. I shouldn't even have made that post because all it can do is help you if you actually listened to it. Luckily you won't.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Like I said, keep it up. I shouldn't even have made that post because all it can do is help you if you actually listened to it. Luckily you won't.

Whatever AJ, whatever.

[Baculus]

75% supported the war beforehand. Anyone who falls into that category and now wants to jump ship is more of a traitor than the left wing extremists who opposed it from the beginning.

Considering that what our government told us, from the beginning, wasn't necessarily accurate or truthful, then I would disagree. People are going to change their mind if they being to understand or believe that the premise for the Iraqi conflict wasn't quite what we were purveyed by our own government.

Why is it traitorous, first of all, to oppose war? After all, the Defense department were less-than-enthused about the idea of the war, too, as well as the State department: Are they traitors as well? And second of all, as previously mentioned, if our government was less-than-honest for the reasoning for the Iraqi invasion, then how is it patriotic to support that war for those reasons?

If you notice, a lot of folks aren't critiquing the Afghan conflict in the same manner as Iraq: More folks still feel that Afghanistan was a bit more justified, compared to the reasoning presented by the current Bush administration for Iraq's intervention.

[alexey]

Give 100,000 people assault rifles and put them in a stressful hostile situation. As Destino said, any thinking person knows these kinds of things to be unavoidable.

There is a reason why this war has been executed the way it has. War is an ugly thing. We don't want Americans looking at ugly things, especially if we want them supporting the war.

[jpillian]

As opposed to the soldier, who isn't spoon-fed anything, but is encouraged to question his superiors and think for himself.

Now, I don't believe this article is representative of all the troops, but soldiers are not above reproach, either. Granted, my experience with military personnel is limited, and to be quite honest, they make me uncomfortable (just like cops). I have met a few, though, who joined because they truly believe that it is the right and honorable thing to defend their country and its principles. I've also met those who joined because they didn't know what to do with their lives. Then I've met a couple who joined because they "wanted to shoot some ****in sand******s."

The other thing I wanted to point out, because it's not mentioned often, but soldiers essentially serve their commanders, and they've been dispatched at times in our history against the citizenry, to quell slave rebellions with whatever means necessary, to limit workers' rights at the height of the industrial age, to contain war protesters and civil rights marchers in the mid-twentieth century.

This not to say they are bad people or to make some kind of moral judgement against them, but our military has been used at times to restrict our freedoms rather than defend them, against our citizens rather than for them.

Wow -- what a completely tangential post. Great job

You've shown that at your core you believe that:

1) American soldiers are automotons, incapable of being individual moral agents;

2) American soldiers make you uncomfortable, as do our police;

3) Usually when atrocities are committed, they are the result of orders from superiors to commit war crimes, and not due to the failings of individual soldiers.

[luckydevil]

OMGness you are serious aren't you!? Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11 this has been proved over and over and over and over and over again, when will you get it. We started the Iraq war, us. Garbage like this infuriates me.:mad:

Even if Iraq was connected to 9/11, his post is disturbing.

[AsburySkinsFan]

We don't want Americans looking at ugly things, especially if we want them supporting the war.

Or war in general, ever wonder why so many pacifists are created during war time?

[AsburySkinsFan]

Even if Iraq was connected to 9/11, his post is disturbing.

Trust me, there is plenty more that is disturbing in this thread.

[alexey]

I don't think words can explain this. America never had a multi-million casualty war, let alone one of those fought on it's soil. America has not seen war in all its glory. That is why we see so many fundamentally, hopelessly immature war proponents here.

[Koolblue13]

We don't want Americans looking at ugly things, especially if we want them supporting the war.

Que Paris Hilton story in 3...2...1...