Forums > Social Discussion > Anti War

Posted: 6th Feb 2002
itsgottab...one other thing, my screen name is Tanzen...T-a-n-z-e-n...not "tarzan", as you typed in your above post. I don't know if you did that on purpose as a joke or if you just read it wrong.If it was meant as a joke, then I didn't find it to be funny, though, I'm not annoyed by it either...just indifferent.I just thought I'd point it out in case you read it wrong."Tanzen", by the way, is a German verb meaning "to dance". It's closely related to "Tarzan" which is the Latin verb meaning "to swing on vines and make animal calls". Tanzen------------------Ravers don't share glowsticks![This message has been edited by Tanzen (edited 07 February 2002).]

Ravers don't share glowsticks!

Posted: 6th Feb 2002
Right on tanzen, i respect that 100%

~whoosh whoosh whoosh~

Posted: 6th Feb 2002
Just on a side point.Personally I don't think being in the military necessarily makes you better suited to being a politician. The military is pretty rigid, politicians need to be flexible. Personal opinion, be free to hold your own.Did a bit of searching around. Bush Junior was a pilot in the Texas national guard after graduation from college.However, Bush achieved a poor test grade and there was a long waiting list - which Bush jumped. Recently this prompted recent allegations that his family pulled strings to keep him out of Vietnam.As always, do your own research, draw your own conclusions.

Posted: 7th Feb 2002
tanzen i miss read it actually, but i that made it all the funnier when you pointed it out, thank you. i'm a little dyslexic you see.for someone with such command over the english language it seems a pitty you are unwilling to debate this issue, it would seem 'ray' has yet to learn this lesson.it seems strange that those who support the idea of war are those that benifit from it directly. either economically though the fact they can hold onto certain beliefs or prehaps even the life style/life experinces it enables certain people to have.why someone would see war, espeacially the wars you have taken part (and the role america has played in these wars) in as nesscessities is beyond me.i will assume (i'm sure your reasons are more complex, but my assumaptions may get totally off track, so i won't go there) you beleive america has done the good thing in these wars by protecting those on the back foot so to speak and prehaps lessing the overall suffering of all peoples.apart from protect and establish economic interests for americans and at a strech other western investors, basically america has interfered in conflicts they had/have no other interest in but for your own gain.the problems that appear to have been resolved (thou u.s. involvment) have not and will not go away, many have been going on for centuries and will continue to do so. arm twisting of all types milatary and economic are the factors that start wars just as much as end them, or do they just perpetuate them?some peoples don't have war as an option in there culture, i saw some south american tribe on the discovery channel the other day about it, sorry i can't remmember where excatly they were. so to say you can't get away from war is not ture. it is ture however that some people can't live without war, i personally would like to shoot those people!!!!!!

Posted: 7th Feb 2002
I would rather know that my Commander and Chief knew what I would go through if I was sent into combat. I do personally feel that there is a fog of war that is clouding my current Commanders mind, but then again I think that all minds everywhere are clouded. That is all I can say on the political aspect of things seen as how I would rather avoid politcis all together.About pay, I do not share Tanzen's cander when it comes to pay. So I am going to be outright with it. I get aprox $1300 a month as an E3. Medical is payed for and food is free with the exception of like when I was in Thialand I was paid alittle something to buy food with seen as how there was not a chowhall around for me to eat at for free. Basicly that came out to $43 a day. The sad part about that is in two days I made more money for food than they average Thai made in a month. I live on base so room and board are free. I have no bills so basicly if I had an ounce of restraint I would have a good $20k in the bank right now but I would rather spend my money on usless items.Some of you out there might think that we get paid too much, but I look at some of my friends that work at McDonalds that are making more money than I, but my frienge benefets pay off.

Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"

Posted: 8th Feb 2002
*BUMP*(Me thinks that my computer sucks or has nobody responded?)

Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"

Posted: 8th Feb 2002
Tanzen-<>In my mind this type of thinking breeds ignorance. You are unwilling to look at things from a different perspective which might show a fear of change(not ment as an insult, many people are afraid of change). I believe that one of our greatest gifts as humans is the ability to keep an open mind, to be able to look at every side of an issue and not be stuck in our preconceptions. Once we stop learning and believe that we know everything we become trapped in our ignorance. Maybe being in the military is the reason you are unwilling to change your view. My best friend went to West Point and would tell me about how they brainwash people(which they have to do to make someone into a deadly weapon who will follow orders in an instant)This was not ment as an attack, it just hurts me to see people who are unwilling to look at things from a different view. -Sundevil"Show me a person who knows everything and I will show you a triangle with four corners"

Posted: 9th Feb 2002
Well I wrote a nice long post and had to leave the comp on for a while and when I came back it was gone! So now I am not too happy but se la vi (or however you spell it).My main point was, was do not judge us militray folk untill you have been there. Untill you have gone through our training do not say that we are trained terrorists. Untill you have fired our weapons do not say that we are blood theirsty. Untill you have walked the many miles in our shoes that we have do not thing ill of what we are trained to do.My second big thing was my Nam Vet that I was trying to get to put a few posts up said that he would not. I will tell you a bit about him though (with his permission of course). During his time in Nam he put 68 of his friends in body bags, was shot our of a helo. Recieved a purple hart and combat aircrew wings for that incident. He has never lost the faith. He does believe that what American military personel is right and we have not done anything attrocius on purpose. I agree with him I feel that we are justified in reacting with the level of force that we have.~edit~Sundevil, if a person does not wish to change his/her mind about one topic it does not make them ignorant. If a person does not want to look at one topic from a different point of view it does not make them ignorant. Try looking at it from someone like myselfs point of view. I know that for you pacifists that would be a huge undertaking seen as how your mind may not work that way, none the less try. I am not ignorant and I have looked at this topic from others points of view but my view stands firm. America is in the right when it comes to Afganistan.[This message has been edited by Raymund Phule (edited 10 February 2002).]

Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"

Posted: 9th Feb 2002
military spending....USA in 2001 (world big spender)330 billion!!!bushs Proposed increase: 45 billionthis more that UK or france who each spent 30 billion in 2001 totalIf fact us 2001 rankings for wasting money buying bombs went:1 USA 330m2 Russia about 130m3 Japan 60m4 UK 30m5 France 30m6 the restbut lets put this into perspectiveIf we that the military budget of the USA, it is bigger than the combined budget ofthe next 20 biggest spenders(including russia + japan + UK + France + all the rest of europe!!!)just half of one of the US 12 aircraft carriers cost more than the entire military budget of all of the "axis of evil" contries combined!!!ever see an elephant crush an ant.Drew

Posted: 9th Feb 2002
I'm just curious as to what military rank gives you the status of infallibility. I'm going to bring up the My Lai massacre because it was stated earlier that the military has never done anything atrocious on purpose. The massacre was not the work of a rogue soldier, the lower-ranking men were actually given orders to kill defenseless citizens while there was no threat to them.(no conclusion)-Wren

-WrenAnd that, my friends, is condensed evil.

Posted: 9th Feb 2002
There was no order given to kill all that they saw. No it was a search and destroy mission, meaning when you find the enimy kill them. To say "there was an order" you are wrong. Also this came from an Army Lt. William Calley. If he so orderd his men to kill everyone then it would be an error on the part of one man not the entire military. That is kinda like saying if your black and you where baggy jeans then your in a gang. Sorry it just aint like that. I have one point on the defence of those men, multiple times the 7 year old kid whos life you saved today would come back and put a bomb in your bed room. Whos to say that all those people were not VC. Maybe they were maybe they were not. The soldiers would not have been in the area if they had not heard of VC being in that area.I must also tell you that Lt. Calley was tried and convicted of murder.[This message has been edited by Raymund Phule (edited 10 February 2002).]

Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"

Posted: 9th Feb 2002
I actually sat down and did a tiny bit of reserch and this is what I found.WASHINGTON (Army News Service, March 11, 1998) -- Three soldiers were recognized Friday for heroism in saving Vietnamese civilians from attack by U.S. troops in the village of My Lai in 1968. The pilot and the door gunner of an Army helicopter supporting an infantry operation in Quang Ngai Province received the Soldiers Medal. The Soldiers Medal will be awarded the family of a third crewman who was later killed in action during the war. Hugh C. Thompson Jr. and Lawrence Colburn stood side by side at the outdoor ceremony near the Vietnam Veterans Memorial as citations for the medal were read. Maj. Gen. Michael W. Ackerman, commander of the U.S. Army Signal Center and Fort Gordon, Ga., presented Thompson and Colburn with the awards. The citations said the two saved 11 Vietnamese villagers from being killed by American soldiers. Ackerman, who commanded a gunship platoon in the Americal Division two years after the events for which Thompson and Colburn were being honored, praised them as embodying the best of Army values and for "setting the standard" on a day that was "one of the most shameful chapters in the Army's history." After My Lai was exposed, Ackerman said, Army leadership took action to make sure such an event would never happen again. "And it has not happened again," he said. The awarded medals replace the Distinguished Flying Cross that Thompson earlier received and the Bronze Star medals awarded to Colburn and the deceased crew chief, Spc. Glenn Andreotta. Those awards were premised on the crew having saving villagers during combat with the enemy, rather than from American troops. Citations read at the ceremony described how on March 16, 1968, helicopter pilot Thompson, door gunner Colburn and helicopter crew chief Andreotta saved 10 civilians "during the unlawful massacre of noncombatants by American forces" by placing themselves between the American soldiers and the fleeing villagers. The helicopter gunship was present to draw fire from the Viet Cong, but did not receive any fire. They observed U.S. soldiers apparently firing on Vietnamese noncombatants, women and children. Thompson landed and spoke to a lieutenant to find out what was going on and then argued with him about what was occurring, according to a published account by Michael Bilton and Kevin Sim, "Four Hours in My Lai." The helicopter took off, but then landed again. According to Thompson's citation, he placed his helicopter between a group of soldiers and civilians they were pursuing "to prevent their murder." He then personally confronted the leader of the American ground troops and was prepared to open fire on those American troops should they fire upon the civilians." Colburn and Andreotta aimed their weapons on the American troops as Thompson confronted the soldiers. Thompson then went forward of the U.S. lines to coax the frightened villagers out of a bunker where they had sought refuge and the crew helped facilitate their evacuation. Leaving the area, the three observed movement in a pile of shot civilians. Landing again, Andreotta rescued a child from the pile, who was evacuated to a nearby hospital. Thompson's radio reports of the massacre and a subsequent report to his section leader and commander finally brought about a cease fire order "and the end to the killing of innocent civilians." Thompson and Colburn later testified at the court-martial of Lt. William L. Calley Jr., a platoon leader what became known as the "My Lai Massacre." Calley was convicted and other officers were censured and demoted for their part in the a cover-up which followed the incident. Army Chief of Staff Gen. William S. Westmoreland ordered an investigation that was completed by Lt. Gen. W.R. Peers in 1969. Ackerman quoted the Peers report's assessment of Thompson: "If there was a hero at My Lai, he was it." Colburn at that point looked to Thompson and beamed an expression of love. "This is really his day," Colburn said to some in the long line of well-wishers who congratulated the two after the medal presentation. Army Chief of Chaplains Maj. Gen. Donald W. Shea led off the ceremony, praising the actions of the recognized individuals. "We're here to recognize three soldiers for their solemn heroism ... on hallowed ground. Their heroism symbolizes all that we hold good and true," he said. Ackerman said it was appropriate that the ceremony be held adjacent the Vietnam Memorial, the Wall, which he called a "place of healing." "The soldiers here today ... stood tall during a time of great introspection for our country," he continued. "The Army's enduring values -- loyalty, duty, respect, honor, integrity and personal courage -- ... inspire a sense of purpose necessary to sustain soldiers in difficult times." Ackerman credited the values with giving Thompson and Colburn "the ability to do the right thing, even at the risk of their personal safety." He added, "They clearly captured the essence of Army values -- courage and the highest standards of moral, personal and ethical conduct. This award is a symbolic affirmation of these long-held Army ideals and is a tribute to these great soldiers." Ackerman closed by quoting former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill: "'God, grant me that my principal men be men of principle." Thompson thanked the Army for the award and praised Colburn and Andreotta. He also thanked his family and David Egan, a Clemson University professor and former Army officer who initiated a nine-year, letter-writing campaign that sought to award Thompson the medal. "I proudly and humbly accept [the award], not only for myself, but for all the men who served their country with honor on the battlefield of Southeast Asia," Thompson said. "And I see many of those great men in the audience today. Welcome home!" Colburn followed and also thanked fellow crew members and family "It is my solemn wish that we all never forget the tragedy and brutality of war," Colburn said before quoting Gen. Douglas MacArthur: "'The soldier, be he friend or foe, is charged with the protection of the weak and the unarmed. It's his very existence for being.'" The afternoon event took place under blue skies during unseasonably warm weather. The audience included U.S. Senators Max Cleland (D-Ga.) and Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.), Army leaders, veterans, family members and friends of the medal winners, and also tourists who stumbled onto the event while strolling the mall. Doug Reese, a Vietnam veteran and U.S. Post Office employee who started a Vietnam-centered tourist agency, was one of the spectators at the ceremony. He said the ceremony helped effect a sense of closure for events that happened some 30 years ago. Thompson will travel to Vietnam for the anniversary of the incident Monday, where he will be reunited with a child whose life he saved. (Editor's note: Norris is a writer with the Military District of Washington's Pentagram Newspaper.) Not everybody was out for blood that day.Not to move the subject off America but take a look at what the Japenesse did to the Philipine Islands.[This message has been edited by Raymund Phule (edited 10 February 2002).]

Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"

Posted: 9th Feb 2002
Yes, its true that there were heroic men that took part in that fight (the helicopter people) and without them we would probably have an even more shrouded version of what happened there.The point I was attempting to make was that your earlier comments of (paraphrase) "not being able to stray from the orders of your superiors" If the men at My Lai 4 had rebelled against Lt. Calley, there may not have been so many innocents dead there.Also, from what I have read it was not just Calley. The officer that gave them information (there's probably a military term for this, but I don't know it) before the mission implied, or at least many of the soldiers that later testified said, that he wanted everything in the village destroyed.Also, its not like the officers above these officers went to correct everything right away once they heard about it. They (according to my articles) tried to cover it up, once again proving that the people above you are not always perfect and working to better the world.And yes, I'm sure this has happened countless other times with many other countries in forms more severe than this. I don't condone that or think it is even slightly less abhorrent than that which was done by the United States.ok, must go-Wren-------------------WrenKeeping time, time, time,In a sort of Runic rhyme...

-WrenAnd that, my friends, is condensed evil.

Posted: 9th Feb 2002
glass...yes, the U.S. spends a lot on it's military. However, look at the size of the U.S. compared to France, UK, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Switzerland. Yes, Russia is bigger, but mostly undeveloped.People in Europe should be THRILLED that the U.S. spends the amount of money it does on the military. Who came to help the Europeans out in WWI and WWII? I'll refresh your memory...it was the U.S. Who sent an extremely large force of soldiers to Bosnia from 1995 to the present? Who sent soldiers to Somolia in 1993? Who sent soldiers to the Persian Gulf in 1990-91? Who sent soldiers to Afgahnistan? The U.S. did. Of course, other countries did send troops as well, but NO OTHER COUNTRY sent the amount of troops and equipment as the U.S. did. That is FACT.I don't see other countries sending troops and/or equipment to the U.S. to help with our problems. I don't see other countries sending troops to South America to help with the drug problem there (the U.S. has military and police personnel in those countries helping them).My point is, the U.S. spends that kind of money because it's the WORLD LEADER! Russia is no longer a super power. There are two super powers now...the U.S. and China...and I don't think China is going to help the Europeans control their constant bickering about religion, land, etc.Did you piss me off with your petty statements about what country spends what? Yes, you did. I'm assuming your numbers are correct (I don't feel like looking that up). But, what you left out was WHY the numbers are like they are. I'm SURE that if the U.S. said "to hell with the European conflicts" and decided to no longer help out militarily, then you'd see a BIG change in how much the European countries spend on their military.Tanzen------------------Ravers don't share glowsticks![This message has been edited by Tanzen (edited 10 February 2002).][This message has been edited by Tanzen (edited 10 February 2002).]

Ravers don't share glowsticks!

Posted: 9th Feb 2002
Sundevil <>Perhaps when you were sitting there quoting me, you should have quoted the sentence where I said that I'M NO LONGER IN THE MILITARY. How do you like being quoted and then having your words thown back at you? Especially when you're obviously wrong.Secondly, I'd like to address your "afraid of change" comment. This actually made me laugh. I'll have you know that "change" is my middle name. I've moved around and experienced more change in the past 11 years than you will in your entire life time. And, I'm still not finished moving around. I'm moving to south Florida next week. I don't know a sole there and will certainly experience "change" once again.I've not only seen "change" in regards to location, but also "change" OF the location. I've seen the quiet desert of Kuwait. Then I saw it "change" to a black night, even when the sun was out, due to oil fires needlessly set. I've seen the people of Kuwait "change" from depression to relief upon seeing American soldiers. I've seen Sarajevo, Bosnia when there was bullet holes in EVERY structure in the city. And I've seen that city "change" where people were no longer afaid to do something as simple as walk down the main street that bisects the city (nicknamed "Sniper Alley" because of the amount of people shot while making that walk before peacekeepers -like myself- stepped in to stop the violence).I've seen chance in more countries than you have fingers to count them on. How dare you accuse me of being "afraid of change".Let me spell it out for you why I don't wish to debate war with non-combatants.1) You can't debate what you don't know about. That's my polite way of saying that if you haven't been in a war, then you don't know what the hell you're talking about.2) I have debated war with non-combatants in the past...know what I learned? Refer to "1)".I assure you, it has NOTHING to do with not having empathy (the ability to view something from more than one perspective).Join the military and fight a war. Or, become a photographer for CNN and go experience the fighting going on in Afgahnistan or in central Africa...you don't even have to fire a weapon...just experience what's going on around you. Then, come back and I'll debate it with you as long as you like.Tanzen------------------Ravers don't share glowsticks![This message has been edited by Tanzen (edited 10 February 2002).]

Ravers don't share glowsticks!

Posted: 9th Feb 2002
A few lines form military cadences:"What makes the grass grow?Blood, blood, blood""Kill, kill, kill, said the Sergeant."Ahhh...love those marching songs! Tanzen[This message has been edited by Tanzen (edited 10 February 2002).]

Ravers don't share glowsticks!

Posted: 9th Feb 2002
Oh yes, before someone replies with:"Well, if you kill as a reaction to the killing that they are doing, then you lower yourselves to their level and they win."To that, I'll say...Okay, maybe they do win. But it'll be nice knowing that some of their boys won't be at the awards ceremony. Tanzen------------------Ravers don't share glowsticks!

Ravers don't share glowsticks!

Posted: 10th Feb 2002
Tanzen I like your style and your point of view is pretty much right on with mine. You are absolutly right. In the first 19 years of my life I moved 11 times (my parents were Air Force), and since I have joind the Corps I have moved 5 times in almost 2 years. (counting training bases)The American military moves more often than probably every other country out there.

Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"

Posted: 10th Feb 2002
Tanzen, we debated that who 'Who came to you aid in WW2' thing a while back, so I won't repeat myself. Anyway, it's getting old and is, like most things, a little bit more complex Anyway, Tanzen, you're a prime example of why the US is now looking more and more politically isolated from every other country in the world. The EU, the US's best buddy, is now at odds with the US on lots of major issues, from climate control to landmines and political outlook. The EU doesn't like America's bullying tactics, nobody does. The EU continues to use reason and diplomatic process to help repair the damage the US is doing to world politics at the moment. The EU is still happily talking to Iran and North Korea, and funding the PLO in Palestine. Bush's bullying tactics and lame speeches have set us back quite a lot, but headway is still made thankfully.Why? The EU may be smaller than the US, but it's doing more good for the world than the US, hands down. EU politicians are definitely more experienced at talking to people of different nationalities and cultures. On top of this 55% of the developmental aid, and 66% of grant aid given out world wide comes from the EU. Basically the EU is doing more than the US to help the world become a better place and reduce the threat of terrorism and rouge states, and it's doing it not through threats and branding countries 'evil', but by talk. A far more intelligent solution to any problem than fighting.If the US wants to act all high and mighty world leader why doesn't it use than $43 billion to end world hunger, and make billions of friend in the process. That'd be something for history. What would you rather your country was know as, an ignorant bully, or the saviour that ended world hunger?Anyway, this topic is going off topic. The war thing came to a natural conclusion. If we want to debate every aspect of world politics maybe we should trot off to a politics forum

Posted: 10th Feb 2002
-Dom-...Yes, I read your earlier posts about the U.S. not joining WWII until after it was attacked and that we were just defending ourselves, etc, etc, etc. I'll agree that I think the U.S. joined the fight later than when it should have...HOWEVER...you might recall that although we weren't fighting until after the Pearl Harbor incident, we did supply the allies with bullets, tanks, planes, and yes...even some American pilots to defend the UK. There are other ways of "comming to the rescue" than just actually fighting...and we did those other things for years, which helped you all hold out against Germany's advance.Next, I'll address the "using $43 billion dollars to end world hunger and make lots of friends" crap. I'll just point at Somolia. The U.S. poured a LOT of money and food into that piece of sh*t country to try to end the hunger and violence that was taking place there. What did we get for it? Dead soldiers. So I'm sorry if I don't agree with you that money solves the world hunger crisis.Then, we have this whole EU thing. OF COURSE the EU is going to spend more money than the U.S. for aid, etc...it consists of A LOT OF COUNTRIES! Typical European...you expect the U.S. to match the entire EU.As for all the "talk" mess. Oh, let's solve everything diplomaticly, and we just HAVE to make sure that nobody's feedings gets hurt. Heaven forbid that we should offend someone. What would we do? Oh nooooo! Let's just talk and talk and talk and then we'll talk some more.Well, like I said before, it is better to solve things diplomaticly...but diplomacy doesn't always work. In the long run, talk is cheep. I didn't see the terrorists do any talking before they flew a few jets into our buildings. Well, unless you count "praise be to Allah" and sh*t like that to be "talking".Do you think "talking" to Hitler in WWII would have saved Europe? HA! I seriously doubt it. Geez...you know, there's nothing I hate more than people who think all war is wrong and that we should "talk" everything out. "Can't we all just get along?"Yes, some wars are wrong...the civil war in Somolia where over 300,000 civians died...that was certainly wrong. The war in the Gulf were Iraq invaded Kuwait...that was wrong. BUT, some wars are RIGHT...like when the U.S. (and other countries) went to the Gulf to go to war with Iraq and liberate Kuwait.Look...if you want, we can just agree to disagree. But there's no way in hell any peacenik is going to convience me that all wars are bad and that everything should be solved diplomaticly.Tanzen------------------Ravers don't share glowsticks![This message has been edited by Tanzen (edited 11 February 2002).]

Ravers don't share glowsticks!

Posted: 10th Feb 2002
Raymond->>Sundevil, if a person does not wish to change his/her mind about one topic it does not make them ignorant. If a person does not want to look at one topic from a different point of view it does not make them ignorant. <>Sundevil <>Perhaps when you were sitting there quoting me, you should have quoted the sentence where I said that I'M NO LONGER IN THE MILITARY. How do you like being quoted and then having your words thown back at you? <

Similar Topics

Using the keywords [anti war] we found the following existing topics.

1. Forums > NEWS FLASH A MUST READ [6 replies]
2. Forums > Official What's wrong with the World thread [30 replies]
3. Forums > Not In Our Name (War protests etc. in the States) [14 replies]
4. Forums > anti war rally, shall i represent HoP? ALL READ PLEASE!!!!!! [9 replies]
5. Forums > Peace rally saturday [4 replies]

      Show more..