A Soldiers Christmas

[Ayano]

My god you fly as if you know the whole picture, you even throw in the UN. I'm talking on respecting your armed services and yet you throw in the political shit that colludes it all. I watered it down to layman's terms; wanna extrapolate all my misgivings? What you want a god dammed thesis paper?

You are heartless, you can't even respect those who fight to ensure than just maybe, your grandchildren might not have to. Sure, if you wanna spin off on how a new bipolar scenario is forming due to western incursions, go ahead. The the majority of the men on the ground however, there either for college, money or a 'nationalistic' pride, take their uniform with a sense of honor. That is that they are there so you can happily sit in your fucking chair and not worry about getting shot in the dick. The money to them is a bonus in most cases as it eventually works in that it may be hell, but you've done your duty where most would have cowered away or argue against.

The military is the branch of action, the decision making comes from government. If an order comes in that theres a rescue/extraction mission in Sudan and, you need to be ready at 0700; are you going to argue about sovereignty? Service men are not mindless men at arms, they know that they carry out orders regardless of the circumstances, but it doesn't mean their are on the agenda line. The counter belief is that 'what if their right' at some level that adds a peace of mind to their 'work'.

So you hate servicemen for their 'mindless' adherence to whatever the government or body of governments that tells them? Who the hell are you.

[Ayano]

That, and your reasoning goes out from your self centered point of view and the disrespect and contempt of other races and religions.
If you could, would you please explain me why your life is worth more than that of others? Of people of another race and nationality.

I hope you do know that people die in conflicts, infrastructures get destroyed during wars, economy drops when a country is occupied.
And you started out by illustrating that your countrymen are hardly worth the effort.

If only the world could exist of well-educated good-looking soldiers. :wub:

THIS IS NOT A GOD DAMMED PERFECT WORLD.

Want me to elaborate on this? Thinking as a perfectionist will get nothing done.

Now you need me to explain? Well I have class in a bit so I'll humor your request. first I never once mentioned that my life is of more importance to others. In fact, I place others before myself as I realize that life is not based on the self, but by those you pass by in life. People know that they are a part of the world but sometimes they forget that it's also a part of themselves. You of all people can extrapolate that notion. With that, do you truly believe that the world will come to a point where servicemen will be necessary? Peace is an illusion that can be local, but never global, even now we're at conflict. This is human nature, one agrees another disagrees; now talk in populations and you have armies at war where you can sit in your cozy chair and contemplate wither you support this or that, and wither or not you at least CARE for those who don't ask these delaying questions, but rather risk their lives on the notion that they will protect YOU in some way.

[Ayano]

you are delusional wrong and uneduacated if you think peace and love is going to improving with the numbers of solidiers you support. and respect is earned for what you do, if a fireman risks his live to save someone he has my respect, if a solidier kills people out of free will in a questionable war im going to spit on him when he comes back. also pride is a sin, of course i try not to feel it.

I can't even get a simple point across, want me to lower my Flesch-Kincaid level to that of a 2nd grade?

Also i never even noted at that, nice ASSumption. I was saying that that soldiers need respect for the responsibility they under take. as much a a police officer may not want to convict a child, a soldier must kill man he's never known. Not many can do it, and one needs not be heartless or sinful to carry these burdens.

This topic has ruined my respect for Europeans. They don't even respect their own troops never less our own which you'd probably sooner shit on than shake hands with. I know not all are like this, but this topic is far gone.

[Noah]

So many big words on how idealistic and thoughtful you are, but you still manige to say that you lose all respect for Europeans.

Da1, looks like you lost respect because you got generalized. How sad it that?

Looks like the point I made in my first post turned out the be true. Every thread that has something to do with the war on terrorism, middle east, and those sorts of topics turns out into this. Just look at the forum history. Everyone who has been on these forums knows this, and we try to avoid topics like this, because nobody wants this shit-fest. This was BOUND to happen, and LF should've known better.

For that I got called a hater, and that I'm against Americans.

I don't support the war in the middle east, but I still respect the opinion of those who do.

[Zerzera]

these delaying questions, but rather risk their lives on the notion that they will protect YOU in some way.

So you are saying that a conflict should be handled with violence, and you shouldn't think, but act.

This is not how you handle a conflict, it is possible to negotiate and come to a solution that serves every party. There always is this solution, but it takes effort and diplomacy. I don't understand how you couldn't afford standstill, rather than a war.

Take an oil crisis.
A country produces and sells oil to one country, but because of a conflict they decide to place an embargo.
Now the way America would go about, is to attack that country and secure the flow of the recourses, rather than trying to solve the conflict.

You can afford this kind of policy because you do not neighbour these countries, they lack the army and technology to really hurt you. All you have to do is paralyze them and keep them on that level.

You can never leave the middle east ever again if you continue this policy, Even when their conventional recourses run out, you will have to stay before you solved the conflict. And the policies of the last fifty years only increased conflicts on about all levels.

[FarScape]

This is not how you handle a conflict, it is possible to negotiate and come to a solution that serves every party. There always is this solution, but it takes effort and diplomacy. I don't understand how you couldn't afford standstill, rather than a war.

Dude, you should really pull out your head out of the ground.

Learn history, it will only do you good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement

[Doc Flabby]

not just americans out there.

I support the UK troops. I don't support the reason why they are there. But your job in the army is to fight for your country, even if you don't agree with the cause. Unfortunately our country has decided to fight a pointless war which was poorly planned and whilst the goverment decided to cut funding on defence. For some reason the electorate re-voted in the people who decided to do it.

[Noah]

I don't agree with fighting for what the politicians tell you to fight for. I've been in the army, I'm a medic, and I'd happily go out for my country if it was something I personally believed had to be done for my country. On the flip side of that I wouldn't join in on an attack on Sweeden because our leader said so.

[Fluffz]

I can't even get a simple point across

saying 1+1=3 just because it is simple doesnt make it true either

Learn history, it will only do you good.

what i learned was that WW2 was a result of WW1 which was started because a single person was shot. Someone might argue not starting a war back in 1914 but negotiationg would have been a better way to go.

[Zerzera]

Dude, you should really pull out your head out of the ground.

Learn history, it will only do you good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement

Yes, very smart of you to bring in the second world war, because it's a school example of how soldiers are used as tools by propaganda and nationalism.
Germany in the forties is an example of a country that highly valued militarism and heroism. Not to mention that it had an ideological leader, which is very common in countries that are in a depression.

But you know what, despite the fact that Germany attacked their surrounding countries, killed millions and millions of people. Despite their crimes against mankind, 50 years later there is hardly any people left in my country that feel hatred towards Germans. I can't recall any terrorist attacks by Dutch people on Germans because of what happened. They must be one of our closest allies at this moment.

It's because of your narrow minded nationalism that you make and keep enemies.


EDIT: I have some cool German propaganda movies, but they are German and Dutch, you can find one on youtube where the narrator speaks of 'counter attack' and 'pushing the enemy back' while they were marching into the Netherlands.
In case you miss the point; the press told German people they had been attacked by the Dutch, they had no clue they were the ones that were attacking.

[Ayano]

So you are saying that a conflict should be handled with violence, and you shouldn't think, but act. -stupidest retort, try reading; twisting words gets you nowhere

This is not how you handle a conflict, it is possible to negotiate and come to a solution that serves every party. There always is this solution, but it takes effort and diplomacy. I don't understand how you couldn't afford standstill, rather than a war. -your point is null now, we're talking about supporting soldiers not political standpoints and 'YOUR COUNTRY' remarks
Take an oil crisis.
A country produces and sells oil to one country, but because of a conflict they decide to place an embargo.
Now the way America would go about, is to attack that country and secure the flow of the recourses, rather than trying to solve the conflict.

You can afford this kind of policy because you do not neighbour these countries, they lack the army and technology to really hurt you. All you have to do is paralyze them and keep them on that level.

You can never leave the middle east ever again if you continue this policy, Even when their conventional recourses run out, you will have to stay before you solved the conflict. And the policies of the last fifty years only increased conflicts on about all levels.

You think before you interprete. I suggest you re-read before you believe you're apt enough to press the objection button. I took the liberty to remove your rantings in fine print.

Also you run off on a political tangent THAT IS IRRELEVANT. Your opinions are now null and void now in my eyes. I don't favor the war either but I respect the troops on the ground who served regardless. If we debated everything democraticaly, nothing would get done in the immediate time frame. This is why there is an executive branch, and at times (more often than not) it's wrong. The point is there has to be a section that will act to carry out decisions based on provided information without overly questioning the facts. More or less, it is an ASSumtion that is given to the military, and they act on it. If this ASSumtion is right, the situation is resolved quickly before it can escalate further such as Bosnia. If it's wrong, then we have the current political situation. The administration that makes this decision is to blame, not the servicemen that answer the call.

I'll lower my writing level even further:

Person: I need help! my leg is bleeding
EMS operator: how bad is it?
Person: It's BLEEEEDING!!
EMS operator: okay, an ambulance has been dispached

later...

Person: HELP! HERE!!
EMS:a scrape?
Person: Yes, please I need help!
EMS: we can just give you a band ai-
Person2:No! thats not how you're supposed to do it
Person3:Yea! you need to brace the leg and prevent the clotting
EMS: Thats a bit-
Person: I'm BLEEEDING
Person2:You call yourself an EMS worker! get him in the dammed ambulance!
Person3 cunt!
(others): You suck!.. freaking idiot!....This situation is dire!!...(mumble mumble)

[Ayano]

....In case you miss the point; the press told German people they had been attacked by the Dutch, they had no clue they were the ones that were attacking.

Who is to blame, the armies that attacked under the assumtion that they were attacked or the planners that falsified the information? Also take note that this is Nazi germany, and this was an age where Information wasn't as freely exchanged as it is now.

I support the UK troops. I don't support the reason why they are there. But your job in the army is to fight for your country, even if you don't agree with the cause. Unfortunately our country has decided to fight a pointless war which was poorly planned and whilst the goverment decided to cut funding on defence. For some reason the electorate re-voted in the people who decided to do it.

This is what Zerz can't see; he's blind or deaf I say to any analytical reason. While this isn't that elaborate, it's the outline which apparenty can't get through to him.

[Galleleo]

Zerz, The Dutch Army hold out for 5 or 7 days against the Germans and all we had was 1 tank and we were unprepared cause we were neutral like in the WWI but Hitler ignored that.

Anyway, I never said I do not have respect for soldier, I do however not have MORE respect for soldiers then anyone else. All these soldiers (except Finnish and I believe Norwegian?) choose to be a soldier. Its their right to do so, for whatever reason they want. But that doesn't that they deserve more respect than others. And Zerz is right that we (Netherlands) don't really have soldiers fighting for us anymore, but fight because we are part of the UN. Part of the reason we are in Uruzgan was because no other country would take the job of cleaning up the mess the US left there. It isnt until 2 years later (while everyone already knew that Uruzgan was a dangerous area in Afghanistan with lots of Taliban) that we now get support from other countries there.

And Ayano, let me point out again, that the only reason the Taliban exists in the ways it does now, and the only reason Saddam was in power in the first place was because of the US and their funding and training and weapons delivery and what not.

[Ayano]

saying 1+1=3 just because it is simple doesnt make it true either

If you knew that I was talking of intergrals rather than diffrentials then maybe we'd actually make a connection

[Galleleo]

Who is to blame, the armies that attacked under the assumtion that they were attacked or the planners that falsified the information? Also take note that this is Nazi germany, and this was an age where Information wasn't as freely exchanged as it is now.

Information still isn't as freely exchanged as you think, the US government, but also the Dutch government still hide stuff, twist stories, etc. etc. Sure, a journalist is now allowed to distribute his opinion, he wasn't back then. But there is still a lot of propaganda and censoring going on.