Why is it called "fighting for our freedom"? What freedom can someone take from us half a world awa

[buddhallah_the_christ]

"We" are not fighting. Americans are fighting the Ideological Left and it's religious arm Islam.

I understand what you are talking about but don't you think that to impose ideas on other peoples is wrong? American society has every right to deal with anything on its land, but why someone has to endure this struggle and its results on their own land?

 

[francoHFW]

That's just the view of fools who believe Obama is a far leftist and all Muslims are evil. Brainwashed, bigotted ugly American Pubcrappe.

 

[OKTexas]

Don't mean to offend anyone but can someone explain? But we generally go to a country and has done anything to us and shoot and kill them. My view is that they're defending themselves, how does killing someone who did nothing to us make someone honorable or a hero? I know we say "risking ours lives for our freedom". If Syria came over here shoot at us and our family wouldnt you shoot back? The only ones taking our freedom away with laws are our politicans. What freedoms could the people we fight possibly take from us?

The only reason we can prevail in the wars we chose to engage in is we don't have to fight them on our soil. It's much more difficult to prosecute a war when you have to defend the manufacturing capabilities for war material. Don't believe me, look at Germany and Japan.

The only way to defeat an insurgency type action is to cut off the supply lines of the enemy and so far this country has been unwilling, because of politicians, or unable to do so and our uniformed personnel pay the price.

If the politicians decide a war is worth prosecuting they should turn it over to the military and let them do what they do and stay the hell out of it.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

"We" are not fighting. Americans are fighting the Ideological Left and it's religious arm Islam.

I understand what you are talking about but don't you think that to impose ideas on other peoples is wrong? American society has every right to deal with anything on its land, but why someone has to endure this struggle and its results on their own land?

Just get me a little closer and I just feel that I will eventually discover what it is you're trying to say. Just one more clue.

 

[Iceweasel]

I understand what you are talking about but don't you think that to impose ideas on other peoples is wrong? American society has every right to deal with anything on its land, but why someone has to endure this struggle and its results on their own land?

So the US had no business invading Germany?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Don't mean to offend anyone but can someone explain? But we generally go to a country and has done anything to us and shoot and kill them. My view is that they're defending themselves, how does killing someone who did nothing to us make someone honorable or a hero? I know we say "risking ours lives for our freedom". If Syria came over here shoot at us and our family wouldnt you shoot back? The only ones taking our freedom away with laws are our politicans. What freedoms could the people we fight possibly take from us?

This ^^^POS isn't worth responding to seriously.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

[QUOTE="Iceweasel, post: 10655036, member: 46539] So the US had no business invading Germany?[/QUOTE]
Well nazism is a left wing ideology.

 

[Sonny Clark]

I understand what you are talking about but don't you think that to impose ideas on other peoples is wrong? American society has every right to deal with anything on its land, but why someone has to endure this struggle and its results on their own land?

So the US had no business invading Germany?

That was a different time, under much different circumstances. It's difficult to compare then and now. That was part of a "world war", and not isolated countries engaged for basically religious reasons. We have "groups" to deal with, and not so much countries as such. We only wish that it was as simple as countries and not terrorist groups. The ones now don't wear uniforms that represent a country.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Why is it called "fighting for our freedom"? What freedom can someone take from us half a world awa


3,000 former World Trade Center workers were not available for comment.

Neither are 60,000 soldiers who died in Vet Nam, 5,000 that died in Iraq, and the count continues in Afghanistan. Besides, destroying Iraq didn't solve the issue, nor did it punish the ones responsible for 9/11.

More left wing disinformation.

 

[Sonny Clark]

Don't mean to offend anyone but can someone explain? But we generally go to a country and has done anything to us and shoot and kill them. My view is that they're defending themselves, how does killing someone who did nothing to us make someone honorable or a hero? I know we say "risking ours lives for our freedom". If Syria came over here shoot at us and our family wouldnt you shoot back? The only ones taking our freedom away with laws are our politicans. What freedoms could the people we fight possibly take from us?

This ^^^POS isn't worth responding to seriously.

The poster posed some legitimate questions. Those questions certainly merit thought. Yes, we have been known to trump-up reasons to go to war. But, usually, at least in the past 50 years, those reasons mainly consist of two words, "Freedom" and "Democracy". Yet, we have neither established freedom nor democracy anywhere. And, any losses or threats to our own freedom and democracy, have come from within.

 

[Iceweasel]

I understand what you are talking about but don't you think that to impose ideas on other peoples is wrong? American society has every right to deal with anything on its land, but why someone has to endure this struggle and its results on their own land?

So the US had no business invading Germany?

That was a different time, under much different circumstances. It's difficult to compare then and now. That was part of a "world war", and not isolated countries engaged for basically religious reasons. We have "groups" to deal with, and not so much countries as such. We only wish that it was as simple as countries and not terrorist groups. The ones now don't wear uniforms that represent a country.

What was the religious reason we went in to Afghanistan and Iraq? We had coalition forces and the motives were the same, stop the nutbags from taking over. There, or here.

 

[Iceweasel]

The poster posed some legitimate questions. Those questions certainly merit thought. Yes, we have been known to trump-up reasons to go to war. But, usually, at least in the past 50 years, those reasons mainly consist of two words, "Freedom" and "Democracy". Yet, we have neither established freedom nor democracy anywhere. And, any losses or threats to our own freedom and democracy, have come from within.

Nonsense. Go to Germany or Japan and get back to us.

 

[Sonny Clark]

Why is it called "fighting for our freedom"? What freedom can someone take from us half a world awa


3,000 former World Trade Center workers were not available for comment.

Neither are 60,000 soldiers who died in Vet Nam, 5,000 that died in Iraq, and the count continues in Afghanistan. Besides, destroying Iraq didn't solve the issue, nor did it punish the ones responsible for 9/11.

More left wing disinformation.

What is false or misleading about it? Disinformation? How so? Please explain. Thanks. ( I'm not a "left wing", nor am I associated with any wing, thank you. )

 

[Sonny Clark]

The poster posed some legitimate questions. Those questions certainly merit thought. Yes, we have been known to trump-up reasons to go to war. But, usually, at least in the past 50 years, those reasons mainly consist of two words, "Freedom" and "Democracy". Yet, we have neither established freedom nor democracy anywhere. And, any losses or threats to our own freedom and democracy, have come from within.

Nonsense. Go to Germany or Japan and get back to us.

What is "nonsense" about it? Why should myself, or anyone, go to those countries? Please explain. Thanks.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

[
This ^^^POS isn't worth responding to seriously.

The poster posed some legitimate questions. Those questions certainly merit thought. Yes, we have been known to trump-up reasons to go to war. But, usually, at least in the past 50 years, those reasons mainly consist of two words, "Freedom" and "Democracy". Yet, we have neither established freedom nor democracy anywhere. And, any losses or threats to our own freedom and democracy, have come from within.[/QUOTE]. The poster is stating a lie as fact. We did not invade Iraq because of The attack on 9/11.

 

[Sonny Clark]

I understand what you are talking about but don't you think that to impose ideas on other peoples is wrong? American society has every right to deal with anything on its land, but why someone has to endure this struggle and its results on their own land?

So the US had no business invading Germany?

That was a different time, under much different circumstances. It's difficult to compare then and now. That was part of a "world war", and not isolated countries engaged for basically religious reasons. We have "groups" to deal with, and not so much countries as such. We only wish that it was as simple as countries and not terrorist groups. The ones now don't wear uniforms that represent a country.

What was the religious reason we went in to Afghanistan and Iraq? We had coalition forces and the motives were the same, stop the nutbags from taking over. There, or here.

We did NOT go to Afghanistan for religious reasons, and I never ever said that we did. We did NOT go to Iraq for religious reasons, and I never ever said that we did. Yes, we went in an effort to stop terrorists, I agree. Why were the terrorists fighting?

 

[Iceweasel]

The poster posed some legitimate questions. Those questions certainly merit thought. Yes, we have been known to trump-up reasons to go to war. But, usually, at least in the past 50 years, those reasons mainly consist of two words, "Freedom" and "Democracy". Yet, we have neither established freedom nor democracy anywhere. And, any losses or threats to our own freedom and democracy, have come from within.

Nonsense. Go to Germany or Japan and get back to us.

What is "nonsense" about it? Why should myself, or anyone, go to those countries? Please explain. Thanks.

If it isn't obvious it would be a waste of time.

 

[Sonny Clark]

The poster posed some legitimate questions. Those questions certainly merit thought. Yes, we have been known to trump-up reasons to go to war. But, usually, at least in the past 50 years, those reasons mainly consist of two words, "Freedom" and "Democracy". Yet, we have neither established freedom nor democracy anywhere. And, any losses or threats to our own freedom and democracy, have come from within.

Nonsense. Go to Germany or Japan and get back to us.

What is "nonsense" about it? Why should myself, or anyone, go to those countries? Please explain. Thanks.

If it isn't obvious it would be a waste of time.

Very poor dodge. Obviously you have nothing to contribute but one-liners consisting of "nothing". Does it give you a thrill? Does it make you feel better? Does it make you feel important and intelligent? Just curious. Hey, I just gave you an opening to start the name calling and personal attacks.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The thing to remember here is that the United States is seriously infected with Foreign Ideas Hostile to American Principle.

As a result, the US has not 'Gone to War' to defeat an enemy, since WW2. A war that lasted, for the US, from December 7th, 1941, until mid 1945... .

Now... from the 1940, US Army, alone... by itself went from ~200,000 to nearly 9 million troops.

As it stands now... the US Military has roughly the same man power is it did in 1941... or roughly 1.5 million troops in uniform.

Where the US were to rid ourselves of the Leftist infection, and consequently use our Military for its only legitimate purpose, which is to kill those who have harmed us and decidedly NOT to 'win the hearts and minds' of the citizens of those who harmed us..., we would have neither the trouble, nor expense, of prolonged military campaigns and the subsequent issues that come with such.

We could easily have accomplished the necessary goals in Iraq and Afghanistan, by simply having told Turkey we would be using their airspace and to not launch anything that they don't want shot down... providing our means to pinch the Iraqi Military... eviscerating it in a matter of a couple of weeks. Rubble-izing Baghdad ... and leaving a massive bounty on the head of President Hussein on the carpet of fliers we left behind warning the Iraqis that 'if we have to return to get him, we will not be so nice next time...'.

Afghanistan, should have remained a heavily supported special operations campaign. We should never have tried to set up a government in that shit-hole. The people there are simply not inclined to be governed and there's no reason why they should be. It doesn't take much government to look after goats, rocks and dirt.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

The thing to remember here is that the United States is seriously infected with Foreign Ideas Hostile to American Principle.

As a result, the US has not 'Gone to War' to defeat an enemy, since WW2. A war that lasted, for the US, from December 7th, 1941, until mid 1945... .

Now... from the 1940, US Army, alone... by itself went from ~200,000 to nearly 9 million troops.

As it stands now... the US Military has roughly the same man power is it did in 1941... or roughly 1.5 million troops in uniform.

Where the US were to rid ourselves of the Leftist infection, and consequently use our Military for its only legitimate purpose, which is to kill those who have harmed us and decidedly NOT to 'win the hearts and minds' of the citizens of those who harmed us..., we would have neither the trouble, nor expense, of prolonged military campaigns and the subsequent issues that come with such.

We could easily have accomplished the necessary goals in Iraq and Afghanistan, by simply having told Turkey we would be using their airspace and to not launch anything that they don't want shot down... providing our means to pinch the Iraqi Military... eviscerating it in a matter of a couple of weeks. Rubble-izing Baghdad ... and leaving a massive bounty on the head of President Hussein on the carpet of fliers we left behind warning the Iraqis that 'if we have to return to get him, we will not be so nice next time...'.

Afghanistan, should have remained a heavily supported special operations campaign. We should never have tried to set up a government in that shit-hole. The people there are simply not inclined to be governed and there's no reason why they should be. It doesn't take much government to look after goats, rocks and dirt.

While president Bush's intentions were good that we might turn them into democracies, I tend to agree with you. We don't need to involve ourselves in nation building, what we need to do is turn those shit holes into glass parking lots and tell the libertarians and progressives to go **** themselves.