View Full Version : "bad" US conflicts and the reasons for them
Chewillneverdie
27th November 2003, 08:09
alright just wondering which conflicts do u absolutely disagree with and which do u kinda think has a good side and whatnot lol. I agree with WW2, and understand a bit of Somalia. I also think Saddam needed taken out, but they coulda been less subtle about it lol. Vietnam's a touchy subject to me, i disagree with the motives of the war but i wont trash talk US troops in the war. I dont agree with the war, a stupid loss of life. but i feel sorry for the troops
Chewillneverdie
27th November 2003, 08:15
im going for Conflicts out in the open lol. i could list alot more but to tired to
redstar2000
27th November 2003, 13:46
...but I won't trash talk US troops in the war. I don't agree with the war, a stupid loss of life, but I feel sorry for the troops.
Why not "trash talk" them? They murdered somewhere between two and three million Vietnamese.
They dropped more explosives on that small country than were used by all sides in World War II.
Feel sorry for them, do you?
I don't!
In Vietnam or anywhere else.
cubist
27th November 2003, 14:33
personally
ALL CONFLICTS THE U.S has ever been involved in were unneccassary.
Gulf War one is remotely acceptable as iraq invaded kuwait until embargos were placed on iraq
the qoute at the bottom of my post sums my opinion up
Intifada
27th November 2003, 14:56
the usa is the biggest terrorist nation in the world. they have attacked 72 nations since ww2, and the list keeps growing.
i have no sympathy for the troops who died recently in iraq.
i support the iraqi resistance and want an end to the occupation.
deimos
27th November 2003, 16:01
The recent war in Iraq was a war that I supported. Saddam was (is?) evil(plz don't disagree with me on that. My father is an Iraqi Kurd, I know quite a lot about it), his removal made the world a little bit better.
Gulf War one is remotely acceptable as iraq invaded kuwait until embargos were placed on iraq
No, it wasn't. I mean, it was, but not because of the reasons you mentioned. Kuwait is a completely artificial state(so are the UAE, Bahrain or Qatar) that is still ruled by a medieval monarchy. There is absolutely no difference between an iraqi and a Kuwaiti. Neither is there one between southerniraqis and shias from northeast SaudiArabia. In my opinion, kuwait is a part of Iraq(actually it was, but then the brits divided it to control the ressources easilier)
There was no alternative to WW2. Vietnam was not justified at all. The dictator in South vietnam was a complete fascist. The American troups are responslibe for quite a lot of massacres there, many of them were never discovered by the public.
The Korean war was justified too, in my view.
flayer2
27th November 2003, 16:41
chewill neverdie ,
Very few wars waged by the united states can be considered "just wars".
You may want to read what CHE had to say on the Vietnam conflict as well as other wars.
http://www.che-lives.com/home/modules.php?...=showpage&pid=8 (http://www.che-lives.com/home/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=8)
BuyOurEverything
27th November 2003, 20:20
Vietnam's a touchy subject to me, i disagree with the motives of the war but i wont trash talk US troops in the war. I dont agree with the war, a stupid loss of life. but i feel sorry for the troops
Why wouldn't you trash talk the troops, simply because they're American? I do feel sorry for some of the troops. The young naive kids that just turned 18 and got drafted and didn't know what the fuck to do and ended up dying over there. I do feel sorry for them but I feel a lot more sympathy for the Vietnamese who they slaughtered and who's land they invaded.
Morpheus
27th November 2003, 20:37
All wars between states are immoral. Working people die in order to enrich the working class. No war but the class war.
cubist
27th November 2003, 20:39
ok fair enough i thought it was, i was young when it went down haven't really thought about it on that level i am only 20 now so i would have been 7 then.
deimos it wasn't a just action to take unilateral action, against the decision of the world powers i don't care if you think the UN is aload of tripe, but to undermind the "peacekeepers" just removed the regard for the UN to the likes of the militants in iraq and other arabic movements
sadam IS WAS?! evil true he had to go but not like that.
Chewillneverdie
28th November 2003, 07:11
Grandfather was drafted for Nam, 101st Airborne sniper, sent in a few times to save POWs the missions were fruitless as the usually tortured troops were quickly moved. He killed his own officer once, a racist lt. who the platoon knew was gonna get them killed. so they blew his brains out (literally) jesus am i the only one who knows the atrocities the N. Vietnamese commited on the Tet Offensive? they attacked civilian areas and that was pretty much their main target. my g-father had no knowledge of why he was fighting, but he had to fight. Got cancer from Nam from that agent orange shit. I always pity the troops. In Iraq the troops BELIEVE they are trying to help the people. The troops there are losing faith. i.e. there are more and more suicides from the troops. If the US pulled out from every country in the world, and kept all our forces here. Would the smaller countries fall prey to those that need support by a big country? Then all we would hear is how everyone needs our help and were insensitive pricks. Oh and the Mogidishu shit was alright in my opinion, the militias were gunning down people wanting food and trying to pin it on UN forces. The militia fighters even used the soldiers weakness for trying to help against them. Holding guns to the backs of children and firing from beneath their legs. WW2 was justifiable. Alotta people enlist cus they have no fucking choice. My family was and is poor Irish immigrants and because of that we have always had to enlist to make a living, so dont give me all that shit how the US troops are trying to kill everyone off.
SgtPepper369
28th November 2003, 08:38
It's either Kill or Die when you are a troop. And there are no sympathies. When in war you can't just join the other side in the middle of the battle. You aren't just "saving your country" you're really fighting for you're own life. At least thats my opinion. Hell alot of these kids in war enlisted to pay their way throgh college... oops. Too bad they have to go fight a war now.
I don't consider the troops to be the murderers. It's the comanders (in cheif) who sit on their rich white asses and send troops full of minorities (poor, blacks, hispanics, etc.) who have no choice but to fight cause the boss say's so. I try not to think what one goes throgh when in the army. I don't think I'd ever know unless I experienced it first hand and that's a risk I'm not willing to take. Seeing as most veterans don't want to talk about their experiences (watching their freinds die... finding that they have the power to kill a man)
now don't get me started on veterans...
deimos
28th November 2003, 14:29
Sadam IS WAS?! evil true he had to go but not like that.
It would have been impossible to remove him democratically. No chance.
deimos it wasn't a just action to take unilateral action, against the decision of the world powers i don't care if you think the UN is aload of tripe, but to undermind the "peacekeepers" just removed the regard for the UN to the likes of the militants in iraq and other arabic movements
Ofcourse I don't like how the US are treating the UN(all in all, I hate the US...but why stop them if they do a good thing?atl least once..) and their allies. Thats this Bush extremist and cheney(he's really fascist...Fini is a communist compared with Dick). It's their fault.
cubist
29th November 2003, 11:57
i do agree, don't get me wrong i am just not a fan of War really,
And we knew doing it may leave a large gap to be filled by converted western hating islamic militants who just lost there families becuase of it. and thats why it shouldn't have been done
Soviet power supreme
29th November 2003, 14:04
Don't forget that U.S backed Saddam in 80s against Iran.
deimos
29th November 2003, 14:16
they did not only back him, in fact they also brought him to power. They provided sattelite images tp fight the Kurdish rebells, and they gave their permission to invade Kuwait(Saddam was too stupid to realize that it was a trap)
LuZhiming
2nd December 2003, 08:01
Originally posted by Soviet power
[email protected] 29 2003, 03:04 PM
Don't forget that U.S backed Saddam in 80s against Iran.
The "backing" of Saddam was quite treachorous. The U.S. did allow the sales of chemical weapons to Iraq, encouraged him to invade Iran, and vetoed U.N. resolutions condemning his attacks against the Kurds, but remember in 1983 the U.S. secretly gave weapons to Iran. The purpose of all of these actions was to cause heavy damages on both sides.
Maynard
2nd December 2003, 08:23
I agree it was necessary to be involved in the fight against fascism. I don't agree with a lot of things that America did during the war but it was a better alternative, than fascist rule.
, i disagree with the motives of the war but i wont trash talk US troops in the war
Not even those who killed innocents for no reason ? Or raped woman ? Surely they deserve denouncing no matter who they are.
Gulf War one is remotely acceptable as iraq invaded kuwait until embargos were placed on iraq
That was just to protect American economic interests, just before it happened. The USA said they would take no position on such an issue, till the United States feared a united Arab world, which may be as a collective too powerful.
The recent war in Iraq was a war that I supported. Saddam was (is?) evil(plz don't disagree with me on that.
I don't think many would disagree with that but the fact is, Saddam was temporary. He would have been overthrown/died eventually. American imperialism will be there for a lot longer. It will just be an American installed dictator ( Like Saddam used to be), who will look after US interests beyond everything else. It will be the same all over again except Iraq will be less economically "free" than ever before.
Looter
2nd December 2003, 10:59
The Americans saved Naziism, although they hated German Culture and Civilization, Naziism was the same System of Slavery and Genocide that America has. They spent the war destroying cities and killing Civilians, by D Day the war was over and they took up Hitlers crusade against Bolshevism and made it their own. Hitler admired America and used it as a model for Germany.
Sandino111
2nd December 2003, 20:38
1) The Americans and Viet Cong both commited atrocities! My lai massacre, anybody? The whole point is there should not have been U.S. troops in Vietnam!
:angry: Ronald Reagan supported terrorism in Nicaragua. He sold weapons to Iran and used the money to finance the Contras. The Sandanistas wanted to overthrow the Somoza dictatorship, but Reagan didn't see it that way, he saw the spread of communism, thus he had to act against the Sandanistas. To many Nicaraguan people Ronal Reagan is the American Osama Bin Laded.
Can any one add or correct ? I heard the World court found the U.S. guilty of war crimes, because of the Contra scandal.
ComradeRobertRiley
2nd December 2003, 20:53
Originally posted by
[email protected] 27 2003, 05:56 PM
the usa is the biggest terrorist nation in the world. they have attacked 72 nations since ww2, and the list keeps growing.
i have no sympathy for the troops who died recently in iraq.
i support the iraqi resistance and want an end to the occupation.
what are the 72 countries/dates since WW2 that they occoured.
would appreciate if you could tell me please.
Bastardo
2nd December 2003, 21:05
IMO anybody on here who posts joy that working class people of ANY nation has died in ANY conflict is FULL OF SHIT!!!
You boys and girls who profess to know Che Guevara should learn a little bit more! There is NO glory in ANY of the WORKING CLASS DYEING!!!
THERE ARE A LOT OF CHILDREN ON HERE WHO TALK SHITE!!!!!!
Edited to curb my foul drunken language.
Sandino111
4th December 2003, 20:40
There have been lists on this subject, but I will give you a few countries.
Argentina
Chile
Cuba
El Salvador
Greece
Guatemala
Italy
Iraq
Nicaragua
Venezuela
Vietnam
any body else want to add to the list?
LuZhiming
5th December 2003, 00:33
Originally posted by Sandino111+Dec 4 2003, 09:40 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Sandino111 @ Dec 4 2003, 09:40 PM) There have been lists on this subject, but I will give you a few countries.
Argentina
Chile
Cuba
El Salvador
Greece
Guatemala
Italy
Iraq
Nicaragua
Venezuela
Vietnam
any body else want to add to the list? [/b]
Afghanistan
Angola
Bolivia
Bosnia
Cambodia
Dominican Republic
Grenada
Haiti
Iran
Laos
Lebanon
Libya
North Korea
Panama
Phillipines
Puerto Rico
Somalia
Sudan
Yugoslavia
[email protected] 4 2003, 09:40 PM
Vietnam
That counts as two countries. The U.S. attacked both South and North Vietnam while they were seperate.
pedro san pedro
5th December 2003, 05:11
please remember that the supposed "liberation" of the Iraqi people was more a consequence, rather than a motivation for the USA invading Iraq.
Bush's reason for this war was because of the weapons of mass destruction apparently controlled by Saddam Hussien.
After this was dissmissed as bollocks by the worlds populus, the motivation for war became the link between the Iraqi regime and al queda.
After this was dimissed ss bollocks by the worlds population, the offical line became the liberation of the Iraqi people.
If the USA was so concerned with the welfare of the Iraqis, why have they enforced a decade of ruthless sanctions?? these have not hurt Saddam Hussien, it is the people who have suffered.
Why has the USA dropped so much depleted uranium over the country??
Almost all the Iraqi's I have met have been dead set against this war. Bombing a civilain population is not the way to win their freedom.
Chewillneverdie
6th December 2003, 05:09
They spent the war destroying cities and killing Civilians, by D Day the war was over and they took up Hitlers crusade against Bolshevism and made it their own. Hitler admired America and used it as a model for Germany.
yeah thats a big load of BS buddy, my g-grandfather fought in the war, dropped over Normandy, and the war was far from over when he landed and secured the area. Battle of the Bulge anyone? jesus christ this is getting pathetic. You actually hate the US for fighting WW2, i can understand most everything, i hate the US also but WW2 is something diff. Anyone agree with me that if Stalin would have been killed and Trotsky would have been put into power the USSR would have been much better. Im sorry but i really hate Stalin with a fiery passion. Estimated by historians around 20million dead while he was in power, that just seems a little fucking much doesnt it?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.