AEON said:
Yes. That is exactly what I want to tell Sean Penn, Cindy Sheehan, and the lovely Code Pink women.
Diemen said:Right. Because they're the ones causing the real damage to America and its reputation.
AEON said:
Yes.
phillyfan26 said:
Are you serious?
Well you can't deny certain morally reprehensible acts that this country has executed.AEON said:
Perhaps. Quotes like this are a bit disturbing:
"I was raised in a country by a public school system that taught us that America was good, that America was just. America has been killing people, like my sister over here says, since we first stepped on this continent, we have been responsible for death and destruction. I passed on that bullshit to my son and my son enlisted. I’m going all over the country telling moms: ‘This country is not worth dying for.’
The people are good, and the system is pretty bad, on all sides. You can't deny that.AEON said:
I would never have let [Casey] go and try and defend this morally repugnant system we have. The people are good, the system is morally repugnant.
AEON said:
They’re a bunch of f**king hypocrites! And we need to, we just need to rise up. We need a revolution!"
Irvine511 said:
that said, do you really think that Cindy freakin' Sheehan is a greater threat to the US and its reputation than George W. Bush?
Most supporters of this war, in this forum that were of age that have been asked if they would serve, they said no. How many in Washington have children in the war? The list of hypocricies goes on and on. [/B]
AEON said:
Anyone demanding a revolution to overthrow the US government is a threat.
BonoVoxSupastar said:
I really don't think that's what she's talking about... what a stretch.
MLK lead a revolution without any "overthrow"...
AEON said:
I joined in 2003. Senator McCain has a kid in the war. General Petraeus also has a kid in the Army.
AEON said:
Comparing Cindy sheehan to MLK is a both a stretch and an insult.
he wasn't asked if the surge was making us safer. he was asked if the entire mission was making us safer. [/B]
Jefferson had some things to say on the subject.AEON said:
Anyone demanding a revolution to overthrow the US government is a threat.
A_Wanderer said:Jefferson had some things to say on the subject.
AEON said:
Anyone demanding a revolution to overthrow the US government is a threat.
AEON said:
However, the "system" she and her collegues want to bring down is a constitutional republic. Should we simply stand by and allow it to happen? What would they replace it with? (most of us could guess)
Bluer White said:
Losing Iraq to AQ/Iran would make us considerably less safe....no matter our foolishness that caused this whole mess.
AEON said:
Perhaps. Quotes like this are a bit disturbing:
"I was raised in a country by a public school system that taught us that America was good, that America was just. America has been killing people, like my sister over here says, since we first stepped on this continent, we have been responsible for death and destruction. I passed on that bullshit to my son and my son enlisted. I’m going all over the country telling moms: ‘This country is not worth dying for.’
I would never have let [Casey] go and try and defend this morally repugnant system we have. The people are good, the system is morally repugnant.
They’re a bunch of f**king hypocrites! And we need to, we just need to rise up. We need a revolution!"
AEON said:
Anyone demanding a revolution to overthrow the US government is a threat.
AEON said:
Anyone demanding a revolution to overthrow the US government is a threat.
AEON said:
It is not the job of the soldier to understand the entire reason he or she is being sent into battle. They are given a mission. The "why are we there" question is to be answered by those that send the soldier into battle (Congress and the President)
That being said, I am quite certain this general believes that his mission in Iraq is legal and moral. However, he is unable to draw a direct parallel between his mission and the overall safety of America because that is quite frankly WELL beyond his scope of responsibilities.
You must admit - this man is not an idiot. He was 5th in his class at West Point and has a PhD from Princeton - not something to ignore. He is wise to admit that his focus is Iraq.
Vincent Vega said:
Sorry, but this line of thinking, especially if you are the leading general in an operation like the Iraq war is very risky.
"I'm just a soldier doing what I got told to do, without thinking myself", is what got many countries, mine included, into deep trouble.
Blindly following your leaders and not thinking for one second about the country you are meant to serve and protect, not the President or his friends, shouldn't be the soldiers task in these days.
A man with a degree from Princeton and being the fifth best of his class in West Point should be wise enough to assess the big picture on his own, don't you think?
Bluer White said:
Losing Iraq to AQ/Iran would make us considerably less safe....no matter our foolishness that caused this whole mess.
DaveC said:
Indeed.
Saying that the "just following orders" mentality applies to the Commanding General of an entire war is absolutely foolish.
Vincent Vega said:
Sorry, but this line of thinking, especially if you are the leading general in an operation like the Iraq war is very risky.
"I'm just a soldier doing what I got told to do, without thinking myself", is what got many countries, mine included, into deep trouble.
Blindly following your leaders and not thinking for one second about the country you are meant to serve and protect, not the President or his friends, shouldn't be the soldiers task in these days.
A man with a degree from Princeton and being the fifth best of his class in West Point should be wise enough to assess the big picture on his own, don't you think?
Irvine511 said:
it gets us to My Lai.