America Supports You

Jeremy2009

Just felt like expressing some thanks to all of those that are serving or have served in the military. We cannot do what we do if it werent for what you and your families do to secure our freedoms. Thanks!

John

CorporateWhore

What freedoms are they securing exactly?

Don't get me wrong, I got family in the army and I love our troops. I support them until the end.

But in Iraq, what freedoms are they securing for us here in America?

Jeremy2009

I dont think it's necessary to point out what freedoms we have. We have so many ...my favorite is FREEDOM! I really didnt mean to start this thread to start a political war ...again. There is too much of that shit going on now already ...everywhere. It just seems that all I hear in the news on TV, radio and internet is all the negative things in the world. It doesnt matter what country your serving from UK, AUS, FRA, Kuwait. Those people do so much for the world and they should get so much more.

jlew24asu

Thank you for all you do. I fully support you!!!

CorporateWhore

Jeremy2009 wrote:

I dont think it's necessary to point out what freedoms we have. We have so many ...my favorite is FREEDOM! I really didnt mean to start this thread to start a political war ...again. There is too much of that shit going on now already ...everywhere. It just seems that all I hear in the news on TV, radio and internet is all the negative things in the world. It doesnt matter what country your serving from UK, AUS, FRA, Kuwait. Those people do so much for the world and they should get so much more.

Well, amen. They do do a lot for us and they SHOULD get more.

The 9/11 families got 2 million each for losing someone in the WTC attacks. 3,000 perished.

Military families get far less for boys that sign up to defend their country and know they could die.

Not like I'm comparing, but our boys in the military are a gift from God.

MrBrian

CorporateWhore wrote:

ie.

Not like I'm comparing, but our boys in the military are a gift from God.

I'm sure the families of all the innocents they killed feel the same way about them.
----

The troops should should be paid more and not treated like meat, they should also not be sent out for war so quickly and the people who just scream "support" needs to understand that "support the troops" means not having them invade countries (on anyones orders) when the only thing they are really securing is not anyones freedoms but the oil fields of the third world.

Supporting the troops does not mean a yellow ribbon or a bumper sticker with a faded flag on the back, it means proper health care and benefits for the families of the soldiers. It means making sure they are taken care of.
It also means not scaring them with a prison sentance if they choose not to fight, what's the point of forcing someone to do something? the job will just be done incorrectly.

This is supporting the troops.

surferdude

MrBrian wrote:

Supporting the troops does not mean a yellow ribbon or a bumper sticker with a faded flag on the back, it means proper health care and benefits for the families of the soldiers. It means making sure they are taken care of.
It also means not scaring them with a prison sentance if they choose not to fight, what's the point of forcing someone to do something? the job will just be done incorrectly.

This is supporting the troops.

Thanks for deciding for all of us what supporting the troops mean. I'm so glad it was a consensus decision you made for all of us.

MrBrian

surferdude wrote:

Thanks for deciding for all of us what supporting the troops mean. I'm so glad it was a consensus decision you made for all of us.

fine, "to my mind, that is supporting the troops"
--

miller8966

MrBrian wrote:

I'm sure the families of all the innocents they killed feel the same way about them.
----

.
It also means not scaring them with a prison sentance if they choose not to fight, what's the point of forcing someone to do something? the job will just be done incorrectly.

This is supporting the troops.

I dont believe in a prison sentence but they should definetly be kicked out of the military.

sapperskunk

MrBrian wrote:

I'm sure the families of all the innocents they killed feel the same way about them.
----

The troops should should be paid more and not treated like meat, they should also not be sent out for war so quickly and the people who just scream "support" needs to understand that "support the troops" means not having them invade countries (on anyones orders) when the only thing they are really securing is not anyones freedoms but the oil fields of the third world.

Supporting the troops does not mean a yellow ribbon or a bumper sticker with a faded flag on the back, it means proper health care and benefits for the families of the soldiers. It means making sure they are taken care of.
It also means not scaring them with a prison sentance if they choose not to fight, what's the point of forcing someone to do something? the job will just be done incorrectly.

This is supporting the troops.

Kind of a generalization isn't it? I was a troop and I never killed an innocent person. So please elaborate some more how I killed some innocent families?

And how the fuck do you know what the troops need? Cause of your two buddies, one that was medically discharged and the other who was too chickenshit to support his friends in combat. Great assesment.

Your knowledge of the military is like my knowledge of fish hatcherys, absolutely none. Stop faking the funk dipshit.

MrBrian

sapperskunk wrote:

Kind of a generalization isn't it? I was a troop and I never killed an innocent person. So please elaborate some more how I killed some innocent families?

And how the fuck do you know what the troops need?

.

I know what they need because they are human like everyone else, they need a better wage and better benefits. Fairly obvious I think.

as far as your first question goes, you were part of group of people (in this case the army) that has a history wrongs. I did'nt mean to generalize but if you go back you'll see that my reply was towards "but our boys in the military are a gift from God".... then read my reply and I hope you undertstand my point. I don't wish to reply to the rest of your post because talk like that just does'nt interest me. sorry.

sapperskunk

MrBrian wrote:

I know what they need because they are human like everyone else, they need a better wage and better benefits. Fairly obvious I think.

as far as your first question goes, you were part of group of people (in this case the army) that has a history wrongs. I did'nt mean to generalize but if you go back you'll see that my reply was towards "but our boys in the military are a gift from God".... then read my reply and I hope you undertstand my point. I don't wish to reply to the rest of your post because talk like that just does'nt interest me. sorry.

And what about the history of the Army in terms of "rights"? I guess you got a problem with humanitarian missions too?

CorporateWhore

Mr Brian got pwned.

MrBrian

sapperskunk wrote:

And what about the history of the Army in terms of "rights"? I guess you got a problem with humanitarian missions too?

of course not my friend, I do however have major problems when other plans are hidden under the blanket of a "humanitarian mission" such as the case with somalia (i.e black hawk down) when the real work was about oil interests.

jlew24asu

class act turning this thread into this. you know who you are

sapperskunk

MrBrian wrote:

of course not my friend, I do however have major problems when other plans are hidden under the blanket of a "humanitarian mission" such as the case with somalia (i.e black hawk down) when the real work was about oil interests.

So you have no problem whatsoever for humanitarian missions the Army conducts as long as there are no hidden agendas?

So what your telling me is we should NOT have gone to Somalia with the UNITED NATIONS to feed people that were starving to death because there were other interests at hand?

This is from Wikipedia

Following the failure of United Nations' Operation Restore Hope and beginning in 1993, a two-year UN effort (primarily in the south) was ABLE to alleviate famine conditions. The UN contingent was at times led by American troops, 18 of whom were killed in a raid in Mogadishu where two helicopters (Supers 61&64) were shot down (as portrayed in the film "Black Hawk Down").


Didn't you say you understand what humans need? Well second to water, humans need food. So I take it your not a fan of the UN also? Balkans mission? Kosovo? Bosnia?

MrBrian

sapperskunk wrote:

So you have no problem whatsoever for humanitarian missions the Army conducts as long as there are no hidden agendas?

So what your telling me is we should NOT have gone to Somalia with the UNITED NATIONS to feed people that were starving to death because there were other interests at hand?

This is from Wikipedia

Following the failure of United Nations' Operation Restore Hope and beginning in 1993, a two-year UN effort (primarily in the south) was ABLE to alleviate famine conditions. The UN contingent was at times led by American troops, 18 of whom were killed in a raid in Mogadishu where two helicopters (Supers 61&64) were shot down (as portrayed in the film "Black Hawk Down").


Didn't you say you understand what humans need? Well second to water, humans need food. So I take it your not a fan of the UN also? Balkans mission? Kosovo? Bosnia?

Without the oil connection, america would not of touched somalia. I don't call feeding someone because you want what they have a good thing. Feed them so they like you, so they get close to you, then rape them.

We also see just how well that mission worked out yeah? and you guys are back again only this time fighting "terrorism" in somalia.

Ignore Rwanda, go to somalia.
--

Now what are you saying, kosovo and said missions had more than meets the eye?

Nothingman54

I dont support killers of any kind.

sapperskunk

MrBrian wrote:

Without the oil connection, america would not of touched somalia. I don't call feeding someone because you want what they have a good thing. Feed them so they like you, so they get close to you, then rape them.

We also see just how well that mission worked out yeah? and you guys are back again only this time fighting "terrorism" in somalia.

Ignore Rwanda, go to somalia.
--

Now what are you saying, kosovo and said missions had more than meets the eye?

Okay so ultimately you are in support of letting people die, starve, be wiped off the earth etc, if underlying political back scratching is prevalent?

Yeah and the Somalia mission worked out pretty good, why do you think I included the wikipedia quote? "Able to alleviate famine conditions" ring a bell? But what was I thinking, you don't care about people starving to death.

I sincerely feel sorry for you, go to your closest college and enroll in "International Human Rights" immediately.

ThumbingMyWay32

MrBrian wrote:

Without the oil connection, america would not of touched somalia. I don't call feeding someone because you want what they have a good thing. Feed them so they like you, so they get close to you, then rape them.

We also see just how well that mission worked out yeah? and you guys are back again only this time fighting "terrorism" in somalia.

Ignore Rwanda, go to somalia.
--

Now what are you saying, kosovo and said missions had more than meets the eye?

You want to know what happend in Somalia? A couple soldiers died and Clinton ran away with his balls cut off. The Ethiopian army, using 4,000 soldiers, recently captured the entire nation. (And they're supressing the violence)

This is an example of what happens when a military is allowed to fight a war without liberal intervention. Refer to the "Feminization of America."

MrBrian

ThumbingMyWay32 wrote:

You want to know what happend in Somalia? A couple soldiers died and Clinton ran away with his balls cut off. The Ethiopian army, using 4,000 soldiers, recently captured the entire nation. (And they're supressing the violence)

This is an example of what happens when a military is allowed to fight a war without liberal intervention. Refer to the "Feminization of America."

If you do a search for "somalia" you should be able to find a couple threads about it, on one of them i posted an article. it should answer your lack of understanding on the issue.

nevertheless, ethiopia and the warlords in somalia are currently backed by america. bombs, missles, bullets and all. the same kind of warlords that brought down those helicopters are now holding hands with america.