Red Dawn vs. Iraq : A comparative discussion

24

Comments

  • 69charger
    69charger Posts: 1,045
    Cosmo wrote:
    ...
    The Wolverines were insurgents... they used 'unfair', terrorist tactics on uniformed soldiers. They were cowards for not coming out and fighting like men. They blended in with the civilian population and planted bombs. They even killed their own kind for cooperating with their 'Liberators'.

    Sounds like our founding fathers against the British! To win you need to be playing the same game at the same level as your opponent. We need to be just as ruthless, if not more so, than our enemy in order to prevail.
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    69charger wrote:
    Sounds like our founding fathers against the British! To win you need to be playing the same game at the same level as your opponent. We need to be just as ruthless, if not more so, than our enemy in order to prevail.
    ...
    Which is exactly what those guys planting I.E.D.s to blow up U.S. HMMWVs in Sumara are saying. 'Terrorist' is just a name you tag onto someone... depending on which side of the fence you are on. Maybe we don't see them as George Washington and his crew... but, I'm guessing they see us as the British Army in 1770 and the Soviet/Cubans in 'Red Dawn'. And how far off-base would they be?
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    69charger wrote:
    Sounds like our founding fathers against the British! To win you need to be playing the same game at the same level as your opponent. We need to be just as ruthless, if not more so, than our enemy in order to prevail.

    if you're going to fight; fight to win. if you have to hide in bushes or trees; then that's what you do. when it's freedom you're fighting for; all is fair. if you're playing a game that's one thing; but when you fight; you fight to win or you lose.
  • gue_barium
    gue_barium Posts: 5,515
    onelongsong wrote:
    you sure can read a lot into something. what i don't understand is why. the movie was as factual as ghostbusters. that is; the plot. it used factual basis but my point was that the movie portrayed how armed americans could or would protect themselves from an invading force. thus the relevence of the second amendment in current times.
    you can twist it any way you wish; but that was my point.

    It isn't relevant to Iraq. I mean, even if you want to use the comparison of insurgencies, these are two different ball games. One is fantasy, the other is real. In the fantasy, America has a fighting chance. In reality, Iraq insurgents are radically outgunned and outmanned.
    As for citizens being armed...I'm fairly certain the Iraqi population has a higher private gun ownership per capita than does the US. Again, that doesn't do a whole lot in the face of tanks, and bombs dropping down overhead.
    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • gue_barium
    gue_barium Posts: 5,515
    onelongsong wrote:
    if you're going to fight; fight to win. if you have to hide in bushes or trees; then that's what you do. when it's freedom you're fighting for; all is fair. if you're playing a game that's one thing; but when you fight; you fight to win or you lose.

    Nah, in Iraq, ultimately Iraq will win. After paying a tremendous price. The invaders have no intention of ever winning.... they only want to not lose.
    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • 69charger
    69charger Posts: 1,045
    Cosmo wrote:
    ...
    Which is exactly what those guys planting I.E.D.s to blow up U.S. HMMWVs in Sumara are saying. 'Terrorist' is just a name you tag onto someone... depending on which side of the fence you are on. Maybe we don't see them as George Washington and his crew... but, I'm guessing they see us as the British Army in 1770 and the Soviet/Cubans in 'Red Dawn'. And how far off-base would they be?

    That's completely true but I am not on thier side, are you?
  • 69charger
    69charger Posts: 1,045
    onelongsong wrote:
    if you're going to fight; fight to win. if you have to hide in bushes or trees; then that's what you do. when it's freedom you're fighting for; all is fair. if you're playing a game that's one thing; but when you fight; you fight to win or you lose.

    Whatever it takes, I agree, but when you loose the will to do whatever it takes you've already lost.
  • gue_barium
    gue_barium Posts: 5,515
    69charger wrote:
    That's completely true but I am not on thier side, are you?

    You're not on either side.
    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • Specifics
    Specifics Posts: 417
    69charger wrote:
    Whatever it takes, I agree, but when you loose the will to do whatever it takes you've already lost.

    so you lost when you didnt sign up?
  • Specifics
    Specifics Posts: 417
    onelongsong wrote:
    you sure can read a lot into something. what i don't understand is why. the movie was as factual as ghostbusters. that is; the plot. it used factual basis but my point was that the movie portrayed how armed americans could or would protect themselves from an invading force. thus the relevence of the second amendment in current times.
    you can twist it any way you wish; but that was my point.

    You should watch Independence Day, its even better, Will Smith actually knocked an alien clean out with ONE PUNCH man!!
    thats the way we're gonna have to deal with those alien fuckers when they finally get the balls to come down here!
  • 69charger
    69charger Posts: 1,045
    gue_barium wrote:
    You're not on either side.

    Sure I am.
  • 69charger
    69charger Posts: 1,045
    Specifics wrote:
    so you lost when you didnt sign up?

    Love it or leave it right back at ya! ;)
  • gue_barium
    gue_barium Posts: 5,515
    69charger wrote:
    Sure I am.

    I guess I have to ask. Since when have you been an insurgent?
    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • Specifics
    Specifics Posts: 417
    69charger wrote:
    Love it or leave it right back at ya! ;)

    I left the army less than 6 mths ago, i left because i'm not on your side.
    I'll leave it.
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    Specifics wrote:
    You should watch Independence Day, its even better, Will Smith actually knocked an alien clean out with ONE PUNCH man!!
    thats the way we're gonna have to deal with those alien fuckers when they finally get the balls to come down here!

    what are you talking about?
  • Specifics
    Specifics Posts: 417
    onelongsong wrote:
    what are you talking about?

    Im backing you up, the film Independance Day you know? its about as factual as ghostbusters, but....the movie portrays how americans could and would save the world from alien invaders. I'm with you.
  • onelongsong
    onelongsong Posts: 3,517
    gue_barium wrote:
    It isn't relevant to Iraq. I mean, even if you want to use the comparison of insurgencies, these are two different ball games. One is fantasy, the other is real. In the fantasy, America has a fighting chance. In reality, Iraq insurgents are radically outgunned and outmanned.
    As for citizens being armed...I'm fairly certain the Iraqi population has a higher private gun ownership per capita than does the US. Again, that doesn't do a whole lot in the face of tanks, and bombs dropping down overhead.

    one is not fantacy. it is history represented in a modern day context. in reality; america has every chance to win against an invasion. you can count on at least 50 million citizens to take up arms to protect their homeland. there isn't a country with 50 million in their armies. anyone attacking the us is out gunned and out maned. plus we have home court advantage. we know where to ambush; topography; and all the other advantages.
    i'm fairly certain that saddam disarmed the population or he couldn't have stayed in power. the insurgents are being supplied guns and bombs from outside if iraq. but they have the home court advantage and we'll never win until we flood the country with troops. that's our only chance. secure the borders and fight from the outside in. america has the guns and ammo inside the country. america also has vast wilderness which wouldn't be bombed. not to mention that bombers will not be able to fly in. the military can protect the skys.
  • Specifics
    Specifics Posts: 417
    onelongsong wrote:
    one is not fantacy. it is history represented in a modern day context. in reality; america has every chance to win against an invasion. you can count on at least 50 million citizens to take up arms to protect their homeland. there isn't a country with 50 million in their armies. anyone attacking the us is out gunned and out maned. plus we have home court advantage. we know where to ambush; topography; and all the other advantages.
    i'm fairly certain that saddam disarmed the population or he couldn't have stayed in power. the insurgents are being supplied guns and bombs from outside if iraq. but they have the home court advantage and we'll never win until we flood the country with troops. that's our only chance. secure the borders and fight from the outside in. america has the guns and ammo inside the country. america also has vast wilderness which wouldn't be bombed. not to mention that bombers will not be able to fly in. the military can protect the skys.

    dude give the weed a break for a week or so.

    the military can protect the skies? but on the ground the military is overwhelmed? think about it.
  • 69charger
    69charger Posts: 1,045
    gue_barium wrote:
    I guess I have to ask. Since when have you been an insurgent?

    Born one. I love this country.
  • 69charger
    69charger Posts: 1,045
    Specifics wrote:
    I left the army less than 6 mths ago, i left because i'm not on your side.
    I'll leave it.

    Thank you for your service. Have fun in France.

Categories