jordan Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 He could still be tried on the world court for humanitarian violations. Instead, it will just be Iraq deciding. I like jgerlica's view. From someone whose been there the story is always different than those who rely on the news. That's generaly what I've heard from the people who have been there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 there certainly are other stories. i respect jglerica's view, but i do not believe he represents the united states military. the images i have seen are enough to disturb me and i do not even have to be there. i pity our soldiers; they are being used as pawns. unfortunately, the lower and middle classes must always be the ones who suffer for the advancement of the corrupt "elite" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordan Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 I don't want to speak fo jgerlica on this but my oppinion: He was there, in Iraq himself. What images have you seen that have led you to believe you have more knowledge of the situation than he does? Our soldiers are being used as pawns? They are the military. This is what they signed up for. Their job is not always to agree or disagree with the cause. I wouldn't bet that a lot of them disagree anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 What images have you seen that have led you to believe you have more knowledge of the situation than he does? i did not say i know more than he does. i said that i have seen things that he most like has not. i also realize that he has seen things that i have not. isn't it a shame that our soldiers have to be pawns? when they are recruited, surely they are never told of the atrocities many are expected to commit. surely they are not told of the horrors of war. a great number of soldiers disagree with the cause; have you seen the statistics on how few people are re-enlisting? how about the suicide rate? according to their job specifications, it may not be the "place" of soldiers to question their commanding officers, but that does not mean they have lost the natural state of free will. if i were there i would be outraged. i definately would leave. there is no way that i would ever let myself be used by the government for the economic gains of a few individuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgerlica Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Actually it is a point in western militaries to have the lower enlisted question their superiors to some extent. That is why article 92 of the UCMJ states violation of a "lawful order." We are not expected to commit attrocities, as the Nuremburg trials showed. I was just following orders is not a valid defence in a military court. And I'm really sick of hearing how the middle and lower classes are the majority of our armed forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 well it's true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordan Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 when they are recruited, urely they are never told of the atrocities many are expected to commit. surely they are not told of the horrors of war. I disagree. I always thought they were put through tough situations for the reason of knowing exactly what to expect. a great number of soldiers disagree with the cause; have you seen the statistics on how few people are re-enlisting? how about the suicide rate? I haven't seen those stats. but that does not mean they have lost the natural state of free will. if i were there i would be outraged. i definately would leave. there is no way that i would ever let myself be used by the government for the economic gains of a few individuals. What do you know? That sounds a lot like the situation from a couple months ago in a certain country I've been hearing about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgerlica Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 What is true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgerlica Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Last time I checked we're not all paupers desperately seeking a new life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 I haven't seen those stats. you should find them. What do you know? That sounds a lot like the situation from a couple months ago in a certain country I've been hearing about. ???????? free will is impossible to take. identify that country and substantiate your post, if you please Last time I checked we're not all paupers desperately seeking a new life. nope, you aren't. you drew a conclusion that was not implied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordan Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 you should find them. Not my responsability as I did cite them. ????????free will is impossible to take. identify that country and substantiate your post, if you please The mystery country is Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgerlica Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 nope, you aren't. you drew a conclusion that was not implied. Oh but you did, you clearly alluded to the iniquity of military service, and then to the demographics of said organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 just to clarify my point (since you missed it)... i find it to be sad that the have-nots are the ones who pay in cash and in blood for the benefits of the haves. this is exactly what marx warned of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgerlica Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 That's precisely what I have taken umbrage with. It does not apply in any way to our volunteer system. The haves do serve, and continue to serve. May I point out one well known example: John Kerry. We can go round and round on this for hours. And by the way, I much prefer Bakunin to Marx or Engels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 just to clarify my point (since you missed it)... i find it to be sad that the have-nots are the ones who pay in cash and in blood for the benefits of the haves. this is exactly what marx warned of Right, so what do you suppose should be done about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 The haves do serve, and continue to serve. a low percent do And by the way, I much prefer Bakunin to Marx or Engels. have you read das kapital? it's quite a fascinating look into capitalism and where it fails. it proposes socialistic values; some of which we use today in the united states. Right, so what do you suppose should be done about it? i believe that when a soldier pledges his life to defend his country that he should not be misled into fighting for the economic gains of a select few. THAT is the problem we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordan Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 a low percent do I really like sources. I'm still not sure why you say you would leave the military if you didn't have a voice in anything and then say it was bad we freed the Iraqis from a dictator who restricted all his people's freedoms for personal gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 I'm still not sure why you say you would leave the military if you didn't have a voice in anything and then say it was bad we freed the Iraqis from a dictator who restricted all his people's freedoms for personal gain. mmm, killing them all really is giving them freedom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordan Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Exactly my point, when Hussein killed them for speaking out or practicing a different religion, he was resticting their freedom. Glad we agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 apparently you missed my point. hussein killed 5,000 kurds in 1995. i believed he killed more. i do not believe he killed hundreds of thousands. meanwhile, the un estimates that between the two gulf wars that 500,000 iraqi CHILDREN ALONE (so i suppose that would put the total count in the millions) died as a result of coalition bombings and economic sanctions. they also estimated that iraqi civilian casualties from the second war would be upwards of 500,000. right, that really is worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jordan Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 I really like sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 bah ive been avoiding this because it's late and i dont want to look around but fine: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0107-09.htm http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/27c/100.html http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/03/11/ana03308.html http://www.unknownnews.net/031112a-nt.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skye Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Good luck Iraq Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 you should find them. A point of courtesy here: if you bring up 'statistics' which you think prove your side of the argument, always give sources, if they're not extremely widely known. It's bad form to do otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atinymonkey Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 To be honest, the re-enlistment stats will always be low. If your 17 > 25 when you join up, your young and fit. Few people aged 30+ really want to rejoin the armed services, they have cumulative injures and a greater risk of physical harm from the training regimes. That and they would rejoin at the level they left, minus the lag time for the years out of service, they end up in a disadvantaged position both physically and financially. That and the fact they left the military service for a reason, like you leave any job, and are not likely to change their minds. What's more interesting is the percentage of people who remain in military service all there working lives, compared to any other job. The re-enlistment stats are a moot point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now