Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 3/12/07 02:00 PM, TheRoyalEnglishman wrote:

Stop dodging the question. How does this make them terror supporters? Just because they're not blindly patriotic and can understand the other side of the story.

So you're saying that US soldiers are just as evil as the suicide bombers who target civilians?

At 3/12/07 02:03 PM, Memorize wrote: So you're saying that US soldiers are just as evil as the suicide bombers who target civilians?

I didn't say a thing. But you are suggesting that being able to understand the insurgents, even if you don't agree with their actions is supporting terror. Which is wrong.

At 3/12/07 02:18 PM, TheRoyalEnglishman wrote:

I didn't say a thing. But you are suggesting that being able to understand the insurgents, even if you don't agree with their actions is supporting terror. Which is wrong.

He says: "The terror is coming from the US side ..AND.. suicide bombers. The distinction is moot because they both want to take control of Iraq for their own purposes."

Then you in defense to that statement: "How does this make them terror supporters? Just because they're not blindly patriotic and can understand the other side of the story."

He compared Soldiers who protect people to those who specifically target to civilians while setting a tone as if the soldiers are worse. You're coming in defense to that statement. Why? He's clearly deluded himself into thinking they're no different from each other. So why are you coming to his aid unless you feel the same way? What possible explaination could you have in defending his statement?

He may understand insurgents or he may understand the soldiers, but you can't understand both with that statement when you compare them side by side and claim their similar.

So, you feel as if soldiers are terrorists?

At 3/12/07 02:24 PM, Memorize wrote: What possible explaination could you have in defending his statement?

I thought that I would question your bleating of 'terror support'. Besides, the quote you just used suggests that he utterly despises terrorism of all forms. Just because he can see it doesn't just flow on one side of the river.

He may understand insurgents or he may understand the soldiers, but you can't understand both with that statement when you compare them side by side and claim their similar.

Understanding is different from support.

So, you feel as if soldiers are terrorists?

No, I was not the one who made the point in the first place. That is in fact completely different from what I said. I just thought I would question your use of the term 'terror supporter'.

At 3/12/07 03:57 AM, JudgeDredd wrote:

"A war without reason reduces civilization to a monstrous machine for creating amputees and corpses. Since wars are now fought with science, such a war is a defilement of all scientists." -- The Editors of ScienceWeek

So when the editors of ScienceWeek say "...wars are now fought with science..."; by "now" they mean the entirity of human history? I can't stand sanctimonious scientists who behave as if science is some pure and perfect thing that has a noble history unpolluted by the more base human instincts. From the very first weapon made of metal was used to kill another human being, scientists have profited. Science has always been the decisive factor in a conflict, and scientists have always "defiled" themselves in war and peace by developing new weapons to further their scientific research.

I guess it is time for the priests of the new God (scientists) to come and crucify me for my blasphamy...

At 3/12/07 02:34 PM, TheRoyalEnglishman wrote:

No, I was not the one who made the point in the first place. That is in fact completely different from what I said. I just thought I would question your use of the term 'terror supporter'.

Goodie for you.

Altho I do absolutely LOVE how you self proclaimed "troop supportors" will come to the aid of someone who labels them as bad as the insurgents who blow up people on a daily basis. How very noble of you.

I hate crackas younger than the age of sixteen.

And that limit might go up soon.

At 3/12/07 05:35 PM, Memorize wrote: Altho I do absolutely LOVE how you self proclaimed "troop supportors" will come to the aid of someone who labels them as bad as the insurgents who blow up people on a daily basis. How very noble of you.

I wasn't necessarily coming to anyone's aid. I was just pointing out that your phrase was incorrect. I'm sick of repeating that now.

At 3/11/07 11:56 PM, jay777 wrote:

If it was up to me, I would have the fucking US soldiers executed and their bodies ripped apart and fed to the Iraqis." -Begoner

they're just doing their job
they will be put in prison for a very long time if they don't do their job
so leave the soldiers out of it
it's the gov that should be ripped apart

At 3/12/07 02:24 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 3/12/07 02:18 PM, TheRoyalEnglishman wrote:

So, you feel as if soldiers are terrorists?

one mans freedom fighter is another man's terrorist
it all depends on point of view
over there religion is very VERY strong
so they follow their religion and that entitles them to kill infadels
you have to understand all aspects of the question to get a clear answer

At 3/12/07 01:13 PM, JakeHero wrote: You guys are imbeciles. This topic starter is obviously a troll. You've fallen into his snare.

But old judgey has to take his point of view on why America is evil. At lease Begoner is a citizen here. Um...ya know the website your on Dredd? Its American. It is so funny how you agreed until an army Guy came. Then like the shit you are you pretend to be sensitive.

one mans freedom fighter is another man's terrorist
it all depends on point of view

I hate that analogy.

There's a difference in target that makes ALL the difference between the two groups. One attacks a political or military target, the other attacks civilian targets.

Anyone who blows up civilians as a means to their end is a terrorist, REGARDLESS of POV.

That's a bullshit analogy that completely nullifies any sort of morality on the distinction, of which makes all the difference.

At 3/12/07 08:09 PM, Imperator wrote:

That's a bullshit analogy that completely nullifies any sort of morality on the distinction, of which makes all the difference.

What do you call a group that mixes or deaths come out accidental.

Like, the IRA for example.

Nothing like a fresh batch of America hating to brighten the day.

You really have no idea about the situation.

The fact that you badmouth the soldiers makes you lose a lot of credibility.

Don't have another opinion again.

At 3/11/07 11:56 PM, jay777 wrote: i agree with this guy.

If it was up to me, I would have the fucking US soldiers executed and their bodies ripped apart and fed to the Iraqis." -Begoner

Great, so you're ignorant, grammatically and politically retarded, and you whole-heartedly agree with a radical, bloodthirsty statement by a guy who has swastikas in his sig.

At 3/12/07 03:31 AM, MortalWound wrote: I truely hope that you live in the US and a government official is reading this. Why? because under the patriot act, what you said about what you want to do to our army, is considered a terrorist threat. You probably are just saying this cause your parents told you to believe this way.

dude fuck the patriot act. im not plotting against the US. i plot against assuming assholes like you that say stupid shit. and no my parents did not tell me shit. theres shit goin down and the entire country needs to know about. THE SOLDIERS WERE INSTRUCTED TO TEACH THE GUYS BEFORE THEY WERE TERROISTS HOW TO BECOME ONE. THEY EVEN LOADED THEM UP WITH WEAPONS. soldiers know what there gettin in to. there hasnt been a draft since nam

At 3/12/07 01:27 PM, Memorize wrote: Haha, that's great! We have another person on the forum who supports blowing up innocents. Haha, wow I love how people can be.

I love it when you set up straw men.

At 3/12/07 07:00 PM, uhnoesanoob wrote: Its American. It is so funny how you agreed until an army Guy came. Then like the shit you are you pretend to be sensitive.

I think you quoted the wrong person.

your just stupid. i live right on a military base and they train hard to keep our freedom so we dont get our asses blown off this planet.

At 3/12/07 09:16 PM, JakeHero wrote:

At 3/12/07 07:00 PM, uhnoesanoob wrote: Its American. It is so funny how you agreed until an army Guy came. Then like the shit you are you pretend to be sensitive.

I think you quoted the wrong person.

whoops sorry Jake. Meant to quote Ol drugeey

At 3/12/07 06:03 PM, TheRoyalEnglishman wrote:

At 3/12/07 05:35 PM, Memorize wrote: Altho I do absolutely LOVE how you self proclaimed "troop supportors" will come to the aid of someone who labels them as bad as the insurgents who blow up people on a daily basis. How very noble of you.

I wasn't necessarily coming to anyone's aid. I was just pointing out that your phrase was incorrect. I'm sick of repeating that now.

C'mon, stop being a dimwitt and trying to hide it. You're arguing with me when you agree with my statement, that soldiers are not the same as insurgents.

Deep down you probly do feel the need to attack me over something someone from your side said that was stupid.

For example. When a hardcore enviornmentalist jumps in front of a tractor and gets ran over trying to save a tree, i'll probly say "how sad", but on the inside i'm thinking "Heh, he did it to himself".

Those of us serving in the military during this war are not to blame for the war. I will be the first to say that I am a patriot above all else. I love this country with all my heart. This is my home and I will always defend it with my life. BUT, I do not believe in this war. I do not agree with what we are doing. The funny thing is that I have the choice of following or going to prison. Part of being in the military is doing things you don't want to do. I am contracted to follow the orders of my superiors. Does that mean I agree with them? No, but it's not my job to agree with them. Every empire, small country, or governmental body has had a form of military from the dawn of time, whether it be raiding partys, militia, or organized armies, it has always been there. People agree to join the military to protect there homes. That was why I joined, as well as pay and beifits. The point is that when you swear alegence to the military, it's not a if I feel like it type of thing. You don't get to pick the fights. It's not a militia that you can leave when you diagree with them. It's a long term haul and frankly it would be dishonorable to just throwin the towel and quit over a disagreement. I am pledged to defend this country, that's not a pledge I take lightly. I don't have to love the government. I don't even have to agree wih the government. And no soldier is forced to commit a crime. There is a such thing as an unlawfull order, and you don't have to follow that kind.

At 3/12/07 07:00 PM, uhnoesanoob wrote: But old judgey has to take his point of view on why America is evil. At lease Begoner is a citizen here. Um...ya know the website your on Dredd? Its American. It is so funny how you agreed until an army Guy came. Then like the shit you are you pretend to be sensitive.

The queue is backing up a little....

1) This is NOT about how America or it's people are evil. The topic starter clearly stated this is a government issue. But then vents it on the army. Having been on this site for 5 years, i've clearly shown i have no issue with American people, except those who support this pointless war (or stupid laws, etc). I said that before the war started, and am saying that still now. My position has not changed.

2) This site IS American. It has a TANK for an icon, and until recently.. "Problems of tomorrow, today!" as it's motto. I come here as a moderate who doesn't support war for wars sake. The sake of having a war every decade to justify having an army, or to flaunt one's superiority, or to wave the flag for the President, or as a means to push one's culture or political system on other another country that doesn't directly threaten you.

Getting rid of Saddam, stopping Iraq form obtaining nukes, any thing of that sort of thing CAN be claimed self-defense. But as soon as the US administration claimed to spreading democracy, they totally lost the plot! The topic starter made this very point infact! I think no-one here but me picked up on this, because as you pointed out, i'm not American, and i haven't been brainwashed into thinking democracy is the mild word it sounds like. Under YOUR system, people get sent fight in a wars they don't believe in. That's the OPPOSITE of democracy..

"What is democracy?"

"It's got something to do with young men killing each other" - Metallica

3) The "Army Guy" ..zendahl, has clearly stated that he doesn't support this war. I said the topic starter is allowed to vent, but i didn't say i agree with his sentiment. I see a clear difference between young guys who can't wait to join the army to fight for the American flag in any war, and it doesn't really matter, and people who get sent to fight in some war they don't even believe in.

Hey, I'm also a family man, so i'm kinda sensitive to family life, be it Iraqi or American ; )

At 3/13/07 02:22 AM, zendahl wrote: Those of us serving in the military during this war are not to blame for the war.

Except those who joined the army to fight in Iraq. Surely those recruits hold some responsibiliy for their support of this war. Or does ALL responsibility stop with the President and his advisors?

Every empire, small country, or governmental body has had a form of military from the dawn of time, whether it be raiding partys, militia, or organized armies, it has always been there. People agree to join the military to protect there homes. The point is that when you swear alegence to the military.. you don't get to pick the fights.

And sure enough, the Iraqi army faced the same dilemma. Those who followed orders to defend Iraq against America almost certainly died. Those who disobeyed or desserted were , if lucky, left to fend on the jobless streets (regardless if they had families or not). The unlucky risked being shot for not fighting or disobeying an order.

I am pledged to defend this country, that's not a pledge I take lightly. I don't have to love the government. I don't even have to agree wih the government.

Although i get your point, where is the pledge to defend yourself or what you believe in? If you didn't get paid to fight, would you still fight, say out of patriotism, despite disagreeing with the war in general? How much of this about the job - fulfilling your obligation as a soldier, thereby defending your home and future livelyhood by keeping your reputation as a soldier who will follow orders.

Put it this way; If you were lovingly married to an Iraqi woman, and joined the army during peacetime, where would your allegiance lie with respect to this war in Iraq? Would you follow what your government tells you to do, or would you follow what your heart and mind tells you to do, regardless of the consequences.

At 3/12/07 11:44 PM, Memorize wrote: C'mon, stop being a dimwitt and trying to hide it. You're arguing with me when you agree with my statement, that soldiers are not the same as insurgents.

I don't think that this is what I started talking about it, but if I must, no I do not feel that soldiers are the same as insurgents.

Deep down you probly do feel the need to attack me over something someone from your side said that was stupid.

No, it's just that when I see an accusation of 'supporting terror' without any real basis, I have to correct who says it. Which I now have done. The rest is irrelevant.

At 3/13/07 01:01 PM, TheRoyalEnglishman wrote:

No, it's just that when I see an accusation of 'supporting terror' without any real basis, I have to correct who says it. Which I now have done. The rest is irrelevant.

And you are the shining example of someone who has no idea how people really are.

At 3/13/07 02:05 PM, Memorize wrote: And you are the shining example of someone who has no idea how people really are.

And you are just making increasingly irrelevant statements with every post you make. I don't even want this one explained, I've proved my point. You are incredibly paranoid about the way people think. Just because someone might hate the war, or a government does not make them morally invalid and likely to be a terror supporter.

At 3/12/07 04:35 PM, TheMason wrote:

At 3/12/07 03:57 AM, JudgeDredd wrote:

"A war without reason reduces civilization to a monstrous machine for creating amputees and corpses. Since wars are now fought with science, such a war is a defilement of all scientists." -- The Editors of ScienceWeek

Science has always been the decisive factor in a conflict, and scientists have always "defiled" themselves in war and peace by developing new weapons to further their scientific research.

Gotta agree that it's a 2 way process. It's where the most funding is.

Erm.. now i have to admit an error on my part. On their website it says "A war without reason reduces to a monstrous machine for creating amputees and corpses." ..thus i was wondering what word was missing as i copied it to my notes..

There I slipped in the first word that seemed to fit, and forgot to remove it again when i posted it here. Not sure how they left off such a critical word on a sizable quote on every page of their site ...meh, perhaps it's just a ploy to get us to buy the above-listed book.

At 3/13/07 02:21 PM, TheRoyalEnglishman wrote:

And you are just making increasingly irrelevant statements with every post you make. I don't even want this one explained, I've proved my point. You are incredibly paranoid about the way people think.

And this is why you're an idiot. You fail to comprehend even the simplest of things.

I know I sound arrogant saying this, but I believe this goes against the rules by attacking a specific group of people.

And I also wish the poster, who could not even possibly know how much we are trying to keep civil war from breaking out, please refrain from being an idiot.