15 more U.S soldiers killed in helicopter strike - Page 3

Dr. Deleto · 11-03-2003, 01:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninty9

thats not the point, dipshit.

the point is, these are very different wars, and different times. people expect that soldiers lives will be taken care of. And when you lose 1 or 2 or 3 a day to ambushes, it becomes too much. Especially when you were lied to in th first place, right? I think hitler was a much bigger threat than saddam was.

tell that to all the Iraqui people he had executed for doing nothing whatsoever. Saddam is a shitheel just like Hitler was. This is what really sets America and Britain apart. People raise thier liberal hands and fuss about everything the government does because they have always lived a life of protectedness. When will you people realize that shit exactly like this is happening all over the world every day. I would bet that you would be singing a different tune if you were an Iraqui man whos father had been executed for some supposed crime.

Maybe...just MAYBE, if people would quit bitching about Iraq and actually back thier country for once, then things would happen a lot differently. The reason why Vietnam went the way it did was because stupid fucking hippies protested the war...for no goddamn reason other than to fit in with a couple of insane, burnt out idealists who would shit on the American flag and all it stands for if it meant someone would buy a $2 ticket to his next rally. Why is it that WW2 vets are thought of as heroes and Vietnam vets are not? Will you people treat the Iraq vets as the heroes they are when its finally over? I will, because they fought and are still fighting for thier country like all the great heroes of the past have.

ninty · 11-03-2003, 01:12 AM

HOLY FUCK.

All of you are missing the point. My response was to Blitz who was comparing this war to world war 2. I really haven't said one way or the other if this war is good or not, or if I agree with it. I did say that the president mislead you, but that was the only time I eluded to that. All I was doing was comparing the two wars. I know saddam was a fuckhead. In all of my posts I was comparing how today casualties aren't accepted, nor should they be. I didn't really say whether I supported those casualties in order to oust Saddam.

And secondly, its not my country to back. I don't live in the states. but I thought the whole deal was freedom of speech? If, hypethically no one wanted war, why would you not listen to that. Why would everyone shut up and stop talking about it? They wouldn't. But thats a whole nother issue.

I'm done in this thread now. It's gone way offtopic.

guarnere · 11-03-2003, 01:13 AM

finally, a great point made, gg deleto wink:

p.s. whats up long time no see lol rock:

Tripper · 11-03-2003, 01:21 AM

[quote="Dr. Deleto":8c432]Why is it that WW2 vets are thought of as heroes and Vietnam vets are not?[/quote:8c432]

I don't think that's entirely true.....But I think it has to do with the fact that the reason the U.S (and all other Allied nations) fought in WW2 is set in stone......Whereas the reason soldiers fought for their country in Vietnam is a bit more clouded and wishy washy.

IMO - WW2 was the only major war fought where the allies were totally innocent in getting involved.....The only war off the top of my head, of course.

Dr. Deleto · 11-03-2003, 01:25 AM

lol thanks. Been spending a lot more time in the *gasp* real world. It is a fabled land of beer and bitches. Hit me up on msn sometime tho. Be good to holler at ya.

btw ninty9, I think youve said before that you were british, and I pointed out britain as being the same way. And yes I saw where you were going with your posts, I was replying more to the general public than you solely, I just used your point of them being different wars as a basis for my post.

I personally think that the Iraq war and WW2 are quite similar, considering we rousted a mad dictator who was commiting genocide on a part of his country's population and threatening the well being of neighboring countries. Hitler just did it on a much larger scale. Who knows, in ten years Saddam could have allied with another country in the region and started the same scale conflict that Hitler did. In effect our actions made sure that never happened.

KTOG · 11-03-2003, 01:27 AM

WW2 are thought of heroes because they are dieing left and right these days. In about 20 years we'll start seeing the vets from 'nam being shown as heroes.

Dr. Deleto · 11-03-2003, 01:30 AM

[quote=Tripper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by "Dr. Deleto":08189

Why is it that WW2 vets are thought of as heroes and Vietnam vets are not?

I don't think that's entirely true.....But I think it has to do with the fact that the reason the U.S (and all other Allied nations) fought in WW2 is set in stone......Whereas the reason soldiers fought for their country in Vietnam is a bit more clouded and wishy washy.

IMO - WW2 was the only major war fought where the allies were totally innocent in getting involved.....The only war off the top of my head, of course.[/quote:08189]

excellent point. I agree with that myself, but I think it was more the soldiers were fighting for the same reasons as they did in WW2, but the conflict itself was cloudy in its purpose. The soldiers deserve the same respect no matter what, since they are fighting for thier country. I think that a country should back a war just for the simple basis that the soldiers themselves need that backing to thrive and succeed. Good point made though.

Tripper · 11-03-2003, 01:46 AM

[quote="Dr. Deleto":1a415][quote=Tripper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by "Dr. Deleto":1a415

Why is it that WW2 vets are thought of as heroes and Vietnam vets are not?

I don't think that's entirely true.....But I think it has to do with the fact that the reason the U.S (and all other Allied nations) fought in WW2 is set in stone......Whereas the reason soldiers fought for their country in Vietnam is a bit more clouded and wishy washy.

IMO - WW2 was the only major war fought where the allies were totally innocent in getting involved.....The only war off the top of my head, of course.[/quote:1a415]

excellent point. I agree with that myself, but I think it was more the soldiers were fighting for the same reasons as they did in WW2, but the conflict itself was cloudy in its purpose. The soldiers deserve the same respect no matter what, since they are fighting for thier country. I think that a country should back a war just for the simple basis that the soldiers themselves need that backing to thrive and succeed. Good point made though.[/quote:1a415]

Yeah, I agree......

Stinger_Dude · 11-03-2003, 03:20 AM

Many of you forget to many of the Iraqis believe the Americans are there as occupiers, not liberators and this of course would mean resistance. Also the resistance are gaining lots of media coverage which is good for them and bad for the coalition. Its not who has the strong army, its the willingness to fight. A lesson learnt from Vietnam.

And Who said it will ever be easy to rebuild a new Iraq? Invading Iraq was easy but building a new regime will be hard as already seen. Easy come easy go.

Time will tell, I think it'll be best to hand over all authority back to the Iraqis as soon as possible to give the right impression because everyone is thinking the US is there to control the Oil and that will just make the Iraqis fight harder.

ninty · 11-03-2003, 11:33 AM

Well, now you make me reply once again.

There is a Calgary in Britain, however that is not the Calgary I live in. I never said I was from Britain, because i'm not.

The location bar that says: Calgary, Alberta and the maple leaf in my avatar I thought made it pretty clear.

11-03-2003, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninty9

Well, now you make me reply once again.

There is a Calgary in Britain, however that is not the Calgary I live in. I never said I was from Britain, because i'm not.

The location bar that says: Calgary, Alberta and the maple leaf in my avatar I thought made it pretty clear.

maple leaf, union jack, it's all the same to yanks like us biggrin:

just kidding of course, being a hockey fan I associate Calgary with Canada

ninty · 11-03-2003, 11:50 AM

GO FLAMES GO!!

JBird · 11-04-2003, 04:35 AM

[quote="Dr. Deleto":7ba19]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninty9

thats not the point, dipshit.

the point is, these are very different wars, and different times. people expect that soldiers lives will be taken care of. And when you lose 1 or 2 or 3 a day to ambushes, it becomes too much. Especially when you were lied to in th first place, right? I think hitler was a much bigger threat than saddam was.

tell that to all the Iraqui people he had executed for doing nothing whatsoever. Saddam is a shitheel just like Hitler was. This is what really sets America and Britain apart. People raise thier liberal hands and fuss about everything the government does because they have always lived a life of protectedness. When will you people realize that shit exactly like this is happening all over the world every day. I would bet that you would be singing a different tune if you were an Iraqui man whos father had been executed for some supposed crime.

Maybe...just MAYBE, if people would quit bitching about Iraq and actually back thier country for once, then things would happen a lot differently. The reason why Vietnam went the way it did was because stupid fucking hippies protested the war...for no goddamn reason other than to fit in with a couple of insane, burnt out idealists who would shit on the American flag and all it stands for if it meant someone would buy a $2 ticket to his next rally. Why is it that WW2 vets are thought of as heroes and Vietnam vets are not? Will you people treat the Iraq vets as the heroes they are when its finally over? I will, because they fought and are still fighting for thier country like all the great heroes of the past have.[/quote:7ba19]

take notes ppl, this is a major league post right here rock:

intrestedviewer · 11-04-2003, 11:29 AM

Vietnam wasnt lost to hippies, Vietnam was lost becuase of politics getting in the way of war. Becuase of not being able to go into Cambodia sooner.

11-04-2003, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by intrestedviewer

Vietnam wasnt lost to hippies, Vietnam was lost becuase of politics getting in the way of war. Becuase of not being able to go into Cambodia sooner.

Vietnam was lost because we didn't publically execute Ngo Diem and his entire government, these guys were as bad, if not worse, than the commies, which is why the VC got so much support.