Originally posted by UncleAdamWhos government? All the news and the USA leaderships are now apologicing/explaining how the war is going to be longer than they thought and that the Iraqi resistance is tougher than anticipated. No one expected (in the USA military leadership) expected this kind of resistance and it is admitted in the news by all the officials.
only the media said that, the gov has always said it would be a few
3-to-6 months
Its already going worse than it was supposed to...
Originally posted by torgarthquite.
Whos government? All the news and the USA leaderships are now apologicing/explaining how the war is going to be longer than they thought and that the Iraqi resistance is tougher than anticipated. No one expected (in the USA military leadership) expected this kind of resistance and it is admitted in the news by all the officials.
Its already going worse than it was supposed to...
war is never the attractive option and in this case should never have been an option
anyone hear of the 2 British soldiers who have deserted? I have only second hand reports (and dare I trust them concidering the date) that they have gone AWOL claiming that they will not continue to fight in such an unjust war. Anyone confirm this? If it is true it is one heck of a statement, and a sign that things could fall apart internally.
- Joined
- 20 Feb 02
- Moves
- 58336
Originally posted by belgianfreakAccording to BBC Radio 5, 3 British soliders have been sent home for failing fo follow "illegal" orders. They will face a court martial.
anyone hear of the 2 British soldiers who have deserted? I have only second hand reports (and dare I trust them concidering the date) that they have gone AWOL claiming that they will not continue to fight in such an unjust war. Anyone confirm this? If it is true it is one heck of a statement, and a sign that things could fall apart internally.
Andrew
That's a pretty brave stance for them to take. It's not quite in the same league as the Zimbabwian cricketers wearing black armbands, but it's getting close. They may not be risking their lives, but they will have just lost their jobs, their homes, their friends... if you're in the army it is your entire life, and they just gave all of it up.
Anyone know if they were soldier or officers? It may not be right, but officers disobeying orders will be seen as a more profound rebellion. What ere the "illegal" orders they were being asked to carry out? Was it that they do not recognise the legality of the war, or were they being asked to break other rules (such as firing indirect weaponry at civilian populated areas)?
- Joined
- 20 Feb 02
- Moves
- 58336
Originally posted by belgianfreakI do not think they know for sure, but it was implied that they viewed an act as illegal and refused to do it, rather than the war itself. I do not know about rank, but they said one was a royal marine.
That's a pretty brave stance for them to take. It's not quite in the same league as the Zimbabwian cricketers wearing black armbands, but it's getting close. They may not be risking their lives, but they will have just lost their jobs, their homes, their friends... if you're in the army it is your entire life, and they just gave all of it up.
Any ...[text shortened]... being asked to break other rules (such as firing indirect weaponry at civilian populated areas)?
Andrew
- Joined
- 20 Feb 02
- Moves
- 58336
this is a quote from a sky news article on George Galloway:
"Illegal orders are no longer a defence (after the Nuremberg war trials). I support the three British soldiers on their way back home to Britain who are facing a court martial for refusing to carry out illegal orders."
Andrew
absolutelyright. Saying that you were ordered to do something is no longer recognised as an excuse for carrying out an illegal action.
The reason this interests me so greatly is that I was nearly in the military, and if I was I would be in the situation of having to decide whether or not to resign my commision. Or would I, if I was immersed in that life, not think the same way as I do now?
Many friends asked me at the time why I wanted to join the army, a profession that when it boils down to it is to kill people. My answer was always that the British forces would always be invoved in a conflict for the greater good, and certainly wouldn't be the aggressors. How wrong I was. For the first time in my life I am ashamed to be British.
Well it's been changed back now.
"we're going in to Iraq to get the terrorists" changed to
"we're going into Iraq to take away his chemical weapons" which changed to
"were going into Iraq to save his people from his brutal regeme"
Also "the war will be over in weeks" has changed to "the war will be long and draw out, with no quick solutions"
[/b]
From reading all these posts it appears that Britain and the US are just terrible countries and are getting their just rewards by losing this quagmire of a war (that is 9 days old). OK, reality check. I would venture to guess that the desertion ratio of British soldiers to Iraqi soldiers is about 10,000 to 1, but may be more. More innocent Iraqis have been killed by their own army as they tried to flee. Americans are so horrible that we pay a lot of money for very expensive guidance systems on these bombs just so Baghdad doesn't end up like Dresden. LIke the war or not, Iraq has already lost. Deal with it.
As for the deserting British soldiers. If they were men of honor, they would have asked to be assigned to a medical team or the like. Whiney butts. 😠Kirk
Originally posted by kirksey957Agreed completly,
From reading all these posts it appears that Britain and the US are just terrible countries and are getting their just rewards by losing this quagmire of a war (that is 9 days old). OK, reality check. I would venture to guess that the desertion ratio of British soldiers to Iraqi soldiers is about 10,000 to 1, but may be more. More innocent Iraqis have ...[text shortened]... nor, they would have asked to be assigned to a medical team or the like. Whiney butts. 😠Kirk
I have never heard of a war that lasted less than 10 days,
oh,and I dont know about Britin, but USA has strick rules against deserting in war time (or anytime).
but at least Britn is helping us, unlike some other countrys I could menton
As always, all I need to break my Zen is to read the war debate. What can I say? I guess I just can't help it if guided missiles being toted as a "nice" way of killing people upsets me a little. My oh my, aren't we the "nice" war makers now because we spent a little extra. Perhaps soon we can make the smoke from our bombs form a big happy face in the sky and our bombers can have streamers that read, "Have a nice day". Yeah, that would make me feel a LOT better about killing people.
Actually, the lack of support from other countries helps my Zen a lot. It serves to remind me that some people really ARE still thinking for themselves and really DO stand up for what they believe. But of course what do I know? I'm just one of the great multitude of people in this world that has a bit of a problem with killing people. I'm sure most bodybuilding, sword toting, martial artists like me are just wimps, right? I'm just a member of Mensa. I'm just a humanist who has seen more of the world come to his inns door than many avid travelers. What do I know? I'm just one of many like me.
But by all means, close your minds and take your orders. Kill people that aren't attacking you. Go ahead. While you're at it, "Have a nice day". The humanists will check mate you yet!
🙂
- Joined
- 20 Feb 02
- Moves
- 58336
Originally posted by UncleAdamThe 6 days War in 1967. Israel trounced Egypt and Jordan in 132 hours and 30 min. They Israeli ari force flew around the Egyptian radar and bombed most of their planes while they were still in the ground.
Agreed completly,
I have never heard of a war that lasted less than 10 days,
oh,and I dont know about Britin, but USA has strick rules against deserting in war time (or anytime).
but at least Britn is helping us, unlike some other countrys I could menton
As for deserters, we used to just shoot them. I hope that is no longer the case!!!
Andrew
- Joined
- 20 Feb 02
- Moves
- 58336
Originally posted by kirksey957Kirk,
From reading all these posts it appears that Britain and the US are just terrible countries and are getting their just rewards by losing this quagmire of a war (that is 9 days old). OK, reality check. I would venture to guess that the desertion ratio of British soldiers to Iraqi soldiers is about 10,000 to 1, but may be more. More innocent Iraqis have ...[text shortened]... nor, they would have asked to be assigned to a medical team or the like. Whiney butts. 😠Kirk
I would agree if you join the armed forces you should not be too supprised to find yourself:-
1) Finding yourself in a dangerous position
2) Being shot at
3) Shooting back
4) Seeing your peers injured or killed
5) being asked to do something you do not totally agree with.
If you join the armed forces you let yourself become part of a tool of government policy, and resign yourself to the fact that you have no control over what that government policy is and with who it is aimed.
The whole basis of this argument is based on responsible government - if the government is irresponsible and wants to follow a policy that is against the will of its people (who give that government the mandate to govern) should the armed forces still follow the government or side with the general population which they too are part of? This is obvioulsy a thoetical argument but I think it is where people are coming from, what happens when the government wants to carry on a war and the people do not want it to?
As for "war with Iraq", my understanding is that we are not at war with Iraq, but are using military power to remove their current government. Not supprisingly if the terms "war with Iraq", war against "syria, Iraq, and Iran" are being mentioned people can interpret these terms in very differnet ways.
I am against Britain being in Iraq as I think there is no clear logical argument to why they are there at this current time. If the US and Britain could not use their political might to force the issues through the UN there must be some serious holes in the argument as the US has some serious financial dipolmatic power.
Andrew