| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
quote:
Originally posted by Hexy
The percieved threat, lol. How come the US was the only one to see this enemy as dangerous? Because a bully picks on the weak? But it's nice to know that you want the US to start invading other countries simply because of the "evil" leaders. Really. They Bushes are paladins! Look at how much peace and stability the US has brought!
...
Man, you sure proved me wrong.
This is just nonsense. The US wasn't the only one, there is a long list of countries that have sent troops to aid the effort. And the debate was never about WMDs, it was about a broken treaty. Iraq signed a treaty and broke articles upon articles, WMDs or not we had the right (as stated by the treaty) to go in. The UN debate was just about if they had broken enough of the treaty to warrant an invasion. Does a criminal have to break enough laws to finally get arrested? Should we wait for a rapist to rape one more woman before taking action? If enforcing treaties makes the US bullies then I guess we are bullies. THen enforcing olaws makes the police bullies also. Even Clinton tried to enforce the treaty.
And your last part about the Bush not being a paladin is crazy. Who wants a paladin? So a president taking military action is a bad guy? Or one with alterior motives? Washington and his men wore a red coat during the revolutionary wore so the Brits would think he was friendly and then he shot them in the back. Lincoln's emancipation declaration freed the slaves only in the rebel states under the parralel, slavery was A-Okay in union slave states. Teddy's Rough Riders. FDR's concentration camps for japs, germans, and italians. JFK was a Paladin right? What about the Bay, and Vietnam? ANd LBJ continued Vietnam. It was Nixon who brought the troops home so he must be the Paladin. Clinton sent me personally to two places to "remove" an evil leader" so he must be the Paladin, right? A Paladin president's picture would never make it on currency. And they'll never make it into the white house. Are you voting for Nadar this year Hexy?
People answer the questions you bring up, you skirt the tough questions people bring up. The only thing you can have aginst the Iraqi invasion is that the US was opposed by France, Germany, and Russia. Either that or you believe having a Genocidal ruler is a good thing, in which case you need to condemn Clinton for Kosovo and Bosnia. But you won't because in Kosovo I was with Germans , French, and later even Russians.
So your problem is that you are for one world democracy that everyone should listen to, and the US hurt that. Even though we made the world a safer place by removing a mad, genocidal, tyrrant. Even though we recieved support from the majority of world leaders. Even though if the UN was a corporation we would be majority stock holders. Even though France, Germany, and Russia all had alterior motives (economic and world view) to not wanting an invasion of Iraq. The troops over their from the US are all volunteers. They all new the risks they were taking prior to swearing in. No President can enforce policy and not risk soldier's lives. Wether it's Clinton and the Balkans or JFK and Vietnam. So your only problem can be that the US didn't cow-tow to France, Germany, and Russia's smoke blowing. That really makes sense.
_________________
Vegitarian is the Indian word for lousey hunter. |
Sun Apr 04, 2004 6:10 pm |
|
|
xSamhainx
Paws of Doom
Joined: 11 Sep 2002
Posts: 2192
Location: San Diego |
Dt, dont break a sweat on these people and please dont get all frustrated. Been there done that, it aint worth it. Especially when it starts drifting into the esoterics of subjective right and wrong. You are dealing with a breed of person who would wholeheartedly equate wartime collateral damage fatalities with men/women/kids forced to kneel along the edge of a pit until they are shot in the head and kicked in. Last I heard, it was up to like 400,000 people they've pulled out of the ground with their hands tied behind their backs, and a bullet in their skull. Humanitarian reasons were cited for going in as well, I remember that quite well in a few of the pre-war speeches. The mission itself was called "Operation Iraqi Freedom", but that of course doesnt matter either.
Sam's Official Bookmarks of Interest. This is really all you need-
The Kaye Report in it's entirety. Really, read it for once...
http://www.bannerofliberty.com/BOL-03HL/10-9-2003.1.html
Resolution 1441 in it's entirety. Saddam was in clear violation.
http://www.un.int/usa/sres-iraq.htm
Then give the thing a rest. In a year or so WMDs will be found in some bunker or buried under some dune, and these people are completely neutered. Think about it, they are rooting for a genocidal islamofascist dictator. They are denying the world for ten years knew Saddam was doing what he was doing. They've put all their eggs in one basket. They simply cannot win, period.
_________________
“Then away out in the woods I heard that kind of a sound that a ghost makes when it wants to tell about something that's on its mind and can't make itself understood, and so can't rest easy in its grave, and has to go about that way every night grieving.”-Mark Twain |
|
Sun Apr 04, 2004 6:21 pm |
|
|
dteowner
Shoegazer
Joined: 21 Mar 2002
Posts: 7570
Location: Third Hero of Erathia |
Not to worry, Sammy. I learned the hard way last year (back in the "is the war justified" thread) not to get overly taken in with these discussions- thus my decision to exit the exchange with Hexy for a bit. Some people are content to live in their fabricated world and there's no way to so much as open a window on reality for them.
Too bad Hyrrix doesn't drop in. I didn't care for his politics in the slightest, but he at least was willing to discuss issues, even if he was likely to come out on the short end of it. He did a pretty good job of dishing out on those extremely rare occasions when he had some obscure fact that could be twisted to his purposes, too. 
_________________
=Proud Member of the Non-Flamers Guild=
=Benevolent Dictator, X2/X3 and Morrowind/Oblivion Forums=
Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
RIP Red Wings How 'Bout Dem Cowboys! |
|
Sun Apr 04, 2004 8:15 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote:
Not to worry, Sammy. I learned the hard way last year (back in the "is the war justified" thread) not to get overly taken in with these discussions- thus my decision to exit the exchange with Hexy for a bit. Some people are content to live in their fabricated world and there's no way to so much as open a window on reality for them.
Too bad Hyrrix doesn't drop in. I didn't care for his politics in the slightest, but he at least was willing to discuss issues, even if he was likely to come out on the short end of it. He did a pretty good job of dishing out on those extremely rare occasions when he had some obscure fact that could be twisted to his purposes, too.
Your inability to discuss beyond the point american deaths are mentioned is astonishing. By your own account, it's ok to mention Iraqis or Kurds being shot in the head on a firing line while filling mass graves to support your arguments, but it's not okay to mention americans being hung off a bridge. Laughable.
By that, I means stuff like this:
"You are dealing with a breed of person who would wholeheartedly equate wartime collateral damage fatalities with men/women/kids forced to kneel along the edge of a pit until they are shot in the head and kicked in. Last I heard, it was up to like 400,000 people they've pulled out of the ground with their hands tied behind their backs, and a bullet in their skull. "
And:
"Good thing the mass graves that WERE found mean nothing, eh? It's rather revealing that people will condemn US actions based on the sanctity of life while ignoring the mass graves."
And:
"Either there was a reason to remove him from power (that would be the genocide evidenced by the mass graves, folks) or there wasn't, which means that the thousands and thousands of dead Iraqis in those mass graves don't count."
quote:
Originally posted by Roqua
This is just nonsense. The US wasn't the only one, there is a long list of countries that have sent troops to aid the effort. And the debate was never about WMDs, it was about a broken treaty. Iraq signed a treaty and broke articles upon articles, WMDs or not we had the right (as stated by the treaty) to go in. The UN debate was just about if they had broken enough of the treaty to warrant an invasion. Does a criminal have to break enough laws to finally get arrested? Should we wait for a rapist to rape one more woman before taking action? If enforcing treaties makes the US bullies then I guess we are bullies. THen enforcing olaws makes the police bullies also. Even Clinton tried to enforce the treaty.
Awwwww, I thought you were on my side Roqua? What happened?
I think that it was NOT okay for the US to attack Iraq according to UN rules (and subsequently, US rules as well). But it's okay acting like a hypocrite in the fight for justice, eh? But making simplifications like that is a bit disturbing, though. But in the end, Iraq must have gotten way better, right? It's not like people are not resisting the US liberation, right?
quote:
And your last part about the Bush not being a paladin is crazy. Who wants a paladin? So a president taking military action is a bad guy? Or one with alterior motives? Washington and his men wore a red coat during the revolutionary wore so the Brits would think he was friendly and then he shot them in the back. Lincoln's emancipation declaration freed the slaves only in the rebel states under the parralel, slavery was A-Okay in union slave states. Teddy's Rough Riders. FDR's concentration camps for japs, germans, and italians. JFK was a Paladin right? What about the Bay, and Vietnam? ANd LBJ continued Vietnam. It was Nixon who brought the troops home so he must be the Paladin. Clinton sent me personally to two places to "remove" an evil leader" so he must be the Paladin, right? A Paladin president's picture would never make it on currency. And they'll never make it into the white house. Are you voting for Nadar this year Hexy?
A president taking military action against a harmless opponent on untrue reasons (the WMD), going against international law is pretty bad IMO.
quote:
People answer the questions you bring up, you skirt the tough questions people bring up. The only thing you can have aginst the Iraqi invasion is that the US was opposed by France, Germany, and Russia. Either that or you believe having a Genocidal ruler is a good thing, in which case you need to condemn Clinton for Kosovo and Bosnia. But you won't because in Kosovo I was with Germans , French, and later even Russians.
Haha, really, now? Please show me the questions relevant to this debate that I have skipped? While you yourself have averted questions by me.
And again, you bring on those tiresome simplifications: If you think one event is not okay, then you must think ALL events (however VAGUELY connected they might be), disregarding circumstances and reasons, are not okay.
BTW, did Kosovo have support from the UN? Nato? Was it by the rules?
quote:
So your problem is that you are for one world democracy that everyone should listen to, and the US hurt that. Even though we made the world a safer place by removing a mad, genocidal, tyrrant. Even though we recieved support from the majority of world leaders. Even though if the UN was a corporation we would be majority stock holders. Even though France, Germany, and Russia all had alterior motives (economic and world view) to not wanting an invasion of Iraq. The troops over their from the US are all volunteers. They all new the risks they were taking prior to swearing in. No President can enforce policy and not risk soldier's lives. Wether it's Clinton and the Balkans or JFK and Vietnam. So your only problem can be that the US didn't cow-tow to France, Germany, and Russia's smoke blowing. That really makes sense.
They still had the rules on their side. Even if the rules may seem unnecessary, they're still rules. And you should follow them, especially when using them as justification. Support from the majority of the world leaders? I seriously doubt that. In fact, I believe it was the opposite. I am not sure, however. I do know, that the international law was against it. But I suppose US allies leaving, one after another, must mean support!
The US doesn't have the right to be world police and attack any country they find un-democratic. Crusading to make the entire world democratic doesn't fly anymore. The Cold War ended some time ago.
Using the oppression of the Iraqi people, a minor point made by Bush before the war, and now widely emphasized sinced their other reasons have been trashed, is not enough to cause a war. At least if you listen to organizations like the Human Rights Watch etc.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
|
Sun Apr 04, 2004 9:59 pm |
|
|
Myrthos
Spoiler of All Fun
Joined: 07 Jul 2001
Posts: 1926
Location: Holland |
quote:
Originally posted by dteowner
...dont break a sweat on these people and please dont get all frustrated. Been there done that, it aint worth it. Especially when it starts drifting into the esoterics of subjective right and wrong.
quote:
Originally posted by dteowner
....Some people are content to live in their fabricated world and there's no way to so much as open a window on reality for them.
....dishing out on those extremely rare occasions when he had some obscure fact that could be twisted to his purposes, too.
I just have to say I completely agree with the above statements....although from the other side of the proverbial fence 
_________________
Kewl quotes:
I often have an odd sense of humor - Roach
Why quote somebody else, think of something yourself. - XeroX
...you won't have to unbookmark this site, we'll unbookmark you. - Val
Reports Myrthos for making me scared and humbled at the mere sight of his name - kayla |
|
Sun Apr 04, 2004 10:55 pm |
|
|
dteowner
Shoegazer
Joined: 21 Mar 2002
Posts: 7570
Location: Third Hero of Erathia |
When facts that both sides are willing to accept are practically nonexistent, it's going to be difficult to change anyone's opinion. Both sides of our little discussion here patently refuse to acknowledge any documentation from the other side. Bottom line- there's really no point in continuing the debate until we can agree on at least a few "basic truths".
This would also entail our European friends accepting that their news media is no more reliable than any other, be it US or Arab, Myrthos- something you've had a bit of trouble with in the past.
@Hexy- you're attributing Sammy's quotes to me to justify your endorsement of barbaric behavior. Take a moment to actually read who is saying what, since your argument goes down the toilet in a real hurry when it's built on such a careless flaw.
_________________
=Proud Member of the Non-Flamers Guild=
=Benevolent Dictator, X2/X3 and Morrowind/Oblivion Forums=
Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
RIP Red Wings How 'Bout Dem Cowboys! |
|
Mon Apr 05, 2004 4:06 am |
|
|
Myrthos
Spoiler of All Fun
Joined: 07 Jul 2001
Posts: 1926
Location: Holland |
quote:
Originally posted by dteowner
This would also entail our European friends accepting that their news media is no more reliable than any other, be it US or Arab, Myrthos- something you've had a bit of trouble with in the past.
I did? Could be I suppose, but I belief Gorath was a frontrunner for the European news reporting, IIRC.
I think that a newsmedia that has its base in and its staff from, a country, is bound to have some bias in the news reporting. In general, news that doesn't fit someones line of thinking or beliefs is not untrue just because of that, and news that does fit isn't true because of that either. If you put an arab, US and european reporter in the same place at the same time, under the same circumstances, would they each report the same? And if they did, would all three articles have the same atmosphere?
I for one seriously doubt that.
And as to WMD's being the main reason to start the war or not; DTE and I still have a standing arrangement about what the other one has to do, depending on whether they find them or not. Of course, silly me, I forgot to put and end date on that. So this could take years.... or not.
_________________
Kewl quotes:
I often have an odd sense of humor - Roach
Why quote somebody else, think of something yourself. - XeroX
...you won't have to unbookmark this site, we'll unbookmark you. - Val
Reports Myrthos for making me scared and humbled at the mere sight of his name - kayla |
|
Mon Apr 05, 2004 8:20 am |
|
|
Lintra
Elf Friend
Joined: 23 Apr 2002
Posts: 9448
Location: Bermuda, the triangle place with SANDY BEACHES |
@Myrthos - *always* put a sunset clause in your agreements! Or if the other side won't have it, then have it documented that you wanted one, but were denied the opportunity.
I can write a book about how *not* to write a contract ... you'd be surprised at what 'educated consumers' will sign. Incredible!!
_________________
=Member of The Nonflamers' Guild=
=Just plain clueless= |
|
Mon Apr 05, 2004 5:16 pm |
|
|
dteowner
Shoegazer
Joined: 21 Mar 2002
Posts: 7570
Location: Third Hero of Erathia |
quote:
Originally posted by Myrthos
I did? Could be I suppose, but I belief Gorath was a frontrunner for the European news reporting, IIRC.
 Bad things happen when I rely on my memory these days... For that matter, you're going to have to refresh my memory on this WMD "understanding".
_________________
=Proud Member of the Non-Flamers Guild=
=Benevolent Dictator, X2/X3 and Morrowind/Oblivion Forums=
Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
RIP Red Wings How 'Bout Dem Cowboys! |
|
Mon Apr 05, 2004 8:26 pm |
|
|
Myrthos
Spoiler of All Fun
Joined: 07 Jul 2001
Posts: 1926
Location: Holland |
I would have to find the thread again and I don't have the time now to do the research, or anything else for that matter (beats me, why I actually think I have time to post silly comments here though). Anyway, I vaguely remember it was about a point in the somewhat heated discussions last year about one of the reasons for the war was the existence of WMDs in Iraq. I doubted the evidence and I think I mentioned something about saying I was wrong when they were found and you stating the same in the oppsite case.
Of course, at 41 I've lost a few braincells down the road, so I could be completely wrong and it was all about a discussion about where the smurfs come from. And why is there only one female smurf?? And what does that mean for all the male smurfs.
Then again, if it was about the smurfs then I wonder what on earth we agreed upon.... I sure as hell am not gonna paint myself blue.
_________________
Kewl quotes:
I often have an odd sense of humor - Roach
Why quote somebody else, think of something yourself. - XeroX
...you won't have to unbookmark this site, we'll unbookmark you. - Val
Reports Myrthos for making me scared and humbled at the mere sight of his name - kayla |
|
Tue Apr 06, 2004 11:31 pm |
|
|
dteowner
Shoegazer
Joined: 21 Mar 2002
Posts: 7570
Location: Third Hero of Erathia |
Lintra asked me for details. I told him I thought perhaps the loser was going to have to run naked thru downtown Baghdad singing the "Dradle Song"...
You know, Myrthos, you scare me when you make jokes.
_________________
=Proud Member of the Non-Flamers Guild=
=Benevolent Dictator, X2/X3 and Morrowind/Oblivion Forums=
Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
RIP Red Wings How 'Bout Dem Cowboys! |
|
Wed Apr 07, 2004 11:40 pm |
|
|
Scribelus
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 08 Apr 2004
Posts: 46
|
Hi guys!
I used to post back here just before the beginning of the war, under the name "Scrivener". That was back when Morrowind was just out and this was the number one site for information! Then I completed Morrowind, forgot my site password, changed my email address, and my account died I think.
We had lots of big arguments about the upcoming war, and some of the same people are still around. I just thought I would drop back in and see how things were going, and the arguments are basically still the same! I think you could cut and paste them. The only thing was that most people (including me ) were sure there were lots of WMDs in Iraq back then. Now it takes quite a bit of faith to say they will be found, it seems.
My moral position is basically "utilitarian". That is, I judge actions by the sum total of the suffering they cause. Although I have always denounced Saddam, I was against the war back then because I thought it was very unlikely to make things in Iraq better. (In ultilitarianism, you make choices based on probable outcomes, and eventually history proves you right or wrong.)
I had a set of predictions at the very beginning of the war, and most have come true, I think. Basically I said that the US would easily defeat the Iraqis and take control (though Saddam would flee into hiding - I predicted that, but not his eventual capture), but that the chaotic post-war situation would cause them to pull out prematurely. This would then lead to fundamentalist government in Iraq, and we would be back to a Saddam-type situation, only with a war in between.
Back then, people assured me that the US would stay the distance and stabilize Iraq, but I was pretty skeptical.
Now we are getting into the crunch period where we will see if stabilization is possible. First it depends on the guts of the US administration, then it depends on whether even the US military has the power to quiet down Iraq.
As I said way back then, there was the possibility of creating a democratic Middle East if absolutely everything went perfectly. Well, surprise surprise, things are not going perfectly. There was one year of relative calm, and now that grace period is up. The US has to get the Shiites happy very very quickly, without selling out the Kurds or Sunnis. Bremer and Rumsfeld may have the brains to do it, but I don't think they have the attitude of compromise that is needed.
Of course, someone will ask me "well, what should we have done about Saddam?" The first answer is, I don't really need to provide an alternative to a failed policy of preemptive attack. The second answer is, if you are going to attack preemptively, make sure you do enough planning to get it right, and then I might go along with you.
But the real answer is that the US attitude to dictatorship in general is completely bogus. The US is still supporting dictatorships in places like Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Egypt, Uzbekistan, not to mention their well known track record in Central and South America, etc.
Tears for the victims of Saddam just seem so selective that they must be crocodile tears. And now that those same victims (poor Shiites) are revolting against the US, it's "let's nuke all the bastards". I get the feeling guys like Paul Wolfowitz were genuine in their concern for the Middle East (all its inhabitants including Israel) but guys like Rumsfeld and Cheney had their eyes on America's interests only, and they got it badly wrong.
So what I'm saying is, if you want to get rid of dictators like Saddam, put ALL your resources (diplomatic, trade, as well as military) into accomplishing it. Don't use half-assed military solutions that just make everything worse. And recognize that it will take longer to remove dictators than it took you to set them up in the first place.
PS: Please don't call me anti-American. I answered that charge last time. I think the US is one of the best countries on earth. However you can call me anti-Rumsfeld/Cheney/Bush!
EDIT:
I went back and found my predictions! Couldn't believe they were still there. This is from the first day of the invasion.
The progress of the war:
1. Big victories throughout the south
2. Quick progress to the capital
3. Some nasty fighting and misery in Baghdad
4. Hussein flees into hiding
5. Opposition parties and factions squabble over power while people starve
6. The US decides to "leave them to it" as in Somalia, Afghanistan, Kosovo
7. A fundamentalist Islamic government takes control
8. "What are we going to do about Iraq?" |
|
Thu Apr 08, 2004 3:28 am |
|
|
Hyrrix
Fourty-two
Joined: 20 Jan 2003
Posts: 282
|
quote:
Originally posted by dteowner
Too bad Hyrrix doesn't drop in. I didn't care for his politics in the slightest, but he at least was willing to discuss issues, even if he was likely to come out on the short end of it. He did a pretty good job of dishing out on those extremely rare occasions when he had some obscure fact that could be twisted to his purposes, too.
Oh, I'm here alright. Reading, not dropping in for the exact reason you mentioned: most of the people don't care about the politics - only about the discussion and the argument.
To wrap it up: I'm glad, as I have always stated, that a brutal dictator such as Saddam has been removed; although I think there were ways to achieve this with less innocent victims on "both" sides. Even if not so, I fear the current chances of Iraq getting into a horrible civil war.
_________________
Vault Network Editor |
|
Thu Apr 08, 2004 4:16 pm |
|
|
Val
Risen From Ashes
Joined: 18 Feb 2002
Posts: 14724
Location: Utah, USA |
quote:
Originally posted by Scribelus
Hi guys!
I used to post back here just before the beginning of the war, under the name "Scrivener". That was back when Morrowind was just out and this was the number one site for information! Then I completed Morrowind, forgot my site password, changed my email address, and my account died I think.
Contact an Admin, the account probably still exists and we can change the password and e-mail address for you.
_________________
Freeeeeeedom! Thank heavens it's summer!
What do I have to show for my hard work? A piece of paper! Wee!
=Guardian, Moderator, UltimaDot Newshound=  |
|
Thu Apr 08, 2004 5:11 pm |
|
|
Scribelus
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 08 Apr 2004
Posts: 46
|
Thanks a lot Val, it is OK though, no big problem to start a new one...
EDIT:
How about this interesting email, quoted by Republican columnist Andrew Sullivan. This is an email from a soldier friend of his serving in Iraq.
Troop strength - I think we have consistently underestimated the number of troops it would take to pacify Iraq. Gen Shinseki's original estimates were much closer to the mark. The fact that the 1st Armored Division (my unit) has now been extended for at least 4 months shows there aren't enough troops - in order to deal with a fairly minor uprising we had to break the one-year-boots-on-ground pledge. If we had had a strategic reserve, this would not be necessary. However, the dirty secret is that there aren't any more troops to be had - at least not the active-duty armor/infantry brigades and divisions requried to fight a tough enemy. Furthermore, the frenetic destruction that occured after the fall of Baghdad set us way back in terms of reconstruction - more troops could have limited if not prevented the extensive looting.
Sadir et al. - Although his uprising is seen as a ominious sign for the coalition, it does have an upside. His poorly trained and poorly equiped rag-bad militia is being chewed up by our army. His defeat and eventual marginalization will serve the coalition well. After one year of occupation, I think many Iraqis have come to see the army as rather toothless - we get blown up by roadside bombs or mortars and yet we continue to rebuild schools, enforce the laws, train police etc. Now because of Fallujah and what has been going on in Baghdad, our potency and resolve are on full display. My task force alone has killed many insurgents in the last two weeks - something that was not happening before. By confronting us in a conventional way, Sadir et al. are playing to our military strengths - and it isn't going well for them.
Long term prospects - I have to admit that after one year here I am largely pessimistic. Iraqi society is sick in many ways. Sometimes it's hard to tell if Saddam was the problem or the symptom. I just don't know how a society so divided along ethnic and tribal lines, with no democratic or liberal traditions and almost zero respect for the rule of law can build any kind of society accept and autocratic one. I'm not ashamed that the US came here with good intentions and noble sentiments about the universality of our values - democracy, liberty, the rule of law etc., but I think all our efforts might be eventually futile. In essence, we have given the Iraqis an enormous gift, but they don't seem to be seizing the opportunity. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink...
The Army - Most soldiers in my unit were pretty demoralized by the extension. We were promised a one year tour and now that promise has been broken. Retention will certainly suffer. However, we are facing a difficult time in Iraq and our continued presence is necessary. What I would like to hear and I think most soldiers feel the same way - is for someone high up to say "Look, we didn't plan for this. Things have gotten screwed up and we need your continued sacrifice. This is why it is so important you stay." Instead we have gotten vague comments about "managing the troop redeployment" - as if it were some little snafu or inconvenience. The truth is, our division is now getting ready for another bloody and hellishly hot summer that none of us expected to ever go through again. |
|
Fri Apr 09, 2004 2:55 am |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2
All times are GMT. The time now is Thu Apr 11, 2019 6:53 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
