Wishing our Troops well

Discussion in 'Getting Started' started by digital_signal_, Mar 22, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Been glued to the TV for a couple of days instead of our hobby, and wanted to post that I wish the men and women who are in the thick of it good luck. Regardless of opinion on the why's and the what-fors of this war, I hope most people's wishes are behind our troops while they're in harms way.
  2. interurban

    interurban Active Member

    Lets Pray for a swift end to the war.
    And the least loss of Life on all sides.
  3. sumpter250

    sumpter250 multiscale modelbuilder

    Regardless of our opinions about whether or not we should be in this war, Let's keep our troops in our prayers, and when this thing is done, let us welcome them home as conquering heros. They didn't start this, they are doing what their country asked them to do.
    I remember 'Nam.
  4. jmarksbery

    jmarksbery Active Member

    Freedom and peace for the whole world will always come at a cost.
    Col. Jim Marksberry
  5. boppa

    boppa Member

    i hope all your guys get home safe,but i cant agree with the us govn on this one,its wrong
  6. cidchase

    cidchase Active Member

    Let's not argue about this one, guys:D :D
  7. boppa

    boppa Member

    said my piece-i do hope all the us guys-and the iraq guys-get to go home to their families-best wishes to u all
  8. brakie

    brakie Active Member

    When I saw my old unit the 7th Cav,I was with them in mind and spirit and started whistling Garryowen,the unoffical marching song of the 7th-Custers own.I wish them the best of luck and may they win many victories.

    Let Bacchus sons be not dismayed
    But join with me each jovial blade
    Come,drink and sing and lend me your aid
    to help me with the chorus

    Last Chorus

    Our hearts are stout have got no flame
    For soon'tis known from which we came
    Where'er we go they will fear the name
    Of Garry Owen in glory!!
    My prayer goes out to all units fighting this war as well.I wish them Godspeed and a quick victory.
  9. Wasn't the 7th cav the same one in "We were soldiers (and young)" the vietnam film/book with mel gibson?
  10. chiak47

    chiak47 New Member

    I also pray for a fast and safe return of our troops.And I would also like to say thanks to the Brits for the good faith.
  11. rsn48

    rsn48 Member

    I am like you riveted to the tv set. And my thoughts and prayers go with the families negatively affected by the war.

    Captain Rick Nicholson
  12. jon-monon

    jon-monon Active Member

    If I were 20 again, there's no place I would rather be than on the flight deck of the shitty kitty, launchin' birds. God bless our heros and may they come home safely. My heart goes out to all those who suffer losses. I know our boys are doin' all they can to minimise injuries to everyone involved. Justification is and will be uncovered as we progress, so if you don't believe in the cause, just pray for the troops and their families, pray for the innocent and have a little blind faith. God does all things for the good of those who love him. We just are not capable of understanding it all the time.
  13. rockislandmike

    rockislandmike Active Member

    Blind faith is for the blind, and this war has nothing to do with god.
  14. Gary Pfeil

    Gary Pfeil Active Member

    True, it has nothing to do with god, or else it would just be another one of a long string of religious wars, difference in religious beliefs being the leading cause of death since time immemorial. This war is about ousting a ruthless dictator who deserves it for using poisons against neighboring countries and in his own country against ethnic minorities. It amazes me how these crimes mean nothing to the "peace loving" amoung us. If the US government were to gas whole cities of black or hispanic or any other minority, it too would deserve to be removed by force. Note that it is not another countries obligation to do so, but it is their right, when the country in question has a freely elected government which respects the rights of its citizens. No one has denied the fact that Kurds have been exterminated, or that Iranians were also victims, or that Kuwaiti women were raped and killed during Iraq's brief occupation. No one seems to deny that Hussein gives money to families of suicide bombers. If these are not reasons to pursue his removal, then just what do those of you who call the war "wrong" suggest as an alternative? Pursue UN approval, with countries like France who have it in their economic self interest to keep him in power at all costs because he signed contracts for the French to develop his oil fields which are worth billions to the French? Russia has similar contracts tho worth much less. Leave it to an institution which removes the US from the a council dedicated to watching for human rights abuses and replaces it with Syria? The whole concept of the UN is a joke and I've believed it since its inception. A world body which included the Soviet Union as a charter member gave its hand away immediately. It's no different than having the mafia run a police dept. And I am left aghast at the sight of those who proclaim we went to war for oil. I often doubt the intellectual capacity of our elected officials, but even so am sure they can not be stupid enough to pay this kind of price for oil. We can afford to buy it! The fact is the major countries oppossed to the war are the ones who have the money created by Iraqi oil on their minds.
    What exactly is the reasoning behind the claims that this war is wrong?
  15. rockislandmike

    rockislandmike Active Member

    I have no problems with having Hussein removed from power – his is an oppressive regime that has, undeniably, violated many (if not all) civil rights along the way. My problem is with how the US banties about its foreign policy around the world at its whim and fancy. I would run out of fingers and toes counting other countries that have committed atrocies against its citizens, and yet the US does not raise a hand. ONLY when it’s in their best interest do they get involved. Period.

    While I agree the process was slow, major change almost always is. Changing the very fabric of Iraqi culture is something that should be taken slow. I don’t always see eye to eye with the United Nations either, but its very concept, that all of the world leaders can sit around and discuss issues, is worth its weight in gold. Why you don’t think the Soviet Union should have been at the table is beyond my scope of reasoning, and I leave it at that.

    Bush’s primary reason to attack has never been the civil atrocies. In fact, Bush’s primary reason to attack seems to change on a regular basis, and its inconsistency itself is worthy of concern.

    Some of Bush assertions are that it’s part of the continuing war on terrorism (it has never been proven, btw, that Iraq has ties to terrorism – in fact, it has been disproven); and that they have “weapons of mass destruction” that they may use against America (which, by the way, they have never threatened, and it has still never been proven they even have weapons of mass destruction).

    I can name a handful of other countries that have both weapons of mass destruction (proven), and are harbouring/assisting terrorists. Some, in fact, are considered allies of the United States. I don’t see America doing anything about them.

    Nope, this war is about: (1) oil and who is in control of it; (2) proving to the world once again that the US way is the only way; and (3) Bush’s inability to do anything about any other myriad of issues inside the US – the only thing he apparently knows how to do (and gets rave reviews for) – is kicking a--.

    And if that offends anyone, well I’m sorry, but Gary did ask.

    PS - That being said, I do wish all your troops (and the Brits and Aussies) all the best, and hopefully they all return home safely, and as quickly as possible.
  16. spitfire

    spitfire Active Member

    I have found that the old adage, do not discuss religion and politics with friends is a wise policy. Nevertheless, here goes.....

    This situation is so much more complicated than any of us who are not privy to inner state department circles of all countries involved in the Middle East can possibly realize. There are old alliances and old hatreds just waiting for a trigger. Turkey's position against the Kurds is one good example of something that could easily widen the conflict. The region is a powder keg.

    War, once started, has a nasty way of generating its own momentum.

    My step-son informed me that a kid he knows was beat up at school last week for expressing anti-war views. He was also concerned that a sign "Another family for peace" that his sister had put up in their window could lead to trouble and wanted her to take it down. This is how fear silences dissent. I found this relatively minor incident quite disturbing.

    Violence begets violence.

    I firmly believe that the care and precision of the US air strikes and overall campaign are a direct result of the public's lack of appetite for a brutal war. One can be a patriot and still question one's leaders. In fact it is our duty.

    I support the American people, I consider them to be my friends. I understand that the events of September 11 require a response. Personally, I think that response should have been to withdraw all US interests entirely from the middle east and spend the billions currently being poured into this military campaign on alternative energy sources. Then all those corrupt SOB's, Saddam, the Saudis etc. could just rot in hell, cut off from the source of their power.

    If you think that Osama bin Laden's goal was to polarize the west and the arab world, to unify the arab world and divide western nations -- if you believe that this war is doing exactly that, then you will have grave doubts about the wisdom of this course of action.

    Let us pray for a speedy resolution to this conflict with minimal loss of all innocent human lives.

  17. Peace

    I am with you on that one rockislandmike. I support the young men and women who are over seas fighting and but the US should never have been in there with out UN support.
    Peace Now!:(
  18. Amazing post Gary. I suspect despite the reasons given by the media and public representatives, there are -always- other wheels turning. Be it economic benefits unseen to reaped, or as a plan to provide a stabilizing effect to a region ripe with unrest. There are other countries, other regimes, other atrocities being committed against people and the US and UN could seemingly care less. This is a fairly legitimate hypocrisy for someone to protest.

    I believe that the heart of many protestors arguments stems from the "obligation" vs. "right" sides of that coin that you mentioned. The majority would be quelled if the UN had been unanimous in the process of backing US actions. That would been our "obligation" as a UN member to participate and lead the campaign. However, baring that support, most people can't see the eminent "right" that the most powerful country in the world has to enforce it's sense of righteousness and ethics in another nation.

    We have become a sensitive people, sensitive to the needs of others, and to respect other's diversity as we do our own. That is probably why we have tried the past 15 years through various economic and political leveraging to do what we are doing with metal and blood now.

    Make no mistake; no matter how self serving our nations leaders may seem, no elected representative agrees to send his constituents into harms way with any lighter heart or mental debate then you would send your own son or father.

    An elected representative, or someone who has traveled the world extensively, should truly understand the responsibility we have toward using and exercising the power we have. As an employee of the US State Department for 3 years in the foreign service, I had an opportunity to taste many cultures and interact with Americans who had traveled to literally every corner of the world. Their vastly different experiences as well as my own all make me give thanks for being an American.

    Bear in mind, if the Chinese had a massive economy backed by a navy and an armed force as capable as our own, all the countries of the world would be leaning towards China's way of thinking economically, politically and morally. Same would be true of a Soviet, German, or Japanese way of thinking. In any group of kids, adults or countries, a leader is present, either chosen democratically, or by presence and power of personality, or by force.

    It truly is better that the United States rather then many, many other countries have this power, this "right" to spread policy. We blaze a far better, equitable empire then any roman or british ruler could.
  19. Gary Pfeil

    Gary Pfeil Active Member

    I'd like to respond but first wish to state that this is just an exercise in debate and is not meant to offend those who disagree. I feel strongly about my beliefs and am simply stating them and asking for other viewpoints so as to better understand them. If we can all understand where each of us is coming from, all the better.

    In regard to the first paragraph of Mikes reply, he states that the US only gets involved when it is to its own interest. My feeling is that it is only proper to do so when it is to your own interest. To act against your own interest is that suicidal trait known as self sacrifice. While taken as a virtue by most, one needs to take the words literally and realize that mans nature requires, for his survival, to act in his own interest, not against it. I stated above that it is not an obligation of free countries to aid those headed by dictators, but their right to do so. The real question then becomes "What is in our self interest?" This is where I agree the US in terribly inconsistant, and why much of the world has the opinion of us it does. The philosophy we follow, and so does the rest of the world, is Pragmatism. I chuckle when I see this word used to descibe a politician, and it is meant to be a good thing! pragmatism is the belief in doing whatever it takes to achieve the goal of the moment. Champions of this theory state that this means the person in question is "flexible" and "has an open mind". In fact what it means is the person has abondoned the theory of principle. It means that the person is incapable of long range thought. And the world we see is a result of that type thinking. It is the result of believing that whatever I do this split second need not have any affect on the next split second.

    OK, I've gotten a bit theoretical. But this is the practice you see in action at the UN. The theory of the UN is that all nations have a forum to intellectually discuss world problems. Underlaying that basic premise is that all those nations will bargain in good faith. here is where we may have a disagrrement, I do not believe that nations like the Soviet Union, China, syria, etc, will ever bargain in good faith. Simply put, a country that doesn't recognize its own citizens rights are not going to recognize another counties. And it is a serious moral error to grant them equal status to those counties which do. It is not a matter of difference of opinion. A mans rights are not granted to him by a particular countries laws, or by god. A mans rights are derived by his nature, what he needs to survive. All that which enable him to survive is the good, that which destroys him is the evil. The basic requirement of man is reason. A society which forces men to act against their own good is one which is evil. Mans rights is a topic too long to go into here. I will expand on it if anyone is interested. But this is the reason I felt the Soviet Union did not belong in a body which is to decide a proper course for the world. It was a country which intentionally starved its own citizens. I do not claim the US is without faults, tho I suspect we may disagree on what those faults are.

    As to Bush's reasons for going to war, I agree they have been a hodge podge. For the reasons above. He is willing to say whatever he thinks will work today. And something else tomorrow. It is the effort to find the reason which will persuade the others to agree. It is lack of principle, a concept eloquently absent from the world today. However, whatever his stated reasons, I believe the war is just for the ones I mentioned above, I think it is for each person to look at data and find his own assessment.

    I don't know what you mean when you say Iraq's ties to terrorism have been disproven. I hadn't heard anything that made me disbelieve what I gather to be a widely held acceptance of his writing checks to families of suicide bombers. If this is proven to be false, I would like to know, I do not purposely write about things I know are incorrect. But I admit my knowledge here is not as great as it might be.

    Other countries with weapons of mass destruction which harbor terrorists? This is Pragmatism. If I had more faith in my own country, I would say that we can only hope to change one nation at a time. However, my fear is that we will give in to world opinion and leave the job undone, undoing any good which might have come of it, in fact making matters worse. There are many instances to our shame in the past, our support of the shah of Iran comes to mind. Short term thinking, long range disaster. I can offer no argument here!

    I don't believe the war is about oil control but can see why you think so. My belief, as stated above, is that there were cheaper ways for us to go about assuring ourselves oil supplies. But, I suppose thats just my opinion.

    Thanks for letting me go on, I hope you enjoyed it, it is all meant with the deepest respect for the intergity of those who read it.
  20. rockislandmike

    rockislandmike Active Member

    I did enjoy it, Gary. It was nice to see a number of different viewpoints (and get mine off my chest as well) without it devolving into a flamefest as so often happens on online forums.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page