U.S. Troops in Limerick

Liam Byrne

Following on from another thread regarding the U.S. Troops showing up in Ennis, I had to comment on an encounter with them in Limerick at the local shop....apparently their plane developed a fault and they were put up in the area for a couple of days.

While in the other thread I queried the limits of the rules and laws, and while I'd still put forward the idea that Shannon shouldn't be used for this in any shape or form, two things stuck in my mind when I encountered them.

1) I was uncomfortable seeing them strolling around in uniform in my city; while I understand that it was an unexpected stopover, they should probably have been sent down to Penneys or some other budget store for a change of clothes....even profit-hungry airlines give you a clothing allowance if you're waylaid overnight.

HOWEVER (before I'm criticised for expressing an opinion such as the above)

2) I heard these guys speaking with some kids who were around, and speaking in the shop, and kicking football with the kids and my impression was that they are decent, polite and respectful guys.

While I would still have felt the need to walk quickly past them without acknowledging them, in order to show some sort of protest at their involvement in Iraq, the fact is that they are only following orders, so credit where some sort of credit's due......they seemed like a polite, well-mannered bunch.

While I personally would like to think that I'd support a just war (as a last resort) and would go AWOL and accept the consequences if it were one based on lies and agendas, maybe these guys don't have that option ?

Anyways, whatever the ins and outs, their involvement in the discredited invasion of Iraq is due to their Government's agenda and policies, and while it's difficult to completely separate the two I had to post this as a reference to the fact that most people jump down the throats of people who are anti-war as being somehow "anti-American"......

Yes, the war probably couldn't go ahead without them, but aside from their day jobs they seem more polite and more sound than your average gob****e that you'd see hanging around outside a shop.

If this post seems all over the place, that's because I've mixed feelings about it, but the fact is that they seemed like decent enough guys..... but do decent guys blow up innocent people ? I dunno, and that's not a sneaky swipe, because I am genuinely confused having seen and heard them "in person".

Anyways, just to say that I'm DEFINITELY not anti-American and not even anti-troops (as people), and even though there is a weird to-ing and fro-ing in my morality radar as a result of what they're involved in and capable of
(even as I type I'm swaying between viewpoints) but I still needed to say that they seemed like polite, sound guys.....

Does all that make sense ? I dunno - it seems a bit like saying that an abortion doctor is sound, outside of work, even if you're one of those who view abortion as murder - but hopefully it makes some sense.......

Mind you, it's probably a sad indictment of society in general when hearing someone being polite and respectful while hanging around outside a shop stands out from the norm.....nonetheless, as I said, I've no problem acknowledging that it was, indeed, the case that these guys seemed sound, and in different global circumstances it would have probably resulted in an enjoyable encounter and conversation.

talkingclock

Liam Byrne wrote:

While I would still have felt the need to walk quickly past them without acknowledging them, in order to show some sort of protest at their involvement in Iraq, the fact is that they are only following orders, so credit where some sort of credit's due...

As far as i know there is no compulsory military service in the US. So they were not FORCED to attend that war. I you enter the military service there then you are either

a) fully aware of what's going on or
b) you are an imbecile if you don't realise what's going on.

I'm not sure if you serve as a vonlunteer that you can be forced to go into war.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Today they play soccer with kids in Limerick and tomorrow the blow up people in Iraq.... Tough luck, collateral damage...

highlydebased

They are some very nice people, spoke to one or two of them in the airport once or twice

Limerick Dude

Yeah, saw them a few times at Shannon in duty free, they seem to be really nice.

jonski

Well if they are going to be using Shannon anyway , then they might as well come on into town and spend some of those mighty american dollars . A few more faulty jets to boost the city's economy .

highlydebased

Yea why not! Seeing as Aer Lingus no longer wish to bring the tourists in.......

Amazotheamazing

Most of them are polite and respectful. The war is wrong imo, but the reasons why someone might sign up are complicated. It's everything from patriotism to economics.

hobie

I suspect if you did a poll among the U.S. Army guys re should they be in Iraq/Afghanistan the result would be heavily in favour of staying at home .....:cool:

...... but as 'A' suggests ..... it's not that simple ....

bushy...

At least there was no sign of that muppet that appeared in Ennis ....

ninty9er

talkingclock wrote:

As far as i know there is no compulsory military service in the US. So they were not FORCED to attend that war. I you enter the military service there then you are either

a) fully aware of what's going on or
b) you are an imbecile if you don't realise what's going on.

I'm not sure if you serve as a vonlunteer that you can be forced to go into war.

Once you enter the defence/armed forces of any country, you are no longer a civilian and you're not generally given a choice in where you go. Basically, you are not in charge of your own life until you have served your time.

So it's quite possible some of these guys joined the US army because there was nothing else for them to do in 1999 and ended up in Afhanistan 2001/2002 through no fault of their own

Melion

A lot of them are from poorer backgrounds so they enter the military to get a good wage basically. If you speak to any of them in the airport(which i do regularly since i work there) they are all nice, decent men and women. Always stop for a chat to anyone interested in talking to them. They don't have to but are very respectful. You always see them talking to the younger kids who go over to them.

A lot of them do say that they dont want to be going out to iraq/afghanistan/germany, wherever. But they have no choice in where they are stationed.

talkingclock

ninty9er wrote:

Once you enter the defence/armed forces of any country, you are no longer a civilian and you're not generally given a choice in where you go.

if you do your compulsory service in Germany (9 month or so) you will definately not be sent into a warzone. only the full time wannabe Rambos are sent there. you go to a real war scenario only in case germany is getting invaded and they need you to defend the country. but only as well in case you are either a full time Rambo or unfortunately in your compulsory service. and there is still the possiblility to avoid weapons etc at all by working in a hospital or any charitable institution. basically you can choose either doing something good for the society or playing war games.

Melion wrote:

A lot of them do say that they dont want to be going out to iraq/afghanistan/germany, wherever.

excuse me? you are aware of the fact that this war on the continent is over for more then 60 years now?

Lemming

Melion wrote:

A lot of them are from poorer backgrounds so they enter the military to get a good wage basically.

Another significant point to make is the GI bill (passed after ww2 although I'm sure there's some newer version of it doing the rounds now) which entitles servicemen/women to an education paid for by the US government. Considering how expensive third level education is in the States, this is the only real shot that most will ever have at getting a higher education and perhaps moving out of poverty from which they came.

talkingclock

Actually, I don't want to turn this thread in a pro/con army thread.

But getting a higher education for maybe loosing your life in a war?

Re Shannon Airport and troups there: Like the OP said, my form of protest is ignoring them. And turning the back at them in the waiting zone. I haven't them invited so why should I be welcoming?

Lemming

talkingclock wrote:

But getting a higher education for maybe loosing your life in a war?

I'm not justifying it, I'm pointing out that a lot of these people join the army for notions other than blind idiocy or gung-ho rambo delusions.

Of course, it's also incredibly easy to pontificate and lecture from the comfort of an armchair in a warm, well lit room with a fast internet connection isn't it? As opposed to, say ... being desperate and poor and living in a slum getto with no future ...

I'm not saying that's the status quo, but there is a lot of serious poverty in the US, and the exorbitant education and medical costs mean that many people and their families are f*cked over for life and destined for conditions that you or I would have trouble believing. Getting a job with any prospects is difficult in a lot of poor areas, and their only realistic way out is the army and the benefits it offers (assuming you don't get killed/maimed)

talkingclock

Lemming wrote:

Of course, it's also incredibly easy to pontificate and lecture from the comfort of an armchair in a warm, well lit room with a fast internet connection isn't it? As opposed to, say ... being desperate and poor and living in a slum getto with no future ...

that remembers me of that discussion we had here about the term scumbag wher this guy said "calling people scumbags is turning them into scumbags".

poor doesn't mean stupid.

i wasn't fed with golden spoons either but my parents teached me what you can call "nobleness of heart" or "respect for human dignity".

Therefore i can say with all my experience of being 34 years on this planet that I have never and will never touch any weapon under any circumstances and kill other people. never. (i'm talking about real weapons, not the knife in your kitchen drawer, which could make a leathal weapon too)

Erm, I'm not a left-wing tree hugger or do-gooder. by far not! just to make that clear...

ninty9er

talkingclock wrote:

excuse me? you are aware of the fact that this war on the continent is over for more then 60 years now?

I'm sure melion is well aware as most of the rest of the world is; that Germany is the largest US military hub in Europe

talkingclock

but having germany in context with iraq and afghanistan makes it looking strange. BUT iraq is a big US military hub as well. in a way.

cooperguy

OP is it the case that before you met any of the soldiers you kind of dehumanized them, as in you just saw them as all 1 dimensional evil people ravaging the people of Iraq? You have to realise these people are trained soldiers and are doing a (highly skilled and dangerous) job. They may not even support the war themselves.

In my opinion ignoring or being rude to the soldiers on the street here because you disagree with the decisions of the US government is just as ignorant as being rude to a shop assistant because of the price mangement put on a product. In both cases it achieves nothing and your insulting a person who can do nothing about the situation, they are just doing their job.

Finally I would like to say I also do not agree with the decisions George Bush and the US government have made. They went to war based on complete lies and the strong supporters of that government seem to have forgotten completely about the WMDs that were supposed to be there!

However I also think at this stage just pulling out completely over night is not the right move either as that would throw the region into even more chaos. They created a mess and they should stay around to bring the region to stability. The region may eventually end up better off since the dictator has been removed (but it is coming at a very high cost unfortunately)

smokinp

Give the guys a break. There serving their country. And there getting to see a bit of the world.
This is the 3rd and final crusade..
Kick back n enjoy de show...

Amazotheamazing

talkingclock wrote:

but having germany in context with iraq and afghanistan makes it looking strange. BUT iraq is a big US military hub as well. in a way.

Still 80,000 or so US troops in Germany.

I think Irish people are incredibly self-righteous about this war. We're all anti-American intervention but terrified US companies will pull out of the Midwest over the Heathrow slots.

I've no doubt the war shouldn't have happened when it did, and it continues to be run awfully, but some people seem to think that gives them to the moral authourity to judge others reasons for signing up.

talkingclock

i'm not irish...
uuuh, it's confession time!

bullets

I noticed a few week or two ago around South Court Hotel at the shop.
Crikely they looked like a bunch of Kids and looked very green
as fresh out of boot camp and never having server time abroad ever.

They seemed polite enough and were chatting to lots of people that were
passing buy and stopped to engage in conversation.
(It was the fact that they were in uniform that people started chatting to them)
It may leave a good impression on Limerick if they leave here thinking people
are friendly.


~B

Stab*City

jonski wrote:

Well if they are going to be using Shannon anyway , then they might as well come on into town and spend some of those mighty american dollars . A few more faulty jets to boost the city's economy .

typical more proof that every irish man has a price!

jonski

*cm* wrote:

typical more proof that every irish man has a price!

Typical ? where exactly did I say I was Irish ?. And a price for what ? .

From the start I have not had a problem with the troops landing at Shannon so them spending money here won't really make any difference to my thinking . Don't assume that everyone has a problem with the refuelling or even the war in Iraq and Afghanistan for that matter .

Liam Byrne

cooperguy wrote:

OP is it the case that before you met any of the soldiers you kind of dehumanized them, as in you just saw them as all 1 dimensional evil people ravaging the people of Iraq? You have to realise these people are trained soldiers and are doing a (highly skilled and dangerous) job. They may not even support the war themselves.

Fair question, and therein lies the cause of my muddle-headedness.

Yes, given the gung-ho attitude of strolling around in uniform in a foreign country, despite the questions about how legal that is (personal opinion suppressed, but there are, at the very least, questions about it), I was genuinely surprised that they appeared to be decent guys......

But you say that they might not even agree with the war, and that's where my opinion wavers.....I cannot for the life of me see how any decent person could illegally and unjustifiably take the life of another.

Yes, if they misguidedly agreed with a war because of Bush's lies, or had been invaded and were defending themselves, they could still be viewed as decent (and even brave) guys and gals.....maybe even more so.

But while I was impressed at their politeness and demeanour, I was equally annoyed by the uniforms and even more annoyed at thinking that within days these guys would be killing some innocent Iraqis, with our help.

So yeah, it's true to say that I detest what they represent, and am sickened by what they have been/will be doing, and therefore I do feel the need to register my protest by ignoring them, but I genuinely can't square the circle in terms of how "decent" they might really be.....

I think my reason for posting was to highlight the fact that when all is said and done the politeness was surprising and welcome, but once I started typing and thinking it became a to-and-fro minefield of acknowledging that and wondering whether I had just encountered wolves in sheep's clothing......"we'll say 'please' and 'thank you' on our way to killing innocent people for no reason".....

I was trying to be genuine with the initial post, and to offset some of the perceived anti-American sentiments, but the more I think about it, the less sure I am that that was the right thing.....

Having said that, if I had been talking to them, the questions "have your bosses figured out the real reason why ye're there yet ?" or "how many innocent people did ye kill before ye flew home ?" and "did ye find any WMDs in your travels ?" would have been somehow unfair, yet partially justified ?

Surely in order to kill innocent people or fire a missile bomb into residential areas you need to be in some way evil or brainwashed or something ? Or do normal people actually buy into the lies that started the war and the sickening term of "collateral damage" to refer to anyone innocent who dies ?

I mean, did those who perpetrated 9/11 just want to knock the Twin Towers and all the capitalism they represent, and were the innocent people who died just "collateral damage" too ?

What makes the guys who did that any different to the U.S. Troops, if both were just brainwashed or ordered into following the inexcusable orders of maniacs ?

Decent guys led astray ? Maybe. But I still can't see how they can do what they do and still sleep at night.

cooperguy

Liam Byrne wrote:

Fair question, and therein lies the cause of my muddle-headedness.

Yes, given the gung-ho attitude of strolling around in uniform in a foreign country, despite the questions about how legal that is (personal opinion suppressed, but there are, at the very least, questions about it), I was genuinely surprised that they appeared to be decent guys......

But you say that they might not even agree with the war, and that's where my opinion wavers.....I cannot for the life of me see how any decent person could illegally and unjustifiably take the life of another.

Yes, if they misguidedly agreed with a war because of Bush's lies, or had been invaded and were defending themselves, they could still be viewed as decent (and even brave) guys and gals.....maybe even more so.

But while I was impressed at their politeness and demeanour, I was equally annoyed by the uniforms and even more annoyed at thinking that within days these guys would be killing some innocent Iraqis, with our help.

So yeah, it's true to say that I detest what they represent, and am sickened by what they have been/will be doing, and therefore I do feel the need to register my protest by ignoring them, but I genuinely can't square the circle in terms of how "decent" they might really be.....

I think my reason for posting was to highlight the fact that when all is said and done the politeness was surprising and welcome, but once I started typing and thinking it became a to-and-fro minefield of acknowledging that and wondering whether I had just encountered wolves in sheep's clothing......"we'll say 'please' and 'thank you' on our way to killing innocent people for no reason".....

I was trying to be genuine with the initial post, and to offset some of the perceived anti-American sentiments, but the more I think about it, the less sure I am that that was the right thing.....

Having said that, if I had been talking to them, the questions "have your bosses figured out the real reason why ye're there yet ?" or "how many innocent people did ye kill before ye flew home ?" and "did ye find any WMDs in your travels ?" would have been somehow unfair, yet partially justified ?

Surely in order to kill innocent people or fire a missile bomb into residential areas you need to be in some way evil or brainwashed or something ? Or do normal people actually buy into the lies that started the war and the sickening term of "collateral damage" to refer to anyone innocent who dies ?

I mean, did those who perpetrated 9/11 just want to knock the Twin Towers and all the capitalism they represent, and were the innocent people who died just "collateral damage" too ?

What makes the guys who did that any different to the U.S. Troops, if both were just brainwashed or ordered into following the inexcusable orders of maniacs ?

Decent guys led astray ? Maybe. But I still can't see how they can do what they do and still sleep at night.

Again I have problems with what you are saying. Do you honestly think that they are "killing innocent people for no reason" the vast vast vast majority of people they have hostile interaction with are the scum of the earth. You cannot tell me that the people who carry out suicide bombings and car bombings are anything less surely. Some of them are the same people who were supporting Sadam.

The US army also have not been completly bad for the region they have removed a dictator and set the wheels in motion for a better quality of life for the people of the nation. And they do have support of at least some of the people in the country. Which is why there was and still is queues of people outside the recruitment points for police and army.

I know I seem to be defending this war alot but my impression is that you are seeing everything very black and white and it really isnt like that.

Stab*City

jonski wrote:

Typical ? where exactly did I say I was Irish ?. And a price for what ? .

From the start I have not had a problem with the troops landing at Shannon so them spending money here won't really make any difference to my thinking . Don't assume that everyone has a problem with the refuelling or even the war in Iraq and Afghanistan for that matter .

ok first of all if your not irish i dont really think your opinion matters to me when it comes to people using our country as a stop off on their way to killing people.. and of course you wouldnt have a problem with such war just as long as it wasnt on your doorstep and costing you money..

Liam Byrne

Nope - not seeing it in B&W - if I was I wouldn't have posted anything remotely nice about these guys. I was actually originally trying to separate the scum (U.S. Administration) from the guys "doing their job", and the grey area of "how can you do a job that you don't believe in and that kills innocent people" crept in.

How "good for the region" or otherwise is debatable and also a side issue; it was the U.S. that installed Saddam when it suited them, and they took him out when it suited them (oil for sale in euro, anyone?)

Also, in the process, THOUSANDS of innocent people have been killed, dismissed as "collateral damage".....I would have had no objection had the "scum of the earth" that you referred to been taken out, but because of the decision to invade/start a war, the number of people who have been killed is far, far greater than "the vast vast vast majority of people they have hostile interaction".

If the U.S. had said "we're going after Bin Laden", I would have supported them 100%. But they didn't, and they still haven't got him, despite most of the goodwill of the world being behind them to do so......the invasion of Iraq has distracted everyone from this fact.

Do you honestly think that they are "killing innocent people for no reason"

1. There was no reason for the war (otherwise the U.S. Administration would not have had to give us different reasons every day in an effort to convince us). 2. Innocent people are being killed every day as a result. Therefore, "innocent people are being killed for no reason".

Yes, I'm anti-war.......simply because there was no justification for the war.....having a handy side effect doesn't excuse it, nor does it excuse the lies and deceit that was used to convince us that Saddam had something to do with 9/11, or that Saddam had WMDs, or whatever else was thrown in along the way in an attempt to get us to agree with Bush.

Like I said, there were terrorists in Ireland, along with lots of sound people; at one stage, Charlie Haughey tried importing arms for those terrorists.....if the Brits had done a Bush back then, you and I would have been invaded for a reason that had nothing to do with us, and thousands of innocent Irish would have died, as well as prompting many, many moderates to take sides to defend against the unjust invasion, as is the case in Iraq.

Yes, the fact that we are implicit in this war (through Bertie & Co rolling over) makes it all the more sickening and therefore more emotive, but the fact is that there was no justification for this war and therefore people involved give me the creeps.

But that's just my opinion, and I'm not going to hijack the thread on the ins and outs of the war itself......I was just wondering about people's views on the people involved, and I was - at least originally - trying to separate the people on the ground from their lying bosses with hidden agendas.

Stab*City

Liam Byrne wrote:

Nope - not seeing it in B&W - if I was I wouldn't have posted anything remotely nice about these guys. I was actually originally trying to separate the scum (U.S. Administration) from the guys "doing their job", and the grey area of "how can you do a job that you don't believe in and that kills innocent people" crept in.

How "good for the region" or otherwise is debatable and also a side issue; it was the U.S. that installed Saddam when it suited them, and they took him out when it suited them (oil for sale in euro, anyone?)

Also, in the process, THOUSANDS of innocent people have been killed, dismissed as "collateral damage".....I would have had no objection had the "scum of the earth" that you referred to been taken out, but because of the decision to invade/start a war, the number of people who have been killed is far, far greater than "the vast vast vast majority of people they have hostile interaction".

If the U.S. had said "we're going after Bin Laden", I would have supported them 100%. But they didn't, and they still haven't got him, despite most of the goodwill of the world being behind them to do so......the invasion of Iraq has distracted everyone from this fact.

1. There was no reason for the war (otherwise the U.S. Administration would not have had to give us different reasons every day in an effort to convince us). 2. Innocent people are being killed every day as a result. Therefore, "innocent people are being killed for no reason".

Yes, I'm anti-war.......simply because there was no justification for the war.....having a handy side effect doesn't excuse it, nor does it excuse the lies and deceit that was used to convince us that Saddam had something to do with 9/11, or that Saddam had WMDs, or whatever else was thrown in along the way in an attempt to get us to agree with Bush.

Like I said, there were terrorists in Ireland, along with lots of sound people; at one stage, Charlie Haughey tried importing arms for those terrorists.....if the Brits had done a Bush back then, you and I would have been invaded for a reason that had nothing to do with us, and thousands of innocent Irish would have died, as well as prompting many, many moderates to take sides to defend against the unjust invasion, as is the case in Iraq.

Yes, the fact that we are implicit in this war (through Bertie & Co rolling over) makes it all the more sickening and therefore more emotive, but the fact is that there was no justification for this war and therefore people involved give me the creeps.

But that's just my opinion, and I'm not going to hijack the thread on the ins and outs of the war itself......I was just wondering about people's views on the people involved, and I was - at least originally - trying to separate the people on the ground from their lying bosses with hidden agendas.

i agree

CptSternn

The troops, contrary to what they are telling us in the news and from Dublin, are being housed throughout the area. Limerick, Shannon, and throughout Clare hundreds of troops daily are being setup in hotels and B&B's.

Most never know it though. There have been two incidents, which haven't made national news, one at a late night chipper, another at a nightclub in Shannon, where troops collided with the locals and gards had to be called to quell the violence.

Since then, all troops now are supposed to wear plain clothes when intermingling with 'the locals'.

I don't support the troops, nor do I support the war. I don't think it's possible. It's like being against the british in the north, but still supporting the squadies.

It can't be done. In fact, the one thing your forgettings is these guys aren't going to help anyone - their primary goal is to take away life, to kill the native indegeonous people living in their own country.

No matter how you look at it or how nice they may appear, in a few days they will be shooting innocent men, women, and children.

Don't forget 650,000 people are already dead. Although bush and his cronies may have ordered this, bush has yet to pull the trigger. I haven't seen cheny out there dropping any bombs personally.

The men you see that are 'so nice' are about to embark on a mission that will lead to the deaths of thousands more, including women and children.

Everyday we see pictures of abuse from Iraq, hear the stories of their new modern day gulag in Cuba, how they have now 'legalised' certain forms of torture.

As I stated before, bush and his people may have ordered it, but it's those men who are water boarding prisoners, kicking in doors and tossing homes, and shooting at car loads of families who don't break soon enough at checkpoints.

Anyone who takes money from these killers and looks the other way while they perform such heinous acts, well, makes you no better than them.

Nice or not, they are killers with blood on their hands.

jonski

*cm* wrote:

ok first of all if your not irish i dont really think your opinion matters to me when it comes to people using our country as a stop off on their way to killing people..

Well actually I am Irish , but that was just to show you the error of typing before you think .

*cm* wrote:

and of course you wouldnt have a problem with such war just as long as it wasnt on your doorstep and costing you money..

Everytime I put petrol in my car it costs me money .

My thoughts on the war are as complicated as the original posters thoughts on the soldiers and while I would be a lot happier if it wasn't happening I am a realist and feel now that what was started ( for whatever reason )must be finished . But , I also have a much greater problem with a world that stands idly by while innocent people are killed in their own countries by their own leaders .