Thanks for fighting for our freedom in Iraq!

MagicMarker

Numerous times over the last week or two I've seen this being said on other, predominantly American, fora. Obviously that statement is aimed at people who post who happen to be soldiers.

I just don't quite get it. They're not fighting for their freedom, they're fighting for freedom for the Iraqi's.

It's all just a bit wanky. It's all very ''America, Fúck Yeah''.

phasers

America, fúck no.

shenanigans1982

I thought they were fighting for oil.

FlutterinBantam

Have you got a problem with it??

Hazys

What they mean is thanks for fighting in Iraq against forces which could eventually comprise their freedom in the states aka Al-Qaeda

BaconZombie

They where fighting for the oils freedom to be saved from the iraqs and be liberated to the US.

shenanigans1982 wrote: »

I thought they were fighting for oil.

the_syco

shenanigans1982 wrote: »

I thought they were fighting for oil.

Eh, no. Iraq will try to sell their oil to China.

Nodin

MagicMarker wrote: »

I just don't quite get it. They're not fighting for their freedom, they're fighting for freedom for the Iraqi's.

Any freedom obtained by the Iraqis was and is incidental to the whole misadventure. The majority of the Iraqi states oil fields are in Foreign control, the majority of the revenue is destined to leave the country, and a foreign economic model has been imposed on the country via Bremmers CPA.

Overheal

MagicMarker wrote: »

Numerous times over the last week or two I've seen this being said on other, predominantly American, fora. Obviously that statement is aimed at people who post who happen to be soldiers.

I just don't quite get it. They're not fighting for their freedom, they're fighting for freedom for the Iraqi's.

It's all just a bit wanky. It's all very ''America, Fúck Yeah''.

It is a bit.

But the concept being that is we had done nothing it would only send a message to terrorist cells across the world that America could be fcuked with. That by going into the Middle East, its saying if you mess with us, we're coming to you. The same way negotiating with terrorists only makes your country a target for profitable terrorism.

But of course, Afghanistan this, Iraq that. And it was all really Saudi's. Bah.

The other irony is that with the Patriot Act and the formation of TWA and all that jazz, the war on terror has actually chipped away at our freedoms at the cost of security.

Berty

Hmmm lets see. They invaded Iraq, claiming to the perceived ignorance of their own citizens, that Osama Bin Laden was in Iraq when in fact he was in Afghanistan/Pakistan.

Now they are there trying to rebuild the country the destroyed.

The poor British people fell for it as well.

Fighting for nothing but the removal of a dictator they hated and the oil.

Ardscoil Ris

As long as women and children are murdered I couldn't give a toss.

Gives me something to watch on Sky News while I wait for the footy results.

Dear USA,

Please invade China next.

Sincerely,
The Rest of the World.

Tech3

Ardscoil Ris wrote: »

As long as women and children are murdered I couldn't give a toss.

:eek:

shenanigans1982

Ardscoil Ris wrote: »

As long as women and children are murdered I couldn't give a toss.

Gives me something to watch on Sky News while I wait for the footy results.

Dear USA,

Please invade China next.

Sincerely,
The Rest of the World.

I hate this kind of stereotyping, it's not as if they just go in and start shooting down women and children....they have also killed a few of their own soldiers.

FlutterinBantam

Aaah the good old USA .. fair play to ya Uncle Sam.

I'll just sit here and wait for some mad mullahs and fcukers who don't give a bollix about personal freedoms to take over and not do a frikken thing.

I'll sit back while a bunch of **** demolish the WTC and hold out the hand of friendship!

I'll watch while a corrupt Govt. screws their people into the ground and do nothing in case some left wing jerkoffs get a bit worked up??


Let's get real here folks.

Overheal

How stupid would you have to be to invade China?

Before you say it, we're not that stupid.

Ardscoil Ris

Overheal wrote: »

How stupid would you have to be to invade China?

Before you say it, we're not that stupid.

America Stupid I'd say.

holly1

Ardscoil Ris wrote: »

As long as women and children are murdered I couldn't give a toss.

Gives me something to watch on Sky News while I wait for the footy results.

Dear USA,

Please invade China next.

Sincerely,
The Rest of the World.

I dont know if you were trying to be funny or not,but your NOT:mad:.

Professey Chin

Overheal wrote: »

How stupid would you have to be to invade China?

Before you say it, we're not that stupid.

I think India and China should go to war with each other for my amusement. Should sort out overpopulation for a while too

DeVore

I dont have a political agenda on this but I do think the following...

History is a long time.

The Iraqi's seem to be better off even now then they were under Saddam. America wouldnt have given a sh*t if they only grew potatos but since they had oil...um, thats different (where is the Operation Darfur Freedom?).

No one actually gave much of a crap. Oh lots of people got very upset and marched etc. But they wont actually do much about it when it comes down to it (like vote based on it). In that respect Ardscoil Ris is right, it was a big thing for Sky and that was about it. Roll on Iran, cant wait to see what the new bombs do.

I think time will still have to tell and who knows... maybe the WMD's will finally turn up under someones bed.

DeV.

Nodin

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Aaah the good old USA .. fair play to ya Uncle Sam.

I'll just sit here and wait for some mad mullahs and fcukers who don't give a bollix about personal freedoms to take over and not do a frikken thing.

I'll sit back while a bunch of **** demolish the WTC and hold out the hand of friendship!

There were no mullahs in chargde of Iran when America overthrew their democratically elected Government. There was after they supported a Dictator for near on 25 years.

No one from Iraq has anything to do with the WTC attack.

Try adding in some facts before commenting next time.

FlutterinBantam

Nodin wrote: »

There were no mullahs in chargde of Iran when America overthrew their democratically elected Government. There was after they supported a Dictator for near on 25 years.

No one from Iraq has anything to do with the WTC attack.

Try adding in some facts before commenting next time.

In case you didn't notice I was speaking generally.

Last I saw I never mentioned Iran.

Try to read the post before you fire off at the poster.

Gran Hermano

Is WMD how Americans spell OIL? Did they not invade looking for WMD?
I think all they found was oil.
(I know they spell other words like 'colour' wrong.)

Nothing beats a war to pump-prime a home economy and stimulate demand.
An invasion of Iran will create a lot of employment in the USA from factories to cannon-fodder.
Thatcher used the Argie-bargy in the Falklands
in the early 80's to boost the UK economy.

Acacia

I remember some guy telling me that a relation of his died in 9/11 (which is terrible). He then told me he going to go to Iraq and kill a load of ''Pakis". :rolleyes:
I walked away.

cork1

well i do admire the soldiers fighting there.i dont like what there fighting for but neither do most of them. they are detailed to go to iraq they dont have a choice in that. if they dont go they will be charged for desertion. i know ye will say they didnt have to join the army but i wouldnt agree with that.there is a great deal of honour in serving ones country.

brianthebard

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

In case you didn't notice I was speaking generally.

Last I saw I never mentioned Iran.

Try to read the post before you fire off at the poster.

I think Nodin assumed you were talking about Iran because there were never any mullahs, mad or otherwise, in charge in Iraq, not under Saddam. Course if you were applying a derogatory term generally, without recourse to historical precedent, well that's just fine isn't it? Clearly thought out, inciteful argument Flut. Well done.

Ardscoil Ris

holly1 wrote: »

I dont know if you were trying to be funny or not,but your NOT:mad:.

Wasn't trying to be funny.

FlutterinBantam

Brian,I'm at a loss as to where you are coming from.

I suppose a simple question would be the best thing.

Do you expect the US to sit back while an unstable area controls the lifeblood of the world economy,and rattles sabres, and threatens world economic stability.

As the "Bull Goose" in the new World order , do you expect the US to do that??

brianthebard

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Brian,I'm at a loss as to where you are coming from.

I suppose a simple question would be the best thing.

Do you expect the US to sit back while an unstable area controls the lifeblood of the world economy,and rattles sabres, and threatens world economic stability.

As the "Bull Goose" in the new World order , do you expect the US to do that??

The US is not my international police force. The Monroe Doctrine is not my doctrine. I've no idea what your bull goose reference means, so I can't comment on that.

FlutterinBantam

brianthebard wrote: »

The US is not my international police force. The Monroe Doctrine is not my doctrine. I've no idea what your bull goose reference means, so I can't comment on that.

try "Top Dog" Big kahuna" "Alpha male"Head honcho""Kaiser Chief"

So you expect the US to sit back and just let things evolve ,no matter what way.

Is that it??

Poccington

People having a bit of respect for members of their countries military.

The madness of it all. :rolleyes:

brianthebard

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

try "Top Dog" Big kahuna" "Alpha male"Head honcho""Kaiser Chief"

So you expect the US to sit back and just let things evolve ,no matter what way.

Is that it??

If they had done that then they wouldn't need to later engage in a 6 year war after taking out the dictator they installed in a country a few decades ago. So in a word, yes.

ejmaztec

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

try "Top Dog" Big kahuna" "Alpha male"Head honcho""Kaiser Chief"

So you expect the US to sit back and just let things evolve ,no matter what way.

Is that it??

Isn't the US where the big sh1ts hang out?

dr.bollocko

Lads if we keep moaning on about it it will only get them all angry. And when they get angry they shoot more bullets. And bullets are bloody expensive and there's a recession on and I for one want to support Obama through this recession.

FlutterinBantam

Good logic.

Right , we will all sit back while Pakistan and India flake nuclear missiles at each other in the next few years.

We will do nothing, just let them at it, none of our business.

No sir.

ejmaztec

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Good logic.

Right , we will all sit back while Pakistan and India flake nuclear missiles at each other in the next few years.

We will do nothing, just let them at it, none of our business.

No sir.

Well, you'll be ok, tucked away in the safety of your Horsehead Nebula.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

I think that kind of language is just so ingrained in the average American's brain they do it automatically? Like a politician can't end a speech without saying "God Bless America", they're taught the Pledge of Allegiance when they're four, you probably couldn't watch a straight hour of American news without some reference to "this great country", "our founding fathers" etc. I can't remember if it was like that pre-2001 but it sure as shit is now. But while I can't seriously comprehend anyone still thinking the Iraq invasion was a good idea, respecting the soldiers is a different thing.

adagio

Please note I am using 'you' pejoratively.
Fighting for freedom - are you for real.
If you call invading another sovereign nation under false pretenses and using weaponry that has killed thousands of innocent people fighting for freedom then you are a moron.
I can't believe the a relatively educated population can hold such naive opinions, it makes my blood boil.
Have you taken a look at the history of the region and the reasons thus far for invading Iraq?
It is a fact that the neo-cons who drove the Bush senior Iraq campaign openly felt they had unfinished business - and they are heavily involved in the oil industry. They are also aware of something called 'peak oil.'
Please, please educate yourself before making glib comments about war and freedom.
Imagine, you and your family are living in an area that has several competing tribes that are at this point in time being ruled by a ruthless dictator - you are either part of the dictators ethnic group and an active supporter = you are living a relatively good life.
Or you are not part of the dictators ethnic group and are being persecuted every second day = you are living in misery.
And then, the government who armed the dictator during the Iraq/Iran war, decided to blanket bomb your town for a second time, how would you feel? Well, this would depend upon how many of your family members have been killed.
And after the overthrow of the Dictator, the several competing tribes now take indiscriminate vengeance upon the community they perceive to be their enemy = friends and family have been further terrorized.
Finally, the 'freedom fighters' agree a time for departure only after building several bases in vital areas of the Oil region, you are left in a county that has had it's infrastructure destroyed, its economy under pressure due to corruption and finally you may or may not come home this evening as you may be collateral damage in a car bombing carried out by your own people.
My friend you have a warped sense of what constitutes Freedom.
The least you can do as you live in a relatively free society is to avail of the possibility of education that is not yet available in a country that at one time was the center of education and prosperity.
Shame on you.:mad:

dr.bollocko

Jaime Savory Levee wrote: »

I think that kind of language is just so ingrained in the average American's brain they do it automatically? Like a politician can't end a speech without saying "God Bless America", they're taught the Pledge of Allegiance when they're four, you probably couldn't watch a straight hour of American news without some reference to "this great country", "our founding fathers" etc. I can't remember if it was like that pre-2001 but it sure as shit is now. But while I can't seriously comprehend anyone still thinking the Iraq invasion was a good idea, respecting the soldiers is a different thing.

Well at least they have that hopeful language to automatically reach for. Seems like expression of patriotism is no reason to hate someone. I reckon the Irish have this ingrained language too and our automatic phrases are much worse. "Sorry" and "D'ya wanna go for a pint." "Stick on the kettle." and "I'm a mother..."

FlutterinBantam

Jaime Savory Levee wrote: »

I think that kind of language is just so ingrained in the average American's brain they do it automatically? Like a politician can't end a speech without saying "God Bless America", they're taught the Pledge of Allegiance when they're four, you probably couldn't watch a straight hour of American news without some reference to "this great country", "our founding fathers" etc. I can't remember if it was like that pre-2001 but it sure as shit is now. But while I can't seriously comprehend anyone still thinking the Iraq invasion was a good idea, respecting the soldiers is a different thing.

Seriously, there are quite a lot of people in Iraq right now who think it was a very good idea.

We denigrate people for being proud of their country?

Yet we do the very same ourselves and depend on them to ensure
stability in world affairs??

Are people kinda mad here ??

MagicMarker

adagio wrote: »

Please note I am using 'you' pejoratively.
Fighting for freedom - are you for real.
If you call invading another sovereign nation under false pretenses and using weaponry that has killed thousands of innocent people fighting for freedom then you are a moron.
I can't believe the a relatively educated population can hold such naive opinions, it makes my blood boil.
Have you taken a look at the history of the region and the reasons thus far for invading Iraq?
It is a fact that the neo-cons who drove the Bush senior Iraq campaign openly felt they had unfinished business - and they are heavily involved in the oil industry. They are also aware of something called 'peak oil.'
Please, please educate yourself before making glib comments about war and freedom.
Imagine, you and your family are living in an area that has several competing tribes that are at this point in time being ruled by a ruthless dictator - you are either part of the dictators ethnic group and an active supporter = you are living a relatively good life.
Or you are not part of the dictators ethnic group and are being persecuted every second day = you are living in misery.
And then, the government who armed the dictator during the Iraq/Iran war, decided to blanket bomb your town for a second time, how would you feel? Well, this would depend upon how many of your family members have been killed.
And after the overthrow of the Dictator, the several competing tribes now take indiscriminate vengeance upon the community they perceive to be their enemy = friends and family have been further terrorized.
Finally, the 'freedom fighters' agree a time for departure only after building several bases in vital areas of the Oil region, you are left in a county that has had it's infrastructure destroyed, its economy under pressure due to corruption and finally you may or may not come home this evening as you may be collateral damage in a car bombing carried out by your own people.
My friend you have a warped sense of what constitutes Freedom.
The least you can do as you live in a relatively free society is to avail of the possibility of education that is not yet available in a country that at one time was the center of education and prosperity.
Shame on you.:mad:

Pick up a p p p paragraph.

adagio

Ooooohhhhhhhhh........ now that's told me.
I wish I were as pedantic and anal as you...... you're my grammatical hero!

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

dr.sucks.bollocko wrote: »

Well at least they have that hopeful language to automatically reach for. Seems like expression of patriotism is no reason to hate someone. I reckon the Irish have this ingrained language too and our automatic phrases are much worse. "Sorry" and "D'ya wanna go for a pint." "Stick on the kettle." and "I'm a mother..."

Lol. Yeah I'm not giving out about it, I'm just saying it's why some people might say "Thanks for protecting my freedom" without even thinking about it

shotgun mike

MagicMarker wrote: »

Pick up a p p p paragraph.

Kudos!!!

thethedev

Overheal wrote: »

How stupid would you have to be to invade China?

Before you say it, we're not that stupid.

Like a fox!!

Fratton Fred

Berty wrote: »

Fighting for nothing but the removal of a dictator they hated and the oil.

Hated almost as much as the Iraqi's did. Remind me again, how many civlians were murdered in Halabja?

DeVore wrote: »

I dont have a political agenda on this but I do think the following...

History is a long time.

The Iraqi's seem to be better off even now then they were under Saddam. America wouldnt have given a sh*t if they only grew potatos but since they had oil...um, thats different (where is the Operation Darfur Freedom?).

No one actually gave much of a crap. Oh lots of people got very upset and marched etc. But they wont actually do much about it when it comes down to it (like vote based on it). In that respect Ardscoil Ris is right, it was a big thing for Sky and that was about it. Roll on Iran, cant wait to see what the new bombs do.

I think time will still have to tell and who knows... maybe the WMD's will finally turn up under someones bed.

DeV.

I recall getting an email about 8 years ago from some leftie feminist organisation demanding the west do something about the regime in Afghanistan. Women were being stoned to death in the street for going out without a male escort, teachers, doctors and lawyers were banned from working on the basis they were female and other such human rights abuses.

So, the west go in, change the regime and the same leftie lesbians and shinners are complaining about the was in Afghanistan.:rolleyes:

Gran Hermano wrote: »

Thatcher used the Argie-bargy in the Falklands in the early 80's to boost the UK economy.

What the **** did Thatcher do wrong there, the Argies invaded :rolleyes:

Manic Moran

Jaime Savory Levee wrote: »

Lol. Yeah I'm not giving out about it, I'm just saying it's why some people might say "Thanks for protecting my freedom" without even thinking about it

The difference, I think, is that they do think about it, and they mean it when they say it.

This isn't an incidental comment like a scripted 'Have a nice day, Mr Moran' at the supermarket checkout. These are people who will go out of their way to come over to you and shake your hand. They will reach into their pockets and pay for your meal, no matter how much you protest against it. I've had people pay for my meal anonymously, the first I've found out about it is when I ask for the bill and am told 'the people who had been sitting at that table over there, but left five minutes ago' paid for it. And more than once, if you think I'm taking a single example. 'Military discounts' are a very real financial display from anything from small business owners through major companies like GM. And bear in mind, I live in the San Francisco region, the absolute most anti-war part of the country. I'm typing from within eyesight of Berkeley. (Out my office window). Can you imagine what it's like in more conservative parts of the country?

We had an officer from New Zealand's army come out to visit us, and he was astonished by the depth of feeling shown towards US servicemen, something he would never imagine at home. I certainly can't imagine it in Ireland. How many people would anonymously pay for a three-course-meal for a member of either the RDF or PDF? If Mairt went to Pete's of Parnell St and asked for a military discount on a big-screen TV, do you think he'd get 15% off, or laughed at? That's how heartfelt it is. It's not national jingo-ism, it's an honest appreciation of the work and risk voluntarily taken by servicemen on the behalf of the citizenry of the country.

Now, that covers the 'Thank you for serving', 'thank you for protecting us', and 'thank you for fighting for our freedoms,' all of which I commonly receive.

When it comes down to the very specific 'thank you for fighting for our freedom in Iraq' (which, truthfully, I've very rarely received) that does get a little more indirect. The initial cause, the WMDs, would have applied fine to begin with, as WMDs would have been a bit of a threat to US security. I fully admit that Iraqi freedoms were pretty much incidental, a positive side-effect, if you will. Once the WMDs turned out to not be present, the focus shifted towards leaving Iraq in a condition which would not see it is a threat to US security in the future. At that point, US and Iraqi freedoms did become closely interlinked on the basis that democracies very rarely attack other democracies if nothing else. The US, like any country, very rarely will do anything out of the pure goodness of its heart, excepting maybe the odd humanitarian rescue which in the scheme of things costs very little. To that end, US forces are in Iraq fighting for the US. It just happens that the US goals and the concept of freedom for Iraqis seem to be interdependent.

But while I can't seriously comprehend anyone still thinking the Iraq invasion was a good idea, respecting the soldiers is a different thing.

Wonder no more. I still think it was a good idea, even after having to spend a year risking getting shot at. I am not alone. Now, I also think it was very poorly executed, which is a different matter entirely, which I think is, indeed, the dominant viewpoint.

They invaded Iraq, claiming to the perceived ignorance of their own citizens, that Osama Bin Laden was in Iraq when in fact he was in Afghanistan/Pakistan.

I don't know if they were claiming that. I certainly recall quite a bit of news about how they almost got Bin Laden in the Tora Bora region around that time. The discussion was of prospective co-operation, not of co-location.

NTM

FlutterinBantam

Excellent and considered post from someone who put his ass on the line, as opposed to shaking his fist in a fcukin subsidised bar.

Respect Sir.

Nodin

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

In case you didn't notice I was speaking generally.

Last I saw I never mentioned Iran.

You decided to just throw in mullahs, wtc and assorted 'OMG TEH MOSZLEMS!!!!'/Theyz-a Comin Right For Us' cack to muddy the waters when the thread was about Iraq then. Goody for you.

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Do you expect the US to sit back while an unstable area controls the lifeblood of the world economy,and rattles sabres, and threatens world economic stability.

What? The US is finally going to reign in Israel?

O....You mean Iraq....Funny, this is what your chief ally thought in 2002, before you 'went-a liberaytin'

IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY

Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy

It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article387374.ece

And they made that muppet a "peace envoy"....deary me.

FlutterinBantam

Whatever you are on, I want it too.:cool:

Nodin

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Whatever you are on, I want it too.:cool:

O Well thought out refutation Sir. I thought you were going to try the 'Why do you hate Freedom' gambit, but I see now your level.

Whats next? 'You'd be speaking German if it wasn't for us?'

FlutterinBantam

Nodin wrote: »

O Well thought out refutation Sir. I thought you were going to try the 'Why do you hate Freedom' gambit, but I see now your level.

Whats next? 'You'd be speaking German if it wasn't for us?'

What's wrong with that.??

Are you saying it's not true?

maybe we would be better off:cool: