ATTENTION US service men and women

[Titanic]

Well aside form the fact that I said you did win the BOB without us, If Germany did conquer you then they would have more than likely been forced into a peace with Russia, because they couldn't mount a proper invasion, and Russia couldn't conquered the whole of Europe under german control. My point was that you couldn't have held out indefinitely against German blockades, etc., and they would eventually gain air superiority. Even if you were able to hold out, there would be no way in hell that you would be able to launch a successful counterattack without U.S. help.

How could have not held out indefinitely against German blockades? The Germans did everything they could to sink supply ships during the war, but after a change of tactics and better intelligence for the British the attacks slowed down to a level where enough supplies were getting through for Britain to survive. After the German failure in the Battle of Britain, on European soil they only fought Russia (until D-Day) and it was Russia who ultimately defeated them, so your points do not stand as a) Germany did not and could not blockade Britain indefinitely, and b) the Russians did defeat Germany when they were 1v1.

Your last point in not relevant as I never denied that we needed US support to defeat Nazi Germany, my point was simply that we managed to defend ourself without US help.

[jonka]

As bad as yo might think the USA is, I would be willing to bet that if it wasn't for the USA the out come of WWII might have been different and you might not have the freedom to voice your opinion. Don't thank the USA, but do thank all the service men and women from all over the world that died to give you that freedom.
lgoasklucyl say all you want, good or bad but please just do one thing, thank the men and women like Tyr who protect your right of freedom of speech.

I agree with your point about WW2, but I don't agree with that same point about any of the wars since then.
What I'm trying to say is: I'll thank my Grandparents that Hitler and Japan didn't conquer the world and take away certain liberties from me, but my freedom of speech is not in any way affected by the US's decision to invade a completely irrelevant country to take their oil.

[PLAYER57832]

I agree that civilian and ally casualties are inevitable, but it seems that the USA makes a hell of alot more of these mistakes then any other nation.

We have more opportunities to screw up, because our numbers are greater and our involvement more widespread around the world.

Add onto this that when you do kill British troops you refuse to release the videos and surveillance to the coroner and British Army even though you just killed one of their troops.

True, and it was wrong.

Also even if the USA did not join WWII I would still have freedom because we won the Battle of Britain without your help, you never liberated us.

Sorry, but history tells a different tale. You might have won the battle, indeed. However, most historians do say that you could not have won the war alone. Britain was the last domino in Europe. It was not very far down the line.

[thegreekdog]

I would posit that if the USA did not get involved in WWII in Europe and Germany still invaded the Soviet Union, the Soviets would have liberated France and we'd have had a "red" Europe with only England as the non-communist bastion. We'd have communist France, Germany, Italy, Greece, etc. Doesn't really have anything to do with US soldiers killing innocent people or allies, but I like alternate histories.

[PLAYER57832]

Well aside form the fact that I said you did win the BOB without us, If Germany did conquer you then they would have more than likely been forced into a peace with Russia, because they couldn't mount a proper invasion, and Russia couldn't conquered the whole of Europe under german control. My point was that you couldn't have held out indefinitely against German blockades, etc., and they would eventually gain air superiority. Even if you were able to hold out, there would be no way in hell that you would be able to launch a successful counterattack without U.S. help.

How could have not held out indefinitely against German blockades? The Germans did everything they could to sink supply ships during the war, but after a change of tactics and better intelligence for the British the attacks slowed down to a level where enough supplies were getting through for Britain to survive. After the German failure in the Battle of Britain, on European soil they only fought Russia (until D-Day) and it was Russia who ultimately defeated them, so your points do not stand as a) Germany did not and could not blockade Britain indefinitely, and b) the Russians did defeat Germany when they were 1v1.

Your last point in not relevant as I never denied that we needed US support to defeat Nazi Germany, my point was simply that we managed to defend ourself without US help.

You forget the atomic bomb. Germany was close to achieving one, though debate will always rage over how close. That could have changed the entire picture, and was a very real reason for US involvement.

[Titanic]

I would posit that if the USA did not get involved in WWII in Europe and Germany still invaded the Soviet Union, the Soviets would have liberated France and we'd have had a "red" Europe with only England as the non-communist bastion. We'd have communist France, Germany, Italy, Greece, etc. Doesn't really have anything to do with US soldiers killing innocent people or allies, but I like alternate histories.

Which has been the point I've been trying to get across...thank you

You forget the atomic bomb. Germany was close to achieving one, though debate will always rage over how close. That could have changed the entire picture, and was a very real reason for US involvement.

I don't think the atomic bomb was a motivating factor of US invlovement, but if Germany did invent one before the allies beat them then the war would have been very different. Thats a huge "if" though.

[PLAYER57832]

First of all the U.S is doing the brunt of the fighting so naturally more "mistakes" would be made by our forces,when's the last time the Brits spearheaded any major operation?

The fact that you say "mistakes" probably means you don't give a f*ck if innocent Iraqis die.

One of the marines stated earlier in this thread that they are taught very specific protocols on how and when to use force. If you have to make a split second decision about firing on a speeding car approaching a checkpoint, or an individual carrying a suspected IED, and you follow the protocol and kill a civilian or group of civilians, it's not a mistake. You are performing the actions that your training prepared you for. The training is designed to minimize the threat to the soldiers and civilians. Note that minimize does not mean eliminate.

Me personally, if I was to make that decision, and it's a potential "him or me" situation, it's going to be him. I would have absolutely no qualms about splattering someone all over the sidewalk if I thought he was endangering me or any of my fellow soldiers. If it turns out that that person was innocent, oh well. He should know better than to speed towards my checkpoint, or throw down his backpack near me.

Lucky for all you liberals, I'm not out there. But I'm damn glad that there are Americans out there on my behalf, so I can sit here on my ass and bullshit on the internet. I'm also glad they are protecting (sometimes at the expense of their own lives) your right to bitch and moan about how they don't do it how you would like. I may prefer that you use your right to free speech to speak upon their service more positively, but, you can't always get your way.

Are you seriously claiming that no US troops have acted wrongly? Several have already been convicted and/or condemned by fully MILITARY courts. Sure, the standards to which solidiers should be held are very different from those in civilian life. However, there are standards. For a soldier to kill a civilian, even a child, running toward them (etc... let's not get into all the horrible situations, please) is one thing, but for a group of soldiers to take turns raping a teenage girl while their "buddies" stand gaurd, to sexually degrade a man already in prison... To shoot a man who has already given up his arms, laying prone on the ground... Those things are just wrong.

[thegreekdog]

Those things are all wrong.

However, unfortunately all of those incidents are used as evidence to show that all military men and women behave badly and that the US military is full of hooligans and criminals. That is what I have a major problem with.

[Titanic]

Those things are all wrong.

However, unfortunately all of those incidents are used as evidence to show that all military men and women behave badly and that the US military is full of hooligans and criminals. That is what I have a major problem with.

How are they all wrong?

I don't think that anyone is saying that the whole US military is full of thugs and dumb jocks, just that the proportion of soldiers who abuse their position and the arrogance of them is much larger then in other militaries around the world.

[thegreekdog]

Those things are all wrong.

However, unfortunately all of those incidents are used as evidence to show that all military men and women behave badly and that the US military is full of hooligans and criminals. That is what I have a major problem with.

How are they all wrong?

I don't think that anyone is saying that the whole US military is full of thugs and dumb jocks, just that the proportion of soldiers who abuse their position and the arrogance of them is much larger then in other militaries around the world.

I mean the things that the soliders did are wrong. In other words, they shouldn't have done them, they are bad things. You misunderstood and I wasn't clear.

I think you're way off base and there's no evidence that there are a greater proportion of soldiers that abuse their position. Arrogance? Yeah, probably. We generally think of ourselves has having the finest soldiers in the world.

[pimpdave]

How are they all wrong?

I don't think that anyone is saying that the whole US military is full of thugs and dumb jocks, just that the proportion of soldiers who abuse their position and the arrogance of them is much larger then in other militaries around the world.

Now you're looking really, really dumb. Also like a vindictive jerk.

People are the same everywhere. The number of bad apples exist in the same proportion everywhere.

Also, ATTN: ALL SANCTIMONIOUS BRITS, your empire was quite brutal and unkind. So shut up with your "we're so much better than the USA" dance. It makes you look even more foppish and gay than you do already, and no one likes having an ally that's always whining about how much they hate you for having cooler airplanes and stuff.

[Titanic]

:roll: Now you're looking really, really dumb. Also like a vindictive jerk.

People are the same everywhere. The number of bad apples exist in the same proportion everywhere.

Also, ATTN: ALL SANCTIMONIOUS BRITS, your empire was quite brutal and unkind. So shut up with your "we're so much better than the USA" dance. It makes you look even more foppish and gay than you do already, and no one likes having an ally that's always whining about how much they hate you for having cooler airplanes and stuff.

I don't think the number of "bad apples" are the same everywhere. When was the last time Canada, Netherlands or Germany had troops which were accused of the things that the Americans or Brits have been (our soldiers aren't perfect either, a lot of dirty crap went down in Basra).

Also when have I said that our empire was not brutal? We conquered by force and governed through skill, manipulation ad fear. When have any of us whined about your air force? We're one of the biggest, if not the biggest, importers of US military hardware.

[pimpdave]

When was the last time Canada, Netherlands or Germany had troops which were accused of the things that the Americans or Brits have been (our soldiers aren't perfect either, a lot of dirty crap went down in Basra).

Probably, the last time they served in a role that the Americans or Brits are currently. Which proves my point, and further demonstrates your bias.

You have your conclusions then work backwards looking for evidence that proves them. My axiom that human nature doesn't change holds true.

[Titanic]

When was the last time Canada, Netherlands or Germany had troops which were accused of the things that the Americans or Brits have been (our soldiers aren't perfect either, a lot of dirty crap went down in Basra).

Probably, the last time they served in a role that the Americans or Brits are currently. Which proves my point, and further demonstrates your bias.

You have your conclusions then work backwards looking for evidence that proves them. My axiom that human nature doesn't change holds true.

Unless I remember incorrectly, Canada and the Netherlands both have provided troops to southern and central Afghanistan, and whilst Germany may be in the "safer" north they have recently had more violence to deal with and I've never heard a bad word about any of these. From my recolection none of these countries went to Iraq so I can't compare their troops there, in Kosovo none of the European forces from any country were accused of inhuman treatment or mass civilian killings, and before that I think the last time these countries were in a major war was probably WWII (when no, one especially the Germans, had a clean record).

I don't look for proof to back up my conclusions, my conclusions come from the proof. The USA may be in more wars and fight more often, but even the rare times that other developed nations to war there are never really any abuses or unreasonable civilian killings. IMO, I think the arrogance has a large part to play as it probably leads a lot of the people within the military to think that they are superior to the enemy and the surrounding country.

[PLAYER57832]

Those things are all wrong.

However, unfortunately all of those incidents are used as evidence to show that all military men and women behave badly and that the US military is full of hooligans and criminals. That is what I have a major problem with.

How are they all wrong?

I don't think that anyone is saying that the whole US military is full of thugs and dumb jocks, just that the proportion of soldiers who abuse their position and the arrogance of them is much larger then in other militaries around the world.

You will have to find some proof of this assertion.

For one thing, as I said before, the US just has a lot more solidiers out there. I think our guys (and gals) tend to get more publicity, both because the US is so big and because, yes, the US did essentially start the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (albiet with allied support). However, when you make such statements, you ignore the hundreds of thousands of soldiers deployed around the world with only few incidents.

I don't look for proof to back up my conclusions, my conclusions come from the proof. The USA may be in more wars and fight more often, but even the rare times that other developed nations to war there are never really any abuses or unreasonable civilian killings. IMO, I think the arrogance has a large part to play as it probably leads a lot of the people within the military to think that they are superior to the enemy and the surrounding country.

Solidiers are always going to be more arrogant and "macho" than your average person. It tends to come with the job.

However, you cannot on the one hand, fully admit that US troops well outnumber other countries and say that the numbers of abuses from US troops are greater, so therefore its obvious they are worse. You have to look proportionally.

[Snorri1234]

Solidiers are always going to be more arrogant and "macho" than your average person. It tends to come with the job.

Seriously though, the way the American military brainwashes it's troops fucking scares me. It is far more severe than that of other countries.

[thegreekdog]

Solidiers are always going to be more arrogant and "macho" than your average person. It tends to come with the job.

Seriously though, the way the American military brainwashes it's troops fucking scares me. It is far more severe than that of other countries.

Brainwashes? More severe? Please elaborate. I have some friends and relatives in the US military and they have not reported any brainwashing to me. Perhaps that's part of the brainwashing - "If you report this brainwashing to your friends and family, you will be destroyed..." I'd be concerned for them and this brainwashing if I wasn't more concerned about their physical well-being.

[Woodruff]

Solidiers are always going to be more arrogant and "macho" than your average person. It tends to come with the job.

Seriously though, the way the American military brainwashes it's troops fucking scares me. It is far more severe than that of other countries.

Have I often come across to you as brainwashed, Snorri? We've disagreed on issues, to be sure...but brainwashed? My 23 years in the American military and recent retirement (thus being fairly current to any potential "brainwashing") says your assumptions on this one are full of crap.

Oh, and one of the primary reasons we cause more "collateral damage" is because of the high firepower of our weaponry in general.

(Just couldn't help myself. I'll now return to lurk mode.)

[jonesthecurl]

Don't you mean "engage cloak"?

btw, live long and prosper.

[thegreekdog]

Welcome back (sort of) Woodruff.

[Snorri1234]

Solidiers are always going to be more arrogant and "macho" than your average person. It tends to come with the job.

Seriously though, the way the American military brainwashes it's troops fucking scares me. It is far more severe than that of other countries.

Have I often come across to you as brainwashed, Snorri? We've disagreed on issues, to be sure...but brainwashed? My 23 years in the American military and recent retirement (thus being fairly current to any potential "brainwashing") says your assumptions on this one are full of crap.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWqT8Rljt_8

When I read things like this:

I would have absolutely no qualms about splattering someone all over the sidewalk if I thought he was endangering me or any of my fellow soldiers. If it turns out that that person was innocent, oh well. He should know better than to speed towards my checkpoint, or throw down his backpack near me.

I feel a little bit sick. I know the guy isn't even in the military, but I also know that opinions offered by several soldiers closely echo those sentiments.


Now obviously any military that actually wants to function needs some brainwashing. You can't very well expect your soldiers to shoot people they have never met without some serious propaganda. But the USA has gone of it's rocker in that direction and paints every soldier as The Best Person Ever and the enemy as nothing more than 2-dimensional batman villains. This tactic of dehumanizing the enemy (and anyone who vaguely looks like the enemy) has led directly to the torture of prisoners and the backwards justification for it. The cases of rape and torture of prisoners, killing of civilians and other crimes are not just a few bad apples spoiling it for everyone else, it's systematic indoctrination from the highest spots.


Of course, that isn't the fault of the soldiers. Plenty of them aren't even affected that much by it, but it is cause for concern.

[thegreekdog]

When I read things like this:

I would have absolutely no qualms about splattering someone all over the sidewalk if I thought he was endangering me or any of my fellow soldiers. If it turns out that that person was innocent, oh well. He should know better than to speed towards my checkpoint, or throw down his backpack near me.

I feel a little bit sick. I know the guy isn't even in the military, but I also know that opinions offered by several soldiers closely echo those sentiments.

So you don't think a German soldier would say the same thing? Albeit in German? I suspect that the situation/thought quoted above flows naturally from being in imminent danger on a daily basis, regardless of what country's uniform you wear.

I guess what I'm saying is that there is no real evidence that US soldiers are psychotic comparatively to other soldiers.

[mpjh]

Guernica - lesson not learned yet.

[Snorri1234]

When I read things like this:

I would have absolutely no qualms about splattering someone all over the sidewalk if I thought he was endangering me or any of my fellow soldiers. If it turns out that that person was innocent, oh well. He should know better than to speed towards my checkpoint, or throw down his backpack near me.

I feel a little bit sick. I know the guy isn't even in the military, but I also know that opinions offered by several soldiers closely echo those sentiments.

So you don't think a German soldier would say the same thing?

Certainly not. If your response to shooting an innocent is "oh well, guy should've known better" there is something very wrong with you.

[Pedronicus]

Brainwashes? More severe? Please elaborate. I have some friends and relatives in the US military and they have not reported any brainwashing to me.

Your country is brainwashed, not just those who enter the military.

This thread made me cry for the fourth time today. Damnit.........A moment of silence.*Military Funeral Horn Plays* Damn.....I wish I could go over now and bomb the terrorists in a B-52.

I would guess that the majority of people who voluntarily join a countries armed forces aren't the sharpest tool in the box in the first place.
I've lost count how many times the words Patriot & Liberty are thrown about by Americans on the internet.
I love my country and my country offers me freedom. But I don't bang on about it.