Re: What's the War Really About? -- Talking Circle Alternative

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, [10] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Tue, 12/17/02 6:36pm
Author: KiowaScout
Subject: Re: What's the War Really About?
In reply to: Cherokee Snooze 's message, "Re: sean penn" on Tue, 12/17/02 2:50pm

Let me first say that I mean absolutely NO disrespect for fellow posters. I support our military boys 100% wherever they are. They are brave and indeed deserve our undying gratitude and unwavering loyalty. I totally agree that Ms. Fonda made a grave mistake. I hope that she remains haunted by the pain she caused those poor boys in Vietnam.

That said. Unfortunately, I cannot say the same things about the heads of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Sec of Defense, nor the Commander-in-Chief. These are the guys who make military decisions, not the boys on the front line. The same was true about the Vietnam War. Hell, the Pentagon called it a "conflict". They didn't even have the decency to call it a war.

There are some differences and some striking similarities between the war in Vietnam and the "proposed" military strike in Iraq.

Similarities:

Hindsight being 20/20, I believe that the White House and the Pentagon conned Americans into believing that US involvement in the Vietnamese civil strife was about somehow "stopping" the spread of Communism. History tells us a different story. The fault was never with the troops. Most fought out of loyalty to this country and to protect our homeland. The fault lie with those in charge. The arms buildup benefitted those corporations with defense contracts.

The "proposed" attack on Iraq has false pretenses: Hussein and Al Queda are NOT buddies. Hussein opposes fundamentalist religion. Al Queda opposes a non-religious leader for Iraq. Al Queda would love to depose Hussein in favor of a Muslim fundamentalist state, such as the former Taliban regime of Afghanistan. Hussein would not support his sworn enemies.

Our "fearless leaders" are not freaking out about the nuclear and WMD capabilities of N. Korea (with whom we already had one war), India, Russia, or other rogue elements in numerous politically unstable governments. We're even setting up Turkey as a base of operations. And what is Turkey getting out of it? Arms. I'd bet my front teeth on it. Turkey wants a war with Greece over Cyprus. NOBODY has even questioned that.

All this will only lead to further destabilization in many regions. Then what? How is this winning a war on terrorism? They can't even find one deathly sick old man. They haven't even broken Al Queda in Afghanistan. Now they want to enter yet an entirely different conflict based on false notions and greed.

This conflict with Iraq is all about the oil my friends. Cheney's oil company Haliburton has set up subsidiaries in the Bahamas. Under this guise, Haliburton has done business with Iraq despite the embargo.

Differences:

The Vietnam War was well underway with horrific casualties before the massive protests began. The "proposed" war with Iraq has yet to be. America has experienced Vietnam, an unpopular war. Prior to Vietnam, America's wars were more or less borne out of a true defense of the homeland.

I believe that it IS patriotic to question the "powers that be" BEFORE the body bags start coming home. I do not believe that questioning authority is disrespectful of our troops.

We live in a world of 30 second sounbites. Very few bother to really read the news, much less do any fact-finding on their own. The truth about this "proposed" war with Iraq is not making it to the general populace. Unfortunately, they will listen to anything spewing forth from a celebrity. If Mr. Penn can open the lazy eyes of America BEFORE our boys die in a needless conflict, then let him go for it.

I tend to agree with former Pres Carter, "War may be a necessary evil. Nevertheless, it is an evil".

Every day I pray that our boys won't be sent to the frontlines to fight a needless battle. Let the rich white boys go first. We'll see how strong the convictions of the military brass are then.

>>how do you feel about his trip to baghdad? was he
>>wrong? right?
>>i have problems with the intertainment industry stars
>>with super-egos, trying to formulate U.S. policy by
>>following in Jane Fonda's footsteps.
>
>I have similar feelings about him that I do about
>Hanoi Jane. She was a traitor and encouraged dhe
>torture and even death of our POWs. I still wear a POW
>patch on my blanket to remember those of my comrads
>who never returned.
>
>Penn is garbage!

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: What's the War Really About? -- tso, Tue, 12/17/02 9:06pm
- Re: What's the War Really About? -- Bella, Fri, 12/20/02 6:00pm