Propaganda at its best


I am sure that Hitler would be proud to have Hollywood instead of his Propaganda Office. When a movie where "good" armed-to-the-teeth marines execute "evil" citizens throwing stones and wielding 2 AK-47s, gets a warm welcoming, then hell, everything is permitted on this planet as long as it's the US troops getting killed. It's a movie to justify soldiers killing people defending their lands, something that happens every day.
When we were fighting against the Nazis, they were the criminals and we were the heros. Now thanks to Hollywood, the ones invading are the Heros and the defenders are conviniently renamed to terrorists. Replace "Arian Race" with "Need more Oil" and "Preemptive War" and there you have it.

What a total piece of crap.

WMD anyone?

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

The removal of an Iranian democratic president and placing the Shaw who was a dictator in power in 1953 was a British Idea but the Brits lacked the force to do the job. Israel also gets us to do their dirty work. Most Iranian disagree with their current mullahcracy but they shot themselves in the foot in 1979. Of course the U.K has a new Prime minister now.

reply

I've read your first post where you detail why war is good. Anything you say is hard to agree with henceforth for the sole reason you are the one stating it. I don't think this movie makes america look particularly good, which is the purpose of propaganda, but it also asks and answers a question about morality. Yes they fired into a crowd of women and children and old men, but they were all enemies. None in that crowd were peaceably demonstrating by the time the snipers started shooting marines. SHould they have been there in the first place? Looking at the choices made, can anyone say they would honestly have chosen differently in that situation.

reply

Oh yeah, my post is in response to AntiNicolae.

Also I think the movie comes to a head when they bring the north vietnamese Soldier back and he testifies that he would have done the same as Col. Childers did. The point of the movies is: the rules of engagement can't be defined people who aren't fighting, they are mutually agreed upon during combat. No one side wins by following all the rules, because the side that breaks the rules best wins.

The rules in the movie for yemen were pretty much non-existent. The hatred for americans would not abate if Col. Childers was convicted, it would just mean that we are condemning our own.

reply

I just read this comment by combatreview - and it's rather nutty.

"You'll forgive me for skipping right over the more reasonable things you were saying, but I found this last comment especially ridiculous. Do you not think that maybe, possibly, just conceivably, 9/11 happened because people are already frightened and hateful of the US? Indeed, I'd suggest there's a limit to just how much you can scare people who are willing to die attacking you".

Clearly people who are frightened do not attack - they cower. And undoubtedly those willing to die will not be deterred - but there is a limit to those willing to die - most aren't.

"Moreover, I sincerely hope you don't buy into the myth that the US is attacked because it has stood in the corner minding its own business for the last fifty years? Clearly, the average US citizen has probably been doing just that, but unfortunately there are many countries where people have been given cause to hate and fear the US precisely because of the wilfull and overbearing exercising of power. Heaven forbid that somebody might actually realise one day that the US has the potential to be history's greatest global benefactor in reality, rather than in terms of a myth spread among its citizens, and that if such a thing were to happen it would help to eliminate the hate, fear and resentment that makes things like 9/11 possible".

There are no countries where people have been given cause to hate and fear the U.S. Certainly since World War II, the U.S. has been the greatest force for the liberation of people's spirits ever seen in the world. For millenia, the largest nations had sought to create empires, enslave the subject peoples, snd out military forces to rule them - the astonishing thing has been that the U.S. with its power has instead sought to promote and to ensure liberty on the part of people - from El Salvador to Granada, from Vietnam to the Domnican Republic, from South Korea to Kuwait, from Afganistan to Iraq. It's been astonishing to me. I wonder where combatreview gets contrary notions.

reply

[deleted]

>>>War is population control.

Clearly this is incorrect, since the global population has done nothing but rise during the last hundred years, arguably the most violent century on record.


Take politics out of the equation and it would be one hell of a population control mechanism.

reply

... I don't exactly want my doctor making the same as a guy who flips burgers... If everything was equal there would be no drive for anything. Why work harder if you always get paid the same as the next guy?

I always thought I went to school to get a degree so I could do jobs that required more skill so I wouldn't be stuck with minimum wage...

I like some of your other points but I don't think we should start just handing out money like that.

reply

"I believe these days 90% of wartime casualties are civilian, a horrible reversal of the 10% of a century ago."

Yeah, aerial bombardment (nothing to do with this movie) has been hailed as a quicker and less costly form of combat, but it has resulted in the innocent as being the main casualties of war.

reply


Can you tell me of a better way to show your love of country other than to serve in your country's military? Is there anything more difficult than to leave your family and friends behind while you deploy to a hostile territory and risk your life for your country? If so, please let me know.


You see, unless US is a socialist or communist country, there's no such thing as "for my country", there's only "for me". Nobody really cares "for my country" but just "for me"

But I'm sure what you do in War and leaving your love ones behind, is very difficult. But you know, you might want to step back and think what you're doing (specifically, what orders you're following).


Do you think that Marines make the decision to invade a foreign country just to show our power?


I think Marines are just brainless cows who do whatever the politicians order to do. They've got no brain, they've only got the power and strength to be in War. They don't care the purpose of War nor the outcome. They are ignorant about it.


Their agenda is clear: conversion by jihad or persuasion, but conversion nonetheless. I will not convert to Islam and I WILL defend the constitution of my government.


good on you, but you're not really doing what you said you're doing (defending so that you don't have to be into Islam) but you're just invading other countries for the sake of politicans. Don't try to respond me yet, just think for yourselves first.


as it presents itself to be, as it brutally presented itself on 9/11.


And do you know how effective your "proactive strategies" of attacking other countries first? Are you learning yet?


Furthermore, G. K. Chesterson:

"Mere tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything."

and finally, from one of the Left's favorites, Leon Trotsky:

"You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you."


plain bullshits

--
The Purpose of Life is to End

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

Combat, MOST of what you've said through your argument I agree with, and I find you to be extrememly intelligent and well-spoken. However, I take issue with your comments on Israel for a number of reasons.

First of all, you mention Palestine, what is this Palestine you speak of? If you look through history, you'll notice there was no such thing. If Israel is a nation created by Zionists in 1948, Palestine was a nation created by Imperial Brits in 1922. They tried to carve out mutual homelands for the Muslims and Jews in that agreement, but all of the land was in effect given to the Muslims who became "Palestinians," when prior to 1922 there was no such thing. They promptly made a government that made quotas on how many Jewish people could migrate there and had restrictions to the daily lives of Jews. They also neglected Jews any rights to Jerusalem, especially the Western Wall.

Britain knew that their "Mandate of Palestine" was not followed, and that the land they gave to the Jewish people was not followed in 1922 (though the Muslims were happy to take the autonomy that was granted them) but World War I had just been fought and had taken its toll on the country (and all the rest in Europe) and Britain didn't have the time, money, or patience to make sure that the NEW nation of Jordan (which took up what is today the country of the same name, AND what is today Israel, plus the West Bank and Gaza Strip).

In 1948, when Israel was given by the UN and "Zionists" to the Jewish People, those "Palestinians" who never existed before were not kicked out, which you'd know if you read about it. They left voluntarily, ASKED to do so by Egypt, Syria, and other surrounding Muslim nations who let them know that an attack was imminent, and told them they should be on the right side of the law. Those people willingly left their homes to engage in a war that was STARTED by the nations they joined (whether provoked or unprovoked rightfully by the formation of Israel).

However, Israel was able, even as a new nation, to fend off the attacks and to keep their land. Those people who then left looked pretty stupid, and wanted to come back; why was that in Israel's hands? If a German-American left the US to go fight in WWII, and then after the war blamed the US government for "forcing" him out, who would believe him? However, that war did not give Israel possession of Jerusalem, which still belonged to Jordan.

After several more wars, most notably the 1967 war (the 6 Day War), ONCE AGAIN started by the other sides (Egypt, Syria, and Jordan) Israel crushed the opposition and was able to carve out the territory it has today. The 1973 Yom Kippur War the Muslim nations enjoyed early success before massive defeat. However that early success was necessary for piece of mind and it led to the peace accords between Egypt and Israel later in the decade.

I am all for alternatives to war and the UN (in Principle) but the fact is that it just seems to anti-semitic to me. Read the LONG LIST UN's resolutions AGAINST Israel (which can be found quite easily) and you'll notice a pattern. Even wars and attacks started against Israel have led to condemnations of Israel when it has defended itself.

Sure, Israel was carved out in 1948 and people like to dwell on that as if to vindicate hatred against it, "Well it has no reason to exist, so OF COURSE it will and should be attacked." But that is a load of crap. Jordan was created in 1922 in the Mandate of Palestine. Iraq was carved out by Britain (for Oil) right after World War I, I believe. The entire situation in the Middle East is odd in that MOST of the nations (with their present boundaries) have been carved out in the era after Imperialism. However, the only nation that is routinely bashed for this process is Israel. It is the only one created by this process in which MANY nations created that has its sovreignty questioned. If Jordan, Iraq, and the rest of the states of the Middle East enjoy unquestioned sovreignty, why doesn't Israel? I believe the issue to be anti-semitism. Jordan and Iraq were created during the 20th century by former Imperial Powers (and Iraq for a reason as NOBLE as Oil), but only Israel is the one questioned as a state, and yet IT was created by the UN, not by an oil hungry imperial power.

Other nations have been created or re-created (like Poland) since World War II. After the break-up of the Soviet Union, many sovreign states enterred the fold. The whole idea of states on the world scale is relatively new, and yet Israel is thought to be ULTRA new, and to be wrong. It is older than Georgia, it is older than South Korea, it is around the same age as Taiwan; but it is inhabited by JEWS, and Jews are bad, right?

You scored points with me, I thought you smart and respectable until you began to REEK of anti-semitism. I am a moderate person, I can't tolerate or understand the ULTRAS on each side (Liberals and Conservatives). Ultra-Liberals created Israel to atone for the Holocaust, to atone for around 2,000 years ago when the Romans banished the Jews from their homeland. However, now they want to apologize for that apology that was Israel.

The main problem in Israel right now is that (for the most part) Palestinians see a state of their own WITHOUT Israel. In the beginning, both sides (a majority of them) felt that way. However, over time the majority of Israelis (not all, I can't speak for all) have come to understand that the only future for the two peoples is a Palestinian state within (next to) an Israeli state. For the most part (though once again, I can't speak for all) Palestinians still envision the destruction of Israel. If you don't believe me, ask yourself what would happen if the Israeli's gave them EVERYTHING they currently are asking for. If honestly believe that the Palestinians (Groups like Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, and all the rest) would then lay down their weapons and leave peacefully side by side with the nation of Israel, then I believe you are gravely mistaken and naieve on this issue.

I am an American New Yorker who is Jewish by birth, but I am currently agonostic, believing in no religion. If you want to believe that I only defend Israel BECAUSE of my Jewish roots, go ahead and believe it. But the double-standards against Israel make me sick to my stomach.

In Israel you have a country created in 1948 (out of a country created, Jordan, in 1922; so not exactly a LONG standing nation of tradition) that was attacked and then defended itself. Look at the large scale wars they've fought since formation (until the Palestinians, Jordanians, Egyptians, and Syrians realized they could not win that way and resorted to terrorism), they started NONE of them. You can justify away the attacks of the other nations, but the fact is they started the wars.

Now apply this situation around the world. What if the Mexicans (who DIDN'T start their war against the US, they were attacked!) came to the US and asked to have their old territories back. Meaning most of California, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Colorado and more. Do you think the entire world community would take them seriously? AND THEY WERE ATTACKED, they were NOT the aggresor.

Now go to a sitation when someone was attacked. France took posessions from Germany after World War II, and I believe that not every territorial dispute has since been worked out. Even if they have, picture Germany in 1960 coming to France and asking for their land back, what would France have done? They'd have said, "Well YOU were the aggressor!"

But in Israel's situation, THEY are the Mexico. THEY are the France. And the world community abhors them for their own defense. When a terrorist straps a bomb onto his chest and blows up a bus, Israel kills a leader of Hamas (those bombings are called by the WORLD Community, RETALITORY attacks). Meaning, the World community ACKNOWLEDGES that those attacks are in retaliation. And yet, the world asks Israel to stop those attacks, in order to further the peace plan.

The situation of Israel is unique in world history. Not because it was carved out in 1948 (as we've already established, many nations have been carved out during the 20th century, the only one everyone regrets is Israe. It seems that's because Jewish people live there). Heck, everything Israel has done is discredited and condemned by the UN. In 1983 (or 1984, I am not sure of the exact year, just of the action) Israel found out of an Iraqi attempt to enrich Uranium and begin a Nuclear program. They flew a secret mission, and destroyed the installation. Iraq's lack of Nuclear Weapons (which made Bush look extremely stupid) is due to Israel, and yet when it happened in 1983 (or 1984) the world condemned it; however the world cheered when Saddam started gassing his own people and commiting other attrocities, and started bombing Israeli cities during the Gulf War. Of course, once again Israel was asked to stand down because the US and the world didn't want a global crisis. They were afraid that if Israel defended itself from Iraq's scud missles, a war would engulf the region and (gasp!) oil would be more expensive and harder to get!

I was so impressed by you, but you went and lost me. You proved yourself to be a disgusting anti-semite, the only thing missing was a rant about how Israel has no right to exist at all (although you did come close to it).

Palestine never existed, it is a myth, although a well established one. Israel and the Jewish people are the scapegoats not only of the Muslim world, but in much of the world entirely. A study showed that in 2003 more than half of the Muslim world (and much of the rest of the world, too) believed that 9/11 had been perpetrated by the Massad to invoke hatred of Muslims. They spread a rumor that 40,000 Jews had been told by Israel not to come to work that day, and that they complied, and that they didn't die because of it. (Which is miraculous considering that nowhere near 40,000 Jews worked in the World Trade Center, 40,000 Jews didn't even work in Lower Manhattan. And numerous Jewish people, Israelis, American Jews, and foreign Jews died in the tragedy. A fair percentage that stands with just about every other group of people compared to how many Jews worked in the area and all that. Needless to say, Israel and the GREAT Jewish conspiracy was not responsible for 9/11. Although I DO hope, Combat Review, that you know that one.

Mein Kampf translated into Arabic is a fixture among the most read books yearly in the Middle East. And countries in Europe like France and Germany, that have always had a sick Anti-semitism that pulsated like a cancer are only getting worse as the older citizens of those countries who already hate Jews are being joined by an increasing number of Muslim immigrants who also hate the Jews. The world outrage at the Holocaust was not great enough and now, less than a century later the hatred that fueled it is back; although not as fanatical (I hope). Even in Russia in 2004, a group of Jews were badly beaten as rumors spread through newspapers and magazines that Jews were performing a blood libel with Russian children. In 2004 (and of course, now 2005) people belived this!

Of course, the hatred that flows like milk and honey never will in this world is alive and well and not focused entirely on Jews, not by a long shot. Muslims, African-Americans, Homosexuals, Hispanics, Asians (the list goes on) are all hated against and all made to feel like victims. Even women, who make up half the population of the WORLD are still badly persecuted in 2005. This hatred rises up so powerfully that it makes it hard to see the sun sometimes.

And I'm not saying these races and groups that are hated are innocent, they hate too, which makes it all reciprocal. Jews hate, African-Americans hate...all groups hate, and it only makes things worse. Religion, which was once (hopefully at least once) used to unite people has been used for thousands of years in a divisive and sickening manner. Religion was used as an excuse to hate people, to go to war with them, to murder them. "Love thy neighbor" the new testament says, but on their path to war to the crusades, I think the Christians were too busy burning Jewish villages and cutting the heads off Muslim men, women, and children to pay attention to the fine print.

How did it get like this? Is it human nature to hate others? Christians in this country telling people that unless they embrace Christ they don't get to go to heaven. Well, I don't know about most people but their view of heaven is not one I want to go to. A heaven where everyone is the same, united by the love of the same person, having the same views about every important issue?

Religion (all of them, Judaism is no exception) arose from a need by humanity to answer certain questions that might be (and in my opinion, should REMAIN) unanswerable. What happens when we die? Why are we here? Instead of wasting actual THOUGHT on these question, religion gives us the answer! And it's so great, in the view of many, to have an answer without having to seek it. This SICK need of humanity to live forever and to enjoy earthly pleasures for all-time gave birth to the notion of heaven. "A place where you can live forever!" And of course, Hell was born as a tool to CONVERT people to those same religions, especially the uneducated who could be eaisly cowed. People were much more eager to join your religion if you frightened them into believing that IF they didn't, they'd burn for all-time in a place called Hell. Of course, the fear of burning alive is pretty universal; if you'd sleep on a lovely feather bed while making love to the person who means most to you were hell, I doubt the imagery would have been so successful. Of course, if the idea of Hell and Satan weren't enough to cow you, there was always torture and death! Kill those Heathens!

And yet, I have a terrifying feeling that we're moving backwards, humanity. Religion seems to be taking over at a time when it should be fading into obscurity. Americans laugh at Muslims, thinking that they haven't progressed in nearly 2,000 years. That they adhere to their book and that's kept them from science and technology, and so they're behind. But what of us in America (and in the rest of the West, too; although America seems worse at the moment) who are getting worse and worse. Americans who don't believe in Evolution because a 2,000 year old book says it didn't happen. (Don't you think we might have learned SOMETHING new in 2,000 years? That maybe those who wrote the bible just might not have been able to forsee some things like...AIDS? Like Computers? Like planes or guns?)

During the Greek and then Roman times, history was viewed as a circle, but there was much knowledge. When Christianity took over, static reigned for around 1,000 years, until the enlightenment. Then the power of the Catholic Church abated and people could have IDEAS and the idea of history was thought of like a line moving upwards at a slope. We're moving FORWARD, we're PROGRESSING. But not anymore, it seems...not anymore.

People are so frightened of the future and the unknown that they hold onto ideals and knowledge formed 2,000 years in the past and they find whatever they WANT to find in the Bible. If they want to hate gays they could look at a passage in the Bible that says, "And so John went to the store because he enjoyed Buy One Get One Free Saturdays because he could get TWO boxs of Stoufer's French Bread Pizza!" Someone who hates Gays, Jews, Blacks, Women...whatever they hate, just found a reason for it by reading that.

I am truly scared of the future. I am scared that being born in 1985 makes me part of the "Paris Hilton Generation." A generation that has less expectations, and is willing to do less for the future. America is in the process of being overtaken by India, China, and many other countries because we've grown stagnant and infatuated with religion and a lack of progress while these other countries have taken the advances in technology (many that we came up with) and used them to catch up to us and soon with their gigantic populations (Between the two countries there's over 2.5 BILLION people, which is a LARGE chunk out of the 6.5 billion in the world.) and then overtake us. We're not fighting it too much because we're too busy fighting over whether abortions are legal. A woman can be raped by her brother, but an abortion is AGAINST God! We can't have that! Of course, an abortion is murder, but if you blow up a "murder" clinic killing the 15 people inside (who might not even have had the procedure yet, and might not even DO it) is perfectly rational. One unborn fetus? Murder. 15 adults? Nope, not at all. That's just God's work.

And of course, Condoms are wrong too. Can't have those. Everytime people have sex, it should be for procreation. Which of course works for many Christians, Catholics, Ultra-religious Jews, Muslims and more because so many of them hate Gays and think Homosexuality is a sin. If people can only have sex to procreate, then gay people can NEVER have sex. The ban on gay marriage is ridiculous, I am currently engaged to my girlfriend of almost 3 years, and we plan on having a family. First of all, the "sanctity" of our marriage would not be affected by gay marriage. Secondly, if we have a gay son or daughter, the thought of them never being allowed to get married (even WITH a commitment ceremony) would break my heart. But then again, my relationship speaks to issues with America as I'm Jewish, my fiancee is Catholic, and we both agreed that if somehow (accidentally, as we're not planning for a family YET) we got pregnant (I say we becuase I'm 100% behind her whatever she does) we've decided to have an abortion. However, her parents are very religious, and we'd need to hide it from them. How horrible is it that because of religion my fiancee would need to hide that from her parents? (Of course, she also doesn't tell them that we've ever been together, because that is a big no-no before marriage).

But enough about me, I am going to wrap up this ridiculously long post which I hope (and expect) that no one will read all the way through. It is a long, boring pointless rant. And I need to apologize to you, Combat review, because I do not and HAVE not wanted to offend you. I just have meant to say that I myself was offended. You had come off so smart and well-thought out. But the blatant anti-semitism SO indicative of the world today really hurt me. We live in a culture of hate which can't be stopped. Bush's quest for the "Hearts and Minds" of Iraqi's has led us to a situation where not only do Iraqi's hate us more than ever, but the whole of the Middle East can't stand us.

Everyone knows that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and that Bush was planning on doing it regardless. The reason, of course, is Oil, and it always has been, and everyone knows it. It's the worst kept secret ever, and yet the American public (much of it, anyhow, at least those that voted for W last election) just WILLINGLY look the other way. They pretend that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, that Lewis "Scooter" Libby (and Cheney, who LED the attack on Plame) had nothing to do with outing a CIA agent. Hatred, religion, polticis in this country; lies, deception, oil, big business. How has all of this come together? What has happened to this country, to the world? Why are there such short term goals for the environment, yet long term goals when it comes to making money, as much of it now and in the future. (This original post was much longer, so long no one would ever read it. They chopped it up, and even now it's FAR too long. Sorry)

reply

[deleted]

I owe you an apology for my incredibly offensive post. Sometimes when writing I labor under the dillusion that my rants will never see the light of day; I am inadequately prepared many times for the actual response to them.

I apologize to you for the harsh tone and nature of my comments. I generally agreed with your comments to the poster who you were arguing with, and since I had found myself lulled almost into a state where I found your entire argument reasonable, the comments about Israel were almost like cold water thrown on my face.

My response was unjustified and my rant was far too nasty, and I apologize. And as an answer to one of your questions, I assumed that you were anti-semitic (or at least harbored anti-semitic feelings about Israel) because you came off as SO intelligent and well-organized to me that I didn't even consider for a second that you might be wrong. I feel bad for the assumption, but I think it's borne from there are more hate-filled (including Anti-semitic) people in this world by FAR than there are intelligent people. And the thing is, I know many intelligent people (many of amazing intellect) who are filled with hate. Some of those people are far more likely to say something hateful and (at least in their own minds) correct than to recite an incorrect fact.

Once again, I must apologize to you. I have to reiterate that I believe you to be incrediblly intelligent and well-spoken (written?). I am sorry to come off as hateful and ranting in my response to you. In response to your intelligence I could have tried to come off the same way, but I instead I answered what I perceived to be hatred with hatred of my own.

I am very sorry if I offended or upset you, because I never wanted to do that. Sometimes I don't even realize how truly offensive I can be until after I re-read what I write. I am sorry, I more than sorry, and I hope you can forgive me for being such a thoughtless jerk.

-Heathnyy5

"Well if you wanted to make Syrok the Preparer cry...mission accomplished."

reply

[deleted]

"you don't engage in the tactics that most closed-minded Liberals engage in"
I'd just like to point out here that if you're going to 'attack' Liberal arguments, you must be willing to attack right wing arguments as well. You cannot label one sides argument as being biased and blind, if you aren't going to observe the reality that your commrades also regularly engage in closed-minded arguments.

That said, your arguments are both very interesting, and it's rather refreshing to see them being carried out in a mature friendly manner. It is a rariety these days.

And for the record, I'm what you could consider a Liberal.
I prefer to follow my true Christian beliefs(catholic... if it makes a difference, which it shouldn't)and look at the good in all people. Love your enemies as you would love your neighbor. I do oppose the war in Iraq because I feel America could use its power for a better purpose. For example, the Sudan. I've been there recently with War Child Canada, and these people need help. Not a full blown invasion, but full blown persuasion.
America is one of the greatest countries on earth, but it needs to use its power for purity. While the average American sees the war on terrorism as a war which was brought to them, the rest of the world doesn't see it that way.

ní dhéanfaidh ach Dia breithiúnas orm

reply

To combatreview,

I am new to this site, and I realize this thread is very old, but I have been reading this thread in its entirety and I find your comments interesting.

I would like to know what your stance is exactly on war? You seem to be against war, and all the associated atrocities with it, and seem to prefer peaceful methods over any hostile ones. For example, you countered that even while military service is one way to show your patriotism, another equally worthwhile way would be to volunteer in the same area while taking the same risks.

You also mentioned the fact that whether or not you served in the military shoudl be of no consequence, since your opinions are yours regardless and should not be affected by the context in which they come by. I am sure that if you did serve in the military, youre position might be changed? Meaning that your background does influence your opinions, in varying degrees of importance. Just an observation.

In numerous other posts you seem to be constantly suggesting the anti-war alternative. I understand this is a very general question, but hopefully you can answer it.

reply

[deleted]

Well, A) Nationalism isn't gone in the US, dumbass. Just because we're not socialist or communist, that's not an indication that there's no such thing as nationalism.
Also, when people are getting shot at, or at risk of getting shot at, they don't think, "gee, do I freaking belong here?" Unless they're looking to die.

"I think Marines are just brainless cows who do whatever the politicians order to do. They've got no brain, they've only got the power and strength to be in War. They don't care the purpose of War nor the outcome. They are ignorant about it. "

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brainless cows? Yeah, okay. You're cut. No more speaking. You capitalize war, as if it were a name of a country or specific conflict. That's brainless. And you're also making me angry because of your complete ignorance of Marine's training, or thought processes.

"good on you, but you're not really doing what you said you're doing (defending so that you don't have to be into Islam) but you're just invading other countries for the sake of politicans. Don't try to respond me yet, just think for yourselves first. "

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good on you??? What the freakin' hell is that? Okay, now, maybe we are just invading Iraq for politicians. Or, maybe you've been watching Real Time on HBO too much, and now you're opinion has been set by that. Don't try to respond to me yet, just think for yourself first.


"plain *beep* "

You put that at the end of two literary allusions? You don't go to school much, do you?

reply

I think you're a complete jackass!

Terminator: Hasta lavista, baby.

reply

They Marines were not there, attacking the country. They were there on a Distress call from the United States Embassy. The Embassy was under-fire, and Ben Kinsley's character wanted to get his family out. THe Marines were called, they were put in the line of fire, and returning fire, they operated under the military code of the Rules of Engagement. This is not a propogandist film in any way, lest you make it seem that way.

"Fates spares the men it has not already marked."

reply

Propoganda? Wake up and smell the coffee you dumb *beep*

This movie goes to the extreme, but this is indeed what the muslims are doing, _THEY_ are the masters of the propoganda.

Showing one side when the cameras are rolling, and whole different one in combat.

And don't *beep* mention Iraq here, any sane person knew (even before the war started) that there were no WMDs, and if you only found out just now, then you my friend are a complete and utter moron.

How do you dumbasses manage to breathe ?

reply

[deleted]

Ooh, y’mean like that bit where CNN made that big thing about US POWs paraded on Iraqi television being a, like, y'know, huge war crime an' all. And the very next item showed lines of Iraqi POWs being marched away and randomly beaten by US marines.

Y’mean like that?

Do ya? Do ya?

reply

[deleted]

CombatReview, you ROCK. If I'd known 1/thousandth of what I know now about imperialism/capitalism 20 years ago, I would have vomited my high-school cafeteria portion every single weekday. Literally!

You seem to know your history and know it well. I don't. But I know this. Pure science and true spirituality CAN be friends, and TOGETHER ONLY they can solve many of our species' problems. Nihilism seems to be the only viable alternative.

I trust by now you've visited the PASSION OF THE CHRIST board. I am VERY interested in your "spiritual" ideas, unless you happen to be atheistic.

I honestly don't know how you put up with some of the kids on this thread. "Let's show the world exactly what a WMD IS!" ??? Normally I wouldn't risk getting carpal tunnel over idiots like this.

P.S. I went to college with hundreds of Muslims and Hindus, and not ONE attempted to impose their beliefs on me.


TRIVIA
"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist". (1995)

reply

[deleted]

You have some very original opinions, jackass.

reply

[deleted]

To be fair to Mr. Henley, he was quite respectful when it came down to it. My disagreement with him is well-documented, but he was interested in discussion, unlike certain other people from the same end of the political spectrum you can encounter on these boards.

reply

Hey gothic, you little punk...

I don't agree with Bush but I support our troops in EVERY way.

Get it over with

reply