Thread: Unrest in Iraq, is anyone surprised?

Originally Posted by Spartiate

You go to jail.

Military jail, right? Doesn't seem as bad as normal jail to me but I don't know. Nor does it seem as bad as participating in a war I think is unjust, but that's just me.

Being imprisoned seems a bit much, no? =/

Originally Posted by StonedApe

Military jail, right? Doesn't seem as bad as normal jail to me but I don't know.

But what if you're cell mate is the military equivalent of Bubba? :0

Originally Posted by StonedApe

Military jail, right? Doesn't seem as bad as normal jail to me but I don't know. Nor does it seem as bad as participating in a war I think is unjust, but that's just me.

It's freakin' jail. You know, live in a cell behind bars for years, eat shit, become unemployable...

Originally Posted by GavinGill

Being imprisoned seems a bit much, no? =/

It's considered desertion.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

It's freakin' jail. You know, live in a cell behind bars for years, eat shit, become unemployable...

Yeah but being raped seems much less likely there... And I'm just guessing but they probably have better food and better company. I don't like military people much myself but people who are in the military usually do. Either way I'd rather be stuck hanging out with a bunch of marines than a bunch of criminals.

And I doubt that you'd be unemployable when you got out if you explained that you were in jail for refusing to fight in an unjust war. Some people might not hire you but others would take this as a sign that you are a very responsible and ethical person.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

You go to jail.

Wasn't aware of the details about this. As far as I'm concerned this in itself is hideous morally; what if your commander starts ordering you to kill civilians without reason? There's a fine line and by making it illegal to quit you discourage troops from acting morally. But still, 18 months in prison is not in itself a legitimate reason to kill innocents.

Originally Posted by tommo

Yeah, you invaded a country that you don't even know how to spell the name of. Congrats.

Guess what, there is not proper way to spell Iraq in english. Just like there's no proper way to spell Gaddafi. So... joke's on you.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Guess what, there is not proper way to spell Iraq in english. Just like there's no proper way to spell Gaddafi. So... joke's on you.

Iraq is an English word for that country. A rare alternate form is Irak. No form is Irag.

Just like Germany isn't a misspelling of Deutschland you utter fool.

Originally Posted by Xei

Iraq is an English word for that country. A rare alternate form is Irak. No form is Irag.

Just like Germany isn't a misspelling of Deutschland you utter fool.

Germany is an english word invented by english people to describe foreigners from a foreign area. What do Iraqis call themselves?

Roflysst you are actually arguing about this. Россия is pronounced 'rawseeya' by Russians. Rawseeya is not the correct spelling of Russia.

Originally Posted by Xei

Roflysst you are actually arguing about this. Россия is pronounced 'rawseeya' by Russians. Rawseeya is not the correct spelling of Russia.

What does that have to do with what Iraqis call themselves?

Because it's literally exactly analogous. Like, the most straightforward analogy ever. Iraqis have a different alphabet but what they call their country sounds a bit like Iraq.

Originally Posted by Xei

Because it's literally exactly analogous. Iraqis have a different alphabet but what they call their country sounds a bit like Iraq.

Iraq is an english pronunciation of the word Iraqis call themselves just like how Russia is an english pronunciation of how Russians refer to themselves. We adapted an english spelling based on our english pronunciation. That doesn't make it right. You just like to ridicule people for making human mistakes and I decided to show you how flimsy the proper spelling of Iraq is to begin with.

Originally Posted by Xei

Wasn't aware of the details about this. As far as I'm concerned this in itself is hideous morally; what if your commander starts ordering you to kill civilians without reason? There's a fine line and by making it illegal to quit you discourage troops from acting morally. But still, 18 months in prison is not in itself a legitimate reason to kill innocents.

There are definitely mechanisms in place that allow you to disregard the orders of a superior if you believe that he is putting people at unnecessary risk or not following the rules of engagement. You'd probably be in hot water for a bit and have to participate in some tribunal, but if it's over something as clear as "he ordered me to kill civilians", it would indeed be your duty to refuse.

This applies to countries like the US, UK... not really the same in Syria or Libya.

War is a nasty, terrible, horrible, dangerous thing. Nothing good will ever come out of it. Have you ever attacked an enemy base at midnight? Looked into the eyes of a man you're about to kill? Walked the streets Afgan and Iraq having kids run up to hug you? Having parents smile at you? Having people grown men thank you and hug you with tears of happiness? The people over there are very appreciative of what we do over there. They are sad were leaving Iraq. The only things that are left are some troops training their army for combat. That's it. In Afgan the war may still be ragging but people still love us anyway even though some of their loved ones may have been killed. You may think and say wherever you want to say Xei but all you really know is what you read in the paper or watch on TV. These soldiers share a close bond. They know a feeling that almost nobody else in America knows. They know the truth. What would happen if all these soldiers quit? Well, first of all we would have no defense. Our country would be invaded. Alliances would break, nukes would go off, more people would die. The world would be forever changed at the end of WW3. Once again you may say, think, do whatever you want but what you really know is what the media tells you. It's pretty easier to complain about the world in the comfort of your chair. The question is, how can you change it? The soldiers of every country have things they don't want to do. I have killed men. Does that make me unethical? Does that break my relationship with God? I don't think so. There are many people who are very stong beloved of God on our front lines. I understand why you may feel angry towards the soldiers but you see, people have to do this. The world isn't a perfect place, I wish it was but it isn't. If every country didn't have an army terrorists would destroy them. Why are we over in Afganistan? Because Obama/Bush commanded it. It may not be the right thing, but it's sure as hell not the soldiers fault. War is a horrible thing. In the valley of death...

You seem like a reasonably intelligent person. But you have been fed lies and been brainwashed.
That is all. I'm not gonna try to change your mind though. Just saying.

Of course war is horrible, which is why we shouldn't be starting wars all across the world. The US is a great destabilizing force in the world. We killed democratically elected leaders and install dictatorships, which often grow out of control and then we have to come in and kill them, and in the process thousands of innocent people are killed by our bombs.

You can't have peace through the use of force. If we want peace we need to put the weapons down and talk with each other.

Originally Posted by tommo

You seem like a reasonably intelligent person. But you have been fed lies and been brainwashed.
That is all. I'm not gonna try to change your mind though. Just saying.

All that I was trying to say is that it is not the soldiers fault. It is the people who are in charge. Yeah, I do not completely agree with most of the decisions past Presidents have made. What exactly was I "brainwashed" about. All that I was saying is that you should stop blaming the soldiers and blame the people in charge...

Originally Posted by MarineRecon

All that I was trying to say is that it is not the soldiers fault. It is the people who are in charge. Yeah, I do not completely agree with most of the decisions past Presidents have made. What exactly was I "brainwashed" about.

Originally Posted by Alric

You can't have peace through the use of force. If we want peace we need to put the weapons down and talk with each other.

This. And the fact that Iraq somehow hurt the U.S.

But mostly what Alric said. You think you have helped people, and they may think that too. But you can never solve problems with war.

It is also the soldiers fault. You can't pass the blame on to the people in charge. If there were no soldiers, whatever they were giving orders to do would not be done.

Soldiers are basically an extension. They are a tool and nothing else. Obama asks us to do something, we do it. No questions asked. I agree, everything we do may not be moral, but if it has been commanded then it is our job to get it done.

I also agree that war is horrible. It is curl and unjust. The fact is soldiers are used for so many different things then war though. We are all over the world doing many different things. Handing out food to the poor around the world, saving people from natural disasters, making sure that the world is safe. Obviously soldiers in Iraq are causing more harm than good but we have no choice. The world would be a better place without any combat soldiers, but I am one so I guess some blame could go towards me for deciding to train to go behind enemy lines to capture high level enemies. Not all soldiers are bad though.

Do you know, just as a complete guess, how many people join the army to simply to the humanitarian work? (Build houses, supply food to the poor etc.)

Nope but there is defiantly more combat oriented soldiers though. People don't really join to do humanitarian work they are called on when needed. For example, I know a guy who was in the army. He just came back from Iraq when Japan got hit by the huge wave. He got called on to go help out over there so he did. So yes, that is a good point, they are called on when needed.

Originally Posted by MarineRecon

All that I was trying to say is that it is not the soldiers fault. It is the people who are in charge. Yeah, I do not completely agree with most of the decisions past Presidents have made. What exactly was I "brainwashed" about. All that I was saying is that you should stop blaming the soldiers and blame the people in charge...

Why do you keep using this defence when it's clearly not true. Like I said, it is an obvious moral imperative to not act based on arbitrary edicts but rather act according to your own morality. It's for this reason we don't accept that the Nazis running the concentration camps were engaged in acceptable moral practice because they were 'just taking orders'. Or do you think they were acting morally? Come on, you're supposed to learn as a child to take responsibility for your own actions.

Its not a defense. The world needs soldiers but they do not need them for combat. If there was no training program to become a deadly weapon who could kill anyone in any situation then that would be good. People need soldiers for humanitarian reasons I think instead of for war. The bottom line is, there has not been one single war in history that a innocent was killed. I agree though, it is a bad thing to go around shooting at people who you may "think" is bad. Thats why I joined to go behind "enemy" lines. To take out the real threat. I would hate ( and I hate) people in the Military who jack off and are so eager to shoot their weapon that they killed a whole family of civilians.

I know why there's unrest in Iraq; if we can't even agree to disagree on how to spell a fucking country's NAME in a language that IS NOT THE PRIMARY LANGUAGE of said country... How can we expect anyone else to get along?!