Thread: F*** the Troops

Originally Posted by pseudolus

^ When the US had actually WON a war as opposed to taking credit for the CHinks and Rooskies work, you can keep talking lad.



If you walk down a street with a group of blokes, kick down a door, kidnap a father in front of his kids, take him away for torture, and brutalise the rest of the family, does that "being your job" make that acceptable? Id you are sat in a Apache, pick out a group of men 2 miles away, ask permission to kill them, granted, and you then do, does that "being your job" excuse you? MAke it morally acceptable.?

All this "nice young folks, apple pie and ribbons in their hair, saluting the flag" nonsense IS the propaganda, IS the false narrative. The might well be nice young kids, but at the point where their chosen career option starts or enables the murder, theft, torture, rape, destruction , of other people and countries, your right to call them "nice young kids" ends. They are no. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold might have been nice young kids to some people, but their actions, their choices were repugnant. Dropping a bomb on a school from 2,000 miles away is significantly worse than the Columbine shooting. You condemn on, and excuse the other.

You did not understand a word I said.
Perhaps it is time for another change of Avatar,
I suggest this one.

223,000 and counting dead

Originally Posted by bowie

^ FO Ant

You really are quite the sociopath aren't you.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

38,671 rants and counting

....

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

understand a word I said.

I understood everything you wrote. I couldn't hear what you said. Try recording and posting an Mp4?

Originally Posted by bowie

ever serve in combat?

No - I have a sense of mortality and would never trade my morals for a quid.

Originally Posted by bowie

The Part That Counts

That looks like trumpanzee hell.

Originally Posted by Takeovers

Pre invasion the large majority would probably have voted Ukraine in a referendum.

The very large majority are Russians. And always have been...

BTW, from which source do you take your "assumptions"? Ever heard from somebody who was there?

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

The annexation of Crimea to protect ethnic Russians?

Not so "sanft" handled as the "annexation" of (please no names here...), wasn't it?

Fuck off Klondyke go back to your troll factory.

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

The annexation of Crimea to protect ethnic Russians?

There were just a few...

According to the 2014 Russian census, 84% of Crimean inhabitants named Russian as their native language; 7.9% – Crimean Tatar; 3.7% – Tatar; and 3.3% – Ukrainian.[citation needed] It was the first official census in Crimea since a Ukrainian-held census in 2001.[129]

According to the 2001 census, 77% of Crimean inhabitants named Russian as their native language; 11.4% – Crimean Tatar; and 10.1% – Ukrainian.
Crimea - Wikipedia

Originally Posted by Klondyke

BTW, from which source do you take your "assumptions"? Ever heard from somebody who was there?

The mere fact that they invaded and forced the non russians out. There was not the slightest indication of a threat for the ethnic russians before that. Russia could have pressed for a referendum under international supervision. They did not go that way because they knew they would lose.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

I understood everything you wrote. I couldn't hear what you said. Try recording and posting an Mp4?

You know what they say "you can take a horse to water but you cant make him drink"

Originally Posted by Takeovers

The mere fact that they invaded and forced the non russians out.

When did Russia "invade" Ukraine, 13th, 18th, 20th century. When did Russia force Ukrainians out of Ukraine, where did they go?

Originally Posted by Takeovers

There was not the slightest indication of a threat for the ethnic russians before that

Originally Posted by Takeovers

Russia could have pressed for a referendum

Why would Russia want Ukraine? It had a valid agreement for the part it wanted to keep.

Originally Posted by Buckaroo Banzai

You know what they say "you can take a horse to water but you cant make him drink"

You can take a person to war but you can't make them murder someone?

Originally Posted by Plan B

Peacekeeping in African shitholes.
Peacekeeping in ME shitholes.
Humanitarian aid during famines.
Disaster relief after storms & seismic events.

Aside from the last, ALL caused by the west. ALL. You don't need a gang of hired murderers for humanitarian missions as well!

^
Plenty that are cause by local psychopaths in power. The reason every country has a military is because psychopaths aren't exclusively western.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

You don't need a gang of hired murderers for humanitarian missions as well!

You obviously don't know how a modern military works. Do you have some romantic picture in your head where everyone lines up on a battlefield and the best team wins? Most soldiers/sailors/airmen don't even carry weapons. They move stuff around the world, fix broken infrastructure, and supply means of communication and control when there is none locally.

Originally Posted by Plan B

^
Plenty that are cause by local psychopaths in power. The reason every country has a military is because psychopaths aren't exclusively western.

Why do you need a battlefield?


You obviously don't know how a modern military works. Do you have some romantic picture in your head where everyone lines up on a battlefield and the best team wins? Most soldiers/sailors/airmen don't even carry weapons. They move stuff around the world, fix broken infrastructure, and supply means of communication and control when there is none locally.

FFS No millitary is needed. It's just a tool used by THe State to enrich themselves and their buddies. The people who decide to be their paid for murderers are morally bankrupt idiots so fuck them.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

FFS No millitary is needed. It's just a tool used by THe State to enrich themselves and their buddies.

I've been reading your rants on here, making some good points but also going way out there and painting with the broadest brush.

When you say that no military is needed . . . country A has one. Country B doesn't. Country A wants valuable B land. Country A marches in and takes it. Country B ceases to exist and is a slave to country A.

So yes. Unfortunately this isn't nirvana.

As for enrichment, sure for a time. After that the state goes bankrupt because military expenditure creates very little and is a social program as such. Why do you think most world powers eventually died off?

Originally Posted by pseudolus

The people who decide to be their paid for murderers are morally bankrupt idiots so fuck them.

A - conscription.
B - a job, whether you like it or not. Especially in the US it is a way for financially disadvantaged people to get a job and an education . . . and the vast majority don't see any military action.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Why would Russia want Ukraine? It had a valid agreement for the part it wanted to keep.

They obviously broke that agreement by invading Ukraine, the Krim they ceded in that agreement. They drove non Russians out of Krim.

Originally Posted by pseudolus

You can take a person to war but you can't make them murder someone?

Sure you can, There's a whole industry dedicate to doing exactly that.
I am surprised you didn't know that. Well not really surprised.

They obviously broke that agreement by invading Ukraine

Oh look. A bullshit artist.

Originally Posted by sabang

Oh look. A bullshit artist.

Except he's quite correct

Originally Posted by sabang

Mercenaries, Gung-ho's, psychopaths, right wing Xtians, homicidal maniacs & ilk could join the Offence force, secure in the hope they might well (god willing) be sent to kill 'people' - well gooks, chinks, ragheads etc- in foreign places at somebody elses behest.

You mean like an expedited one-way ticket to a better world? Cool.

Except he's quite correct

Oh look mum. Another one.