Anabolics
Search More Than 6,000,000 Posts
Results 1 to 37 of 37
  1. #1
    Badgerman's Avatar
    Badgerman is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    A mile High
    Posts
    3,089

    What will GW do.......

    when he looks in the mirror and he's old and realizes he is a piece of shit who sold the souls of the young brave soldiers to line the pockets of his old and ready to die halliburton buddies........and all his little photo ops with the christian right don't mean squat.......

  2. #2
    smokethedays's Avatar
    smokethedays is offline Veni, Vedi, Vici.
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    In The Kitchen :)
    Posts
    4,548
    Blog Entries
    1
    i think when someone rise to such power (president of the only super power in the world ) must go insane and do stupid $hit like that

  3. #3
    MilitiaGuy's Avatar
    MilitiaGuy is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Middle-East Lebanon
    Posts
    4,328
    well power can do more than this, Saddam Husseing before getting to power was an amical good friend and he cared about his friends and family but when he rise to power he eliminated most of his friends the second week and he got crueler and crueler.

  4. #4
    smokethedays's Avatar
    smokethedays is offline Veni, Vedi, Vici.
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    In The Kitchen :)
    Posts
    4,548
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by MilitiaGuy
    well power can do more than this, Saddam Husseing before getting to power was an amical good friend and he cared about his friends and family but when he rise to power he eliminated most of his friends the second week and he got crueler and crueler.
    exactly my point, it's the human nature, when they get to power they turn to

  5. #5
    MilitiaGuy's Avatar
    MilitiaGuy is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Middle-East Lebanon
    Posts
    4,328
    Quote Originally Posted by smokethedays
    exactly my point, it's the human nature, when they get to power they turn to
    I am a good person now and I dont know if someday (I hope so :P) I got power I will stay decent person or I will turn to

  6. #6
    elcapitan's Avatar
    elcapitan is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    O.C.
    Posts
    177
    There is a fine line between power and bully and I think GW crossed it a long time ago.

  7. #7
    RA's Avatar
    RA
    RA is offline Grade A Beef
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Getting madcow treatments
    Posts
    18,715
    More propaganda. Dont you guys know any other songs?

  8. #8
    Syndicate's Avatar
    Syndicate is offline Associate Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    484
    I agree with Badger and Militiaguy! Bush has crossed the line and only time will show the blind what happened.

  9. #9
    Badgerman's Avatar
    Badgerman is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    A mile High
    Posts
    3,089
    Quote Originally Posted by Syndicate
    I agree with Badger and Militiaguy! Bush has crossed the line and only time will show the blind what happened.
    The Bush family seems to be a long line of power and money hungry people sacrificing their morals for wordly gain. Remember Satan's tempting.....offering all the world's kingdoms.......

  10. #10
    Jdawg50's Avatar
    Jdawg50 is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Mountains
    Posts
    3,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Badgerman
    when he looks in the mirror and he's old and realizes he is a piece of shit who sold the souls of the young brave soldiers to line the pockets of his old and ready to die halliburton buddies........and all his little photo ops with the christian right don't mean squat.......

    LOL
    I've been gone for a while... but its good to be back... looks like your still bitter about the election huh?
    LMAO!

  11. #11
    Badgerman's Avatar
    Badgerman is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    A mile High
    Posts
    3,089
    JDAWG....you're still gone.....election???.....life is way past that

  12. #12
    BOUNCER is offline Retired Vet
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    IRELAND.
    Posts
    7,772
    Quote Originally Posted by MilitiaGuy
    I am a good person now and I dont know if someday (I hope so :P) I got power I will stay decent person or I will turn to

    But you said you wanted to kill my friend 'Rak_Ani', is that what makes a "good" and "decent" Hezbollah member?.

  13. #13
    Badgerman's Avatar
    Badgerman is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    A mile High
    Posts
    3,089
    Quote Originally Posted by BOUNCER
    But you said you wanted to kill my friend 'Rak_Ani', is that what makes a "good" and "decent" Hezbollah member?.
    Ya......that's no good wanting to kill someone......

  14. #14
    MilitiaGuy's Avatar
    MilitiaGuy is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Middle-East Lebanon
    Posts
    4,328
    Quote Originally Posted by BOUNCER
    But you said you wanted to kill my friend 'Rak_Ani', is that what makes a "good" and "decent" Hezbollah member?.
    Rak_Ani is a soldier!!!!!!!

  15. #15
    BOUNCER is offline Retired Vet
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    IRELAND.
    Posts
    7,772
    Quote Originally Posted by MilitiaGuy
    Rak_Ani is a soldier!!!!!!!
    No, you have that wrong. She WAS a soldier (past tense) (present tense now) I'm a soldier!. So your saying a "good" and "decent person" should kill soldiers?.

    You said your a member of the Hezbollah party, Islamic resistance. Your comrades have killed comrades of mine in Lebanon, is it ok now that I should kill you if you visit Ireland, or I visit Lebanon again (whichever is sooner)?. I'm not saying I want to kill you, I've never wanted to kill another human being in my life. I think your life is just as precious as mine, my families and my friends including Rak_Ani, the lady you want to kill. As a matter of fact, why should we let you continue your membership here if you want to kill another AR.com member?.

  16. #16
    IronFreakX's Avatar
    IronFreakX is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    8,803
    Quote Originally Posted by Badgerman
    Remember Satan's tempting.....offering all the world's kingdoms.......
    Oh yes satans tempting.....know another song?????

  17. #17
    IronFreakX's Avatar
    IronFreakX is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    8,803
    Quote Originally Posted by BOUNCER
    No, you have that wrong. She WAS a soldier (past tense) (present tense now) I'm a soldier!. So your saying a "good" and "decent person" should kill soldiers?.

    You said your a member of the Hezbollah party, Islamic resistance. Your comrades have killed comrades of mine in Lebanon, is it ok now that I should kill you if you visit Ireland, or I visit Lebanon again (whichever is sooner)?. I'm not saying I want to kill you, I've never wanted to kill another human being in my life. I think your life is just as precious as mine, my families and my friends including Rak_Ani, the lady you want to kill. As a matter of fact, why should we let you continue your membership here if you want to kill another AR.com member?.
    Yeah a good decent person should harm soldiers if they are harming him and kill them b4 they kill h/her if those are their intentions.....

    IE: A girl i know was sexually harrassed by a cop.......he felt her up etc... but didnt rape her....i lurked around there had her with me to point him out a couple of nights later me and my friend beat the shit outta him and he deserved it

    Cmon bouncer if some1 tried to kill a family member or take ur land wouldnt u wanna shoot them hell ud do it for a lot less like protecting ur post or to prevent major public property destruction rite?


    im not flaming u or nething....I like u...ur a nice guy im just stating facts.....

  18. #18
    GQ-Bouncer's Avatar
    GQ-Bouncer is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    look beyond what you see
    Posts
    2,304
    Quote Originally Posted by Badgerman
    when he looks in the mirror and he's old and realizes he is a piece of shit who sold the souls of the young brave soldiers to line the pockets of his old and ready to die halliburton buddies........and all his little photo ops with the christian right don't mean squat.......
    Saddam Hussien committed atrocities to his own people - Iraq isnt a peace loving country you may think (ie. the Iran-Iraq conflict / Invading kuwait), your saying Hussien is a good guy? When was the last time Bush ordered a chemical-weapon attack on his own people?

    Remember, its not just America - Great Britain, Poland, Ukraine, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands, these countries have soldiers on the ground in Iraq, their are even more who are supporting the war in Iraq in other ways.
    Last edited by GQ-Bouncer; 06-24-2005 at 02:44 PM.

  19. #19
    BOUNCER is offline Retired Vet
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    IRELAND.
    Posts
    7,772
    IronfreakX your hardly making any sense what so ever. This boils down to Militiaguy saying he's a "good and decent person", and I have an email from him telling me he wanted to kill Rak_Ani (you don't know her, she doesn't post here any longer). She was a soldier, Israeli's are required to do national service, like most European and Middle Eastern countries. So Militiaguy simply wants to murder 'Rak_Ani' (I say murder now because she's a civilian now) because she 'was' an Israeli soldier.

    Taking your argument (if I understand you correctly) its ok for me to want to kill English members of AR.com and its ok for Iraqi's to want to kill Americans?. Have I got that right?. Taking your argument a stage further, if I was to kill (lets say) MatrixGuy (he's British) I'd be a freedom fighter fighting for Ireland since his country occupies 6 counties of Northern Ireland, or would I be a terrorist?.

  20. #20
    symatech's Avatar
    symatech is offline Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    not where I want to be
    Posts
    7,546
    terrorist/freedom fighter. It's all perspective. depends on who you ask. And both are often valid. they are terrorists now, but when they win (which they will... victory will be declared no matter what when the US pulls out) then they just became freedom fighters, and we the tyrants. just like treason....it's all a matter of dates.

  21. #21
    IronFreakX's Avatar
    IronFreakX is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    8,803
    Quote Originally Posted by BOUNCER
    IronfreakX your hardly making any sense what so ever. This boils down to Militiaguy saying he's a "good and decent person", and I have an email from him telling me he wanted to kill Rak_Ani (you don't know her, she doesn't post here any longer). She was a soldier, Israeli's are required to do national service, like most European and Middle Eastern countries. So Militiaguy simply wants to murder 'Rak_Ani' (I say murder now because she's a civilian now) because she 'was' an Israeli soldier.

    Taking your argument (if I understand you correctly) its ok for me to want to kill English members of AR.com and its ok for Iraqi's to want to kill Americans?. Have I got that right?. Taking your argument a stage further, if I was to kill (lets say) MatrixGuy (he's British) I'd be a freedom fighter fighting for Ireland since his country occupies 6 counties of Northern Ireland, or would I be a terrorist?.
    Matrix is just a postwhore shoot him hahah jk jk

    u do not go and kill civilians...unless they want to kill you...other than that yeah go ahead....If some1 invaded a country i was staying in (i have no loyalty 2 ne country i am just looking after my best intrest....) then yeah i would go kill the soldiers and try to help invading theirs eye for an 1000eyes


    I probably didnt make ne sense again im kinda busy writing a F.A.Q ill get 2 u l8r
    peace

  22. #22
    IronFreakX's Avatar
    IronFreakX is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    8,803
    Quote Originally Posted by symatech
    terrorist/freedom fighter. It's all perspective. depends on who you ask. And both are often valid. they are terrorists now, but when they win (which they will... victory will be declared no matter what when the US pulls out) then they just became freedom fighters, and we the tyrants. just like treason....it's all a matter of dates.
    Why are sure the terrorist will win this is intresting??

  23. #23
    Benches505's Avatar
    Benches505 is offline 75% HGH 25% Testosterone
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,366
    Quote Originally Posted by MilitiaGuy
    Rak_Ani is a soldier!!!!!!!
    Every Israeli adult is a soldier. They remain part of the reserves if I'm not mistaken.

    I guess it all boils down to which side of the fence you were born on. Both Muslims and Jews have valid claims to that land.

  24. #24
    GQ-Bouncer's Avatar
    GQ-Bouncer is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    look beyond what you see
    Posts
    2,304
    Quote Originally Posted by BOUNCER
    IronfreakX your hardly making any sense what so ever. This boils down to Militiaguy saying he's a "good and decent person", and I have an email from him telling me he wanted to kill Rak_Ani (you don't know her, she doesn't post here any longer). She was a soldier, Israeli's are required to do national service, like most European and Middle Eastern countries. So Militiaguy simply wants to murder 'Rak_Ani' (I say murder now because she's a civilian now) because she 'was' an Israeli soldier.
    To clear things up - this is BOUNCERs argument (which also represents mine and most western ideologies)

    MGuy is wrong for wanting to plan out and murder Rak_Ani because
    a) she is a woman
    b) she is no longer in the Isreali Army
    c) she was not a member of the combat arms whilst in service
    d) she has never taken arms against a member of MGuys homeland gov't
    e) MGuy is not a soldier, and henceforth does not have any right to feel that way (if he was legit, he would be in the armed forces)
    f) she was "conscripted" to the army (everyone must join when are are 18)
    g) The only way MGuy knows Rak_Ani is through AR.com


    A Soldier is a profession, you must be an enemy soldier in order to be morally justified in killing another soldier.

    Otherwise its the same as me going and killing a Police Officer

  25. #25
    BOUNCER is offline Retired Vet
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    IRELAND.
    Posts
    7,772
    Quote Originally Posted by Benches505
    Every Israeli adult is a soldier. They remain part of the reserves if I'm not mistaken.

    Your mistaken, not every Israeli is a soldier. Some are granted exemptions from military service for a number of good reasons.

    I've taken the time now to ring a female friend of mine in Israel. She tells me that most women are not even given the option of continuing with their military career's in the reserve once they finish their mandatory service.

  26. #26
    GQ-Bouncer's Avatar
    GQ-Bouncer is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    look beyond what you see
    Posts
    2,304
    Quote Originally Posted by symatech
    terrorist/freedom fighter. It's all perspective. depends on who you ask. And both are often valid. they are terrorists now, but when they win (which they will... victory will be declared no matter what when the US pulls out) then they just became freedom fighters, and we the tyrants. just like treason....it's all a matter of dates.
    The terrorists only want the removal of the US Government because of the "Jihad" - not because they want Saddam back. The U.S. will always have troops in the middle-east (essentially it will turn into the next "Bosnia")

  27. #27
    symatech's Avatar
    symatech is offline Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    not where I want to be
    Posts
    7,546
    Quote Originally Posted by IronFreakX
    Why are sure the terrorist will win this is intresting??
    because it's impossible to kill them all. Once we leave Iraq -and we will one day- they will declare victory, and everybody will listen. And it will get chalked up to another vietnam just fewer troops involved. How could anybody ever believe that there was a chance of winning a 'war on terror' like the drug war, both causes which can never be victories. like bouncer said, we win all the battles, but loose the war.

  28. #28
    symatech's Avatar
    symatech is offline Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    not where I want to be
    Posts
    7,546
    Quote Originally Posted by GQ-Bouncer
    The terrorists only want the removal of the US Government because of the "Jihad" - not because they want Saddam back. The U.S. will always have troops in the middle-east (essentially it will turn into the next "Bosnia")
    thank you for making my point. no matter what the US does in Iraq, it will all be destroyed as soon as we leave, so there it is in black and white why we'll never win this war. we'll stay for a while, kill a lot of muslims, loose a lot of our guys, then they'll come home, and the only thing different about Iraq will be the number of people who hate americans, and the number of people who will want us to suffer. sadam will be replaced by some other fanatic and the cycle will continue. what was our mission again? didn't it fail when we found no WMD? how can you win a war that has already been lost?

  29. #29
    GQ-Bouncer's Avatar
    GQ-Bouncer is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    look beyond what you see
    Posts
    2,304
    Quote Originally Posted by symatech
    thank you for making my point. no matter what the US does in Iraq, it will all be destroyed as soon as we leave, so there it is in black and white why we'll never win this war. we'll stay for a while, kill a lot of muslims, loose a lot of our guys, then they'll come home, and the only thing different about Iraq will be the number of people who hate americans, and the number of people who will want us to suffer. sadam will be replaced by some other fanatic and the cycle will continue. what was our mission again? didn't it fail when we found no WMD? how can you win a war that has already been lost?

    ???

    here some education on the issue

    November 27, 2001 Iraq rejects a call by U.S. President George Bush to let United Nations weapons inspectors back into the country to determine whether it is building weapons of mass destruction. An Iraqi spokesman states that, before asking Iraq to allow weapons inspectors to return, the United Nations should lift the 11-year-old sanctions on Iraq and the West should abolish the no-fly zones in northern and southern Iraq. (R)

    February 13, 2002 Iraq says that it will not allow U.N. arms inspectors to return to Iraq. Iraqi Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan states, "There is no need for the spies of the [U.N.] inspection teams to return to Iraq since Iraq is free of weapons of mass destruction." The United States has hinted that actions may be taken against the Iraqi government if U.N. arms inspectors are not allowed to return. (R)

    August 29, 2002 U.S. Vice President Cheney states that a new round of U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq is likely to be insufficient to guarantee that Iraq has ended its biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons programs. That same day, Iraqi Vice President Ramadan declares that future inspections by the United Nations are a "waste of time," as the U.S. administration has already decided upon "changing the regime by force." (WP)

    September 12, 2002 President George W. Bush addresses the General Assembly of the United Nations in New York. President Bush denounces the Iraqi leadership as posing a "grave and gathering danger," calls for the United Nations to act, and states that "The Security Council resolutions will be enforced... or action will be unavoidable." (NYT)

    March 21, 2003 British and American land forces enter Iraq, taking control of areas bordering Kuwait and parts of the Faw Peninsula. British marines seize some oil export facilities and U.S. armored columns push further into Iraq towards the Rumaila oilfields. About 7 oilfields are set on fire by Iraqi forces. U.S. special forces begin conducting significant operations with Kurdish units in the north of Iraq. A primary objective of Coalition forces is to take control of oil wells before they can be sabotaged by Iraqi forces. Coalition air strikes continue on military targets throughout the country." (Reuters, DJ)

    December 15, 2003 Oil prices fall 4% on the news that U.S. military forces capture Saddam Hussein near his hometown of Tikrit, Iraq. (CBS, WMRC)

    January 30, 2005 Millions of Iraqis defy threats and suicide bombers to cast ballots in their country’s first democratic national election. Iraq's Independent Electoral Commission estimates that approximately 60%, or about eight million, of the nearly 14 million registered voters actually vote. Another quarter of a million Iraqi exiles also vote, or 90% of those who had registered. (WP, NYT)
    Last edited by GQ-Bouncer; 06-24-2005 at 07:19 PM.

  30. #30
    IronFreakX's Avatar
    IronFreakX is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    8,803
    Quote Originally Posted by symatech
    because it's impossible to kill them all. Once we leave Iraq -and we will one day- they will declare victory, and everybody will listen. And it will get chalked up to another vietnam just fewer troops involved. How could anybody ever believe that there was a chance of winning a 'war on terror' like the drug war, both causes which can never be victories. like bouncer said, we win all the battles, but loose the war.
    Intresting......yeah thats true tho....if they wanna finda a way they will......It might end in the short term...but it will never end.....

  31. #31
    symatech's Avatar
    symatech is offline Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    not where I want to be
    Posts
    7,546
    here some education on the issue
    so just what was I supposed to learn from that lol?

    November 27, 2001 Iraq rejects a call by U.S. President George Bush to let United Nations weapons inspectors back into the country to determine whether it is building weapons of mass destruction. An Iraqi spokesman states that, before asking Iraq to allow weapons inspectors to return, the United Nations should lift the 11-year-old sanctions on Iraq and the West should abolish the no-fly zones in northern and southern Iraq. (R)
    so a denied phone call years ago is grounds for invasion? too bad the how many dead us servicemen for that call? not worth it.

    February 13, 2002 Iraq says that it will not allow U.N. arms inspectors to return to Iraq. Iraqi Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan states, "There is no need for the spies of the [U.N.] inspection teams to return to Iraq since Iraq is free of weapons of mass destruction." The United States has hinted that actions may be taken against the Iraqi government if U.N. arms inspectors are not allowed to return. (R)
    so turns out he was telling the truth. this doesn't make any point really, how is this supposed to educate me?

    August 29, 2002 U.S. Vice President Cheney states that a new round of U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq is likely to be insufficient to guarantee that Iraq has ended its biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons programs. That same day, Iraqi Vice President Ramadan declares that future inspections by the United Nations are a "waste of time," as the U.S. administration has already decided upon "changing the regime by force." (WP)
    Again what does this prove? there were no wmd right? just like they were saying? how is this grounds for war.

    September 12, 2002 President George W. Bush addresses the General Assembly of the United Nations in New York. President Bush denounces the Iraqi leadership as posing a "grave and gathering danger," calls for the United Nations to act, and states that "The Security Council resolutions will be enforced... or action will be unavoidable." (NYT)
    more of the same, nothing concrete.

    March 21, 2003 British and American land forces enter Iraq, taking control of areas bordering Kuwait and parts of the Faw Peninsula. British marines seize some oil export facilities and U.S. armored columns push further into Iraq towards the Rumaila oilfields. About 7 oilfields are set on fire by Iraqi forces. U.S. special forces begin conducting significant operations with Kurdish units in the north of Iraq. A primary objective of Coalition forces is to take control of oilwells before they can be sabotaged by Iraqi forces. Coalition air strikes continue on military targets throughout the country." (Reuters, DJ)
    now what does this have to do with anything we've been discussing? I'm supposed to educate myself on troop movements.

    December 15, 2003 Oil prices fall 4% on the news that U.S. military forces capture Saddam Hussein near his hometown of Tikrit, Iraq. (CBS, WMRC)
    and now they are higher than ever...great.

    January 30, 2005 Millions of Iraqis defy threats and suicide bombers to cast ballots in their country’s first democratic national election. Iraq's Independent Electoral Commission estimates that approximately 60%, or about eight million, of the nearly 14 million registered voters actually vote. Another quarter of a million Iraqi exiles also vote, or 90% of those who had registered. (WP, NYT)
    and that government will be toppled when the US leaves.

    Not to rag on you but not one of those quotes you posted really prove anything. They educate me to the fact that you've run out of solid arguments and are trying to confuse me into getting further into my tangent. won't work this time

  32. #32
    GQ-Bouncer's Avatar
    GQ-Bouncer is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    look beyond what you see
    Posts
    2,304
    LOL dude, yeah i see what your saying, ill clear it up a bit

    You said = what was our mission again? didn't it fail when we found no WMD? how can you win a war that has already been lost?

    I showed you through a timeline display that the mission was to replace the Iraqi regime with one more responsable. Occupying the country and restoring its infrastructure is a secondary goal

  33. #33
    Jdawg50's Avatar
    Jdawg50 is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Mountains
    Posts
    3,095
    Dayyyymmm boooy! 5700 posts??? what have I missed??? lol
    GW is the man... and that is my post... we gotta stick threw this thing to the end. We cannot leave now, when the Iraqis need us the most. Rummy was great yesterday on the morning talk shows.It you have TIVO you should have taped the sunday talk shows. The Iraqis want us to stay right now, and we need to stay in order to succeed. if we leave now, then we will fail. This is not a 2 year thing and we are out. IN Germany after WWII there was a major insurgency, and around 1/1/1946 "Life Magazine January 7, 1946 : LIFE Magazine: Americans Are Losing the Victory in Europe

    January 7, 1946


    We are in a cabin deep down below decks on a Navy ship jam-packed with troops that’s pitching and creaking its way across the Atlantic in a winter gale. There is a man in every bunk. There’s a man wedged into every corner. There’s a man in every chair. The air is dense with cigarette smoke and with the staleness of packed troops and sour wool.

    “Don’t think I’m sticking up for the Germans,” puts in the lanky young captain in the upper berth, “but…”

    “To hell with the Germans,” says the broad-shouldered dark lieutenant. “It’s what our boys have been doing that worries me.”

    The lieutenant has been talking about the traffic in Army property, the leaking of gasoline into the black market in France and Belgium even while the fighting was going on, the way the Army kicks the civilians around, the looting.

    “Lust, liquor and loot are the soldier’s pay,” interrupts a red-faced major.

    The lieutenant comes out with his conclusion: “Two wrongs don’t make a right.” You hear these two phrases again and again in about every bull session on the shop. “Two wrongs don’t make a right” and “Don’t think I’m sticking up for the Germans, but….”

    The troops returning home are worried. “We’ve lost the peace,” men tell you. “We can’t make it stick.”

    A tour of the beaten-up cities of Europe six months after victory is a mighty sobering experience for anyone. Europeans. Friend and foe alike, look you accusingly in the face and tell you how bitterly they are disappointed in you as an American. They cite the evolution of the word “liberation.” Before the Normandy landings it meant to be freed from the tyranny of the Nazis. Now it stands in the minds of the civilians for one thing, looting.

    You try to explain to these Europeans that they expected too much. They answer that they had a right to, that after the last war America was the hope of the world. They talk about the Hoover relief, the work of the Quakers, the speeches of Woodrow Wilson. They don’t blame us for the fading of that hope. But they blame us now.

    Never has American prestige in Europe been lower. People never tire of telling you of the ignorance and rowdy-ism of American troops, of out misunderstanding of European conditions. They say that the theft and sale of Army supplies by our troops is the basis of their black market. They blame us for the corruption and disorganization of UNRRA. They blame us for the fumbling timidity of our negotiations with the Soviet Union. They tell us that our mechanical de-nazification policy in Germany is producing results opposite to those we planned. “Have you no statesmen in America?” they ask.


    The Skeptical French Press

    Yet whenever we show a trace of positive leadership I found Europeans quite willing to follow our lead. The evening before Robert Jackson’s opening of the case for the prosecution in the Nurnberg trial, I talked to some correspondents from the French newspapers. They were polite but skeptical. They were willing enough to take part in a highly publicized act of vengeance against the enemy, but when you talked about the usefulness of writing a prohibition of aggressive war into the law of nations they laughed in your face. The night after Jackson’s nobly delivered and nobly worded speech I saw then all again. They were very much impressed. Their manner had even changed toward me personally as an American. Their sudden enthusiasm seemed to me typical of the almost neurotic craving for leadership of the European people struggling wearily for existence in the wintry ruins of their world.

    The ruin this war has left in Europe can hardly be exaggerated. I can remember the years after the last war. Then, as soon as you got away from the military, all the little strands and pulleys that form the fabric of a society were still knitted together. Farmers took their crops to market. Money was a valid medium of exchange. Now the entire fabric of a million little routines has broken down. No on can think beyond food for today. Money is worthless. Cigarettes are used as a kind of lunatic travesty on a currency. If a man goes out to work he shops around to find the business that serves the best hot meal. The final pay-off is the situation reported from the Ruhr where the miners are fed at the pits so that they will not be able to take the food home to their families.

    “Well, the Germans are to blame. Let them pay for it. It’s their fault,” you say. The trouble is that starving the Germans and throwing them out of their homes is only producing more areas of famine and collapse.

    One section of the population of Europe looked to us for salvation and another looked to the Soviet Union. Wherever the people have endured either the American armies or the Russian armies both hopes have been bitterly disappointed. The British have won a slightly better reputation. The state of mind in Vienna is interesting because there the part of the population that was not actively Nazi was about equally divided. The wealthier classes looked to America, the workers to the Soviet Union.

    The Russians came first. The Viennese tell you of the savagery of the Russian armies. They came like the ancient Mongol hordes out of the steppes, with the flimsiest supply. The people in the working-class districts had felt that when the Russians came that they at least would be spared. But not at all. In the working-class districts the tropes were allowed to rape and murder and loot at will. When victims complained, the Russians answered, “You are too well off to be workers. You are bourgeoisie.”

    When Americans looted they took cameras and valuables but when the Russians looted they took everything. And they raped and killed. From the eastern frontiers a tide of refugees is seeping across Europe bringing a nightmare tale of helpless populations trampled underfoot. When the British and American came the Viennese felt that at last they were in the hands of civilized people. But instead of coming in with a bold plan of relief and reconstruction we came in full of evasions and apologies.

    U.S. Administration a Poor Third

    We know now the tragic results of the ineptitudes of the Peace of Versailles. The European system it set up was Utopia compared to the present tangle of snarling misery. The Russians at least are carrying out a logical plan for extending their system of control at whatever cost. The British show signs of recovering their good sense and their innate human decency. All we have brought to Europe so far is confusion backed up by a drumhead regime of military courts. We have swept away Hitlerism, but a great many Europeans feel that the cure has been worse than the disease.

    The taste of victory had gone sour in the mouth of every thoughtful American I met. Thoughtful men can’t help remembering that this is a period in history when every political crime and every frivolous mistake in statesmanship has been paid for by the death of innocent people. The Germans built the Stalags; the Nazis are behind barbed wire now, but who will be next? Whenever you sit eating a good meal in the midst of a starving city in a handsome house requisitioned from some German, you find yourself wondering how it would feel to have a conqueror drinking out of your glasses. When you hear the tales of the brutalizing of women from the eastern frontier you think with a shudder of of those you love and cherish at home.

    That we are one world is unfortunately a brutal truth. Punishing the German people indiscriminately for the sins of their leader may be justice, but it is not helping to restore the rule of civilization. The terrible lesson of the events of this year of victory is that what is happening to the bulk of Europe today can happen to American tomorrow.

    In America we are still rich, we are still free to move from place to place and to talk to our friends without fear of the secret police. The time has come, for our own future security, to give the best we have to the world instead of the worst. So far as Europe is concerned, American leadership up to now has been obsessed with a fear of our own virtues. Winston Churchill expressed this state of mind brilliantly in a speech to his own people which applies even more accurately to the people of the U.S. “You must be prepared,” he warned them, “for further efforts of mind and body and further sacrifices to great causes, if you are not to fall back into the rut if inertia, the confusion of aim and the craven fear of being great.”


    Getting Déjà Vu yet? Here's more from this issue of LIFE...

    The first winter of peace holds Europe in a deathly grip of cold, hunger and hopelessness. In the words of the London Sunday Observer: “Europe is threatened by a catastrophe this winter which has no precedent since the Black Death of 1348.”

    These are still more than 25,000,000 homeless people milling about Europe. In Warsaw nearly 1,000,000 live in holes in the ground. Six million building were destroyed in Russia. Rumania has her worst drought of 50 years, and in Greece fuel supplies are terribly low because the Nazis, during their occupation, decimated the forests. In Italy the wheat harvest, which was a meager 3,450,000 tons in 1944, fell to an unendurable 1,304,000 tons in 1945. In France, food consumption per day averages 1,800 calories as compared with 3,000 calories in the U.S.

    Germany is sinking even below the level of the countries she victimized. The German people are still better clothed than most of Europe because during the war they took the best of Europe’s clothing. But their food supply is below subsistence level. In the American zone they beg for the privilege of scraping U.S. army garbage cans. Infant mortality is already so high that a Berlin Quaker, quoted in the British press, predicted. “No child born in Germany in 1945 will survive. Only half the children aged less than 3 years will survive.”

    On Germany, which plunged the Continent into its misery, falls the blame for its own plight and the plight of all Europe. But if this winter proves worse even than the war years, blame will fall on the victor nations. Some Europeans blame Russia for callousness to misery in eastern Europe. But some also blame America because they expected so much more from her. On the following pages the distinguished novelist John Dos Passos, who has been abroad as LIFE correspondent, reports on Europe’s suffering and what it means for America.
    What we are not seeing is all the good that is taking place there. yea we hear about all the car bombings, but we have not seen the billions of dollars they have spent rebuilding homes. schools, road, sewer systems... and a ton more. Its happening, you just have to turn on something other than NBC, CBS, ABC, and CNN.

    Quote Originally Posted by symatech
    so just what was I supposed to learn from that lol?

    so a denied phone call years ago is grounds for invasion? too bad the how many dead us servicemen for that call? not worth it.

    so turns out he was telling the truth. this doesn't make any point really, how is this supposed to educate me?

    Again what does this prove? there were no wmd right? just like they were saying? how is this grounds for war.

    more of the same, nothing concrete.

    now what does this have to do with anything we've been discussing? I'm supposed to educate myself on troop movements.

    and now they are higher than ever...great.

    and that government will be toppled when the US leaves.

    Not to rag on you but not one of those quotes you posted really prove anything. They educate me to the fact that you've run out of solid arguments and are trying to confuse me into getting further into my tangent. won't work this time

  34. #34
    Jdawg50's Avatar
    Jdawg50 is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Mountains
    Posts
    3,095
    Subject: How would the D-day invasion be reported today by the media.


    (Author and source unknown)
    How Would the D-Day Invasion be Reported today?

    (This is what you would hear if Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, Tom Brokow or the rest of today's media reporting on D-Day at Normandy)
    (I regret I do not know the author of this piece which was forwarded by a friend.)

    June 6, 1944. -NORMANDY- Three hundred French civilians were killed and thousands more wounded today in the first hours of America's invasion of continental Europe. Casualties were heaviest among women and children. Most of the French casualties were the result of artillery fire from American ships attempting to knock out German fortifications prior to the landing of hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops.
    Reports from a makeshift hospital in the French town of St. Mere Eglise said the carnage was far worse than the French had anticipated and reaction against the American invasion was running high. "We are dying for no reason," said a Frenchman speaking on condition of anonymity. "Americans can't even shoot straight. I never thought I'd say this, but life was better under Adolph Hitler."

    The invasion also caused severe environmental damage.
    American troops, tanks, trucks and machinery destroyed miles of pristine shoreline and thousands of acres of ecologically sensitive wetlands. It was believed that the habitat of the spineless French crab was completely wiped out, threatening the species with extinction. A representative of Greenpeace said his organization, which had tried to stall the invasion for over a year, was appalled at the destruction, but not surprised. "This is just another example of how the military destroys the environment without a second thought," said Christine Moanmore. "And it's all
    about corporate greed." Contacted at his Manhattan condo, a member of the French government-in-exile who abandoned Paris when Hitler invaded said the invasion was based solely on American financial interests. "Everyone knows that President Roosevelt has ties to big
    beer," said Pierre LeWimp. "Once the German beer industry is conquered, Roosevelt's beer cronies will control the world market and make a fortune."

    Administration supporters said America's aggressive actions were based in part on the assertions of controversial scientist Albert Einstein, who sent a letter to Roosevelt speculating that the Germans were developing a secret weapon, a so-called "atomic bomb."
    Such a weapon could produce casualties on a scale never seen before and cause environmental damage that could last for thousands of years. Hitler has denied having such a weapon and international inspectors were unable to locate such weapons even after spending
    two long weekends in Germany. Shortly after the invasion began reports surfaced that German prisoners had been abused by Americans. Mistreatment of Jews by Germans at so-called "concentration camps" has been rumored but so far, remains unproven.

    Several thousand Americans died during the first hours of the invasion and French officials are concerned that uncollected corpses pose a public health risk.
    "The Americans should have planned for this in advance," they said. "It's their mess and we don't intend to clean it up."

  35. #35
    symatech's Avatar
    symatech is offline Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    not where I want to be
    Posts
    7,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Jdawg50
    Subject: How would the D-day invasion be reported today by the media.


    (Author and source unknown)
    How Would the D-Day Invasion be Reported today?

    (This is what you would hear if Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, Tom Brokow or the rest of today's media reporting on D-Day at Normandy)
    (I regret I do not know the author of this piece which was forwarded by a friend.)

    June 6, 1944. -NORMANDY- Three hundred French civilians were killed and thousands more wounded today in the first hours of America's invasion of continental Europe. Casualties were heaviest among women and children. Most of the French casualties were the result of artillery fire from American ships attempting to knock out German fortifications prior to the landing of hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops.
    Reports from a makeshift hospital in the French town of St. Mere Eglise said the carnage was far worse than the French had anticipated and reaction against the American invasion was running high. "We are dying for no reason," said a Frenchman speaking on condition of anonymity. "Americans can't even shoot straight. I never thought I'd say this, but life was better under Adolph Hitler."

    The invasion also caused severe environmental damage.
    American troops, tanks, trucks and machinery destroyed miles of pristine shoreline and thousands of acres of ecologically sensitive wetlands. It was believed that the habitat of the spineless French crab was completely wiped out, threatening the species with extinction. A representative of Greenpeace said his organization, which had tried to stall the invasion for over a year, was appalled at the destruction, but not surprised. "This is just another example of how the military destroys the environment without a second thought," said Christine Moanmore. "And it's all
    about corporate greed." Contacted at his Manhattan condo, a member of the French government-in-exile who abandoned Paris when Hitler invaded said the invasion was based solely on American financial interests. "Everyone knows that President Roosevelt has ties to big
    beer," said Pierre LeWimp. "Once the German beer industry is conquered, Roosevelt's beer cronies will control the world market and make a fortune."

    Administration supporters said America's aggressive actions were based in part on the assertions of controversial scientist Albert Einstein, who sent a letter to Roosevelt speculating that the Germans were developing a secret weapon, a so-called "atomic bomb."
    Such a weapon could produce casualties on a scale never seen before and cause environmental damage that could last for thousands of years. Hitler has denied having such a weapon and international inspectors were unable to locate such weapons even after spending
    two long weekends in Germany. Shortly after the invasion began reports surfaced that German prisoners had been abused by Americans. Mistreatment of Jews by Germans at so-called "concentration camps" has been rumored but so far, remains unproven.

    Several thousand Americans died during the first hours of the invasion and French officials are concerned that uncollected corpses pose a public health risk.
    "The Americans should have planned for this in advance," they said. "It's their mess and we don't intend to clean it up."
    lol we've been over this before bro. Yeah 5700, but I quit comming in this forum for awhile. after the election I got bored of reading the same threads so I left. I pop in now and then to stir shit up. just keepin you righties on your toes, and reminding the demies not to turn professional conspiracy theorists.

  36. #36
    Jdawg50's Avatar
    Jdawg50 is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Mountains
    Posts
    3,095
    How'd you like that Life Article post WWII?

  37. #37
    symatech's Avatar
    symatech is offline Retired Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    not where I want to be
    Posts
    7,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Jdawg50
    How'd you like that Life Article post WWII?
    I was glad to have read it, I thought it drew some interesting parallels with our situation today, and hopefully what we can expect. However, I do no think Iraq will end up with a stable pro-US gov. Here is why in relation to the article: There is always a certain degree of turmoil with revolution, whether it's a revolution by force or politics. Either way there will be some ruffles that need smoothing. So I'm not dogging on our position in Iraq b/c there is an insurgency, I'm dogging on it because no matter what, this insurgency will claim the country when we leave. Eventually Iraq may be a democracy on its own, but one lesson which can never be denied is that you cannot force-feed maturity. Anything the US sets up in Iraq will be destroyed when we leave, if only out of spite. But it will be gone.

    Secondly, before the war in Europe was even over they knew there would be some serious trouble in Europe -especially in berlin & the soviet buffers- as it was divided up between the allies, most notably Russia. The conflicts between the US and Russia were staved off only by a common cause. Two paths which happened to coincide at the moment. I think it was Patton who said something like "either I fight them now or my sons fight them later." And then less than 20 years later the Berlin wall, cold war etc. So things were tumultuous for awhile.

    Now I think it was worth the price to eliminate the Nazi's from Germany. IMO it was an honorable cause and worth dying for. So the turmoil afterwards was worth it. The conflict I have is that the turmoil right now in Iraq, I don't feel is worth dying for b/c I didn't think the cause was that important in the first place. Afghanistan I fully supported, just Iraq I do not (for reasons which we've all beat to death in a gazillion threads before so I won't get into it). I don't think it's worth American lives to try and install a government which will undoubtedly collapse when we leave the region.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •