If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Really?
I thought that the pilgrim fathers were more like me, critics of the corrupt and millitarily strong situations at home. If they'd been loyal to their allegiances like a good soldier is supposed to be, America would never have gained independance. Thankfully the critics gained sway through their honour and honesty. They ignored the jibes, insults and derision of the people such as you.
One could say that your nation was built by the Founding Fathers, none of whom seem to have been serving millitary personel at the time.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibit_hall/charters_of_freedom/constitution/founding_fathers_overview.html
Still, you have your little illusions don't you.
Enjoy your assault on hell - I'm sure you're expected. I recall something about the whole road there being paved with good intentions. God on the other hands judges on results - and whatever your intentions, you have a lot of blood on your hands I understand, and no idea whether all of it belongs to evil men, or good spirited ones.
True. All I have to go by is his posts here. And those posts reflect a belief that cowardice is normal human nature (or maybe you missed that?).
Guess the differences between "found" "build" and "defend" are lost on you.
"Lost" / "inconvenient"... probably doesn't matter much, in the final judgement...
Reading comprehension lacking? Or reality simply inconvenient and not supportive of you contention?
Exactly. Revolutionaries.
The ones who rebelled and fought against people like yourselves.
No doubt they too were called foolish names, had their courage and ideals questioned by lesser men.
However, Greenhat is right that there is a difference between building, founding, and defending.
I do not question that people such as Greenhat defend nations. Just as I do not question that people such as Greenhat are also the ones nations often need defending against. After all, people like Greenhat are just as often found attacking someone else's nation as defending their own.
I strongly contend the idea that people such as Greenhat build nations however. Millitary men may build infrastructure for better defending or attacking a nation, but they do not build nations themselves.
The church builds nations. Businesses build nations. Educators and Reformers build nations.
I would agree that most nations are built upon the land that people such as Greenhat have stolen (or won in conquest if you prefer). Were there no Native American nations before you built you nation upon their lands?
The British Empie was built in a similar fashion - but that is not 'building' - it is subjucating and destroying and claiming.
Men such as Greenhat, millitary men seeking to 'defend' their Nations, did build the minefields in Afghanistan though. Also the ones in Africa and many other lands. How proud we should all be of your valiant building efforts. Way to go, Boys! :rolleyes:
BlackKnight,
Once again, I suggest you enter the military and spend some time there. Then you might have a clue as to what the military is and what it does. As for what I do, that you'll never comprehend. You seem to have an unreasoning hatred of the military based on assumptions and bias with little basis in reality. But you will continue to build on what little basis there is and convince yourself it is the whole. What a sad commentary on your opinion of the sacrifice your father made.
Missed this, didn't you?
Yeah, horrid people that wear uniforms and serve their nation.
Are you in the infantry, or an engineer? Just out of curiosity.
At the same time as helping to rebuild, and to provide aid to people and refugees, you systematically destroy the infrastructure of the country they are running from.
Whilst you defuse mines, and rebuild hospitals, your brethren somewhere else are laying mines and destroying hospitals.
The job you do is admirable if you really do any of the stuff you mentioned. However in the end it is meaningless if you are going to run away and destroy something else.
Yes, warriors defend nations. But as BK said, you attack, and destroy other nations who have simply looked at you the wrong way.
It is the people who build and define a nation. Not the military. The Armed forces, and the government are serveants of the people, NOT the other way round.
The military in a civilised country are just another branch of government. Countries that get the balance wrong are destroyed as the people the military are supposed to be serving pack up and leave.
Agreed. And the US Military is made up of the US people. It also reflects the same values and culture as the rest of the nation.
As for what I do?
Figure out what my name refers to.
Soldiers here, are I can say a LOT more patriotic than other people.
I can't really explain it, but soldiers that I have met have a completely different mindset to other people, which i guess they have to, but if you saw British culture you would understand the differences.
An example I can think of, the majority of people here work for money and for security. Soldiers work for the fun of their job, and to feel that what they are doing is for the greater good.
I use that as an example because that is how I feel, I don't want to spend my life behind a desk. I want to do something constructive, which is why I will either join the police (hence the criminology degree) or join the airforce, and police officers and soldiers don't work for the money, because frankly it is piss poor for the job they do.
I'm not sure what your reasons for joing the armed forces are, were they similar to mine, or completely different? I know I share my view with a lot of the other people in the armed forces that I know though.
Greenhat.....over here that would mean royal marine, but I assume you're in the infantry?
No, it wouldn't! A green beret is the mark of a Commando in HM Royal Marines; the marks of a member of the Parachute Regiment are (a) the parachutist's wings, and (b) a red beret.
And paratroopers are infantry: they fight on foot. It's just their means of conveyance that gives them an air of being 'non-infantry.' Cf. the Americans' term: Airborne Infantry.
Why do I do it?
Because it is doing what I believe in.
I thought you were referring to the helmets....they're green....oh I know what I meant.
So, wha do you believe in? Do you fight for a cause, or for the people?
How is your Latin?
He has told you in every post. I do not need to speak for him, because he has made it no secret.
US Army Special Forces. T
They wear a green beret. Hence, they're called the Green Berets.
Jesus, that was really hard to explain. :rolleyes:
Not as good as yours apparently... Perhaps you could help out those of us who aren't Latin scholars...
The second part is obviously "fight, f*ck or die". Not sure about the 'de oppressor liber' though - doesn't sound like Latin to me.
I don't know the organisational structure of the US military, I have till now concentrated on the British one, being more relevant to me and all.
It was a simple question, all it requred was a simple answer with none of the sarcasm.
and no, I don't speak latin, which is why i asked what he believed in.
You think THAT was sarcasm?
ROTFLMFAO!
Check your PMs.
I'm not
I'm sure the Bush-supporters agree with that.
So do the Bin Laden one's.
The important parts here then are:
- Who do you use that violence against.
OBL killed American Soldiers.
GWB killed Taliban Soldiers.
OBL killed civilians. So did GWB.
And:
- Why use it...
America's foreign policy kill thousands...
OBL's "forign policy" did too
If you have a Schwarzenegger grabbing your neck with one hand and punching your face in with the other and that's been hapening for 80 years, and someone put a gun in your hand what would you do? Drop it? Or shoot the bastard?
This is just something to think and comment about. I haven't given my opinion.