Over 90,000 US Military Records Leaked

[red oct 2]

For you people like JFK, Dr. King and nowadays Dr. Paul also have to be anti-american then?

Yes, America helped to save the world more then ones and guess what I'm more then thankfull about that. I grew up in the so called American sector of West-Berlin and my father and his brothers were some of the boys that caught the parachutes that Gail Halvorsen and his friends were throwing out of their planes during the blockade. I've to tell only good things about you and never felt you were occupiers but close friends who care for other nations people.

But all this seems to have changed drastically. I want back the old America from about 50 years ago that didn't started aggressiv wars and didn't go to war without a declaration and for lower (economical) reasons.

You say yourself that Iraq was a big mistake and you were betrayed by some few (with which I think you mean your former president and his coatholders) but the same unfortunately goes for Afghanistan, too.

Yes, my country is also involved but I'm surely not down with it even if I was a soldier in our military myself and have friends who were down there. If my voice would count we would be gone yesterday already because in my opinion this is just a massive waste of resources (human and financial).

you realise we were at war with vietnam about 50 years ago right? america 50 years ago was even worse than today. back than 20,000 military deaths were the norm and to destroy military targets by air would involve carpet bombing several city blocks with dumb bombs. Napalm was also a popular weapon of choice too.

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

By "Dr. Paul" I think he might mean "Dr. Phil". In which case that deserves a really big lol.

[T.S.C.Plage 0]

Which Dr. Paul do you refer to? The only one I know is my dentist and he's a sadist, lol. But seriously now, I consider JFK and MLK to be two of the greatest Americans that ever lived. By that same token JFK started a war that went undeclared and lasted for over 10 years.

Maybe Dr. Ron Paul republican candidate for the presideny in 2008? And JFK didn't started the war. Infact it was started already during the time of Eisenhower. JFK was dead before the real intervention started.

Now you're started to talk like a rational human being, I'm proud of you. You are correct in assuming I refer to Bush, but so to our former VP who was the brains behind Iraq. As for Afghanistan you say we went there for ecomical reasons. I want to know what mineral,resource,whatever in that God forsaken country is worth so much that we'd go to war over. It can't be oil since Iraq has more, but yet we were told that the war would pay for itself(meaning the oil.) yet the American people are picking up the bar tab on that one and instead of even lower gas prices we got higher ones. I personally believe that you've been mislead by the media in your country and should do more independent research.

I don't need you to tell me that you're proud of me, thanks. I was always talking rational. The problem is that you (Americans) tend to think everything "contra" has to be leftist, communist, tree-hugging, tin foil headed or what else but that's simply not the case. If I wouldn't care I wouldn't waste my time with posting here. The patriotism you were raised with unfortunately makes you blind on one eye and you can't see that good with just one left.

The "pay for itself" lie is a good example how these few people betrayed you and it's by the way something that the mentioned Dr. Paul was very concenerd about.

You see I really like this guy. You should check out some of his speeches etc. (f.e. on youtube). I guess you'll like him, too...at least a bit. ;)

I'm sorry to disappoint you but I don't have the feeling that I'm mislead by our medias. Our media is unfortunately much more free and unbiased then yours. Same goes for much of the European medias and I'm lucky to be able to understand two other languages besides German so I'm able to check out quite a couple of diffrent sources (pro and contra).

you realise we were at war with vietnam about 50 years ago right? america 50 years ago was even worse than today. back than 20,000 military deaths were the norm and to destroy military targets by air would involve carpet bombing several city blocks with dumb bombs. Napalm was also a popular weapon of choice too.

Yes, I know quite a bit about what lead to this mess but since it "officially" started in '65 (with troops and not only "advisors") I'm not so wrong. Of course you had your fingers in there before so if you want you can add another 10 years to the 50 to make it 60 years ago.

/edit: @ Big Mac: Sorry I did forget to answer to this part of your post.

I want to know what mineral,resource,whatever in that God forsaken country is worth so much that we'd go to war over. It can't be oil since Iraq has more, ...

I already mentioned the Trans-Afghanistan-Pipeline before which is in my opinion the most interesting economical reason but besides that Afghanistan has also larger resources of gold, copper, iron, lithium and cobalt. But I'm not sure if this played a role here because I don't know if this fact was known already before the war started.

Edited August 11, 2010 by T.S.C.Plage

[Baff1 0]

@Clavicula_nox4817: Meh, I don't think this is a fight you can win. I doubt you'll be able to get through that condescending, elitist, know-it-all attitude.

@Baff1: I hope you realize that attempting to paint your adversary or attacking one with ad hominem jabs at one's character or age etc,etc doesn't prove anything nor make you particularity look good. It makes you a condescending asshole, period.

BTW: Anecdotal arguments don't carry much weight either, unless backed up with hard evidence they hold the same weight as an opinion, nothing more.

.

Anecdotal arguments may not carry much weight with you, but they serve as a frame of reference to judge where people are taking their opinions from. What evidence they have experienced that leads them to believe what they believe, to have learnt what they have learnt.

I fully understand that pulling the age card doesn't earn me any brownie points with those younger than me that think they know as much as me about historical subjects that are before their time but not mine.

I was young too once. I still talk to people older than me who pull the same routines on me and I know how it sounds and feels. But that doesn't change the validity of it in anyway.

It stings the pride alright.

But then I didn't post here to impress the youth about how down with them I am.

I understand that people are unable to verify my anecdotal evidence. Or that anecdotal evidence does not provide aboslute historical proof of any of my claims. What it does provide you with however is an insight into my own bias and an insight into why I know things about the subject matter.

It provides a qualification.

If you are unable to accept that qualification, then any condescension you recieve from me you will have earnt.

---------- Post added at 04:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:46 AM ----------

LOL!!! And you're not brainwashed?! You've been listing to way much anti-american/9/11 truther BS. No one here said that the US is the example of perfection. But you throw in our face that America wages war solely for it's own gain. America helped has saved this world from tyranny more than once in the past century.(I say that not out arrogance, but out of fact.) Iraq was a giant cluster fuck that was concocted, but a few men and sold to the world like a lemon car. Afghanistan was not a meaningless war, just handled in meaningless fashion and you're implying that we're punishing the afghan people for the actions of their former government, which is simply untrue and even if it were your country has a hand in it too.

My country has hand in it too.

A hand I don't disagree with.

America's allies joined the war to honour their NATO alliance. To show solidarity with our allies after the attacks of 9/11.

That was the meaning of this war for us when we engaged in it.

I don't think any of us particularly felt 9/11 was the fault of the Afghans in anyway, or that invading Afghanistan would make the world a safer place.

I think we all probably knew it would open us up to terrorism and drugs and all the rest of the things it has. I think we all knew there would be a great human cost for it for the people of Afghanistan and a much lesser one for ourselves.

Since that time of course our politicians have attempted to rebrand that war many times. And the message we fought for has gotten lost. Which is a great pity and ultimately has undermined our reason for being there, with Americans' now routinely thinking that their allies are all there out of self intrest in the results of the conflict. Which is clealry the opposite of why we went.

I think it has been time for us to leave for some time now. And it started to be time to leave the moment the war went off message.

Afgahanistan might not be a meaningless war for Americans (not to mention Paki's and Afghans), or indeed those people from other nations who are personally participating in it, but it pretty much is for many of the rest of us.

I'd like to see an immediate end to our involvement in it.

The release of the Wikileaks information has done a great deal to bring this conflict and the price of it back to the front of all our minds. It's a serious anti war rallying point and will only serve to undermine our military effort there at home.

Edited August 11, 2010 by Baff1

[Big Mac 19]

Maybe Dr. Ron Paul republican candidate for the presideny in 2008? And JFK didn't started the war. Infact it was started already during the time of Eisenhower. JFK was dead before the real intervention started.

Ron Paul is a fool, who would see America become an isolationist and weak nation again. I have no use for idiots like him who think if we bury our heads in the sand that our enemies will simply vanish. Also JFK was the one who sent advisers to Vietnam, while Eisenhower just sent foreign aid. JFK was the one who set in motion the events that lead up to America's role in the Vietnam War.

I think it has been time for us to leave for some time now. And it started to be time to leave the moment the war went off message.

Afgahanistan might not be a meaningless war for Americans (not to mention Paki's and Afghans), or indeed those people from other nations who are personally participating in it, but it pretty much is for many of the rest of us.

I'd like to see an immediate end to our involvement in it.

I think the 56 dead and 700 maimed during the london bombings would disagree with you. This war is not just an American war, it's a European war as well. They paint you with the you with the same brush as they do us. Besides if the Taliban do come back into power after we all leave and afghanistan becomes a haven for islamic terrorists again then what has all this been worth the past few years? We're damned if we stay and we're damned if we go. Edited August 11, 2010 by Big Mac

[T.S.C.Plage 0]

My country has hand in it too.

A hand I don't disagree with.

That's quite an interesing opinion considering what you posted so far.

America's allies joined the war to honour their NATO alliance. To show solidarity with our allies after the attacks of 9/11.

Maybe because of the alliance but I somehow have the feeling that this "Eather you're with us or against us" talk had also a big effect in it. Besides that I think my government thought we're some kind of responsible because some of the terrorists made station here before the attacks.

I generally have a problem how easy our entry was declared. I mean the USA weren't attacked by the military of a soverign country so in my opinion the "collective defence" part doesn't take effect here.

That was the meaning of this war for us when we engaged in it.

I don't think any of us particularly felt 9/11 was the fault of the Afghans in anyway, or that invading Afghanistan would make the world a safer place.

What you mention here are the worst reasons a country should go to war for even if it's a country which has such close relations like the UK has to the USA.

I think we all probably knew it would open us up to terrorism and drugs and all the rest of the things it has. I think we all knew there would be a great human cost for it for the people of Afghanistan and a much lesser one for ourselves.

And that's the point! We're more threatend now then we ever were before.

Since that time of course our politicians have attempted to rebrand that war many times. And the message we fought for has gotten lost. Which is a great pity and ultimately has undermined our reason for being there, with Americans' now routinely thinking that their allies are all there out of self intrest in the results of the conflict. Which is clealry the opposite of why we went.

The message was faul from the beginning but you're right that changing the reasons doesn't helped out to build the trust in to the government in the population of many, especially European countries.

I think it has been time for us to leave for some time now. And it started to be time to leave the moment the war went off message.

Afgahanistan might not be a meaningless war for Americans (not to mention Paki's and Afghans), or indeed those people from other nations who are personally participating in it, but it pretty much is for many of the rest of us.

I'd like to see an immediate end to our involvement in it.

I think you unwillingly mentioned a reason why soldiers are still willing to go there considering they already know it's not for what they've been told. It's money and besides that where can a man nowadays experience something like adventure and can become a "hero" (and even get payed for it).

The release of the Wikileaks information has done a great deal to bring this conflict and the price of it back to the front of all our minds. It's a serious anti war rallying point and will only serve to undermine our military effort there at home.

Which is good because these wars are unjust in many, many ways.

---------- Post added at 04:57 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:33 AM ----------

Ron Paul is a fool, who would see America become an isolationist and weak nation again. I have no use for idiots like him who think if we bury our heads in the sand that our enemies will simply vanish.

Why did I knew that you don't like him?

Also JFK was the one who sent advisers to Vietnam, while Eisenhower just sent foreign aid. JFK was the one who set in motion the events that lead up to America's role in the Vietnam War.

That's not true 14th SFOD was there in '56 already. Not to talk about the guys from the drug traficking agency.

I think the 56 dead and 700 maimed during the london bombings would disagree with you. This war is not just an American war, it's a European war as well. They paint you with the you with the same brush as they do us. Besides if the Taliban do come back into power after we all leave and afghanistan becomes a haven for islamic terrorists again then what has all this been worth the past few years? We're damned if we stay and we're damned if we go.

I know it maybe difficult to understand for you but if the UK wouldn't have been involved in these wars these bombings may would have never taken place. Since it's impossible to prove the opposite I stick with this opinion.

[Placebo 28]

Once upon a time this thread was about 90,000 leaked documents, then it became a bicker fest about US/UK politics and the war on terror in Afghanistan/Iraq which has existing threads, or if it doesn't then great because the bickering is boring.