Whose freedoms?

The idea is and has always been that we fight our wars on the enemies land instead of having to fight it at home and destroying our infrastructure. By tying up the enemies resources away from our homeland they are limited in being able to attack us here.
While I do believe that Afghanistan is proper to have went there, although I am not totally satisfied as to how it was and is being handled I feel that Iraq was totally unnecessary because of overzealousness, hot headedness, stubornness of George Bush along with very poor intelligence, but if we are going to fight it is best not done on our home front.

 

Yes, in a manner of speaking. Afghanistan harbored the terrorist cells and training grounds (as did Iraq -- remember the first days of the war when we found 747 fuselage and training sites?) that DIRECTLY attacked America.

We are justified, and so says the world, who has joined in the effort, even if not at our level. So too has said the United Nations.

The argument you make is an old (and weak) liberal argument. We are not a war-mongering people, nor did we ASK to be attacked (liberal arguments aside) on our home soil. Terrorist groups, sponsored by states and nations did that work TO us. Retribution is required lest they continue their efforts.

A fear of many liberals is that our efforts over seas incites more violence. That is a blatant falsehood. The violence was already incited long before we responded, and it was our lack of response that fomented further violence, even the attacks on the World Trade Center that was the tipping point for our current action. What is there about, "Muslims hate America and wish to destroy it" that liberals fail to understand? Additionally, what is it about Islam seeks to subjugate the entire world under its system of Sharia Law, tariff and tax, that liberals fail to understand. Both are realities, exercised throughout the history of Islam, whenever the people of Islam had the strength to pull it off. The only reason they did not do so continually was that they were beat down by acts of war time and time again.

Oh, and one further point that liberals in America and abroad fail to realize about Islam -- Islam recognizes "people of the book." It is pure secularist and atheists that they have problems with. America is identified now with secularism and atheism, in large part BECAUSE of the actions of godless liberals!

 

For clarification: We are not at war "with" Afghanistan. We are at war "in" Afghanistan. The distinction must be made. We are working with the Afghan government and military, not fighting them. We don't necessarily agree with them about certain (many?) things; but we are not actively engaged in any battles with them.

To answer the opening post: I would love to have the freedom to fly without worries. I would love to have the freedom to go through an airport without TSA groping me. I would love to have the freedom to go to bed at night not having to worry if terrorists have crossed our country's boundaries and are planning on detonating a "dirty nuke" or truck full of fertilizer, killing hundreds (if not thousands) of people--including those I might know and love.

Some might argue that these are not freedoms that I'm describing; when you consider the security measures that have been enacted to try to minimize such fears, you have to admit that our freedoms have been eroded.

Our right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; these are the freedoms that the terrorists have attempted to take away or limit, and these are the freedoms that I and my military brethren fight for.

Just my two cents. We can now return to regular programming.

 

Good deal, and thank you for your service!

I wrote what I wrote, not considering that YOU were the liberal, but rather that liberals are the ones behind that sort of thinking. More so, the liberals, with or without express understanding of the fact, are being driven by world forces originating with a Marxist worldview.

I highly recommend that one goes to the Communist Party USA website and start doing some reading about their pet programs, intentions, and political efforts. It can be a great learning experience, and can also change one's worldview, especially as regards reading the daily paper and watching the news on television. The way the avowed Marxists crow about the current administration's efforts to further unions, destroy our military, encourage rampant socialism and entitlements, and further the cause of extremist groups in all segments of the populace is very instructional, as is their endorsement of certain political candidates (they no longer feel the need to run their own candidate for president, for instance).

 

They are NOT defending our freedoms.

 

One question:

What do you think would have happened to al qaeda if we had not gone to war in Afghanistan? After all, al qaeda has never been a real threat to our "freedom", just our lives. And relatively few of those.

 

No they are not defending our freedoms over there. They're being used as canon fodder for the greater good of the Anglo American banktsers and corporitos who support their lavish lifestyles by murdering over there and stealing over here.

 

Perhaps a bit of discussion concerning military strategy is in order before we get so far off base as to become traitors to our own nation...

It might be said with some reasonable expectation of agreement that Iran is actually the issue in the Middle East. They are the nation guilty of financing and exporting most of the terroristic supplies and expertise. Though not acting alone, Iran has been the most hostile nation in regard to Israel and the USA.

With that thought in mind, we can then examine a map of the Middle East to see if there is some discernible military strategy that involves Iran that might go beyond the liberal headlines on the front page of our daily newspapers.



In the map above, we note that problematic Iran is bordered on the north by former Soviet controlled nations, places where, presumably, we might have difficulty with troop access, re-supply, etc. We find the south of Iran bordered by the waters of the Persian Gulf, and we understand that Iran is well armed with warships in that area. One might also expect heavily mined waters around the coastline, especially in the case of a nation-state that is as pro-actively engaged in making war-talk against Western nations (ala Hitler and Nazi Germany pre-WWII). To the east we find Iraq, and to the west, we find Pakistan (rather unusable for military objectives) and Afghanistan.

Now, we consider the fact that we have been active in both Iraq and Afghanistan, for what has been presented to the American people as a "waste of our time, money, and the lives of our young soldiers, men and women..." And, also as a war that is not "for our freedom." We might have cause to agree with those sentiments, save that what we may have actually accomplished is to establish beachheads and supply routes to both the east and west side of Iran. Once that is factored in, a more clear picture emerges for why we are fighting in nations that appear on the surface as being non-harmful to the USA (or Israel, our ally).

Not only have we opened critical supply and troop engagement corridors with our actions on both borders of Iran, we have also halted Iran's free ability to transport across land to other bothersome Middle Eastern nations such as Syria, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia.

I believe that the troops engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan ARE fighting for our freedoms, but not for the reasons offered commonly to the public. There is a larger game at stake in our efforts, and experts of the highest order in military strategy have done a masterful job of positioning America in a place where we can insure that a rogue nation such as Iran can be incapacitated and rendered null and void at a moment's notice, should cause arise.

 

Yeah I got a map too. This one comes with instructions. And references.

CLICK HERE

You got references? And I believe your map may be against board rules.

 

Jesse Richard seems to have an opinion on this issue.

Let’s make one thing crystal clear, no member of the US military contributes in any way whatsoever to protecting the freedoms of the American people. As a matter of fact, they are more likely to turn their weapons on you than they are to defend your Constitutional rights.

< snip >

Unfortunately, the majority of Americans have neither the intellectual curiosity to actually learn about historical events nor the intelligence to actually think about claims made by their leaders or pop-journalism-gate keeping-icons.

For example: Americans have swallowed whole the concept of our troops “protecting our freedom” without ever once asking “how, how does killing foreigners in Iraq or Afghanistan protect our freedom?” Maybe if they asked that question just once and really waited for an answer, a real answer that actually really made sense to them, they would realize there is no answer – because troops killing foreigners have no impact on the freedoms of the American people, and they never will.

Here is another question Americans have not asked, “How can an Iraqi, Pakistani, Afghan or Islamic fundamentalist in other nations take away our freedom?” The answer to this question is of course…by becoming a member of the US Congress.

It is sad that I will be lambasted for speaking the truth about this sensitive subject, but someone has to. The saddest truth however, is that the members of the US military serve today with no honor. They are dangerous and a threat to all free people, here and abroad. In plain terms - they volunteer to kill at the behest of people who have lied to them for generations about why they are being sent to kill. Generations of lies be dammed, they still follow orders, and kill, without question. I repeat – as a human being I see no honor in this.

While it is true that the existence of our military acts to deter nations from invading our shores, credit really should go more to our nuclear arsenal and military technology than to National Guardsman who find themselves shooting at Iraqis in their own homeland. I don’t think that it is a deterrent to have private American “security firms” torture, for fun, the “enemies” who are in their own country, in their own neighborhoods, near their own families, and who dare to fight the American military personnel who obliterated their homes, killed their brothers, sisters, children, mothers and fathers, and occupy their soil. The nerve of them!

In the meantime, your freedoms and protections are being systematically eliminated while government protected rights for corporations are expanding beyond your wildest dreams. If this nation had a legitimate mainstream news media you would know this and you would probably take to the streets and revolt because you would realize what some of us already know, your rights, health and wealth have been under assault while you are distracted by bogey men in foreign nations who are supposedly going to take your freedom away!!!

So how free are you and who exactly are the terrorists. Here is how free you are in your own home in your own country. These are just a few examples – off the top of my head. – there are more…but to start…

CONTINUE . . .

Now that's an opinion! Most of you probably won't like it because it doesn't follow along with glfredrick's slant on the official cover story but unlike glfredrick's slightly altered version of the "big lie" Richard's opinion is actually based on facts and history instead of corporate propaganda.

People need to understand that our government is basically a middleman for global banks and corporations. It does not represent "we the people" at all.

 

>The idea is and has always been that we fight our wars on the enemies land instead of having to fight it at home and destroying our infrastructure.

How come this Godly principle only applies to 3rd world nations we can walk over and push their faces into the dirt? I thought China and Russia were the important enemies?

 

Do you see the Chinese or the Russians launching attacks on US soil? Perhaps when they do, you'll see your taxpayer-funded men and women visiting those countries....

 

I think you have a legitimate argument to a point. There is no doubt that we have become a sort of bully to those who are much weaker then we are and have started to use military might to back up our bullish attitude. There is no doubt that we should not have become engaged in Iraq, and Libya. However Afghanistan is a different matter and we belong there, but we are dropping the ball by not getting the job done.
Also to your point about Russia and China. We know that if we did with them that which we do with smaller countries (a bully mentality) the price is way more then we want to pay, but you can be sure we would certainly go there if attacked, but I do agree you have a point at least in part.

 

>Do you see the Chinese or the Russians launching attacks on US soil?

I see China and Russia launching attacks through other agencies exactly the same as the the Saudis and other oil nations do.

Defense policy should be to defend the US and let Asia & Africa fight their own tribal areas. Europe can handle their own problems.

Bring home ALL the troops. The Navy's job is to protect our coasts and the sea lanes. The Border Patrol's job is to patrol the border. Assign sufficient military personnel to both those agencies.

Set up ports of entry on off shore US Islands and inspect every container and shipment. The stuff can be loaded into US bottoms.

 

Have you actually considered the impact to trade and global economy that you're proposing?

 

Isolationism does not work. I agree that our current policy is flawed, but so is the one you are proposing.