Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

When Does it End?


stillcrazy
 Share

Recommended Posts

I foudn it quite interesting to read wat is written about Iraq. when we look at from an objective point of view it is really a political war of power and greed. When there is violence in Africa we did not find troops running off to stop this, perhaps it should be considered that because the country does not have oil.

There is also the fact to be considered that troops should move out of a country that is not thiers, putting myself in their shoes (just trying to) seeing that there are bombs laid in places childeren dying there are no homes and all this killing becomes a deeper web of destruction.

There are shrines and there are monumnents places which have been there and are part of the heritage. It seems like the West takes over and strips the country of what it has and its okay because the West is allowed and the media portrays that its okay for them , those in the East to die to be slaughtered. The question here is, is a life of a person living in the West more worth than that of in the East.

It is said that a person's upbringing affects the person, so what bout children whose parents have been shot at and they have died for no reason soldiers have so called accidently bombed their homes.

It is those around you, help you mould as a person and the violence is pushing these people to want to know how to defend themselves.

What would you do if it was your town demolished your children dying you family being shot at? your freedom being taken away. Pretenders stripping your country of all it has and all because of the political greed.

Dont only look at the reflection in the water look at the ripples of effect too. The portryal of the media is not always wat it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Stamford

    21

  • KayEl

    7

  • thebarman

    10

  • stillcrazy

    8

When there is violence in Africa we did not find troops running off to stop this, perhaps it should be considered that because the country does not have oil.

You know, i find it very funny that people still use this argument at all...it's very funny to me. We're still in there for the oil huh? wow, you're a bit late on that argument. If we were there for the oil wouldnt we have lower gas prices by now? if we were there for the oil, don't you think that gas in california wouldnt be up to almost 3 bucks a frickin gallon!? Come on,...get real, that argument was lost as soon as we won the war and gas prices stayed the same...it was a stupid environmentalist liberal anti-war argument from the begining and remains even more ignorant of you to continue to use it at this point.

And once again, yes, there is violence in africa, and parts of south america... why did we go into bosnia under clinton? see, a lot of people don't necessarily have a concept of what really happened in bosnia. Clinton said, "We gotta go in there! They're doing ethnic cleansing! We've gotta help them!" In reality, there were (and i dont mean to dumb it down or anything) only about 500-700 "mass killings" when clinton claimed thousands. So if we can bomb supply lines of food and water to cities (my aunt lives in the former yugoslavia and the bridge that gives them food for the market was bombed, it was never used for military purposes) then i think we should definitely stick it out and help these iraqis who we freed (they were way much more under oppression then the serbians and albanians in bosnia), now that we've freed them, we can't just run. And yes, there are some factions who don't understand what we're doing in helping them...but we've got to keep the course...help those that we can help, whatever ulterior motives bush or anyone had for going in there...we are there, we can help while we're there, they're free already, keep it going....i've talked to soldiers who have been and were going back to iraq and they said that they aren't against being there, they just dont want people in the US to forget they are there (ie Vietnam). No matter what your belief in the war or the current "occupation" or control of iraq...you've gotta support the troops for the fact that they have served their country whether they believed in the cause or not, they went cause they were told to go and did a hell of a job. Any of those who have doubts in supporting your troops ("they're just killing people and the hitmen for bush's evil ways"), watch 'We Were Soldiers,' came out last year, its on dvd now...by mel gibson...you'll never abandon support of your troops after a movie like that. thumbsup.gifthumbsup.gifthumbsup.gifthumbsup.gifthumbsup.gifthumbsup.gifthumbsup.gifthumbsup.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with fearfulone on all points, except for the comment about "We were soldiers".

firstly, because it didn't come out last year it came out the year before;

and secondly and more importantly anyone who watched that film without any knowledge of the Vietnam war would come out thinking the Americans won hands down no trouble at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reality, there were (and i dont mean to dumb it down or anything) only about 500-700 "mass killings" when clinton claimed thousands.

Although this is off-topic I had to comment on your figures, which are way off.

There WERE thousands killed in Bosina, Croatia and in Kosovo.

It is estimated that 20,000 persons are still missing in Bosnia-Herzegovina alone.

I was proud of the fact that the UK was one of the first to send its troops in to put a stop to the ethnic cleansing.

According to official estimates, some 7,500 boys and men 'disappeared' after the UN 'safe area' of Srebrenica fell to the Bosnian Serb Army on 11 July 1995.

These are two of many 'facts' that counter your claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and secondly and more importantly anyone who watched that film without any knowledge of the Vietnam war would come out thinking the Americans won hands down no trouble at all.

I do hope you are not implying that Mel Gibson would in any way be involved in an historically inaccurate film, thebarman?

You only have to see 'Braveheart' and 'The Patriot' to see that he devotes a lot of time to making sure he gets all the facts right before he makes these movies.

Shame on you whistling2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You only have to see 'Braveheart' and 'The Patriot' to see that he devotes a lot of time to making sure he gets all the facts right before he makes these movies.

Shame on you whistling2.gif

Yes you're right, I hereby formally apologise if I in any way offended Mr Gibson or any of his associates blink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL fearfulone im amazed that you would use a movie directed by mel gibson of all people to describe a historical event.

In the run up to and during world war 2 germans were shown movies on just how "subhuman" the jewish people were , the germans left the cinema beleiving this to be the truth, it was called propoganda , remind you of something????

BTW in 1939 WW2 broke out, the vast vast majority of germans turned a blind eye to what was going on as they just "supported the troops" blindly.

If WW2 taught us something then it was that we must always question our leaders and never just alow them to get on with somnething. If someone in a DEMOCRATIC country believes that their country is committing a criminal act by going to war or invaing another then it is their DEMOCRATIC right to protest.

Look how history has judged the germans for not speaking out. Whos to say it wont happen again? Look at vietnam for another example of utter folly.

BTW just because you dont support your governments actions does not mean you are a traitor.

Your comments on the former yugoslavia are both wildly innacurate as well as offensive.

One to say there were "only 500-700 mass killings" is a disgrace , so this this is an acceptable number of innocent people to die then? At what point are people intitled to get help??????????? what kind of attitude is that ?

Two there were thousands killed , read stamfords thumbsup.gif far more accurate statistics and you will maybe understand.

Three the fact you've included the serbians in your comments as being one of the populations that were being massacred just goes to show your lack of understanding on the subject. It was the serbians who were carrying out the atrocitys under the leadership of Slobodan Milosevic.

I hope you now have a better understanding of that subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes you're right, I hereby formally apologise if I in any way offended Mr Gibson or any of his associates

laugh.gifrolleyes.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my aunt lives in the former yugoslavia and the bridge that gives them food for the market was bombed

I especially loved this quote.

Wow, whilst THOUSANDS were being masacred a bridge was blown up!! I smell a war crime, don't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and secondly and more importantly anyone who watched that film without any knowledge of the Vietnam war would come out thinking the Americans won hands down no trouble at all.

First off...i believe the movie did show that the Americans did NOT win hands down no trouble...the vietnamese commander even says at the end..."They will think they won this battle. no one won this battle. This will now become an american war, but the outcome will be the same, more deaths, more killing." Shows that Americans DID NOT win hands down.

LOL fearfulone im amazed that you would use a movie directed by mel gibson of all people to describe a historical event.

"Mr." Gibson did not direct this film. Mel was simply playing the commander in the battle...at this movie WAS historically correct as to the fact that the actual commander and the actual journalist that were really there and fought in this battle were present on the set each day to make sure that they were keeping true to the story of the battle. Makes me doubt whether youve seen this movie or any article or film footage about it.

I was not making a case for or against the vietnamese conflict...i was simply stating....anyone who would like to see how hard our troops fight when they are not even sure why they're there...watch the movie and you'll know.

Although this is off-topic I had to comment on your figures, which are way off.

There WERE thousands killed in Bosina, Croatia and in Kosovo.

It is estimated that 20,000 persons are still missing in Bosnia-Herzegovina alone.

Do you have any sources for this? I may be wrong, and will not be ashamed to admit it...i may have a biased as well because my aunt, cousins, uncle, were all in danger...so i suppose i may have biased...but do you have sources?

And to close...i love how people ridicule...suffering of others...i in no way tried to say "well you see, my aunt's supply bridge to the market was blown up, it was a horrible thing...those people who were being ethnically cleansed are such jerks for expecting to be saved by any other troops or countries." i simply said, my Aunt's bridge was bombed, and im not trying to minimize the sufferings of those being killed, but to my knowledge, the figures were not as high as originally given for reason to the bosnia campaign. And i apologize for my ignorance of the campaign...maybe i have been lied to and mis-informed.... dontgetit.gif

Edited by fearfulone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to official estimates, some 7,500 boys and men 'disappeared' after the UN 'safe area' of Srebrenica fell to the Bosnian Serb Army on 11 July 1995.

Fearfulone, my above quote is from one incident alone, when Dutch UN Peace Keeping Troops allowed the men and boys of Srebrenica to be seperated from the rest of their families by Serb Military.

These men and boys were then led away and masacred; there was a full investigation into the event, but, as I stated this is just one event of many.

And to close...i love how people ridicule...suffering of others

I was not ridiculing her suffering; my point was that when you consider what the Serbs were doing at the time, the loss of a bridge is hardly a human rights violation.

I am sure many Serbs were horrified by the atrocoties commited in their name, however, they were commited and on a far larger scale than you maintain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.