Tech Support Guy banner
  • Please post in our Community Feedback thread for help with the new forum software! If you are having trouble logging in, please Contact Us for assistance.
1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,087 Posts
ahahahhaa
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,469 Posts
Mulder...Here is the actual speech...It is a shame that the America of 2001 doesn't have the balls of the America of 1944...

Patton Speaks To The Troops - England, May 31, 1944

"Now I want you to remember that no ******* ever won a war by dying for his country. You won it by making the other poor dumb ******* die for his country. Men, all this stuff you've heard about America not wanting to fight, wanting to stay out of the war, is a lot of horse dung. Americans traditionally love to fight. ALL REAL Americans, love the sting of battle. When you were kids, you all admired the champion marble shooter, the fastest runner, the big league ball players, the toughest boxers . . . Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in Hell for a man who lost and laughed. That's why Americans have never lost and will never lose a war. Because the very thought of losing is hateful to Americans. Now, an army is a team. It lives, eats, sleeps, fights as a team. This individuality stuff is a bunch of crap. The bilious *******s who wrote that stuff about individuality for the Saturday Evening Post, don't know anything more about real battle than they do about fornicating. Now we have the finest food and equipment, the best spirit, and the best men in the world. You know . . . My God, I actually pity those poor *******s we're going up against. My God, I do. We're not just going to shoot the *******s, we're going to cut out their living guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks. We're going to murder those lousy Hun *******s by the bushel. Now some of you boys, I know, are wondering whether or not you'll chicken out under fire. Don't worry about it. I can assure you that you'll all do your duty. The Nazis are the enemy. Wade into them. Spill their blood, shoot them in the belly. When you put your hand into a bunch of goo, that a moment before was your best friends face, you'll know what to do. Now there's another thing I want you to remember. I don't want to get any messages saying that we are holding our position. We're not holding anything, we'll let the Hun do that. We are advancing constantly, and we're not interested in holding onto anything except the enemy. We're going to hold onto him by the nose, and we're going to kick him in the ***. We're going to kick the hell out of him all the time, and we're going to go through him like crap through a goose. Now, there's one thing that you men will be able to say when you get back home, and you may thank God for it. Thirty years from now when you're sitting around your fireside with your grandson on your knee, and he asks you, "What did you do in the great World War Two?" You won't have to say, "Well, I shoveled **** in Louisiana." Alright now, you sons of *****es, you know how I feel. Oh! . . . I will be proud to lead you wonderful guys into battle anytime, anywhere. That's all."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51,023 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
It is a shame that the America of 2001 doesn't have the balls of the America of 1944...
I'm curious why you say that? I see everyday brave Americans heading over to the middle east to wage war on the Taliban. America now is waging war. I don't think that is fair to say these brave people are any less brave than those in 1944.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,469 Posts
Mulder...When & If...you guys ever get done discussing the USS Liberty.....go HERE and read my post, What Is Going Here?.....
Perhaps your wisdom & intuition will help you to decipher the cognition of what I am saying.....& I am not speaking of the obvious literal words you refer to...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51,023 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
I understand exactly what you are saying--that we should be doing more than we are, but what is that? What did we do in World War II that we are not now doing. You forget that for several years the war in Europe raged and the US endured hostilities against it without entering the war--not until Pearl Harbor. There were the very same criticisms levied back then that the US should have done more earlier and got involved in the war much earlier. This is also very true about World War I, which we stayed out for a long time despite open hostilities. So my point is I don't think we are acting any differently now then we did then.

But this is also a different time period with different considerations. We have world support for the current war with the Taliban and absent sending in ground troops (which will come soon), I don't know what esle we could be doing. Once we rid the world of those insane people, we will continue with an effort to attack terrorism wherever it exists, but first things first.

What more do you think we should be doing? Anyone else?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,469 Posts
Mulder....With all due respect....I am not Kirkland.....or DN......

As Quoted By Mulder....I understand exactly what you are saying... You forget that for several years the war in Europe raged and the US endured hostilities against it without entering the war--not until Pearl Harbor. . So my point is I don't think we are acting any differently now then we did then.

But this is also a different time period with different considerations. We have world support for the current war with the Taliban and absent sending in ground troops (which will come soon)...
Please don't disappoint me and tell me what I have forgotten....that is an assumption....coming from a Juris Doctorate of all people.....
I don't think your point about us acting any differently now then we did in 1944 is something you want to boast about Mulder....
There is very little similarity between Pearl Harbor & the Events Of September 11, 2001!
It was not a military target attacked in 2001...& although I can't technically argue the "US Soil" issue...I will at least argue that it was the first time a major US City was attacked on the Mainland.

I agree with you that this is a different time with different considerations.......SEVERE CONDIDERATIONS.....

You see Mulder.....you want to play a game with me....you want to see how much I will say....how far I will go....so then you can give me one of your labels....Right Wing, Left Wing, Conservative....whatever.....and then you feel you have won, which of course....we both know, you must win....this is your "place"...so those are the "unspoken rules"... Please feel free to correct me whenever or wherever or however I might be in error...

We have "World Support" you say....lets really examine this "World Support"....I see the United Kingdom...this I agree with...a handful of other European Countries that must ally themselves with us for many reasons......Do you think when Bush met with most of the European Countries he "asked" or he "told" them what was expected of them?
As for the Middle Eastern Countries......they "harbor, shelter & feed" these terrorists.....Do these words sound familiar? I think I heard them in a speech by a president! Yet you believe & would willingly trust these people??
China.....now thats a good one......after knocking one of our Military Aircraft from the skies & holding its crew hostage.....I sure want to sleep with them!
Russia will do anything to get out of its economic & political disasters it is in....yet why does it still favor Cold War Nuclear Treaties....there must be a valid explanation for this?

I know I left out many countries in this "World Support"...but I am sure you will fill me in.

I know it was just an error you made regarding the ground troops.....they already are there!

As Quoted By Mulder....What more do you think we should be doing?
Mulder....my friend....you didn't really think I would give you that much......did you??? :cool:

I want a clean, long debate on THAT ISSUE!!!

Just remember my friend(s)....There are "Lives In The Balance".....and this time it is yours and mine....not some poor, ignorant, starving soul living in our TV screens...This time it is not "News Reels" in your local Cinema...

You tell me Mulder......What more do you think we should be doing?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,469 Posts
DNeurococo...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,741 Posts
Originally posted by DNeurococo
How about, instead of saying " Well, I shoveled **** in Louisiana." He says, "Well, I was in the Texas Air National Guard"? :)
Much better than saying "I was a Rhodes
scholar and didn't inhale"....:rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,469 Posts
"Taliban Philosophy Vs. US Philosophy"....continued....

From a religious perspective, the Shahada,(martyr) is "the greatest hope in this world" for a Muslim. The martyr earns eternal glory by "dying for the sake of Allah," and is rewarded with eternal life next to his Lord, in accordance with the Koranic verse that opens each installment of the newspaper biographies: "Do not consider those who are slain in the cause of Allah, as dead. Indeed, they are living by their Lord." This statement underpins the martyr's world view: "strive for death and you will receive life."

The Taliban, described the seven rewards the Martyr earns according to Islamic tradition: "From the moment the first drop of his blood is spilled [by the enemy, the martyr] does not feel the pains of the injury and is absolved of all his [bad] deeds; he sees his seat in Paradise; he is saved from the torture of the grave; he is saved from the fear of Day of Judgment; he marries [seventy beautiful] black-eyed [women]; he is an advocate for seventy of his relatives [to reach paradise]; and he earns the Crown of Glory, whose precious stone is better than all this world and everything in it."

The operations of the martyrs are described as noble, heroic deeds carried out against not only soldiers but also against innocent civilians: women, children and the elderly. The Taliban stresses that these were legitimate operations and not terrorism: "We will continue with our resistance for the sake of freedom. We are not terrorists, but we have to respond with force, in order to frighten the enemies of Allah and our enemies - the plunderers of our land and rights. We have love in our hearts towards mankind that is enough to turn the land into a scene of love, peace and justice."

In western eyes, an individual who chooses to commit martyrdom, in order to kill others, is considered a deranged, irrational fanatic. By viewing it in this way analysts underestimate the calculated ideological nature and social framework in which this phenomenon takes place. As this review demonstrates, the Taliban individuals who choose to commit martyrdom adhere to a rigid, highly developed ideological structure whose irrationality lies in its original assumptions. Hence, the choice to commit martyrdom is not motivated by poverty or mental desperation. Rather, it is an act with deep ideological motivations. Moreover, there exists a social and religious framework which, in laying the foundations for a climate of martyrdom, continures to produce an ongoing supply of future suicide bombers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51,023 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
JewisHeritage.

You're way too sensitive and you're reading too much into my post. I simply posited a position that I thought the US was doing exactly what they should at this point in response to you're position that it should being doing more but without saying what your position is. My position is stated while yours is unknown. If that's the way you want it fine, but I really don't have any alterior motives here other than voicing my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,469 Posts
Mulder..

As Quoted By Mulder.....BTW JH--you and I agree that Hussein and Arafat should be removed from power--all in good time, my friend, all in good time!
Yes, we are HARMONIOUS on this issue.....But SOONER is PREFERABLE than LATER!!

As Quoted By Mulder.....in response to you're position that it should being doing more but without saying what your position is.
There must be "Clouds In Your Coffee".....I will work on a better presentation for you in answering/replying to your/this inquiry!..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,469 Posts
Hi Mulder :)
I see no one touched my comments on the Jihad!
It was part of the answer to your question, "What more do you think we should be doing?"
So I went back to the think tank ... to attempt to make it very simple...

Previous terroristic attacks against Americans, which paled in comparison with September 11ths horrors but were terrible nonetheless, have drawn responses from the United States that are clearly inadequate in the face of the latest tragedies.

U. S. reaction to terrorism in recent years has tended to consist either of selective missile attacks against terrorists' camps or efforts to track down and arrest perpetrators.

Even if taken together, such retaliation would be insufficient in the aftermath of the attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. These crimes killed thousands of Americans and represented aggression on the soil of the United States. As officials from President Bush on down have stated correctly, they were acts of war.

What complicates this war, of course, is that we do not know yet precisely who ALL the enemy is.

Meanwhile, it should be possible to agree on what the nation's goal in this war will be: destruction of the terrorist network that carried out these murders, military action against any regime that aided the attacks on America, and establishing with menacing clarity that harboring terrorists will forevermore carry truly dire consequences.

Federal and local police search for specific individuals, some of whom may be suspects. But in this case, prosecution of these people is secondary to learning about the big picture: the identity of their terrorist organization and the governments that aided them.

In addition, American and Israeli intelligence already know much about Middle Eastern terrorism, which appears to have spawned September 11ths terror. We do not start from scratch.

Similarly, the list of Middle Eastern governments that host terrorists is a familiar rogues' gallery: Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan and elements of the Palestinian Authority. None of these regimes should feel that their longevity is assured.

There will be inevitable calls, at home and abroad, for restraint, arguing that violence cannot deter violence. Such instincts are noble but misplaced. We are not dealing with people who understand the power of the message of peace.

Also, we will hear that Middle Eastern terrorism cannot be curtailed without a peace settlement between Israel and Palestinians. But terrorists are not engaged in a quest for peace; they draw their energy from bloodshed and death. They will, in fact, resist peace.

No resolution to the coming struggle can guarantee absolute safety from a small cell of loners. But that is not a description that fits most terrorists, particularly the ones who struck September 11th. They require safe havens, money, supplies, training and communications. Those needs are generally met by friendly governments.

It is this most evil of symbiotic relationships that America must destroy, with whatever level of ferocity is required. <----------

I hope I have now answered your question.

I am MOST OPEN to CROSS EXAMINATION! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
912 Posts
There will be inevitable calls, at home and abroad, for restraint, arguing that violence cannot deter violence. Such instincts are noble but misplaced. We are not dealing with people who understand the power of the message of peace.
I have just read this complete thread for the second time. (Mulder, you changed the opening question so that poor sods like me miles from a telephone exchange have to wait ages for a download!)

While I agree with the statement above from JewisHeritage, and I am in no way looking to hand olive branches to murderers, I cannot help but feel that whatever is accomplished against the terrorist threat - restraint or caution; strategic 'control' or annihilation - there can never be an end.

Surely we might just as well try to empty a lake with a spade and a sieve?

Both sides in the conflict believe their cause is just. Both will state that their god is on their side. 'Ad majorem Dei gloriam'? - or man?

Both are right - in their own view. And there will always be other sides.

The sad truth is that God, in whatever form he or she takes, is palpably not on anyones side. Only man takes sides, as he has done down the ages and will surely continue to do ad infinitum.

Mulder, your opening gambit compares (contrasts?) 9/11 with 1939/45. Surely we can go back further than that. The Crusades? The campaigns of Alexander The Great? Choose your own favorite from all time. Always we will find that the sum of the arguments for and against this cause or that will essentially be the same, sometimes dressed up in the guise of religion, sometimes as 'politically expedient', sometimes as pure greed or covetousness (or some such):-

"I/we are right. You/they are wrong."

But it seems man is doomed to play this game, and I, like so many others who remain aghast after this brutal attack, am also barking for the game to go on.
This game which has no rules, reason or rhyme.

And in the end, if there ever is an end, there will only be one victor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,054 Posts
"I have just read this complete thread for the second time. (Mulder, you changed the opening question so that poor sods like me miles from a telephone exchange have to wait ages for a download!)"

LOL, from one duck to another........"I feel your pain", but dont worry I can feel page 2 starting anytime now.

DS
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,469 Posts
DNeurococo...With all the material on this THREAD.....I really must ask you....

IS THAT THE BEST YOU CAN COME BACK WITH????

MULDER...HAVE YOU TOO.....NOTHING TO ADD TO THIS THREAD??? or just too busy talking about gif signatures??
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top