Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


(3,557 posts)
118. A lot of my thoughts have already been mentioned above
Thu Dec 6, 2012, 05:02 AM
Dec 2012

Even though I fought in Iraq, I never for a second believed in Iraq or that it was justified on any level.

As far as wars go, I liked the way Libya went. The majority of Libyan citizens were eager for NATO involvement (as was most of the Arab world). It's amazing how different things turn out when you have the cooperation and support of the people you are "helping" and the rest of the world. Obama was able to accomplish in Libya in a matter of a couple of months and $896 million what bush wasn't able accomplish in Iraq with nearly a decade of war and $1 trillion. Syria, if chemical weapons were used, would be justified in my mind.

Having been through a war myself, I've developed very strong anti-war inclinations. However, as much as I hate war and I think it is criminal in nature, I'm not going to pretend that there aren't situations in which it is justified to deploy our troops. Interventions to stop the scope of violence from escalating like Bosnia/Kosovo and (although it never happened) Rwanda would have been justified. Those are/would be the sorts of military missions that would make me proud for how our troops have been used by the government.

However, my biggest sticking point with war is that the media needs to stop sterilizing it. They need to show the dead women and children and report all of the atrocities that happen. The media needs to show the flag draped coffins and the gory images of the mangled dead that is produced. If we can stomach making the decision to send troops into harms way, then we need to stomach the gory details of what the decision fully entails. I know that at some point I need to get over myself, but the personal pain and images that I endure as a result of my war time service needs to be on the conscious of every American who supported the war. Every American who supported the war should have a picture of a mangled child's dead body front and center in their living room. They should have to face that image constantly during every moment of their life and it should haunt them just as much as it haunts the Soldier who killed that child and the family that lost that child. After all, if it wasn't for the support for the war at home there wouldn't have been a war.

War is messed up and it brings the worst out of people who otherwise seem to be the best people we have. When we hear stories of Soldiers posing with bodies of Taliban fighters like they were hunting trophies or videos of Soldiers pissing on the dead surface, we shouldn't be shocked. It's not natural to kill anyone. Having been through that experience myself, it makes you feel like shit regardless of the circumstance or how "justified" you are told it is. And, as much as I like to think that I'm a good person, the honest truth is it only got easier to do it the more the war went on. As soon as you can find yourself easily committing the ultimate transgression what stops you from committing any others? I'm probably doing a great job getting myself the "DU piece of shit" moniker, but the only reason I didn't piss on the body of or pose with the body of a person I killed was because I didn't think of it - and that is the honest truth.

People just need to be aware of the full scope of what their support for a war entails. Again, I'm not saying that there isn't such a thing as a justified war, but all wars are nasty. Our media does humanity a huge disservice by not accurately reporting it. It's just like the average American eating meat. Since most of us are removed from the process that brings us meat, it is easy for us to eat. However, if we all had to go into our backyards and butcher our own meat, I bet many people wouldn't be able to stomach it. The same holds true to war. It's easy to support a war when you are thousands of miles away and you see the clean shrink-wrapped version presented to you by the media but it isn't easy to support a war when you actually have the blood on your hands and you are involved in it.

I predict a Libya redo. Multinational aircraft bombing till the guerilla rebels can take over NightWatcher Dec 2012 #1
I would shed no tears if Assad shared Gaddafi's fate... backscatter712 Dec 2012 #3
I can't see how any nation can stand and watch if he uses chem weapons... Cooley Hurd Dec 2012 #9
It has happened before ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #13
yes... the Kurds... Cooley Hurd Dec 2012 #16
His friends are not as powerful as Saddam's were. nt geek tragedy Dec 2012 #31
Look how long it took things in Libya and how hard it was to get things going ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #81
And he doesn't have the oil Saddam had. gateley Dec 2012 #101
Seems DUers have forgotten where those chemical weapons came from whatchamacallit Dec 2012 #74
What do you think is in the Syrian inventory ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #78
Only if they're Russian ex-pats living in the good old USA. KWorth Dec 2012 #82
Excellent point! Pterodactyl Apr 2013 #183
More like Russia, Iran, and North Korea hack89 Dec 2012 #127
My reply was to a post about the Kurds. whatchamacallit Dec 2012 #136
Perhaps we can reclaim some of that moral authority hack89 Dec 2012 #138
I'd like to think so whatchamacallit Dec 2012 #145
Sarin was invented in Germany in 1938, and can be made fairly easily. friendly_iconoclast Dec 2012 #179
You do know why countries get those weapons right? Dokkie Dec 2012 #91
True, but for the most part, the armed invaders are the Syrian people. KWorth Dec 2012 #94
Rubbish Dokkie Dec 2012 #99
Shock and Awe. I know this will not be popular but so what. Lochloosa Dec 2012 #2
There is a real problem with that... ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #14
I said it would not be popular, but which can we afford the least? Lochloosa Dec 2012 #22
It is a nasty calculus ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #48
Count me in.... AZ Mike Dec 2012 #63
Wonderful. It's really a lucky thing that Assad is the only person who lives in Syria eridani Dec 2012 #120
I think your question is valid, but there is a way to split the cost among civilized nations... Volaris Dec 2012 #83
The precedent is Lybia and this is messier ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #90
What happens when you bomb chemical weapons facilities? Comrade Grumpy Dec 2012 #149
The response should disable his ability to order such a thing ever again. nt msanthrope Dec 2012 #4
Use of chemical weapons on a civilian population can not and should not be tolerated Arcanetrance Dec 2012 #5
The targets won't be inside Syria. Most will be military bases and strategic installations in leveymg Dec 2012 #71
SEAL Team 6 PD Turk Dec 2012 #6
More than Seal teams will be needed. But I agree that Assad should be taken out and bluestate10 Dec 2012 #49
Uh, he hasn't used chemical weapons against anyone. Comrade Grumpy Dec 2012 #151
Im no big fan of intervention but in that case we have to take him out. Mr.Turnip Dec 2012 #7
If he does, two things jberryhill Dec 2012 #8
Massive international military response. Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #10
And then massive international aid to rebuild what was destroyed? ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #15
Targeting is everything. Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #27
Impossible to make it that clean ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #50
You're kidding me, right? Please tell me that you are kidding. Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #65
Tell me you are kidding me about an all American attack force ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #73
British aircraft carriers, French aircraft carriers, German air support, amphibious landing craft Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #86
I updated my prior post while you posted... ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #89
What would you say to framing this in such as way as to make it an extension of the Arab Spring, Volaris Dec 2012 #97
Putting aside the current obvious problems in those two countries Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #102
And who is going to 2naSalit Dec 2012 #114
Yes, because if there was ONE good thing that came from the invasion of Iraq... Volaris Dec 2012 #93
There won't be much of a country left after a massive int'l military response. leveymg Dec 2012 #110
The need for containment will outweigh all the other more desirable outcomes if Assad decides to Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #112
It's not just about one family or one general. It's a religious war. All the generals are Alawite, leveymg Dec 2012 #113
Someone in gold braid is going to crack. Someone is going to get shorted his share of the money, Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #116
That ending to this would be very Old Testament, wouldn't it? leveymg Dec 2012 #122
+1 AngryOldDem Dec 2012 #123
Slightly more than zero theKed Dec 2012 #125
No response. Dash87 Dec 2012 #11
Blame the rebels! Zorra Dec 2012 #12
What if he uses it on al Qaida operatives only? Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #17
no former-republican Dec 2012 #19
Why? Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #21
It's not realistic for one. Sarin gas does not go "oops"...can't kill that one...it's a civilian. Lochloosa Dec 2012 #25
Neither does a Hellfire or Tomahawk missile. Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #34
international law former-republican Dec 2012 #29
Lots of "international laws" the US ignores. Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #35
Oh for fuck's sake, you cannot be serious. geek tragedy Dec 2012 #30
High explosives is a chemical. Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #33
High explosives are not considered WMD's, and you are being deliberately obtuse. Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #41
Obtuse? Hardly. Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #54
You sound bored Kolesar Dec 2012 #44
Just showing the lack of logic. Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #57
Dishonest word games is all you Assadpologists have, I guess. nt geek tragedy Dec 2012 #105
Name calling? Really? Is this the playground or a discussion board? Comrade Grumpy Dec 2012 #152
How would you recommend responding someone seeking to justify geek tragedy Dec 2012 #153
So you got nothing. Again. Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #175
The gas can't be targeted. It kills or seriously injures anyone that get exposed to it. nt bluestate10 Dec 2012 #46
So does a high explosive. Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #58
Stop your dishonest trolling. Chemical weapons are banned under international law. geek tragedy Dec 2012 #108
what is dishonest about blast radius? ...don't care for Assad but that's no dishonest at all uponit7771 Dec 2012 #165
Dishonest is pretending there is no meaningful difference between geek tragedy Dec 2012 #167
LOL on the Godwin fail already Arctic Dave Dec 2012 #176
Turn Assad into a crater full of bone fragments. nt Comrade_McKenzie Dec 2012 #18
...and red mist. LuvLoogie Dec 2012 #23
Realistically: A harshly-worded memo from the U.N. nt Speck Tater Dec 2012 #20
I doubt it. I see an immediate attack with punishing consequences. nt bluestate10 Dec 2012 #42
Bomb the chemical weapons FarCenter Dec 2012 #24
If that is done, will the gasses be released? Renew Deal Dec 2012 #28
Probably, but it renders the weapons unusable. FarCenter Dec 2012 #32
Special, high heat producing bombs have to be used. The gas can survive regular bombs. nt bluestate10 Dec 2012 #39
But high heat bombs may not be completely effective if they miss; use nuclear bombs to be sure FarCenter Dec 2012 #59
Nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure! backscatter712 Dec 2012 #70
Thank you for the Ripley refernece. Volaris Dec 2012 #100
Who would've thought: a humanitarian use for napalm! n/t backscatter712 Dec 2012 #72
Aren't chemical weapons kept in two parts? backscatter712 Dec 2012 #64
Depends on the substance and weapon ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #75
There have been reports that they've already begun mixing the chemicals together Fozzledick Dec 2012 #76
Our forces are already in place with plans to destroy the weapons. Fozzledick Dec 2012 #26
If the weapons are deployed it will be too late by then former-republican Dec 2012 #40
True, but the alternative is to go in before they're deployed. Fozzledick Dec 2012 #53
Sounds like the plan could be commando attack by Seal Team 6... backscatter712 Dec 2012 #80
Oh, I think it would be much more than that. Fozzledick Dec 2012 #87
Very likely. n/t backscatter712 Dec 2012 #88
If Assad's forces use the gas against Turkey, that is a problem for Assad. bluestate10 Dec 2012 #36
How about we stay the fuck out of it... 99Forever Dec 2012 #37
we can't on this one former-republican Dec 2012 #43
Horsepucky. 99Forever Dec 2012 #47
I'm about as antiwar as you can get but if the U.S and the world can stop former-republican Dec 2012 #52
With our current military capabilities, it's a moral imperative to respond to this situation Hippo_Tron Dec 2012 #66
Assume much? 99Forever Dec 2012 #143
good people often do nothing in the face of tragedy LanternWaste Dec 2012 #150
not really no qazplm Dec 2012 #163
That's your opinion. 99Forever Dec 2012 #164
So we sit and watch 10s of thousands of civilians die? hack89 Dec 2012 #128
I love the smell of selective outrage... 99Forever Dec 2012 #129
No - I trust my President to make the correct moral decision. nt hack89 Dec 2012 #130
Nice sidestep. 99Forever Dec 2012 #134
You don't care about the Syrian civilians - I do. hack89 Dec 2012 #137
Make shit up much? 99Forever Dec 2012 #139
So we can't do both? hack89 Dec 2012 #142
Let me know when there is ... 99Forever Dec 2012 #144
so we only help others qazplm Dec 2012 #168
Not exactly. 99Forever Dec 2012 #170
so what level of assistance would qualify qazplm Dec 2012 #171
Who are you? 99Forever Dec 2012 #172
clearly qazplm Dec 2012 #174
10s of thousands are a small number compare with the Iran-Iraq Wars approximate million deaths FarCenter Dec 2012 #140
So because more were killed in the past hack89 Dec 2012 #141
BULL FUCKIN SHIT!! thx uponit7771 Dec 2012 #166
Yeah, just let them get slaughtered by a madman while we sit idly by. Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #51
There's lots of "brown-skinned" people dying .. 99Forever Dec 2012 #60
You picked it up and put it on yourself. Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #67
Bullshit. 99Forever Dec 2012 #126
Are you volunteering to go? JVS Dec 2012 #98
If they asked for my help, sure, why not? Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #103
What makes you think the Syrian rebels don't want your help now? JVS Dec 2012 #104
What makes you think that I am not helping them in some way already? Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #109
Weapons we gave to Rebels everywhere have been used against us Dash87 Dec 2012 #159
Absolutely. 99Forever Dec 2012 #161
NATO or UN military action Spider Jerusalem Dec 2012 #38
agreed, but that is the way it would have to be. We should not do it alone still_one Dec 2012 #55
and when the Russians veto UN action? (nt) AlexSatan Dec 2012 #154
If it comes to that they might not still_one Dec 2012 #162
Post removed Post removed Dec 2012 #45
I will tell you that President Obama would likely send him to his maker at that point. hrmjustin Dec 2012 #56
Something that doesn't cost us money. Pacafishmate Dec 2012 #61
Invade Iran, obviously. AnotherMcIntosh Dec 2012 #62
The Alawite launch at the end, when the invaders break through the gates. The targets will be the leveymg Dec 2012 #68
I agree Dokkie Dec 2012 #96
It's a near certainty that the missile force is already on a Deadman's Trigger leveymg Dec 2012 #106
We shouldn't arm the rebels. That always causes blowback. craigmatic Dec 2012 #69
Whatever we do, if history is any indication whatchamacallit Dec 2012 #77
Sorry... did war crimes become illegal again? MannyGoldstein Dec 2012 #79
Just the ones with high Q scores. allrevvedup Dec 2012 #84
That is because you lack nuance, Manny Fumesucker Dec 2012 #117
Whose response? MrSlayer Dec 2012 #85
And what should be the response if the rebels get their hands on some Sarin gas and use it? Prometheus Bound Dec 2012 #92
Nothing JVS Dec 2012 #95
Whatever has to be done. Firebrand Gary Dec 2012 #107
Fortunately, moondust Dec 2012 #111
It's as if death cults are using world governments to start another war Fire Walk With Me Dec 2012 #115
A lot of my thoughts have already been mentioned above Victor_c3 Dec 2012 #118
Thank you for your post and for your service. LongTomH Dec 2012 #156
Be like Israel - kill everyone you can and get praise for defending yourself The Straight Story Dec 2012 #119
First of all: Find out whether it is actually true or not. redgreenandblue Dec 2012 #121
I think Assad should, ideally, Dorian Gray Dec 2012 #124
If He starts killing people with chemical weapons Mangoman Dec 2012 #131
Cobalt Thorium G longship Dec 2012 #132
Um, unless he's releasing it in LA or NYC, it's not our business. Myrina Dec 2012 #133
If Assad sees no way out, he'll launch on Israel, at the very least. Ikonoklast Dec 2012 #173
Send France in to kick his ass slackmaster Dec 2012 #135
Whose response? Freddie Stubbs Dec 2012 #146
You mean there's a largely disliked world leader who oppresses his own people, hughee99 Dec 2012 #147
Michael ‏@_cypherpunks_ Truth provided by @DBCOOPA: #Syria is a proxy war. Fire Walk With Me Dec 2012 #148
Well, look what we did in Iraq, full scale invasion! quinnox Dec 2012 #155
I'll bet the rapture-ready crowd is having orgasms right now! LongTomH Dec 2012 #157
We always seem to have infinite money when it comes to war Ya Basta Dec 2012 #158
Breaking news: Gen Wesley Clark says an attack is not the best way to stop Syria's chemical weapons LongTomH Dec 2012 #160
well sure qazplm Dec 2012 #169
Like the last Three megalomaniacs we took out, send Soldiers... orpupilofnature57 Dec 2012 #177
UN peacekeepers in a police action, a hot-seat in a war-crimes tribunal... Chan790 Dec 2012 #178
If history is any indication, Mossad already has Assad in the crosshairs liberaltrucker Dec 2012 #180
Wowie.... woo me with science Dec 2012 #181
Post removed Post removed Apr 2013 #182
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If Assad uses Sarin gas, ...»Reply #118