Army deserters. Do we shoot them or promote them?

[Jenga]

Bergdahl Rescued.

Let's set something straight so I can point out how horribly the U.S. Congress is running the military right now.

Bergdahl is an American soldier that has been in Taliban custody for the last five years. He ended up in Taliban custody because he purposely left his post in the back of an Afghan contractor truck to smoke hashish and discuss how ashamed he was of American actions against the Middle East. He was then captured and held hostage. Without a single bruise or sign of starvation he openly railed against the U.S. Military and their presence in Afghanistan. As soon as he was reported missing ALL air assets in Afghanistan were diverted to helping find this piece of human stool costing other soldiers their lives as well as the lives of several soldiers sent to look for him on the ground. He was then promoted to the rank of Sergeant while he was captured automatically without having to go to a company, battalion, or promotion board, let alone "grind" for points like the rest of us.

The U.S. Government decided to trade 4 known terrorists for this individual. Four known terrorists that have taken American lives. To get back what? A deserter. A shitbag. The living embodiment of what todays Army strives to weed out. Why? Because we don't leave anyone behind. The fact that we actually negotiated with terrorists for this living piece of human fecal material is a testament to how for our congress has fallen in its drive to gain votes through the ignorance of voters.

This is a perfect example of how the U.S. Congress has driven the modern military into the ground. By rewarding deserters with a sob story and shitting on heroes that were assigned to classified missions. There is no more integrity or loyalty in the field anymore. Only votes.

I want to vomit right now. Maybe its because the knee jerk reaction to this news was to get filthy drunk but I really can't stand the thought of working for these people anymore if they reward someone who by all rights should be standing in front of a firing squad right now while they steal our hard earned benefits.

I'm glad I'm not reenlisting. I'm done with this bullshit.

So if it was you , should we shoot you too?

These soldiers get to see their family's again , so i don't think we should shoot them.

 

[Aim64C]

*Cringes*

I wasn't aware of the fact people are still dumb enough to blame mohammedans.

Then you really shouldn't care.

You believe the average person is so easily corrupted into killing their own countrymen, or being silent about it. Then the world isn't worth being worried over.

Believe it or not, there are people out there who do wish to attack the U.S. There are people who do wish to attack other countries. The reason it doesn't happen more often is because very few actually put together a plan to try it.

The motto of government is "Let no good tragedy go to waste."

Or are you going to suggest that HAARP was used to direct Hurricanes into the coast to try and advance the global warming agenda that the Federal Reserve is even jumping behind, now?

The same lines of logic used to argue "9/11 was an inside job" would lead one to believe hurricane strikes are an inside job. After all - they turn right around and say: "This is why we must act against climate change and a sustainable future - buy our overpriced shit that doesn't work."

9/11 was the same way. In the wake of any event like this, the agencies went into 'panic' and CYA mode while the politicians went into "how can we use this to increase our power" mode.

Of course, it also doesn't help that our foreign policy has been a schizophrenic mess. The philosophy for many years was: "the enemy of our enemy is our friend - support and supply him." Then we cut ties and/or publicly assail them once they overthrow our 'enemy.'

So I understand how you could be confused - but it doesn't change the fact that you're confused. Not that you are going to trust me.

There is, however, something you need to be familiar with called Hanlon's Razor:

You must be registered for see links

Basically, you are attributing to malice what is most adequately explained through sheer stupidity. This is the government we are talking about.

[video=youtube;T_AAMa_X2dM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_AAMa_X2dM&list=PLDCB90E4125F64774[/video]

 

[Senju Bean]

It's not that. We have to live to a certain code. This man broke it. And was rewarded for it. Not only that he set us back and got people killed. Twelve people died trying to find this man. Why? He chose to abandon his post. He chose to go hang out with possible terrorists. Then he gets captured and what happens? He becomes a media tool for senators to gain votes.

Twelve people died trying to find him. Four men who took American lives went free so he could come back to a country he betrayed.

How am I supposed to tolerate that?

You don't have to. You can track him down yourself. Although I would advise against that as there are negative legal consequences to such an action.

Haha just joking. you take this too seriously. Worry about more important things like banging chicks.

 

[HalcyonDays]

*Cringes*

I wasn't aware of the fact people are still dumb enough to blame mohammedans.

There is no evidence to support your claim and a preponderance amount of evidence against it. People who claim America is some evil expansionist empire clearly have no idea what they're talking about.

US territories surrendered:
Cuba
The Philippines
Liberia
Haiti
Panama Canal
Palau
Micronesia
Marshall Islands
Veracruz
Dominican Republic
Bunch of small Islands

Because the first thing that pops up in my mind when I think of the Roman Empire is surrendering large amounts of territory that easily could have been held. People who claim American went to war with Iraq for oil are just a bunch of edgy kids.

Iraq supplied most of our oil before we went to war with them and now they only supply around 4.8% of it. If the whole point of going to war with them was oil then we would've maintained a stranglehold on it.

 

[YowYan]

There is no evidence to support your claim and a preponderance amount of evidence against it. People who claim America is some evil expansionist empire clearly have no idea what they're talking about.

US territories surrendered:
Cuba
The Philippines
Liberia
Haiti
Panama Canal
Palau
Micronesia
Marshall Islands
Veracruz
Dominican Republic
Bunch of small Islands

Because the first thing that pops up in my mind when I think of the Roman Empire is surrendering large amounts of territory that easily could have been held. People who claim American went to war with Iraq for oil are just a bunch of edgy kids.

Iraq supplied most of our oil before we went to war with them and now they only supply around 4.8% of it. If the whole point of going to war with them was oil then we would've maintained a stranglehold on it.

Terrific. I typed quite a bit and the page refreshed when I left to do some work.

I'll keep it short now -___-'

The new roman empire is about controlling the monetary current of a nation, thus owning every head withn tgose borders. I'm partially dominican and it's utter chaos over there. DR has a lot of valuable resources and those are being exported with unfair trade. The wellveing of the people is of no importance. And "they" survive off our chaos. Ordo ab chao. Same with the phillippines, Manila. The new roman empire is true to no nation. They own everything anyways by banking monopoly.

As for 9/11, obviously they wouldn't make it possible to assemble concrete evidence of it's demolition. Plenty of architects though, that give their unbiased opinion on the tragedy. Anywho, most people immediately blurt out 'conspiracy theorist' without trying to picture why would the elite do this. How would they benefit off of it.

 

[HalcyonDays]

Terrific. I typed quite a bit and the page refreshed when I left to do some work.

I'll keep it short now -___-'

The new roman empire is about controlling the monetary current of a nation, thus owning every head withn tgose borders. I'm partially dominican and it's utter chaos over there. DR has a lot of valuable resources and those are being exported with unfair trade. The wellveing of the people is of no importance. And "they" survive off our chaos. Ordo ab chao. Same with the phillippines, Manila. The new roman empire is true to no nation. They own everything anyways by banking monopoly.

As for 9/11, obviously they wouldn't make it possible to assemble concrete evidence of it's demolition. Plenty of architects though, that give their unbiased opinion on the tragedy. Anywho, most people immediately blurt out 'conspiracy theorist' without trying to picture why would the elite do this. How would they benefit off of it.

Blaming America for the actions of corporations is silly.

The large majority of the civil engineering community disagrees with your delusions and Al Qaeda has already claimed responsibility for the attacks. Do you have any proof that these "elites" gained anything from these attacks?

 

[YowYan]

Blaming America for the actions of corporations is silly.

The large majority of the civil engineering community disagrees with your delusions and Al Qaeda has already claimed responsibility for the attacks. Do you have any proof that these "elites" gained anything from these attacks?

I say usa but I mean the corporations that run it. u.s.'s military complex is just one branch. Usa once defied the roman empire/europe nowadays/british. They fought for their freedom and independence. I think they call it 'the revolutionary war'.

Yeah, I have. In my opinion, You're a victim of what they call; "In plain sight". You live with the answer right under your nose but because it was twisted to serve a purpose, you'll deny what would be the most logical explanation if you look at the bigger picture.

The elites gained 'the patriot act', 'NDAA' for one. Plus, they gained a free-ticket to the middle-east with support of their own deluded citizens.

Your response is only logical though. I thnk it's the result of lack of vision, but I'm sure most readers would say I'm the one that's deluded.

 

[HalcyonDays]

lol

The military industrial complex would be receiving loads of dosh regardless of whether we were at war or not. The Roman empire died about 400 years before America existed.

Al Qaeda has already admitted to the attacks so if anyone is suffering from narrow-mindedness it would be you.
Communications businesses actually lost money to bills like the patriot act because people were wary of the government knowing private info. This is beginning to sound more like a discussion about authoritarianism then plutocracy.

 

[YowYan]

The military industrial complex would be receiving loads of dosh regardless of whether we were at war or not. The Roman empire died about 400 years before America existed.

Al Qaeda has already admitted to the attacks so if anyone is suffering from narrow-mindedness it would be you.
Communications businesses actually lost money to bills like the patriot act because people were wary of the government knowing private info. This is beginning to sound more like a discussion about authoritarianism then plutocracy.

I see you don't see the point orAsf underhand goal of the patriot act and NDAA.

If you closely study Al Qaeda's movements, you'd be able to find some links with western agenda's. For example, how come Al Qaeda never targeted Israel.. or why did the supposedly Lybian rebels walk around with brand new american equipment. Ghadafi claimed they were Al Qaeda.

Do some thinking outside the status quo.

 

[HalcyonDays]

I see you don't see the point orAsf underhand goal of the patriot act and NDAA.

If you closely study Al Qaeda's movements, you'd be able to find some links with western agenda's. For example, how come Al Qaeda never targeted Israel.. or why did the supposedly Lybian rebels walk around with brand new american equipment. Ghadafi claimed they were Al Qaeda.

Do some thinking outside the status quo.

More like you can't name an actual one.

Al Qaeda actually has tried.

You must be registered for see links

The US supplied arms to insurgent forces in Libya which were likely shared with Al Qaeda.

 

[~Sky~]

God forbid you don't want to kill people and risk your life for reasons that are highly likely to be fabricated to cover ulterior motives.

He shouldn't have joined the Army if he was thinking those thoughts. By joining the Army you make a commitment, a conscious commitment.

There's nothing excusable about his actions.

 

[~Sky~]

Great guy. U.S. army and agencies are not in place to criticise this man. The biggest terroristof our age is usa. Hypocrites need to gtfo f the middle east.

He's a great guy for walking out on his commitments and costing several lives, yes of course.

 

[YowYan]

He's a great guy for walking out on his commitments and costing several lives, yes of course.

They shouldn't be there to begin with.

 

[Punk Hazard]

He's a great guy for walking out on his commitments and costing several lives, yes of course.

It's a world sadder than Hell when you are committed to killing other people and risk being killed yourself 24/7 because some guys in suits thousands of miles away decided they wanted to fight. I'm sorry, but human lives are worth far more than a name being engraved in stone and a lump statement like "Sorry and appreciation to our fallen."

If we are so keen on war, if the government sees war as such as a necessity, why don't they pick up an AK, trade their suits for fatigues, and pampered homes for a bunker, and see what it's like to be part of the pawns.

 

[Aim64C]

They shouldn't be there to begin with.

There are a lot of things that shouldn't be.

The Taliban shouldn't be in power over there. Ever.

Europe shouldn't live under nanny-states.

The Federal Reserve should never exist.

There is still such a thing as responsibility, and there is still such a thing as dignity.

What this man did was not just 'decide not to participate.' Hell - there are a lot of ways to accomplish that. Two rounds into a clearing barrel - see ya. Shoot the officer everyone hates - go out in style. Or stay up late into the night screaming about how the penguins want your ovaries. There's a lot of ways to force the hand of people who know that you don't want to be there and are dead set on keeping you there.

Hell - call a congressman about waste and fraud. There isn't a command out there innocent of that one - and nothing pisses off the chain of command more so than a call from a congressman. If you really want to piss them off - complain about constant use of profanity not consistent with army/navy/marine/airforce core values.

There are all kinds of ways to object to the policy and/or the stupidity of your chain of command... some allow those of us with brains to tolerate the chain of command and not kill them... others get you processed out and/or thrown into the brig. Wandering off to make other people go look for you while you help the enemy plan to kill them is "not cool."

Very not cool.

Honestly, I'm surprised this joker wasn't an officer - since that basically describes our strategic plan, right now. "Guys! Let's help the enemy plan to kill us!"

You speak as if he was the only soldier on the ground over there frustrated with the war, with the state of our nation, with the people in charge, our lack of policy regarding the foreign, etc.

Anyone with a functioning brain struggles with the system and policies of our military. Why do you think morale in the military is at an all-time low? There is absolutely no direction. No one is captain of the ship that is our foreign policy. Even the people who don't pay much attention to life outside of their 'bubble' in the military feel it and understand that something is very, very wrong.

It's a world sadder than Hell when you are committed to killing other people and risk being killed yourself 24/7 because some guys in suits thousands of miles away decided they wanted to fight. I'm sorry, but human lives are worth far more than a name being engraved in stone and a lump statement like "Sorry and appreciation to our fallen."

If we are so keen on war, if the government sees war as such as a necessity, why don't they pick up an AK, trade their suits for fatigues, and pampered homes for a bunker, and see what it's like to be part of the pawns.

There is nothing fundamentally wrong or right with war. War is what it is. Someone has said: "I am willing to kill and risk being killed over this issue" - the only way for another will to intervene is to accept the threat of death and the reality of attrition.

It can be over territory. It can be over resources. It can be over ideologies. In the end - war is simply what it is.

The problem is that we fought a war over the Taliban. We fought to kick them out of Afghanistan. To properly think of the Taliban - you have to reference our own history with the Mafia and other organized crime syndicates. The Mafia coerced local businesses into producing materials for them (or simply providing cash), and often forced the adoption of certain policies or prevented ownership of what they determined was 'contraband.'

This is how the Taliban works. If you're a farmer - you grow Opium and maybe some actual food somewhere - but if you've got time to grow food, you've got time to grow opium. Oh, millions of dollars is what you say your crop is worth? A share of it, you want? How about your life, you get to keep?

The Taliban was effectively the government of Afghanistan. The 'official' government was a superficial government - didn't really have power, authority, etc. It was kind of there, and most of Afghanistan couldn't really pick their country out on a map because their concept of a nation is tribally based. Hence why they have like fifty names indicating tribal lineage and/or affiliation. We had a guy who, comically, had an ID card where his name actually ran off the edge of the card (the machine just kept-a-printing). Then there was a guy with a number at the end of his name - we never did figure out what was up with that. NCIS said he was good to go, though...

This is largely why the Taliban persist - they still have a large base of support in "Pakistan" - where the official government has a bit more legitimacy - but is just as corrupt as any tribal government. The Taliban exploited the different concepts of "nation" to base their operations out of a region we defined as a different country - but a line that had absolutely no meaning to the people of the region. Which is why we had some very tough calls to make early on ... if we were serious about getting rid of the Taliban - we should have told Pakistan to shut their trap as we routed the Taliban from their nation (Taliban influence was mostly in Afghanistan and Pakistan).

If not, then we should have annexed Afghanistan as a U.S. territory and turned loose the spectators. Mining operations and the security demands that came with those would forever change the Afghani economy and make it next to impossible for the Taliban to gain control, even if we were to grant independence at a later date.

The problem with doing things the way we did is that we were unable to properly implement the changes in economy necessary to limit the major incentives for Taliban interest/control - but we were also unable to significantly disrupt Taliban organization and operation.

They knew we would leave, and they mostly skirmished on the borders - but Pakistan was still firmly under their thumb and they were probably more prepared to reclaim their territory than they ever had been.

Which is precisely why Karzai - or whatever his name is, sided with the Taliban. He knew we would leave (the writing was on the wall) - and if he didn't make nice with the power that would be filling the void (the idea that the Afghani government had any real power/authority is laughable, mostly because the concept of governments in those regions is alien to our robust, diverse economies) - then they would simply replace him (likely without an option inclusive of life).

And what we just did in this prisoner swap - even if it had been for a legitimate POW, is we just sent the message to every country over there that the Taliban is in control.

Rather than lay down the law - we legitimized their authority. We said that the conflict between Taliban virtues and laws is the same as a conflict between a sovereign nation and our virtues and laws.

In reality, yes, any group of people has the authority to say: "this is how we are going to live."

Also, in reality, another group of people (usually larger) can completely exterminate that group for deciding to live in a manner that pisses it off (or just because it decides to - wouldn't be the first time).

Which is precisely what those regions saw.

This is why we need a clear foreign policy. Arguably, I would say that the President needs to be stripped of most authorities regarding foreign policies. He can be our chief diplomat, but what the current president did, here, was invalidate the last thirteen years. "The guys we came here to kick out? Yeah... - they're in charge. If you have concerns about their behavior, you'd be best off just letting them be in control of things."

And that's the side of this so few people are really seeing, right now.

... Now we are in Poland, promising to stand by them if the Russians come storming through?

Even if we -should- stand by our treaties... who in their right mind over there is going to believe we will?

When the lines get blurred (and they will) - with portions of the population believing their country should join Russia ... especially once the fighting sets in .... who would you feel the 'victory' will go to?

The U.S. - the ones who just handed over authority to the very people they entered the war to oust?

Of course not. Even if the people do not want to become part of Russia - if there is any kind of protracted conflict, Russia wins by default. We don't have a solid reputation of 'sticking it out.' Not recently, at least.

 

[Punk Hazard]

There are a lot of things that shouldn't be.

The Taliban shouldn't be in power over there. Ever.

Europe shouldn't live under nanny-states.

The Federal Reserve should never exist.

There is still such a thing as responsibility, and there is still such a thing as dignity.

What this man did was not just 'decide not to participate.' Hell - there are a lot of ways to accomplish that. Two rounds into a clearing barrel - see ya. Shoot the officer everyone hates - go out in style. Or stay up late into the night screaming about how the penguins want your ovaries. There's a lot of ways to force the hand of people who know that you don't want to be there and are dead set on keeping you there.

Hell - call a congressman about waste and fraud. There isn't a command out there innocent of that one - and nothing pisses off the chain of command more so than a call from a congressman. If you really want to piss them off - complain about constant use of profanity not consistent with army/navy/marine/airforce core values.

There are all kinds of ways to object to the policy and/or the stupidity of your chain of command... some allow those of us with brains to tolerate the chain of command and not kill them... others get you processed out and/or thrown into the brig. Wandering off to make other people go look for you while you help the enemy plan to kill them is "not cool."

Very not cool.

Honestly, I'm surprised this joker wasn't an officer - since that basically describes our strategic plan, right now. "Guys! Let's help the enemy plan to kill us!"

You speak as if he was the only soldier on the ground over there frustrated with the war, with the state of our nation, with the people in charge, our lack of policy regarding the foreign, etc.

Anyone with a functioning brain struggles with the system and policies of our military. Why do you think morale in the military is at an all-time low? There is absolutely no direction. No one is captain of the ship that is our foreign policy. Even the people who don't pay much attention to life outside of their 'bubble' in the military feel it and understand that something is very, very wrong.



There is nothing fundamentally wrong or right with war. War is what it is. Someone has said: "I am willing to kill and risk being killed over this issue" - the only way for another will to intervene is to accept the threat of death and the reality of attrition.

It can be over territory. It can be over resources. It can be over ideologies. In the end - war is simply what it is.

The problem is that we fought a war over the Taliban. We fought to kick them out of Afghanistan. To properly think of the Taliban - you have to reference our own history with the Mafia and other organized crime syndicates. The Mafia coerced local businesses into producing materials for them (or simply providing cash), and often forced the adoption of certain policies or prevented ownership of what they determined was 'contraband.'

This is how the Taliban works. If you're a farmer - you grow Opium and maybe some actual food somewhere - but if you've got time to grow food, you've got time to grow opium. Oh, millions of dollars is what you say your crop is worth? A share of it, you want? How about your life, you get to keep?

The Taliban was effectively the government of Afghanistan. The 'official' government was a superficial government - didn't really have power, authority, etc. It was kind of there, and most of Afghanistan couldn't really pick their country out on a map because their concept of a nation is tribally based. Hence why they have like fifty names indicating tribal lineage and/or affiliation. We had a guy who, comically, had an ID card where his name actually ran off the edge of the card (the machine just kept-a-printing). Then there was a guy with a number at the end of his name - we never did figure out what was up with that. NCIS said he was good to go, though...

This is largely why the Taliban persist - they still have a large base of support in "Pakistan" - where the official government has a bit more legitimacy - but is just as corrupt as any tribal government. The Taliban exploited the different concepts of "nation" to base their operations out of a region we defined as a different country - but a line that had absolutely no meaning to the people of the region. Which is why we had some very tough calls to make early on ... if we were serious about getting rid of the Taliban - we should have told Pakistan to shut their trap as we routed the Taliban from their nation (Taliban influence was mostly in Afghanistan and Pakistan).

If not, then we should have annexed Afghanistan as a U.S. territory and turned loose the spectators. Mining operations and the security demands that came with those would forever change the Afghani economy and make it next to impossible for the Taliban to gain control, even if we were to grant independence at a later date.

The problem with doing things the way we did is that we were unable to properly implement the changes in economy necessary to limit the major incentives for Taliban interest/control - but we were also unable to significantly disrupt Taliban organization and operation.

They knew we would leave, and they mostly skirmished on the borders - but Pakistan was still firmly under their thumb and they were probably more prepared to reclaim their territory than they ever had been.

Which is precisely why Karzai - or whatever his name is, sided with the Taliban. He knew we would leave (the writing was on the wall) - and if he didn't make nice with the power that would be filling the void (the idea that the Afghani government had any real power/authority is laughable, mostly because the concept of governments in those regions is alien to our robust, diverse economies) - then they would simply replace him (likely without an option inclusive of life).

And what we just did in this prisoner swap - even if it had been for a legitimate POW, is we just sent the message to every country over there that the Taliban is in control.

Rather than lay down the law - we legitimized their authority. We said that the conflict between Taliban virtues and laws is the same as a conflict between a sovereign nation and our virtues and laws.

In reality, yes, any group of people has the authority to say: "this is how we are going to live."

Also, in reality, another group of people (usually larger) can completely exterminate that group for deciding to live in a manner that pisses it off (or just because it decides to - wouldn't be the first time).

Which is precisely what those regions saw.

This is why we need a clear foreign policy. Arguably, I would say that the President needs to be stripped of most authorities regarding foreign policies. He can be our chief diplomat, but what the current president did, here, was invalidate the last thirteen years. "The guys we came here to kick out? Yeah... - they're in charge. If you have concerns about their behavior, you'd be best off just letting them be in control of things."

And that's the side of this so few people are really seeing, right now.

... Now we are in Poland, promising to stand by them if the Russians come storming through?

Even if we -should- stand by our treaties... who in their right mind over there is going to believe we will?

When the lines get blurred (and they will) - with portions of the population believing their country should join Russia ... especially once the fighting sets in .... who would you feel the 'victory' will go to?

The U.S. - the ones who just handed over authority to the very people they entered the war to oust?

Of course not. Even if the people do not want to become part of Russia - if there is any kind of protracted conflict, Russia wins by default. We don't have a solid reputation of 'sticking it out.' Not recently, at least.

EVERYTHING is wrong with the concept of war. War is one of the most despicable and petty things about our species. The fact that we, the most intelligent species on earth, have been driven to a point where we send each other to be murdered, and kill each other, it's horrible. The fact that we have wars and we live in such states of division is an embarassment. There is NOTHING honorable or respectful about the fact that our species have driven ourselves to things like the taliban, or states of war. The fact that we are so selfish, so petty, so proud, that we go to war is cringe-worthy.

We are children who cannot share toys so we try to kick others out of the play pen. War is not justifiable. Yes it is happening. And the fact that it is is our species' greatest failure. War is a stain.

 

[Aim64C]

EVERYTHING is wrong with the concept of war. War is one of the most despicable and petty things about our species. The fact that we, the most intelligent species on earth, have been driven to a point where we send each other to be murdered, and kill each other, it's horrible. The fact that we have wars and we live in such states of division is an embarassment. There is NOTHING honorable or respectful about the fact that our species have driven ourselves to things like the taliban, or states of war. The fact that we are so selfish, so petty, so proud, that we go to war is cringe-worthy.

Your opinion is irrelevant to the reality of our nature.

Your "enlightenment" is merely your acknowledgment of darkness.

Call it stupid. Call it sad. Call it all the degrading, derogatory terms you want to. 53% of the voters decided your paycheck belongs to them. They are sending someone to collect it. What do you do?

You haven't the slightest clue how to solve the problem because you live in a fantasy world where the only perfection is your own. War is a natural consequence of having differing opinions and views. There are circumstances that cause people to avoid other means of resolution prior to jumping to war... but if all people willing to participate in defending their way of life are stupid and despicable - then there really isn't much you can do, is there?

We are children who cannot share toys so we try to kick others out of the play pen. War is not justifiable. Yes it is happening. And the fact that it is is our species' greatest failure. War is a stain.

Only in your pristine little concept of perfection.

This is what is meant by: "The beast that shouts "I" at the heart of the universe."

You decide what is perfect. You decide what should and shouldn't be. You. You. You. That's what it's all about. Your view. Your want. Your desires. Your perfection.

Never once did it occur to you that the universe is perfect and is exactly as it should be. It has never been broken. It has always been. It will forever be.

My place isn't to tell the world how to be perfect. I can't so much as poop without peeing - so what the hell would I be able to tell the universe about being controlled perfection? My place is to understand why the world is perfect.

In a round-about way, even the arrogant nature of man to claim its own sense of perfection (and act according to it) is a part of that perfection. In that sense - even the "unnatural" is part of a greater natural process and could even be understood as an evolution of nature.

"So then why bring it up?"

Because the discourse between the two perspectives is also part of a natural process.

Just as it is natural for one man to seek dominion over another, it is natural for the dominated to act independently and freely. The discourse between the two is as natural as the instincts within the two. So, too, is it natural for people to seek solutions alternative to the destruction that comes with fighting and war. It's also natural for conflicts to exceed the bounds of these solutions.

 

[~Sky~]

It's a world sadder than Hell when you are committed to killing other people and risk being killed yourself 24/7 because some guys in suits thousands of miles away decided they wanted to fight. I'm sorry, but human lives are worth far more than a name being engraved in stone and a lump statement like "Sorry and appreciation to our fallen."

If we are so keen on war, if the government sees war as such as a necessity, why don't they pick up an AK, trade their suits for fatigues, and pampered homes for a bunker, and see what it's like to be part of the pawns.

You're completely missing the point of what I'm saying. For one, your views on the U.S. are your own, I won't debate that, what I'm talking about is completely different.

This guy willingly enlisted, knowing full-well what he was getting into. He got cold feet and walked out, costing several other lives. That is the work of scum. You're sitting here saying human lives are worth more than being names engraved on stones yet you're putting up a defense for a man who caused several needless deaths.

 

[Conspirator.]

This guy is NOT a hero-given that being in the army is all about honour and pride(he knew what he signed up for). His actions lead to the death of several other soldiers, great guy indeed..... Also, LOL @ those who think al Qaeda weren't responsible for 9/11.......

 

[battlestatio]

The US got themselves locked into a quagmire and now they want to improve their relationship with the Taliban hence why they decided to return their top leaders just for a mere grunt. This is being done because if the Afghan government were to fall in the future, the US wouldn't want an unfriendly government in place.

Also the US wants to be seen as humane and willing to take good care of their own soldiers so that people don't get disenfranchised with the US government and army.