Would you fight for your country?

Remove all ads!

Yes, I would. And when I say "fight," it doesn't have to wielding the weapons myself, I could support the people doing the actual fighting...there are so many ways. But if it came down to even wielding even a kitchen knife, I guess I would.

Man i keep running into you eveningdrive But then, I know something about you . . .

I am reminded by Stephen Donaldson's Thomas Covenant books on Despite and preserving the Land as well as Robert Jordan's Aes Sedai oaths.

There will come a time that one will have to defend one's own, and the willingness to do violence will probably be the only thing that will preserve one's way of life. This doesn't only apply to men, but to everyone ... any mother fighting to give a decent life for her kids would know this. That doesn't make the violence any cleaner or a better way, but just the means available at that time.

This attack on Afghanistan... I cannot support it, but if anybody tries to usurp my land...there would be hell to pay. Put in that context, I don't see any reason why anyone should refuse to fight for one's country, but then again, I don't know everybody and their reasons.

But an attack? What makes America strong is the strength of her people. This is what I admire most in Americans... that they have an amazing drive to manage and succeed. Complacent, yes, at times, but not weak or cowardly. That is why it is important that the USA's reasons for launching this conflict are clear, or this will become a new kind of Inquisition. No one will win.

 

Praise God and pass the ammunition! If my country were to call I would be there. It is no less then the responsibility of any citizen of a free nation that wishes to remain that way.

 

I always would have said "no." Dad was a conscientious objector (for the non-Americans: that's a draft status in which you're not forced to kill if you're drafted so you become a medic or something) in Vietnam, and I always intended to do the same if it came to war.

But not now.

Now I'm ready to go wherever my country sends me in this conflict, because I know for once -- without a shadow of a doubt -- that this is a just war. Not against the Afghan people. Not against Muslims. But against the terrorists, and I have full confidence that we will discover who did this so we know exactly who to fight and -- hopefully -- capture.

The Swedes do have a kick ass military. If only they had something more than icebergs to guard.

 

I would fight for Canada, but I'm not sure what my role would be. I'm aggresive and patriotic, but when it comes right down to really hurting or killing someone, I'm not sure if I could do it. Sure I've been in a few fights in my time, but when it goes beyond a bloody nose or a black eye, well it suddenly becomes very pointless to me.

The extent of my military training is what I've picked up from TV and from a distance I can be just as brave as the next fellow. Put us all at the bussiness end of an AK-47, and then we'll see who is the bravest of them all.

 

Modjahed, I've always loved the Russian style of fighting. "Engage them a bit, and then let them chase us." They take Moscow? No problem, keep retreating. Sooner or later the Russian winter gets them. I couldn't help laughing when I read about Napoleon's attempt to conquer Russia.

Not that I'm saying Russians are cowards. What they did at St. Petersburg was incredible, and even inspiring. I just love the tactic of walking around until the enemy dies because they can't handle your weather.

 

no one will ever attack us

we are strategically in the most useless location in the world

 

what country wuld that be?

 

I've been in Russia during the winter...It is brutal!!! It does make curling up for warmth more fun though!

 

The russians fought well and brave whenever fighting a war (except vs. japan in 1904 ). However, the russian style of fighting not only included the use of the vastness of their country and it's climate.

Basically it was characterized by sturdiness and massiveness: in a word steamroller tactics with a lot of tanks, endless infantry and even more massive artillery. Considering the losses the russians had to take in the great patriotic war, you also have to add the willingness to sacrifice two or three million soldiers as well. For the americans here who may have seen spielbergs private ryan: compared to the *huge* eastern front battles the invasion of normandy, anzio and the battle of the bulge weres calm and comfy skirmishes.

War is a bloody business, everyone who is cheering to punish the bastards who did the WTC bombings should recall that from time to time.

 

Well, we Swedes might have a hell of an armytraining and yes, I think that the soldiers are good as hell - But we are a small force. Only in sweden there's about 10 million people living, and there are NOT many people who even want to join the army... Plus that we are cutting down on our forces and military all the time. It's too bad that we were not more than this
But still.......
I LOVE SWEDEN!!!
-----------------
ohhh! I need to create a good topic! It's my 500th post!!!

[This message has been edited by Zaragoth (edited September 21, 2001).]

 

I would be proud to go to war for Norway and NATO against evil.

 

I wouldn't fight for a country unless I was asked to fight for something I strongly believed in. Just because a government has had a falling out with another country doesn't mean I have. Fighting against fascism and oppression is good. Fighting because you want a countries oil fields isn't. Oh and if it came to the point I had to join an army I would ask to be in a rescue medical type situation.

So to sum up my ramblings I would fight for a cause but not a country. Possibly selfish, but at least I'm honest

The right to not be taxed on all the treasure I find. Now that I would fight for

 

We have to fight for our right to everyday safety in this world!

 

What are you talking about of the swedish army?? I spent 10 months in the army here in sweden and i wonder where you get your facts from? During the time after the fall of the soviet union the swedish military has had severe cutbacks. It may be true that we during the cold war had a kickass military but that was more because of numbers than training. The average swedish male has about 10 months of military training even though less people get that training every year. We have conscription here so most males have various training the goal of the swedish military has alway been that it should cost more than it tastes to take us. During the 80ties Sweden could mobilize a couple of hundredthousands soldiers in 48 hours and that with a population of 8million but that was during the eighties today the military is almost nonexistant.

And Shura is it not dangerous to make statements like that? If it is like you say that is a capital offense you wrote in your post. Well i wish you luck.

 

I wish I had an M16, fully loaded with tracer rounds with an M203 grenade launcher attached to it and Lee Kuan Yew in my sights.
Not forgetting to stab the fucker in each testicle a few times with my bayonet too.
I'm a traitor and proud of it.

 

Very heated discussion here.

Facts :
1. Americans will not drop nukes as this is a country which is surrounded by other friendly countries.
2. This 'war' will take an invasion force to win. Americans don't really have the commitment for an invasion (Vietnam).
Speculation :
1. British forces will be the first allied forces into this 'war'.
2. French and German armies could be the second/third if thier governments go along with the americans.
3. No-one really wants this war.

Having watched the news over the last while I really can't see why Tony Blair is sticking his nose in. He should look after the UKs affairs and leave the americans to look after thier own country. He can support the americans but he should not be egging another countries enemy into attacking the UK.

 

You've got to look "big picture" at this. "This war" is not about going into Afghanistan and getting Bin Laden, it's the first step.

Here's how I think it will play out: the Northern Alliance has begun attacking the Taliban, I think that, with US support, will topple the Taliban regime. Then, in exchange for Bin Laden and his supporters and the promise of holding democratic elections, and having the refugees in Pakistan return to Afghan territory, the US will aid and support the new government - to promote stability in the region.

Next will be to find the next terrist unit that supports violence as a way to further policy...and root them out.

Blair and the UK are giving their strong support, most likely because they will ask for our support when they do the same thing against the Provisional IRA, because they use violence and terror to further their political objectives.

I've said this before - the world has changed...It won't happen in one day, or even a year...It's going to take a long time.

 

Fergie, you sweet little foreign devil, America DID invade Vietnam. What we did not do was invade China, which was sending troops to back up the N. Vietnamese. This is why we lost Vietnam and found in Korea to a standstill. We just didn't want to get entangled with China. (Well, Gen. MacArthur did, but the president didn't.) We have a lot more will to invade now that we have a concrete evil to point to instead of the amorphous "stop the spread of communism." And the reason Blair is getting involved is that he understands that this is about the entire Western world, not just America.

I don't know how it's going to play out with the Northern Alliance, Sir B. We're also talking with the former Afghan king. It sounds like the Northern Alliance, while necessary to our success in moving about Afghanistan, is not necessarily going to be installed as the ruling regime. I don't think anyone in the West sees that as a wonderful solution.

I suggest we let Russia have the country. They wanted it in the 80s anyway.

 

Shralp
I may not know as much as you about Vietnam but I do know that a war against terrorists isn't a war. They are a plague and you don't know who to kill. Also the more you kill, the more people step into thier shoes to fight against you. Kill a father who is a terrorist and you then have a son/daughter who will hate you enough to become terrorists.
This war will not be easy.
My point about Blair is that he can support the American people in the war but sending forces (this is a given) but he should not be taking stance of saying that he is starting the 'war' when there has not been an attack on British soil. It is up to the Americans to take the offencive and thier allies to help.

Sir Belisarius
Blair was in no way saying yesterday he was supporting the US which he does and should have said. What he actually said was that he was taking an offensive himself. Now the attack was not against the UK, although hundreds of UK citizens were killed and as such does he have the right to start a war when the attack was on an allies soil ?
'Blair and the UK are giving their strong support, most likely because they will ask for our support when they do the same thing against the Provisional IRA, because they use violence and terror to further their political objectives'. This would be nice if it were true. Blair could not wipe out the IRA even with the full support of the rest of the world. He has continually made deals with them in the last decade to reduce the violence in Ulster.
But to put it in perspective how would the US feel if Bin Laden was given a position in United Nations and any Taliban members were set free when the US got a promise there would be no more attacks on the US ?

 

Vietnam = big mistake for US, even though US had continued into the war, I still think they would have their arses kicked, but that's a whole other story.

Let's face it, whether you hit the terrorist or the Taliban, it's the same deal, the taliban is supporting the terrorist and therefore terrorist themselves. This is a war against terror, not just bin laden, so attacking them would be perfectly alright, since they do support terrorist activity. I believe the major plan is to bomb military installations and make a hit and run with invasive forces, support the local rebels to overthrow the taliban rulership. This is something I would really like to see as well, as it would be better for all of them down there(except the terrorist of course), and about Jihad, we're just damn lucky they can't agree on anything down there, else they would probably pronounce Jihad and it would truly become a world war.


And for any talks of nukes, c'mon, grow up and use your brains for a second will ya

[This message has been edited by Lokken (edited September 26, 2001).]