• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Whose War Is It Anyways?

ReasontoBelieve

Registered Member
Well I found this interesting article ..this guy served in the Iraqi and believes that the US government has not been helping out the US military to keep them as strong as they once were and safely bring them home.. Read about this man who put his life on the line for this country and how the US government can not be much help to him. See what it's like to live in the war zone..

Triple-Amputee Iraqi War Hero’s Letter Shames the President of the United States
 

Hilander

Free Spirit
Staff member
V.I.P.
It was a big mistake to go into Iraq to begin with. Not surprised things are no better off there, even worse.

From your article
While I was in Iraq, our mission was to liberate the Iraqi citizens from a tyrant and that’s what we did. Never forget; it was your people who sent us there, like the Clintons, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi & Carl Levin.
He should have added Bush and Cheney to this and everyone else that got us into that mess.
 

sunrise

aka ginger warlock
V.I.P.
I am going to sound very unpopular and very uncaring in my post. I make no apology for this. It is my opinion and if you wish to challenge me on please by all means do so. Okay, here we go:

First of all:

I nearly died in a war that you and most of your colleagues supported overwhelmingly, including the two presidents who came before you. Many citizens may not agree with waging war in Iraq to free the oppressed Iraqi citizens, but it’s something that warriors like myself have zero control over.

I volunteered to go to Iraq on both of my deployments, and the second time I begged to go even after I wasn’t selected, which ultimately got me placed on the team where I would lose both legs and my dominant arm.
Okay this is one of the reasons I do not get this guys argument, he says he has no control over the war and that is under the control of:

George Bush Jnr
,
Tony Blair,
George Bush SNR,
Jack Straw,
Barak Obama,
David Cameron,
Nick Clegg,

Oh no he didn't he brought up a name of someone who was not even in power at the time of the war. Hmm, why exactly did he not mention the three names in bold? These names are they three biggest reasons the war happened. Bush wanted the war in Iraq, Blair supported him & Straw brought in one of the DUMBEST terrorism definitions I have EVER heard.

Secondly he clams he has "no control", well you do, you DON'T GO TO WAR! You don't wanna be there? Fine, I have no problem in that but to say you have no control and then turn around and say you begged to be there? Seems a little odd to me but there we are.

Thirdly, how does this guy not know that Obama does not know what it means to be poor? I don't know Obama's background but here is the difference; I would never claim to comment on it because I do not know enough to do so.

Forthly. hate to break it to Brian but the war on Iraq and September the 11th/Afghanistan are NOT linked, they have never BEEN linked, it has been seen in the past that Saddam Hussain and Osama Bin Laden did not like each other - they didn't even stand together ideology wise! OBL hated the west (after being funded, trained and employed by the west during the days of the fight with Russians) and 9/11 was the first (and only) attack on a ground level within the US, we had the same thing here in the UK bomb in 7/7 and to my knowledge it was still never proven that it was linked with OBL where as Saddam (who was also funded by the US government) was a murderer. Not a man who took over a murderous state but a literally murderer.

This to me is a hate speech pure and simple against a government Brian simply does not like. He asks no questions, offers no solutions and does not even discuss his own opinion but instead blasts BO for things he again knows very little about. And the two biggest problems in all this is not only do a certain group lap it up without having an actual opinion or background as to what they think but the minute, THE MINUTE anyone even DARES to question it they get blasted at by people who call people who were saying the war was a mistake from day one unpatriotic and scum.

I am sorry if I have upset anyone here but if some can put whatever they want on the internet without very little thought I will be dammed if I can't based on what I have seen and evidence which is all out there.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sim

Hilander

Free Spirit
Staff member
V.I.P.
I wasn't going to say it but if he didn't want to go to war why did he volunteer to go and beg to go to Iraq the second time. Sounds like he wanted to go but then he got hurt, which is horrible, now he is mad. If you go to war you might get seriously injured or killed.
 

sunrise

aka ginger warlock
V.I.P.
I wasn't going to say it but if he didn't want to go to war why did he volunteer to go and beg to go to Iraq the second time. Sounds like he wanted to go but then he got hurt, which is horrible, now he is mad. If you go to war you might get seriously injured or killed.
Exactly, I am very sad that he is injured and has a number of limbs that no longer function but conscription and national service is no longer something that is a legal requirement or can be forced upon you.
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
I am going to sound very unpopular and very uncaring in my post. I make no apology for this. It is my opinion and if you wish to challenge me on please by all means do so. Okay, here we go:

First of all:

Okay this is one of the reasons I do not get this guys argument, he says he has no control over the war and that is under the control of:

George Bush Jnr
,
Tony Blair,
George Bush SNR,
Jack Straw,
Barak Obama,
David Cameron,
Nick Clegg,

Oh no he didn't he brought up a name of someone who was not even in power at the time of the war. Hmm, why exactly did he not mention the three names in bold? These names are they three biggest reasons the war happened. Bush wanted the war in Iraq, Blair supported him & Straw brought in one of the DUMBEST terrorism definitions I have EVER heard.
Actually he did say

including the two presidents who came before you.
Which of course includes Bush. His complaint is also the way it has been handled and Obama's claim that Al Qaeda is dead. His complaint is we went to war to liberate Iraq, and TODAY we see it has failed. I would argue the current Commander-in-Chief, who has held that post since January 20, 2009 is in SOME way complicit.

Secondly he clams he has "no control", well you do, you DON'T GO TO WAR! You don't wanna be there? Fine, I have no problem in that but to say you have no control and then turn around and say you begged to be there? Seems a little odd to me but there we are.
Because as a soldier he begged to go to liberate people and help his fellow "brothers" who are in the military.

Thirdly, how does this guy not know that Obama does not know what it means to be poor? I don't know Obama's background but here is the difference; I would never claim to comment on it because I do not know enough to do so.

Because poor people can't afford to attend Punahou and Ivy League schools.

Forthly. hate to break it to Brian but the war on Iraq and September the 11th/Afghanistan are NOT linked, they have never BEEN linked, it has been seen in the past that Saddam Hussain and Osama Bin Laden did not like each other - they didn't even stand together ideology wise! OBL hated the west (after being funded, trained and employed by the west during the days of the fight with Russians) and 9/11 was the first (and only) attack on a ground level within the US, we had the same thing here in the UK bomb in 7/7 and to my knowledge it was still never proven that it was linked with OBL where as Saddam (who was also funded by the US government) was a murderer. Not a man who took over a murderous state but a literally murderer.
That's not conclusive. There was plenty of evidence there was some contact between Bin Laden's men and Hussein, including a meeting in Czechoslovakia just prior to the attacks.

As a sidenote, the firm I used to work for was once contacted by some family members of some 9/11 victims who were interested in filing wrongful death suits in federal court. There was a lawsuit filed in New York I believe against Bin Laden, Hussein, The country of Iraq, and others for wrongful death. There was a default hearing taken (which means none of those sued filed an answer and the judge hears evidence presented by one side with no cross examination) and experts like Laurie Mylroie and others testified. The judge found there was enough evidence to render a judgment against them. Granted, as I said this was without cross examination thus one sided, but there was evidence nonetheless. My firm eventually didn't pursue it because once the war started the Bush administration froze all of Hussein's, OBL and Iraq's assets in the US, in other words, no hope for any recovery.

This to me is a hate speech pure and simple against a government Brian simply does not like. He asks no questions, offers no solutions and does not even discuss his own opinion but instead blasts BO for things he again knows very little about. And the two biggest problems in all this is not only do a certain group lap it up without having an actual opinion or background as to what they think but the minute, THE MINUTE anyone even DARES to question it they get blasted at by people who call people who were saying the war was a mistake from day one unpatriotic and scum.

I'm sorry, maybe I missed the part where he calls anyone who dares to question unpatriotic and scum. Seems to me his beef is with how bad Obama has been as a Commander-in-Chief. Based on the current state of Iraq, the current state of VA hospitals, and the lie that Al Qaeda is dead, the cover up of Benghazi, I would say he is spot on.

EDIT: I would add I wouldn't consider trying to liberate people from an evil dictator who raped and beheaded and killed people with gas a "mess", but I digress.
 
Last edited:

Sim

Registered Member
I am going to sound very unpopular and very uncaring in my post. I make no apology for this. It is my opinion and if you wish to challenge me on please by all means do so. Okay, here we go:

First of all:

Okay this is one of the reasons I do not get this guys argument, he says he has no control over the war and that is under the control of:

George Bush Jnr
,
Tony Blair,
George Bush SNR,
Jack Straw,
Barak Obama,
David Cameron,
Nick Clegg,

Oh no he didn't he brought up a name of someone who was not even in power at the time of the war. Hmm, why exactly did he not mention the three names in bold? These names are they three biggest reasons the war happened. Bush wanted the war in Iraq, Blair supported him & Straw brought in one of the DUMBEST terrorism definitions I have EVER heard.

Secondly he clams he has "no control", well you do, you DON'T GO TO WAR! You don't wanna be there? Fine, I have no problem in that but to say you have no control and then turn around and say you begged to be there? Seems a little odd to me but there we are.

Thirdly, how does this guy not know that Obama does not know what it means to be poor? I don't know Obama's background but here is the difference; I would never claim to comment on it because I do not know enough to do so.

Forthly. hate to break it to Brian but the war on Iraq and September the 11th/Afghanistan are NOT linked, they have never BEEN linked, it has been seen in the past that Saddam Hussain and Osama Bin Laden did not like each other - they didn't even stand together ideology wise! OBL hated the west (after being funded, trained and employed by the west during the days of the fight with Russians) and 9/11 was the first (and only) attack on a ground level within the US, we had the same thing here in the UK bomb in 7/7 and to my knowledge it was still never proven that it was linked with OBL where as Saddam (who was also funded by the US government) was a murderer. Not a man who took over a murderous state but a literally murderer.

This to me is a hate speech pure and simple against a government Brian simply does not like. He asks no questions, offers no solutions and does not even discuss his own opinion but instead blasts BO for things he again knows very little about. And the two biggest problems in all this is not only do a certain group lap it up without having an actual opinion or background as to what they think but the minute, THE MINUTE anyone even DARES to question it they get blasted at by people who call people who were saying the war was a mistake from day one unpatriotic and scum.

I am sorry if I have upset anyone here but if some can put whatever they want on the internet without very little thought I will be dammed if I can't based on what I have seen and evidence which is all out there.
Applause! You said it perfectly.

This is just another incredibly dumb and ignorant attempt to blame Obama for anything that goes wrong. But blaming the Iraq war on Obama rather than Bush is revisionist history and simply so incredibly dumb and ignorant I want to bash my head against the wall. It's like blaming Roosevelt and Churchill for WW2, instead of Hitler. Obama, no matter what else you think of him, clearly opposed the Iraq war and just inherited the utter mess Bush and his ilk created.

But hey, the American right has been in an insane asylum for a while already, so this is really nothing new. No lie, no ignorance, no stupidity is below the American right to smear "libruls". They don't care about facts and truth, and they recreate reality and lie as they please as long as it hurts the damn Democrats. White is black, war is peace and freedom is slavery -- that's the American right since a decade.

Nice quote I read somewhere: The American left has moved into the center, the American right has moved into an insane asylum. That's perfectly worded, not much can be added.

And yeah, if you don't want to risk anything, don't enlist voluntarily for the army. Simple as that.

America is broken, and that's because no republican system can work when the population is uneducted, misinformed, dumb and ignorant. And when elected officials care more about power and winning than about the country and the constitution. This article is a perfect example of what's wrong with America.

/rant off
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
You all are completely missing the point and instead are using the straw man argument of conservatives hating liberals. His point is he was sent to Iraq to liberate them and was wounded. His complaint isn't WHY he was sent but Obama's actions since taking over. Why or who sent us is irrelevant as to what he is complaining about.
------
America is broken, and that's because no republican system can work when the population is uneducted, misinformed, dumb and ignorant. And when elected officials care more about power and winning than about the country and the constitution. This article is a perfect example of what's wrong with America.

/rant off
This is disgusting and completely uncalled for. And incredibly ironic given that you missed the whole point given that he isn't blaming Obama for the war itself, but his actions since taking over.
 
Last edited:

Van

Heavy Weapons Guy
V.I.P.
Who do I blame for the Iraq war? Saddam. Who do I blame for ww2? Hitler. Obviously it's never that simple though as there are hundreds of other causes.

I can't say I know if the war was worth fighting. I can say that if you are going to go to war, you go to war to win.

Should America have won the Vietnam war? Yes. Hands down. But we handicapped ourselves. The media blatantly lied in its reporting of the war and turned the American people against it so we pulled out.

War should only be had if other avenues have failed and there is a clear need to stop a greater evil. Was WW2 worth fighting? Yes I believe it was. Why did we win? We went all in.

By the way every intelligence source we had said saddam had wmds. And they likely did. They even found empty semis that likely had contained wmds. So I don't buy into the "Bush lied, people lied." Nothing more than the liberal media again undermining the military.

Did Obama handle the war correctly when he got into power? No. The surge worked but he simply undermined everything by declaring victory (while actually surrendering and pulling out). 2012 election. Obama continues to claim Al Queda is on the retreat everywhere and is less of a threat. Enter Benghazi. Terrorist attack. Intentionally has his people lie about what happened. Winning/losing a war is very dependent on who you have in command. Or lack there of.

As CO pointed out the question posed by this article was whether or not the war was handled properly after Obama took over, not whether or not we should have been there in the first place. But both are obviously relevant questions.

At some point it's like dropping the atomic bomb. I'm glad I didn't have to make he call.

The world will not did itself of war until after the end times.
 

sunrise

aka ginger warlock
V.I.P.
Which of course includes Bush. His complaint is also the way it has been handled and Obama's claim that Al Qaeda is dead. His complaint is we went to war to liberate Iraq, and TODAY we see it has failed. I would argue the current Commander-in-Chief, who has held that post since January 20, 2009 is in SOME way complicit.
See this is what confused. How can any claim that Al Qaeda is dead? I don't remember Obama saying that but I could be wrong. He may have claimed their leader in OBL is dead but I just don't remember him claiming an ideology is dead but as ever, if I am wrong and if there is evidence please do point me towards it.

Because as a soldier he begged to go to liberate people and help his fellow "brothers" who are in the military.
But how is this forcing him or making him do anything? You can't blame someone for you wanting to do something, doesn't really work that way.




Because poor people can't afford to attend Punahou and Ivy League schools.
Some can yes, what about scholarships? Or funding from another resource?



That's not conclusive. There was plenty of evidence there was some contact between Bin Laden's men and Hussein, including a meeting in Czechoslovakia just prior to the attacks.
Apparently not:

"The Bush Administration sought to link the Iraqi dictator to Islamist radicals early on in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks. President Bush allegedly made the case to Tony Blair as early as September 14, 2001, although Blair urged him not to pursue the claim.

In addition, Bush received on 21 September 2001 a classified President's Daily Brief (PDB), indicating the U.S. intelligence community had no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th attacks and that "there was scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda."

"The consensus of intelligence experts has been that Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda were in contact but it never led to an operational relationship, and that consensus is backed up by reports from the independent 9/11 Commission and by declassified Defense Department reports as well as by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, whose 2006 report of Phase II of its investigation into prewar intelligence reports concluded that there was no evidence of ties between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda".

Wikipedia entry

I'm sorry, maybe I missed the part where he calls anyone who dares to question unpatriotic and scum. Seems to me his beef is with how bad Obama has been as a Commander-in-Chief. Based on the current state of Iraq, the current state of VA hospitals, and the lie that Al Qaeda is dead, the cover up of Benghazi, I would say he is spot on.
No no it's cool bud, you didn't miss it because I didn't say it to begin with, what I said was:

"And the two biggest problems in all this is not only do a certain group lap it up without having an actual opinion or background as to what they think but the minute, THE MINUTE anyone even DARES to question it they get blasted at by people who call people who were saying the war was a mistake from day one unpatriotic and scum."

A bit of a difference there.
------
You all are completely missing the point and instead are using the straw man argument of conservatives hating liberals. His point is he was sent to Iraq to liberate them and was wounded. His complaint isn't WHY he was sent but Obama's actions since taking over. Why or who sent us is irrelevant as to what he is complaining about.
Okay, I accept and it is true but why focus purely on Obama and hurling personal insults at him? If I was going to have a go at system that lead me into the wrong path then I would bring up all parties concerned not just the one who is having try to fix the problem at the present time.
 
Last edited:
Top