Infantry are useless in the 'War on Terror'. When you're trying to kill key targets, you want to do it quietly in a manner that causes the organization to implode. I seriously wish that instead of deploying infantry to fight an [i]organization and not a nation[/i], we stayed in the shadows and killed them discreetly. Then again, Bin Laden would have died in the nineties had the CIA been able to call their own shots.

It's all a matter of perspective. War is intrinsic to humanity. You do not know what others experience. The argument for freedom is moot, for it is unattainable at its core. The person who wrote this post has distorted the truth about the horrors our fellows have seen. To suggest we eliminate the byproducts of billions of years of evolution from humans in fifty years is absurd. Albeit depressing, heroes tend to suffer and often die for their cause, that's what makes them heroes. All capitalist governments will be neutered by greed. As populations increases, freedoms decreases. This is inevitable. The issue here is our government, not "war" Quite simply, you can't have your cake and eat it too, because in the real world, the figurative cake belongs to all life. To the OP. I understand why you are angry, however you make your points using the same ethical rules as your accused. Don't lie next time. This world will forever be tarnished by the facts of life, but whether we enjoy it or not is a decision we all make each day. Your enemy is the perpetuation of greed and the abuse of trust, not the beliefs of others. All of us are ultimately in the same boat, talking about it gets us nowhere, you must act, evolution and faith will fix all the rest. Your opinion may be that it is not a worthwhile fight, mine differs in that I believe fighting for others to be ethically imperative, however our government only does this selectively, and that is the real crime.

I'll just leave this here.

What I don't get is the people saying "We're fighting for the rights of others." Yes, we are, but is it a worthwhile fight? We're fighting to [i]change an entire culture[/i]. No amount of bullets, assassinations, and bombings is going to do that. It's just not. If people hate something, or don't believe in something, they're not going to be changed by the US military coming in and saying "Stop that! You are now a democratic country that believes in equal rights for all, and free speech, and ideological freedom, despite the fact that you haven't been that way for decades, if not longer!" It just won't work, and the idea that it will is foolish. I'm not saying "leave everyone alone and they'll work out their own problems eventually," but at the same time, I kind of am. You have to wait for people to want change before you can fight to defend it. Look at the American south. Even after the Civil War (which I know, wasn't originally about ending slavery), the south only grudgingly gave up its slaves, and many people there often made conditions for the newly freed blacks so poor that they essentially still were slaves. Moving forward, the civil rights movement wasn't born in the US military; it was born in the oppressed, and they sought out their own means of freedom. The time for the US military came when it was time to enforce these newly established rights for blacks, when the idea was already set and defended by the people living there. Not to mention the fact that giving blacks/minorities equal rights took the United States decades. One could argue that equal rights is still not truly achieved even today. Why, then, do we look towards other countries with problems of discrimination and inequality and say "Our military needs to protect the rights of others?" like that's a job that's easily attainable within a decent time-span? It's wishful thinking, but more dangerous, because it's a factor of the support for these long, dragging, unbelievably expensive wars.

Necessary and proper. You may not understand what our military does, but believe me it is all necessary and you don't even realize it.

[quote] I always see that ads try to say that soldiers fight for our freedom everyday,[/quote] They are actively engaged in ongoing operations which help to ensure the global security environment is stable and sturdy enough to continue to allow our nation to prosper. [quote]like if they stopped shooting for a day, we'd be invaded.[/quote] Doubtful, but there would be very negative results to the global economy and our national security. [quote]They, IMO, don't fight for our freedom right now.[/quote] They fight for our security and the freedoms of other nations. [quote]This fight is a useless one. It is one the Soviets tried and failed, and is one we will also fail to do.[/quote] Under Obama's current pull out plan, maybe. [quote]We should stop thinking that we're freeing people or saving them by putting their country into more of a shit hole than what they started out as.[/quote] That's quite simply not true. The economic and social conditions of the average Afghani has improved since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. To imply that it's anything other than that is to deny basic facts of life. [quote]One of my distant cousins joined the military, he seemed like he was brainwashed by some recruiter, saying his college will be payed for, he'll see new places, have an adventure, make life long friends. He used to be funny and out going. But when he came back and we visited him, he wasn't the same. Him and a bunch of his buddies from high school went with him, some of them are dead and most of them were severly maimed. Lucky for him onlly was shot 5 times and had two toes blown clean off. I KNOW he's suffering from PTSD, but he has to much pride in him to admit to it. He finished his college since then, but I don't see much of him anymore.[/quote] I'm very sorry. [quote]The fights we fight now don't.[/quote] The fight to allow religious freedom, economic prosperity, and the right to speak your mind without having a machete brought down on your nose is a worthless fight?

quite simple. a lesson by Sun Tzu that remains true to this day is that you cannot win a war without the will of the people. if we stayed in vietnam and hadn't had a hippie infestation in the media, we actually might have won. by the tet offensive, we had wiped out their irregulars and special forces. all they had left were poorly trained, conscripted farmers.

Military recruitment is horrible. They brainwash you. But, sometimes I think that there are some things we need to do. We aren't going about the best ways of doing it, which usually end up with innocent dead, but I'm happier to know everyday that one of those people who strap bombs to kids, pets, themselves even, has a bullet in their head.

[quote]Stopping Hitler from killing anymore millions of people was "the fight for freedom".[/quote] Did we get Godwin'd? Oh, just to test: [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law]-godwinslaw!-[/url].

How the hell else are you going to get people to kill for you? You: "Hay brah, war is bad, now go invade that country." Soldier: lolno You: "Hay ppl, war is bad, now support my invasion." People: lolno Great job. To be clear, there are good reasons to fight a war. But, more often than not, those reasons don't come into play when you need to go blow some shit up. Nobody wants to hear that you're pursuing military intervention to secure your financial interests in Latin America or something. While it might be the most effective way of making sure your corporations have a monopoly over the resources and labor in that area, thus providing your people with the lowest-cost products, it clashes with the people's idealistic vision of Life Should Be. So you have to pretend reality is just like what's in their heads.

Amen to the 50+ statements made in the OP. The greatest lie - "Dulce et decorum est propatria mori."