Posted: 1/2/2008 9:33:48 AM EDT
|
How come whenever somebody is on here bashing the military, somebody always stands up and tells them that without your military protectors, you wouldn't even have the right to talk that shit? Lately, I've been thinking, has the US soldier ever faced a foriegn enemy that was realistically able to come over here and make us speak his native language and adopt his customs? Most of the "defended freedom" I've seen lately, like since WWII, has been on the form of attacking countries a world away who were "talking things out" with a neighbor of theirs. So basically, how have modern vets "defended my freedom" from those mean men abroad who had either no intention or ability to come over here and enslave the men and rape the women? Hit and run attacks don't count. That isn't an occupation and frankly, the government has taken more from me in knee-jerk reactionism than any jihadist could ever hope to. I'm not trying to troll, I'm really not. I'm just curious about the mentality of defending "freedom" by attacking non-threats. |
Most of the military action since WWII was aimed at stopping global Communisim... Every nation their ideology claimed brought it closer to our doorstep... If you don't think that was a real threat, you're delusional... Freedom is more than not being conquered... Freedom is the ability to live the way we as a nation want to live, to have the policies our citizens vote for WITHOUT consideration for what some tin-hat dictator or deranged religious nut desires us to do... Once you appease them once, they just keep pressing... The right response is the one you see now: Engage, destroy, repeat as needed... |