You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.
#11. Posted:
16
  • Arcade King
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 24, 201310Year Member
Posts: 3,654
Reputation Power: 11981
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 24, 201310Year Member
Posts: 3,654
Reputation Power: 11981
Cioran wrote Who was saying we should have pulled out of Afghanistan? I certainly didn't. It was a dumb war because of how it was being fought, which is what Chelsea Manning exposed, not because it was being fought.

Neither of you have managed to point to a single soldier directly HARMED by the release of this information and you are both applying views to me which I don't hold. It's called straw manning, don't do it.

I'm sorry if the release of this information made the militarys job harder but considering over half of the US budget goes to the military every year I'm sure you could deal with it.

And no Glock, I don't think 9/11 was an inside job, I've actually argued against that notion on this website.


Neither of us pointed out a single **** person?

Read my God damn post a little harder, i clearly said that me and my family and well over half of my company was affected by it?

Jesus **** christ, are you selective or what.

Now please tell me where the **** you get the assumption that the U.S. budget in anyway majorly impacts the military?

"I'm sure you can deal with it"....

Jesus you're a **** moronic adolescent for that one. Did you not consider that while yes we get the funding how long it takes for it to actually go into affect and what branch gets the most?

I personally have yet to see funding majorly impact my job in any possible way or my field in general. It is people like you that just **** piss me off on this site, you are making more assumptions than conclusions with no prior experience to the job.

Tell me if the governmental funding wasn't there and the war with Afghanistan would've never happened what about national security. Would we just allow 9/11 to happen and think nothing of it?

You're taking what you're given for granted and not really making any sense whatsoever with it.

The the argument back to the consequential beginning, you said no one is affected directly?

Tell me why my pay nearly dropped 30% when it happened that isn't be affected? No because surely the government is funded enough.

Now before you comment again, please tell me what prior experience you have other than media feeding and leeching to counter this? I would like to know where you're getting the "no one was affected" logic at.

I highly doubt that you know that a couple years back when all military info was made public or a major chunk at that, the amounts of threats that were made towards any american soldier. You wouldn't know about this would you? Better yet you wouldn't know about wearing over 90+ pounds of gear at times to just walk outside of base would you. No even better than that, once again referring to what Glock- said here, how about clearing with all of that on? Could you do it?

Once again i said this earlier you're taking what you have for granted and abusing it. It makes you look like arrogant and ignorant.

I'm going to stop there. With this one at least.




notice how we didn't post anything about harmed soldiers. Why would we? that is a pointless argument on its own, the risk is there. All it would've taken at the time was a simple view and harm could've happened.

A risk that we face now? They could know some of the ways we use things, they know locations.

let me stop there.
#12. Posted:
Tywin
  • Winter 2016
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 06, 201112Year Member
Posts: 12,347
Reputation Power: 632
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 06, 201112Year Member
Posts: 12,347
Reputation Power: 632
Glock- wrote
Cioran wrote It took him long enough, but this is some great news.
Please explain to me how this is good news.

Or are you just trying to raise your post count...

This piece of crap leaked documents that were highly classified and put men and women overseas in danger, he should have gotten the needle.

Now I see what Snowden did it, he wanted people to know that they were being spied on and i guess i can understand that. But this failed science project leaked them with the intent of causing harm to our assets and our country...


[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

She released what the American people should have seen to begin with. Our tax dollars were being spent on killing innocent people for no damn reason.
How are you going to try to justify that?
#13. Posted:
Glock-
  • TTG Addict
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 28, 201013Year Member
Posts: 2,244
Reputation Power: 257
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 28, 201013Year Member
Posts: 2,244
Reputation Power: 257
Tywin wrote
Glock- wrote
Cioran wrote It took him long enough, but this is some great news.
Please explain to me how this is good news.

Or are you just trying to raise your post count...

This piece of crap leaked documents that were highly classified and put men and women overseas in danger, he should have gotten the needle.

Now I see what Snowden did it, he wanted people to know that they were being spied on and i guess i can understand that. But this failed science project leaked them with the intent of causing harm to our assets and our country...


[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]

She released what the American people should have seen to begin with. Our tax dollars were being spent on killing innocent people for no damn reason.
How are you going to try to justify that?
Civilian deaths are an unfortunate thing but it's called a causality of war. Now i am not saying that i do not care, i do. It is sad that civilians die.

In the wake of the leaks, he said the Pentagon set up a warning system for any Afghan or Iraqi national whose co-operation with the US forces might put them in danger. A "duty to warn" was issued for actual informants who were providing intelligence to the US troops, and a lesser "duty to notify" was provided to local villagers who might be helpful on a less formal basis


Exactly my point when i posted before saying assests were forced to hide and or evac out of hostile sites due to the leaks. IF we did have an informant killed, it would not be released as it's classified so you do not know if and when someone was harmed thus proving my point...

Do you not understand what we are trying to explain to you or are you still blind?
As we both said, if you want to make a difference. Put down your controller and enlist and make that difference you are so judgmental about.
#14. Posted:
Tywin
  • 2 Million
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 06, 201112Year Member
Posts: 12,347
Reputation Power: 632
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 06, 201112Year Member
Posts: 12,347
Reputation Power: 632
Glock- wrote Civilian deaths are an unfortunate thing but it's called a causality of war. Now i am not saying that i do not care, i do. It is sad that civilians die.


Are you sure it's unfortunate? Because in the video that she released the soldiers were laughing about it.

Glock- wrote Exactly my point when i posted before saying assests were forced to hide and or evac out of hostile sites due to the leaks. IF we did have an informant killed, it would not be released as it's classified so you do not know if and when someone was harmed thus proving my point....


Let me guess; You also think that the Abu Ghraib pictures should have never of been made public and kept from the American people because it potentially put people at risk?

Glock- wrote Do you not understand what we are trying to explain to you or are you still blind?
As we both said, if you want to make a difference. Put down your controller and enlist and make that difference you are so judgmental about.


That wouldn't make a difference. It comes down to not invading countries that never attacked us or even wanted to attack us.
#15. Posted:
Glock-
  • TTG Addict
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 28, 201013Year Member
Posts: 2,244
Reputation Power: 257
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 28, 201013Year Member
Posts: 2,244
Reputation Power: 257
Tywin wrote
Glock- wrote Civilian deaths are an unfortunate thing but it's called a causality of war. Now i am not saying that i do not care, i do. It is sad that civilians die.


Are you sure it's unfortunate? Because in the video that she released the soldiers were laughing about it.

Glock- wrote Exactly my point when i posted before saying assests were forced to hide and or evac out of hostile sites due to the leaks. IF we did have an informant killed, it would not be released as it's classified so you do not know if and when someone was harmed thus proving my point....


Let me guess; You also think that the Abu Ghraib pictures should have never of been made public and kept from the American people because it potentially put people at risk?

Glock- wrote Do you not understand what we are trying to explain to you or are you still blind?
As we both said, if you want to make a difference. Put down your controller and enlist and make that difference you are so judgmental about.


That wouldn't make a difference. It comes down to not invading countries that never attacked us or even wanted to attack us.



Let me guess; You also think that the Abu Ghraib pictures should have never of been made public and kept from the American people because it potentially put people at risk?


Did i ever say that? No.

Are you sure it's unfortunate? Because in the video that she released the soldiers were laughing about it.


Did you read that on CNN? So if 3 soldiers were laughing about civilians getting killed, that makes them all bad?

I was overseas and i witnessed a 12 year old boy ripped in half by a VBIED. Did i think it was funny or did i laugh? No, i was mortified. You are basing 1.5 million service members based of 3 soldiers actions. You probably say that all police officers are murderers because a few are bad. You are the problem with america today.


That wouldn't make a difference. It comes down to not invading countries that never attacked us or even wanted to attack us.


Are you being serious right now or are you just trolling?

So you are saying we should have not invaded Afghanistan? Please, go back and read my post about my story if you have not already.

If we never destroyed that equipment, where do you think it would have been used next.

Al-Qaeda is a militant Sunni Islamist multi-national organization founded in 1988 by Osama Bin Laden and was formed in Afghanistan after he left the Sudan. That organization which by the U.N. is a terrorist organization has carried out attacks that have left thousands dead such as 9/1, the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings and more. The invasion of Afghanistan was to disperse the group and or eliminate key terrorist elements which we have been doing, WHICH i was a part of.

You do not have any clue the reality of the situation and believe everything you read on CNN and the internet. If you would really like to see the truth, go enlist and maybe you'll get deployed.

Until then, shut your god damn mouth because what you say has no truth or backing behind it.
#16. Posted:
Tywin
  • 1000 Thanks
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 06, 201112Year Member
Posts: 12,347
Reputation Power: 632
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 06, 201112Year Member
Posts: 12,347
Reputation Power: 632
Glock- wrote Did you read that on CNN? So if 3 soldiers were laughing about civilians getting killed, that makes them all bad?

I was overseas and i witnessed a 12 year old boy ripped in half by a VBIED. Did i think it was funny or did i laugh? No, i was mortified. You are basing 1.5 million service members based of 3 soldiers actions. You probably say that all police officers are murderers because a few are bad. You are the problem with america today.


Please show me where I ever said that all soldiers are bad because of the actions of a few callous men.

Glock- wrote Are you being serious right now or are you just trolling?

So you are saying we should have not invaded Afghanistan? Please, go back and read my post about my story if you have not already.

If we never destroyed that equipment, where do you think it would have been used next.

Al-Qaeda is a militant Sunni Islamist multi-national organization founded in 1988 by Osama Bin Laden and was formed in Afghanistan after he left the Sudan. That organization which by the U.N. is a terrorist organization has carried out attacks that have left thousands dead such as 9/1, the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings and more. The invasion of Afghanistan was to disperse the group and or eliminate key terrorist elements which we have been doing, WHICH i was a part of.

You do not have any clue the reality of the situation and believe everything you read on CNN and the internet. If you would really like to see the truth, go enlist and maybe you'll get deployed.

Until then, shut your god damn mouth because what you say has no truth or backing behind it.


The collateral murder video, the video that brought Chelsea to fame, was in Iraq. Iraq was ruled by a secular party who had no ties to Al Qaeda whatsoever. The Bush administration lied repeatldy to justify the Iraq war. First they tried to link 9/11 to Saddam, then they said he had weapons of mass destruction, then the goalpost was finally moved to "well he's a bad guy".

Even if Saddam did have weapons of mass destruction, he wasn't going to use them. He wasn't a fundamentalist. He knew that if he even thought about using them on us, his entire country would be blown off the map within 30 minutes.


Your personal story is frankly irrelevant. Droplets of anecdotal evidence means nothing when we now know the full picture clearly, assuming you're telling the truth. You seem to have personal experience with everything that fits your argument. You have said that you were in the military, a mercenary, and now you also say that you're a cop.
#17. Posted:
Glock-
  • Halloween!
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 28, 201013Year Member
Posts: 2,244
Reputation Power: 257
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 28, 201013Year Member
Posts: 2,244
Reputation Power: 257
Tywin wrote
Glock- wrote Did you read that on CNN? So if 3 soldiers were laughing about civilians getting killed, that makes them all bad?

I was overseas and i witnessed a 12 year old boy ripped in half by a VBIED. Did i think it was funny or did i laugh? No, i was mortified. You are basing 1.5 million service members based of 3 soldiers actions. You probably say that all police officers are murderers because a few are bad. You are the problem with america today.


Please show me where I ever said that all soldiers are bad because of the actions of a few callous men.

Glock- wrote Are you being serious right now or are you just trolling?

So you are saying we should have not invaded Afghanistan? Please, go back and read my post about my story if you have not already.

If we never destroyed that equipment, where do you think it would have been used next.

Al-Qaeda is a militant Sunni Islamist multi-national organization founded in 1988 by Osama Bin Laden and was formed in Afghanistan after he left the Sudan. That organization which by the U.N. is a terrorist organization has carried out attacks that have left thousands dead such as 9/1, the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings and more. The invasion of Afghanistan was to disperse the group and or eliminate key terrorist elements which we have been doing, WHICH i was a part of.

You do not have any clue the reality of the situation and believe everything you read on CNN and the internet. If you would really like to see the truth, go enlist and maybe you'll get deployed.

Until then, shut your god damn mouth because what you say has no truth or backing behind it.


The collateral murder video, the video that brought Chelsea to fame, was in Iraq. Iraq was ruled by a secular party who had no ties to Al Qaeda whatsoever. The Bush administration lied repeatldy to justify the Iraq war. First they tried to link 9/11 to Saddam, then they said he had weapons of mass destruction, then the goalpost was finally moved to "well he's a bad guy".

Even if Saddam did have weapons of mass destruction, he wasn't going to use them. He wasn't a fundamentalist. He knew that if he even thought about using them on us, his entire country would be blown off the map within 30 minutes.


Your personal story is frankly irrelevant. Droplets of anecdotal evidence means nothing when we now know the full picture clearly, assuming you're telling the truth. You seem to have personal experience with everything that fits your argument. You have said that you were in the military, a mercenary, and now you also say that you're a cop.


You have said that you were in the military, a mercenary, and now you also say that you're a cop.

Now where did i say i was a Mercenary? Quite frankly they are murderers for hire. It is known i was in the service and also that i am currently working as an officer. I do not have a story for everything so i am confused where you are trying to go with this.

Even if Saddam did have weapons of mass destruction, he wasn't going to use them. He wasn't a fundamentalist. He knew that if he even thought about using them on us, his entire country would be blown off the map within 30 minutes.
This isn't a movie, you don't just blow a country off the map so let's get real here, okay?

Saddam did use chemical weapons numerous times which is why we suspected him to use them again against U.S. forces.

Saddam used them during the 1980s campaign against Iranian and Kurdish forces.
After we realized he dismantled his WMD program we began focusing on eliminating key elements.

And for a little history lesson, go and look up Operation Avarice and educate yourself for a bit. Saddam was in possession of chemical weapons during the invasion of Baghdad in 2003 but did not use them.


So please explain more as i'm curious where you will go next.


#18. Posted:
Tywin
  • Tutorial King
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 06, 201112Year Member
Posts: 12,347
Reputation Power: 632
Status: Offline
Joined: Jun 06, 201112Year Member
Posts: 12,347
Reputation Power: 632
Glock- wrote Quite frankly they are murderers for hire. It is known i was in the service and also that i am currently working as an officer. I do not have a story for everything so i am confused where you are trying to go with this.


Nice to see that you have finally changed your mind since last November when I made this same argument and you got pissy with me, talking about how honorable they are.

Glock- wrote This isn't a movie, you don't just blow a country off the map so let's get real here, okay?

Saddam did use chemical weapons numerous times which is why we suspected him to use them again against U.S. forces.

Saddam used them during the 1980s campaign against Iranian and Kurdish forces.
After we realized he dismantled his WMD program we began focusing on eliminating key elements


Please read what you just argued. How would he use chemical weapons against US forces if we weren't in their country to begin with?

First you argue he had chemical weapons and we feared he'd use them on us even though we weren't there, then you justify the WMD lies by repeating the Bush doctrine that led to the rise of ISIS. "Eliminating key elements" is what destabilized the middle east and created the power vacuum.
#19. Posted:
ProfessorNobody
  • TTG Contender
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 07, 201211Year Member
Posts: 3,732
Reputation Power: 362
Status: Offline
Joined: Nov 07, 201211Year Member
Posts: 3,732
Reputation Power: 362
Mitochondria wrote
Cioran wrote Who was saying we should have pulled out of Afghanistan? I certainly didn't. It was a dumb war because of how it was being fought, which is what Chelsea Manning exposed, not because it was being fought.

Neither of you have managed to point to a single soldier directly HARMED by the release of this information and you are both applying views to me which I don't hold. It's called straw manning, don't do it.

I'm sorry if the release of this information made the militarys job harder but considering over half of the US budget goes to the military every year I'm sure you could deal with it.

And no Glock, I don't think 9/11 was an inside job, I've actually argued against that notion on this website.


Neither of us pointed out a single **** person?

Read my God damn post a little harder, i clearly said that me and my family and well over half of my company was affected by it?

Jesus **** christ, are you selective or what.

Now please tell me where the **** you get the assumption that the U.S. budget in anyway majorly impacts the military?

"I'm sure you can deal with it"....

Jesus you're a **** moronic adolescent for that one. Did you not consider that while yes we get the funding how long it takes for it to actually go into affect and what branch gets the most?

I personally have yet to see funding majorly impact my job in any possible way or my field in general. It is people like you that just **** piss me off on this site, you are making more assumptions than conclusions with no prior experience to the job.

Tell me if the governmental funding wasn't there and the war with Afghanistan would've never happened what about national security. Would we just allow 9/11 to happen and think nothing of it?

You're taking what you're given for granted and not really making any sense whatsoever with it.

The the argument back to the consequential beginning, you said no one is affected directly?

Tell me why my pay nearly dropped 30% when it happened that isn't be affected? No because surely the government is funded enough.

Now before you comment again, please tell me what prior experience you have other than media feeding and leeching to counter this? I would like to know where you're getting the "no one was affected" logic at.

I highly doubt that you know that a couple years back when all military info was made public or a major chunk at that, the amounts of threats that were made towards any american soldier. You wouldn't know about this would you? Better yet you wouldn't know about wearing over 90+ pounds of gear at times to just walk outside of base would you. No even better than that, once again referring to what Glock- said here, how about clearing with all of that on? Could you do it?

Once again i said this earlier you're taking what you have for granted and abusing it. It makes you look like arrogant and ignorant.

I'm going to stop there. With this one at least.




notice how we didn't post anything about harmed soldiers. Why would we? that is a pointless argument on its own, the risk is there. All it would've taken at the time was a simple view and harm could've happened.

A risk that we face now? They could know some of the ways we use things, they know locations.

let me stop there.


Yes, please do stop there. If you can't keep your emotions out of this and can't resist attacking me on a personal level then you do need to stop otherwise this post is just going to get closed and I don't think any of us want that.

You must have a very low burden of proof if you think that saying "Me and some people I know were affected" is going to change my mind. Prove it.
I want you to point to a situation where enemy combatants were found to have accessed that information and used it in order to harm military personnel.
That would constitute proof, not an anecdote about you and some people you know.

I'm getting the "No one was HARMED" logic from the fact that no evidence has been presented to say that anybody has been harmed.
I apologise for holding the truth about murder and torture to a higher standard than your wages.

No even better than that, once again referring to what Glock- said here, how about clearing with all of that on? Could you do it?


This is the most boring no-platforming I have ever witnessed and you should realise how this has absolutely no affect on whether or not my opinion is accurate.
You are using this as a way of trying to shut me up and make me look foolish but you're underestimating the intelligence of people on this website, they see right through it.

The risk doesn't matter, you joined the military. If you weren't prepared to be at risk then you shouldn't have joined.

Inb4: "You don't need my help to look foolish you're doing that all by yourself!" yawn.


Glock wrote A dumb war, which would lead one to assume you are insinuating that we should not be there in the first place.

Listen, i am trying to be polite. I stated that it put members at risk not that they were HARMED.

considering over half of the US budget goes to the military every year I'm sure you could deal with it.


So you'll rather me die, right? Yeah, it did make the military's job a lot harder as they were forced to either draw out from an operation or continue with the risk. But it's not like you'd actually know what risk or danger is because you are probably someone who sits behind a desk and does nothing. You can sit there all you want and say how we are doing the war in Afghanistan wrong but what have you done about it? How about you go enlist and make a difference instead of talking about something you know nothing about other then what you see on CNN.


If this is you trying to be polite then you really need to work on your tact.
Yes, you could assume that I meant we shouldn't be there in the first place, I don't blame you for assuming that, but it is still an assumption and it was wrong. I pointed out that it was wrong and you now have to continue this line of argumentation knowing what I really think. If you don't then you're not engaging with me honestly.

Why would I join the military to try and change things when I can just back up the whislteblowers who do change things and defend them from critics like you?

But it's not like you'd actually know what risk or danger is because you are probably someone who sits behind a desk and does nothing.


Yes, yes. Only soldiers know what risk is. That concept is completely foreign to everyone who isn't a soldier.
I'll just let you know now that your ad hominem attacks aren't making me feel bad. I don't care if you don't respect me, I don't care if you don't like me.
I care about what arguments you have to present and I'm pretty underwhelmed so far.

So you'll rather me die, right?


I don't know where you got that idea from. I obviously have quite a lot of faith in the US military's ability to protect itself and its soldiers if I'm alright with the risk inherent in a leak like this.
If you want to try to spin this into me attacking you then you're going to have to try harder than that.

Mitochondria wrote No because surely the government is funded enough.

Yes, it is, and you should be annoyed with your government for dropping your wages when this much money is going into the military.

[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]


Jesus **** christ, are you selective or what. It is people like you that just **** piss me off on this site, you are making more assumptions than conclusions with no prior experience to the job. Jesus you're a **** moronic adolescent for that one.


I know that you were probably quite angry when you wrote these things. I'm not going to claim that my opinion isn't inflammatory [even though I don't personally find it to be that bad] but seriously?

I have seen you have fruitful conversations over difficult topics on this site before.
Just because we disagree about this one thing, and I understand that it might be something which you hold very dear, this isn't a helpful way of engaging with someone.
I would never attack you personally as a way of trying to argue with you and I'm not going to continue debating with you if you insist on continuing this line of attack.


Glock- wrote Exactly my point when i posted before saying assests were forced to hide and or evac out of hostile sites due to the leaks. IF we did have an informant killed, it would not be released as it's classified so you do not know if and when someone was harmed thus proving my point...


Well that settles it then. You can't prove that anyone was harmed and we can't prove that anyone wasn't.
If you want to argue about risk then that's fine but we as dullard non-military types think that soldiers should accept the possibility of their life being at risk before joining the military. You disagree and it doesn't seem that we are going to change each other's opinions about that.

Now I think I'm quite bored of being personally attacked over this subject so I'm just going to leave it at this.
See you two around, hopefully in more friendly conversations.


Last edited by ProfessorNobody ; edited 6 times in total
#20. Posted:
Glock-
  • Halloween!
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 28, 201013Year Member
Posts: 2,244
Reputation Power: 257
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 28, 201013Year Member
Posts: 2,244
Reputation Power: 257
Tywin wrote
Glock- wrote Quite frankly they are murderers for hire. It is known i was in the service and also that i am currently working as an officer. I do not have a story for everything so i am confused where you are trying to go with this.


Nice to see that you have finally changed your mind since last November when I made this same argument and you got pissy with me, talking about how honorable they are.

Glock- wrote This isn't a movie, you don't just blow a country off the map so let's get real here, okay?

Saddam did use chemical weapons numerous times which is why we suspected him to use them again against U.S. forces.

Saddam used them during the 1980s campaign against Iranian and Kurdish forces.
After we realized he dismantled his WMD program we began focusing on eliminating key elements


Please read what you just argued. How would he use chemical weapons against US forces if we weren't in their country to begin with?

First you argue he had chemical weapons and we feared he'd use them on us even though we weren't there, then you justify the WMD lies by repeating the Bush doctrine that led to the rise of ISIS. "Eliminating key elements" is what destabilized the middle east and created the power vacuum.


. How would he use chemical weapons against US forces if we weren't in their country to begin with?
During desert storm he used chemical weapons against the kurds and some U.S. forces were exposed to it. I believe i said in my first two or 3 comments that the war in Iraq was a mess and i still stand with that. I was talking about the war in Afghanistan as i had experience there.


WMD lies by repeating the Bush doctrine that led to the rise of ISIS. "Eliminating key elements" is what destabilized the middle east and created the power vacuum.


Oh jesus, if i am not mistaken i saw something like that posted by CNN. So you probably agree with president Obama when he stated that "no terrorist organization has planned and executed an attack against the U.S. int eh last 8 years" right?

Bush doctrine that led to the rise of ISIS.
You do realize that ISIS has been around since 1999 and were mainly in Syria. They just weren't focused on. I literally learned about this in my class by my professor who happens to be a left-wing. ISIS only grew by about a few thousand after we left Iraq..
Jump to:
You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.