Who's freedom are you protecting?

Status
Not open for further replies.

PlanetEater

New Member
I am not trying to attack or offend anyone on this site, I am going to ask a series of questions that usually anger people

but I do not know why, I apologize if you are hurt or offended by the following.

What does the phrase "defending your freedom" mean? How does going to other countries oceans away from us full of

people with no intention of harming us until provoked and killing tons of people protect American lives or freedoms?

Who has ever came to America to steal our freedom? If that's not why we're waging wars in foreign countries, then why are we?

If we're there to protect the citizens from the "terrorists" then why do we end up kill more civilians than soldiers?


Why do we wage these wars when we end up only killing more people and leaving conflicts unresolved? Al-Queda still

exists and still kill people, so our war on them was pointless. We're pulling out of Afghanistan even though the Taliban

is still raining "terror" on people and there's still fighting there. We created ISIS by destabilizing Iraq in the 2003 war,

then decided we had to go kill them and start yet another years long war that not only endangered Americans, it

costed us innocent American lives when it wouldn't have otherwise. ISIS not only posed no threats to us, they've

released videos stating they'd stop killing us if we stopped bombing and killing them. (Of course they go on to threaten

us if we don't but WE'RE the aggressors here.)

The only time we've actually been attacked on American soil by middle-easterners was 9/11, which was caused by our support of anti-Muslim countries (Specifically the support of their treatment against Muslims) and our military intervention in other countries. So the only time American civilians were killed in America (Other than Pearl Harbor to my knowledge which was mainly aimed towards soldiers) was because our government and military was already in other countries messing things up.

I'm not defending the despicable actions of people who harm Americans, but I also won't turn a blind eye to the horrid things done in other countries in the name of freedom, so why is necessary for us to do these things if they only cost American lives and safety?
I had links to articles that further supported what I'm saying, but this site won't let me post links.
 

Tigerman999

New Member
I am not trying to attack or offend anyone on this site, I am going to ask a series of questions that usually anger people

but I do not know why, I apologize if you are hurt or offended by the following.

What does the phrase "defending your freedom" mean? How does going to other countries oceans away from us full of

people with no intention of harming us until provoked and killing tons of people protect American lives or freedoms?

Who has ever came to America to steal our freedom? If that's not why we're waging wars in foreign countries, then why are we?

If we're there to protect the citizens from the "terrorists" then why do we end up kill more civilians than soldiers?


Why do we wage these wars when we end up only killing more people and leaving conflicts unresolved? Al-Queda still

exists and still kill people, so our war on them was pointless. We're pulling out of Afghanistan even though the Taliban

is still raining "terror" on people and there's still fighting there. We created ISIS by destabilizing Iraq in the 2003 war,

then decided we had to go kill them and start yet another years long war that not only endangered Americans, it

costed us innocent American lives when it wouldn't have otherwise. ISIS not only posed no threats to us, they've

released videos stating they'd stop killing us if we stopped bombing and killing them. (Of course they go on to threaten

us if we don't but WE'RE the aggressors here.)

The only time we've actually been attacked on American soil by middle-easterners was 9/11, which was caused by our support of anti-Muslim countries (Specifically the support of their treatment against Muslims) and our military intervention in other countries. So the only time American civilians were killed in America (Other than Pearl Harbor to my knowledge which was mainly aimed towards soldiers) was because our government and military was already in other countries messing things up.

I'm not defending the despicable actions of people who harm Americans, but I also won't turn a blind eye to the horrid things done in other countries in the name of freedom, so why is necessary for us to do these things if they only cost American lives and safety?
I had links to articles that further supported what I'm saying, but this site won't let me post links.
It is not the issue of protecting freedom or spread the justices .. in fact it's what politicians called hide behind beautiful slogans to justify there greedy decisions and to give it legibility and gain public support .. it's simply a (studied and well woven lie ) .. some time this lie take a form of war against terrorism or protecting US freedom .. all this is a part of the U.S. policy !! If the USA government will launch wars and show there real motives and rising the real slogans .. then simply they will not find or convince enough U.S. citizens and will not find enough U.S. troops to fight and die to complies it. So in order to get people to fight in wars simply you have to convince them that they die for a noble cause and they will sacrifice themselves happily.. SO again if the U.S. telling them that they are fighting and waging wars in order to get Oil or to accomplish a political ambitions or invade countries for strategic reasons , they will lose public support (public opinion) .. in history governments in Europe convince there people that they fighting in the name of . the god ( The Crusades ) , now in 21 century they use other reasons like protect freedom and killing the bad guy.
 

Tigerman999

New Member
Plus it's easier to control people by using fear, than being honest with them .. because fear make people go easy about a lot of things , fear don't let you think freely or logically .. so in order to control the people you must let them think that they are in danger all the time .. this well make them say ok you can invade other countries ok you can put new rules to watch us all the time take some of our freedom .. ok you can take another billion dollar for this or that military thing ignoring the economic situation .. if that will protect us .... how you create this kind of fear ? .. simply make organize terrorist groups like Al or ISIS and the result is you have an enemy to stick on it every bad corrupted or twisted things in the world and be like the universal cop and saviour .. and gain support all the time.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Plus it's easier to control people by using fear, than being honest with them .. because fear make people go easy about a lot of things , fear don't let you think freely or logically .. so in order to control the people you must let them think that they are in danger all the time .. this well make them say ok you can invade other countries ok you can put new rules to watch us all the time take some of our freedom .. ok you can take another billion dollar for this or that military thing ignoring the economic situation .. if that will protect us .... how you create this kind of fear ? .. simply make organize terrorist groups like Al or ISIS and the result is you have an enemy to stick on it every bad corrupted or twisted things in the world and be like the universal cop and saviour .. and gain support all the time.
Seriously?

Come on now have you actually read what you have written?

The more convoluted a conspiracy has to be to achieve the desired result the less likely it is actually a conspiracy rather than independent forces, acting independently and being reacted to by others. Whether the reaction from the west was relative or in proportion to 9/11 can be debated but to suggest that the west organised ISIL is foil hat stuff in the extreme.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
More than a decade after 11th September, 2001, some still claim that Osama was trained and supported by the CIA : a load of bollocks. The CIA (and Saudi Arabia) indeed provided massive amounts of funding to the various anti-Soviet resistance groups and made the stupid mistake of allowing the Pakistanis to decide which groups would receive the aid but it did not directly support or train AQ or OBL.

Not only was AQ a very small part of the Afghan resistance movement but support from the CIA was simply not needed as OBL was flushed with cash and also received tonnes of funding from various sources in the Middle East.

Equally, the rise of IS didn't happen overnight and was not supported by the CIA. IS only started making headlines on a daily or regular basis after it captured a large part of Iraq but Iraqi, Syrian,Turkish and officials from other countries have long warned of such a danger; unfortunately not many listened or took their warnings seriously.

PlanetEater,

Japanese balloons also killed some Americans on American soil.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
More than a decade after 11th September, 2001, some still claim that Osama was trained and supported by the CIA : a load of bollocks. The CIA (and Saudi Arabia) indeed provided massive amounts of funding to the various anti-Soviet resistance groups and made the stupid mistake of allowing the Pakistanis to decide which groups would receive the aid but it did not directly suspport or train AQ or OBL.

Not only was AQ a very small part of the Afghan resistance movement but support from the CIA was simply not needed as OBL was flushed with cash and also received tonnes of funding from various sources in the Middle East.

Equally, the rise of IS didn't happen overnight and was not supported by the CIA. IS only started making headlines on a daily or regular basis after it captured a large part of Iraq but Iraqi, Syrian,Turkish and officials from other countries have long warned of such a danger; unfortunately not many listened or took their warnings seriously.

PlanetEater,

Japanese balloons also killed some Americans on American soil.
We can thank Saudi Arabia and a couple of Gulf states for IS along with the pathetic performance the Iraqi government and army. Leaving Saddam alone was probably, in hindsight, the least $hitty option compared to what we have now.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
Indeed but the West shares part of the blame too. Syrian, Iraqi and Turkish officials have long been warning about IS but nobody that mattered in the West paid serious attention; they were more focused on aiding the ''moderates'' so the ''moderates'' could do away with Assad [the idea was that the ''moderates'' would also do away with the'' extremists'']. Iraqi officials have also long warned that the war in Syria would spill over into Iraq and this is precisely what has happened.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Indeed but the West shares part of the blame too. Syrian, Iraqi and Turkish officials have long been warning about IS but nobody omn the West paid serious attention; they were more focused on aiding the ''moderates'' so the ''moderates'' could do away with Assad [the idea was that the ''moderates'' would also do away with the'' extremists'']. Iraqi officials have also long warned that the war in Syria would spill over into Iraq and this is precisely what has happened.
I forgot to add the other $hitty option in my previous post, leave Assad alone. Hindsight was not required as we had already seen results in Iraq and Libya. Regime change isn't all it is cracked up to be, in the ME anyway.
 

Tigerman999

New Member
Seriously?

Come on now have you actually read what you have written?

The more convoluted a conspiracy has to be to achieve the desired result the less likely it is actually a conspiracy rather than independent forces, acting independently and being reacted to by others. Whether the reaction from the west was relative or in proportion to 9/11 can be debated but to suggest that the west organised ISIL is foil hat stuff in the extreme.
I don't want to talk for days about how many evidences that point that USA created ISIS like they created AL Qaida before to fight the Soviets .. Just go to youtube and Search John McCain support ISIS there are thousands of
TV reports on it and he himself admitted , go and hear it for yourself ... a piece of advice read always in history before you decide what to believe .... don't let anyone fool you .
 

Cadredave

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I don't want to talk for days about how many evidences that point that USA created ISIS like they created AL Qaida before to fight the Soviets .. Just go to youtube and Search John McCain support ISIS there are thousands of
TV reports on it and he himself admitted , go and hear it for yourself ... a piece of advice read always in history before you decide what to believe .... don't let anyone fool you .
Mate take your conspiracy theory's back to MP.net quoting you-tube & fox news wont cut it on this forum..
 

Preceptor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Thread locked. DT is an international defence forum, not a pet rock conspiracy forum. Those wishing to discuss or allege conspiracies should go elsewhere. Quickly. As CD indicated citing youtube sources as "proof" is meaningless, except for pointing out one's own bias and/or lack of knowledge about the internet. Anyone can upload material to youtube, and youtube receives so many uploads that they cannot screen what has been uploaded. There is no screening mechanism to make sure what has been uploaded is truthful or accurate. Someone could post a video showing that Darth Vader is building a new Death Star on the dark side of the Moon for the USAF, and unfortunately some people would probably believe it. That does not make such a video true. Just like people citing Wikipedia as a source or "proof", anything where anyone/everyone post or edit content, especially when doing so functionally anonymous or otherwise without accountability, is a "source" without value.
-Preceptor
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top