Do foreign soldiers in Afghanistan have honor?

[SevenStarsHK2N]

There was zero reason to attack the Taliban or try regime change.

How about the fact that they are islamo-fascists who took control of the country by force - and brutalised it's own people (especially those of non pashtun origin)

Even Iran is against the Taleban.

Fascism should be attacked wherever it raises it's ugly head.

Young girls can go to school now in Afghanistan - millions of people have been given a future and hope who otherwise would have remained illiterate, subservient and treated as 2nd class humans.

 

[BrianLewis]

This not about ME Brian Lewis. There is not one claim to my honor in this whole GD thread. Why do I even have to point that out. This is about what they are doing, which I find to be foolhardy and lacking in enough critical thought to be be deemed honorable.

Military service throughout the entire globe is about following orders, not questioning policy. If you have a beef with policy, like I said before, complain about the policy makers. No military organization would function if every one of their soldiers thought they knew what was best and acted on it. I am sure your not going to bring up military misconduct here. You know what the mis- part of misconduct means right?

Also, you act like it's okay to demoralize troops and call people you have never met dishonorable, simply because you disagree with the general situation. Yet, it's unfair to direct the same criteria towards you on a small forum, where no lives are at stake? Are you in a position judge others? Common sense would seem to say that if you criticise others, prepare to be put under the same microscope.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

So, Zorro, do you think the jihadists in the American Army are part of the Crusade Hezam speaks of? And I still thinks its pretty dumb to say...

Sorry to take time to answer you. I have to admit, it is nice to be asked a question after having others here call me a troll!

I am in about as much agreement with Hezam about use of the word "Crusades" as I am with you using the word "Jihad". I think you both have a bit of a point, but, it seems you are both letting extremists define words for you.

The Crusades were different things to different people. A lot of people lied about their intent for supporting them or participating, surely. Then, as now, some people just love war, and they will make up excuses that sound good for supporting them and participating. There was a time when the words "holy war" sounded nice to Christian ears. That time has past. Now you have to talk about freedom and rights. But for so many, its just talk.

In the sense that this is East vs. West, and a Christian society vs. a Muslim society, it is very much like a Crusade. And while you may be loathe to admit America is a Christian society, the religious people on both sides see America that way.

But in the sense that the Crusades seemed to be about control of the Holy Land, there is nothing to compare. There is nothing holy to Christians about Afghanistan.

But who knows what any of the Christians in the U.S. military are thinking? As much as they are not shouting the word "Crusade" they may be thinking exactly that.

Of course Muslims in the U.S. military would not be there to support such a "crusade", but, they may be thinking to collapse such "crusade" ideas from within by being an example of a good and patriotic Muslim to anyone who thinks a "crusade" would have any validity. And that would be quite a struggle, and yes that struggle would be a form of jihad. I will let a Muslim correct me if I am wrong.

Other reasons for Muslims to join would be to simply oppose the Taliban, which is certainly not loved by moderate Muslims. But I would say they too should join local forces. They might also join just seeing it as a job, like so many others.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

How about the fact that they are islamo-fascists who took control of the country by force - and brutalised it's own people (especially those of non pashtun origin)

You really play fast and loose with your labeling. Thinking like this will have us attacking everyone and before too long, our own tails too!

The Taliban are not fascist. They are fundamentalist. Fascism is founded on nationalism. You don't see Taliban going around pimping Afghan pride do you?

Even Iran is against the Taleban.

So many were for the Taliban before they were against. When the Taliban first started taking control, they were praised for bringing order out of chaos and cracking down the opium trade. Then they destroyed those statues, and what was so important about them, I don't know, but suddenly the Taliban were no good anymore.

Fascism should be attacked wherever it raises it's ugly head.

With people like yourself doing the defining, I should hope not.

Young girls can go to school now in Afghanistan - millions of people have been given a future and hope who otherwise would have remained illiterate, subservient and treated as 2nd class humans.

The dead young girls and not going to school. The dead civilians don't have a future and hope. Foreign intervention has gotten so many innocents killed for about 12 years now.

If the goal was to give Afghans hope and a future and educate girls, coalition countries could have simply opened up immigration to Afghans rather than start shooting at people and raining bombs that land much too randomly.

 

[SevenStarsHK2N]

oh my f*cking god - seriously Zorro -

you need to either learn some facts - preferably about the topic you are trying to argue about - or just shut up.

This is getting SO ridiculous now.

100% of what you have said in your reply to me is wrong.

so you think i'm being loose by calling the taleban islamo-fascists.

hmm lets look at some FACTS shall we. (we will ignore the fact that they took control of the country by force)

Do they believe that it is ok for people to have and express views that are not inline with their own : - NO
Do they believe that one race has more of a right to be in Afghanistan than others : - YES
Are they nationalistic : - YES EXTREMELY SO

I think perhaps you are getting the taleban confused with mujaheddin or more Jihadi elements that are also present in Afghanistan.

seriously do some learning - you are just making yourself look foolish

 

[Tamayo]

I understand how horrible wars can be, and how power can be abused, but I can't fault the people who are thrown into other countries and given orders. It was their choice to accept the risk of being killed and seeing things they'll never be able to forget, but I'm not sure you can argue what they're doing on a personal level. After all, if you call what they're doing wrong, then where does it end? The world is violent, and fights MUST be fought. I don't think that a single one of us at home could really be trusted to make the calls because we barely even see the tip of the iceberg.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

7stars, instead of yelling at me with no leg to stand on, why not go punch a wall? Then you can come back here and discuss like an adult.

Fascism has a definition and no, it does not get to be defined by you.

Fascists seek to unify their nation through a totalitarian state that seeks the mass mobilization of the national community,[3][4] relying on a vanguard party to initiate a revolution to organize the nation on fascist principles.[5] Hostile to liberal democracy, socialism, and communism, fascist movements share certain common features, including the veneration of the state, a devotion to a strong leader, and an emphasis on ultranationalism, ethnocentrism, and militarism. Fascism views political violence, war, and imperialism as a means to achieve national rejuvenation[3][6][7][8] and asserts that "superior" nations and races should attain living space by displacing weak and inferior ones.[9]

Fascism - Wikipedia

That definition fits the United States about as well as the Taliban.

(we will ignore the fact that they took control of the country by force)

Yes we shall, because so did George Washington's army.

Do they believe that it is ok for people to have and express views that are not inline with their own : - NO

This is called authoritarianism.

Do they believe that one race has more of a right to be in Afghanistan than others : - YES

This is called racism.

Are they nationalistic : - YES EXTREMELY SO

Well that would help your case a whole bunch. But I have no idea why you say that. What is your proof?

seriously do some learning - you are just making yourself look foolish

Really? Wiki on the Taliban states: The Taliban (Pashto: طالبان‎ ṭālibān "students"), alternative spelling Taleban,[7] is an Islamic fundamentalist political movement in Afghanistan.

Taliban - Wikipedia

Nothing in there about fascism.

What is foolish is insisting on definitions and "facts" without using one single link, then move on to call others foolish. Throw into that your inability to keep your anger and frustration in check. If you are going to run against mainstream definitions you should be a bit more patient and link/proof oriented.

Now, did I just yell at you? No. That was calm friendly advice pretty much anyone could have suggested.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

I don't think that a single one of us at home could really be trusted to make the calls because we barely even see the tip of the iceberg.

So we trust George W. Bush??

Anyway, thanks so much for that condemnation of democracy. Hitler and Stalin agree with you that the people are too ignorant to decide for themselves when and when not to fight in a foreign war, so they should all just shut up and do their "duty" and follow orders without question. Brilliant.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

Milgram experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

65 percent of the human race has no honor automatically. A person with honor would not harm another against their personal beliefs just because they were ordered.

Trouble is, I cannot tell you who those 65 percent are. But I would wager the number of that 65 percent in the military and in Afghanistan is way higher than the rest of the population.

 

[Tamayo]

So we trust George W. Bush??

...What are you talking about?

Anyway, thanks so much for that condemnation of democracy. Hitler and Stalin agree with you that the people are too ignorant to decide for themselves when and when not to fight in a foreign war, so they should all just shut up and do their "duty" and follow orders without question. Brilliant.

Oh, please. Are you just looking to argue, or are you really acting like a child over what I said?

No, I didn't mean that people shouldn't be able to choose what they want. I meant that civilians really don't have any sort of authority in specific situations like undercover missions and such. Your average person knows nothing about war strategy and many of the other nuances that go into waging wars, so they shouldn't have a hand in it. The only way around the way things work right now is for us to be a complete democracy, or a dictatorship, and both of those situations would be a disaster.

Anyways, I wasn't poking at individual influence so much as I was just trying to point out that we shouldn't be so quick to criticize that which we don't understand. I understand that there are a lot of corrupt people within the government, but I also respect the huge burdens that the others carry for whatever reason, be it loyalty to their country, or to a "greater good" they believe in.

 

[Hezam]

The war tree is like this :

Palestine occupied ----> Jihad declared ----> The west supported the occupation -----> war continued ----> negative feelings grew up -----> Jihadi groups created -----> The west targeted them ------> Jihadi Groups targeted the west ----> the west declared war on them and who support them ...

So i don't expect the US to watch the two buildings in NY falling down and send one or two teams to chase some persons who are protected by another nation, I also don't expect Muslims to watch the US or any nation supporting their enemy and occupying their land..It's a circle of violence that will not end until the head of the problem is solved which is Palestine first and other issues we know.

 

[Hezam]

And for the Topic : To be fair , i can't blame the soldiers for following orders that do not include killing innocents, i blame their government and the soldiers who target innocents and buildings like houses and temples etc.

 

[Krypteia]

65 percent of the human race has no honor automatically.

65 percent? That seems a rather precise figure to come up with for something so subjective.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

And for the Topic : To be fair , i can't blame the soldiers for following orders that do not include killing innocents, i blame their government and the soldiers who target innocents and buildings like houses and temples etc.

I wish it were that simple, but all hell breaks loose when you start to examine the middle, the area between those. And middle is huge in any civil war.

For example, in Libya, when NATO forces rained bombs down on Ghadafis house (which they called a "compound" (gag)) they killed his little grandchildren but did not even kill Ghadafi. So where do you stand on the airmen that did that? They were ordered to bomb a "compound" not a house. They probably had no idea there were little children there, but how could you from thousands of feet up?

I think its pretty clear to even the most idiotic of idiots that if you drop bombs over or shoot missiles into civilian areas there is big chance of killing some kids, so you just can't do it and still have honor, and no, mutterings about "collateral damage" don't help as much the military tries to CYA with jargon like that and "compound" as mentioned before. Its a fool who thinks otherwise, and a such a fool has no honor IMHO.

And if you join a military in a war where they are dropping bombs like that, you support that action by your actions. And if you support that action by your actions, you have no honor.

All this civilian death was completely predictable. I do appreciate that the U.S. generally tries to prevent civilian death in the context of the civil war, but its still a civil war. And the way the U.S. got involved and inflammed the situation in Afghanistan and prolongs that inflammed situation, it gets so many civilians killed it easily overshadows such attempts to prevent civilian death in the context of the war.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

65 percent? That seems a rather precise figure to come up with for something so subjective.

Its not a precise figure. Its the lower end of the scale. 65 percent OR MORE automatically have no honor in IMHO, the Milgram experiment shows it and so do all the experiments that backed up the findings.

 

[Hezam]

That's why i hate policy.

 

[Tamayo]

...and the soldiers who target innocents and buildings like houses and temples etc.

Keep in mind the fact that these are weaknesses that both sides will exploit to the fullest extent when they're backed into a corner. Some of the nastiest tactics in guerrilla warfare involve using children as bomb runners in the middle of the night, then everything goes back to normal in the day time. When the soldiers roam into the town in the morning asking people if they knew anything about the attack in the night, they might actually be asking the people who did it directly.

This is why I was saying that anything involving sensitive intel and undercover operations should be left strictly to those who have the authority to know about and understand the situation. I'm not sure I could ever allow war to come to a small town which isn't seen as a military target, but all the same, I could never hope to really understand how dangerous it is to dismiss a threat under the assumption that it's innocent.

Another thing I guess I forgot to really mention is that the government doesn't just send troops into places just to wreak havoc on the people who live there -- There are real important issues and motives behind every single mission that our troops risk their lives in, whether the general public wants to believe it or not.

 

[Tamayo]

I think its pretty clear to even the most idiotic of idiots that if you drop bombs over or shoot missiles into civilian areas there is big chance of killing some kids, so you just can't do it and still have honor, and no, mutterings about "collateral damage" don't help as much the military tries to CYA with jargon like that and "compound" as mentioned before. Its a fool who thinks otherwise, and a such a fool has no honor IMHO.

What exactly do you propose to be done otherwise? The horror of war is that innocent people die. No innocent death is acceptable, but no war is acceptable either. If you're so dead-set on not having lost innocent lives, then we'd essentially have to disarm ourselves completely. Innocent people get caught up in wars, and that's why the people who have the means to end them are tasked with the responsibility of ending it swiftly and decisively.

If a terrorist really cares so little about his own family that he's willing to house them anywhere near his person, I have no idea how it's the people fighting him who are the evil ones.

And if you join a military in a war where they are dropping bombs like that, you support that action by your actions. And if you support that action by your actions, you have no honor.

That is absolutely untrue. Weren't you the one who said to me in another thread that your employment isn't necessarily a personal statement about the actions of the company? People don't join the armed forces because they want to kill innocent people in their homelands.

 

[Krypteia]

I think its pretty clear to even the most idiotic of idiots that if you drop bombs over or shoot missiles into civilian areas there is big chance of killing some kids, so you just can't do it and still have honor, and no, mutterings about "collateral damage" don't help as much the military tries to CYA with jargon like that and "compound" as mentioned before. Its a fool who thinks otherwise, and a such a fool has no honor IMHO.

It's tragic that civilians are killed in missle strikes along with terrorists. But if the alternative is to send a bunch of 18 year old American grunts into the meat-grinder to clear out the place manually, then I'm all for it. It's an unfortunate fact, but in this day and age, we are fighting an enemy who knowingly hides himself among noncombatants; and to be brutally honest, if I had to choose between saving the life of a foreign civilian or American soldier, I'd go with my countryman.

 

[Chidoriashi]

And if you join a military in a war where they are dropping bombs like that, you support that action by your actions. And if you support that action by your actions, you have no honor.

Then first, there are no modern wars with honor for anybody on both sides! What would you make of WW2?? Millions and millions more civilians on both sides died vs military personnel. Nobody had honor in trying to stop Nazi Germany?

By your logic there can be no honor for anybody on any side of any modern war. Which could be true, if that is the way you define honor, but that is completely subjective, which is something that must bother you to deal with, since subjectivity cannot ultimately make you "right" which is what you think you are in everything you post (no matter how the facts stack against you).

Your idea of honor cannot make anybody or anything honorable that has happened throughout most of history, and certainly any modern war. So if that is the case why don't you lay off picking on the Afghanistan war and talk about all wars and honor?

What was the honorable war? Who was the honorable soldier? What battle would you have been proud of your father, or brother or son, to lay down their life and fight in? Let's get to know Zorro's view of honor so we can understand when he points fingers at others, who in his all knowingness, are foolish to believe that they have it.

 

[Michael Paulson]

The real issue and the underlying issue in a lot of the problems in the US is so many people are simply not doing there job. The US is a democracy and in a democracy its the peoples job to police the government. We the people, By the People, for the People...I could go on for hours. If anyone is to blame for the United States GOV's negative actions its the majority of US citizens fault. It's an ugly truth and so many people are going to fight it, but its the undeniable truth.

My grandfather on my brothers side of the family, who happens to be a Vietnam Vet, told me this years ago and I will never forget it. Because of Vietnam, there is no honor in being a Soldier. No matter who you are fighting for or against. Nam was a major turning point for the US Armed Forces. It was the war where a US Soldier went from being a human being to nothing more then a tool to be used then discarded by corrupt government officials and there backers. Any Soldier that thinks they are a force of good in the Armed Forces has simply been duped into thinking so.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

It's tragic that civilians are killed in missle strikes along with terrorists.

If it happens to your family I bet you will use stronger terms.

And if the Taliban are now labeled as terrorists, its only because those 18 year olds made it a bigger meat grinder than it already was and changed everything. They were not called terrorist before that, not by anybody. You have put the cart before the horse. If anyone should be killed in a missile strike, its the Americans that made this horrible situation. They are the real terrorists.

But if the alternative is to send a bunch of 18 year old American grunts into the meat-grinder to clear out the place manually, then I'm all for it. It's an unfortunate fact, but in this day and age, we are fighting an enemy who knowingly hides himself among noncombatants; and to be brutally honest, if I had to choose between saving the life of a foreign civilian or American soldier, I'd go with my countryman.

America has CHOSEN to go fight half way round the world a group that did not attack America and does not even possess the means to! America has jumped into a place that has been pretty much non-stop civil war for centuries but made it into an even larger blood bath!

America set the stage, and you declare the play horrible and condemn the actors who never wanted their parts??? Is this a muther fuggin joke?

This is the same stupid $#!T as Vietnam and America has not learned a damned thing and you are a prime example. I often lament that the Vietnamese do not hold a grudge against America, because if they did, maybe people like you would friggen learn already?

You should listen carefully to Michael Paulson and his grandad. Learn dammit.

 

[BrianLewis]

The real issue and the underlying issue in a lot of the problems in the US is so many people are simply not doing there job. The US is a democracy and in a democracy its the peoples job to police the government. We the people, By the People, for the People...I could go on for hours. If anyone is to blame for the United States GOV's negative actions its the majority of US citizens fault. It's an ugly truth and so many people are going to fight it, but its the undeniable truth.

Have you written your congressman about this? Or are you just talking about other US citizens' responsibility? Isn't it easy to place blame on others when you have a problem, yet it's all just a lame excuse in the end when one is not willing to do anything themselves.

 

[Mark of Zorro]

BrianLewis, I have not done enough myself and I agree with Michael. But not having done enough does not make us wrong. Even a man in wheelchair can correctly observe that another man walks funny.

 

[Krypteia]

If it happens to your family I bet you will use stronger terms.

Undoubtedly. But my own emotions in the matter would not change the fact that such things are unfortunately bound to happen in war.

And if the Taliban are now labeled as terrorists, its only because those 18 year olds made it a bigger meat grinder than it already was and changed everything.

That's daft. They made it a bigger meat grinder by kicking the Taliban out of the seat of government?

They were not called terrorist before that, not by anybody.

So? There was a time in history when the Klan wasn't called 'terrorist' either.

If anyone should be killed in a missile strike, its the Americans that made this horrible situation.

Pfffttt you got to be kidding me. Toppling an extremist regime in a backwards nation is 'making a horrible situation?'

They are the real terrorists.

That's so stupid I'm not even sure how to respond.