6 ms·

I think you mean the US invasion of Iraq

by jade-m 4y ago

jakear 4y ago
Vouched for this. Names are important, it’s disingenuous to suggest US and Iraq played an equal role in initiating the engagement. Do we call it the Russia/Ukraine war or the Russian invasion of Ukraine?
- IMTDb 4y ago
  We call them : The Iraq War (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War) and the Russo-Ukrainian War (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Ukrainian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Ukrainian_War) This is a discussion about a special kind of explosive and a first hand story on how it is used in a conflict. Leave politics aside.
  - account-5 4y ago
    > The Iraq War was a protracted armed conflict in Iraq from 2003 to 2011 that began with the *invasion of Iraq by the United States–led coalition*... Whilst I agree that the preceding comments are off topic with their own inflammatory agenda's I do think it's important in generally acknowledging the war was caused by a US led invasion based on lies. Disclaimer: I fought there and lost people there, and after, but thankfully came out unscathed.
    - leaflets2 4y ago
      Makes me wonder, back at the time, when you went there -- how much did you believe in what the politicians and military commanders said about weapons of mass destruction etc, if I may ask? Sorry for the ones who died
      - account-5 4y ago
        No, I don't think many people did. But as a soldier you don't have a choice, you go where you are told.
        jokowueu 4y ago
        Just following orders ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders
        account-5 4y ago
        Have you ever been in the military? I'm guessing not. Glib though your answer is it hasn't been that long since people were shot for not following orders. And at 17-18 years old you're unlikely to question much you're told to do, especially after training/indoctrination. Most of the time I had no idea what I was actually doing or why, but when you end up having to fight for your life and those of your muckers you do what you must trying to survive. Trails come if you survive.
        jokowueu 4y ago
        yes i have but it was mandatory conscription . My point still stands though . I guess it's always a risk analysis if you will end up in the winning or losing team .
      - InCityDreams 4y ago
        >Sorry for the ones who died Combatants on both sides, obviously. Oh, and the civilians, too.
        leaflets2 4y ago
        Yes
    - treeman79 4y ago
    - LoveGracePeace 4y ago
      "I do think it's important in generally acknowledging the war was caused by a US led invasion based on lies." https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcrip...
      - account-5 4y ago
        5 years and 1 president before the invasion.
- kodah 4y ago
  Is it disingenuous to speak authoritatively on a subject that one doesn't bother to google? Is it also disingenuous to vouch for someone making an inflammatory comment intended on derailing discussion, especially when that discussion is threaded from someone reliving their experience with explosive projectiles?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- jhgb 4y ago
  Both, since one is a part of the other. The way I get it, the major asymmetry between the two cases is that the US invasion of Iraq was the initial phase of the Iraq war (which had already ended), whereas the Russian invasion of Ukraine is the terminal (and current) phase of the Russo-Ukrainian war (which hasn't ended yet). So if you're talking about these things today, it makes perfect sense to talk about the invasion in progress as it's the current event. If you bring up the Russo-Ukrainian war in a conversation, it's unclear about what part of the events since 2014 you're talking about, since presumably if you were talking about the current events, you'd be more specific. If you talk about the Iraq War, there can be no confusion with current events since it ended a decade ago.
- gpm 4y ago
  Flagged this, I agree names are important, but the tone and context make this flamebait IMHO. I do think it's borderline. I also don't quite buy the argument - see jhgb's reply - but that's definitely not why I flagged it.
bottled_poe 4y ago
The politics are important to understand, but it’s insensitive to bring this up in the context of an individual soldier’s account of this situation. Like, great work with the virtue signalling, you’re very clever and informed. Maybe try reading the room a bit and being a bit more compassionate toward people who have no influence in these politics?
- 4gotunameagain 4y ago
  I'm sorry, but when somebody tells you "we will ship you 7000 miles away to fight in a different continent" and you accept, you share at least some part of the responsibility. There would be no wars without greedy politicians, but there would be no wars without soldiers too.
  - bottled_poe 4y ago
    I hear where you are coming from, but the discussion is out of place, reeks of privilege and lacks perspective.
    - account-5 4y ago
      This and also is naive and knowledge of what a soldier is.
    - aasasd 4y ago
      I've seen and heard many things being said, but calling the Iraqi point of view ‘privileged’ is truly new.
    - canadianfella 4y ago
  - smokey_circles 4y ago
    None of that is salient. Propaganda is an effective drag net. We're all susceptible to some form of it. Outright lying works more effectively than it should. You're just looking for a morale high ground, no need to pretend otherwise.
12ian34 4y ago
I think you mean the US invasion of Iraq under completely false pretences

I think you mean the US invasion of Iraq

by jade-m 4y ago

I think you mean the US invasion of Iraq

Vouched for this. Names are important, it’s disingenuous to suggest US and Iraq played an equal role in initiating the engagement. Do we call it the Russia/Ukraine war or the Russian invasion of Ukraine?

IMTDb 4y ago
We call them : The Iraq War (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War) and the Russo-Ukrainian War (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Ukrainian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Ukrainian_War) This is a discussion about a special kind of explosive and a first hand story on how it is used in a conflict. Leave politics aside.
- account-5 4y ago
  > The Iraq War was a protracted armed conflict in Iraq from 2003 to 2011 that began with the *invasion of Iraq by the United States–led coalition*... Whilst I agree that the preceding comments are off topic with their own inflammatory agenda's I do think it's important in generally acknowledging the war was caused by a US led invasion based on lies. Disclaimer: I fought there and lost people there, and after, but thankfully came out unscathed.
  - leaflets2 4y ago
    Makes me wonder, back at the time, when you went there -- how much did you believe in what the politicians and military commanders said about weapons of mass destruction etc, if I may ask? Sorry for the ones who died
    - account-5 4y ago
      No, I don't think many people did. But as a soldier you don't have a choice, you go where you are told.
      - jokowueu 4y ago
        Just following orders ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superior_orders
        account-5 4y ago
        Have you ever been in the military? I'm guessing not. Glib though your answer is it hasn't been that long since people were shot for not following orders. And at 17-18 years old you're unlikely to question much you're told to do, especially after training/indoctrination. Most of the time I had no idea what I was actually doing or why, but when you end up having to fight for your life and those of your muckers you do what you must trying to survive. Trails come if you survive.
        jokowueu 4y ago
        yes i have but it was mandatory conscription . My point still stands though . I guess it's always a risk analysis if you will end up in the winning or losing team .
    - InCityDreams 4y ago
      >Sorry for the ones who died Combatants on both sides, obviously. Oh, and the civilians, too.
      - leaflets2 4y ago
        Yes
  - treeman79 4y ago
  - LoveGracePeace 4y ago
    "I do think it's important in generally acknowledging the war was caused by a US led invasion based on lies." https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcrip...
    - account-5 4y ago
      5 years and 1 president before the invasion.
kodah 4y ago
Is it disingenuous to speak authoritatively on a subject that one doesn't bother to google? Is it also disingenuous to vouch for someone making an inflammatory comment intended on derailing discussion, especially when that discussion is threaded from someone reliving their experience with explosive projectiles?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
jhgb 4y ago
Both, since one is a part of the other. The way I get it, the major asymmetry between the two cases is that the US invasion of Iraq was the initial phase of the Iraq war (which had already ended), whereas the Russian invasion of Ukraine is the terminal (and current) phase of the Russo-Ukrainian war (which hasn't ended yet). So if you're talking about these things today, it makes perfect sense to talk about the invasion in progress as it's the current event. If you bring up the Russo-Ukrainian war in a conversation, it's unclear about what part of the events since 2014 you're talking about, since presumably if you were talking about the current events, you'd be more specific. If you talk about the Iraq War, there can be no confusion with current events since it ended a decade ago.
gpm 4y ago
Flagged this, I agree names are important, but the tone and context make this flamebait IMHO. I do think it's borderline. I also don't quite buy the argument - see jhgb's reply - but that's definitely not why I flagged it.

bottled_poe 4y ago

The politics are important to understand, but it’s insensitive to bring this up in the context of an individual soldier’s account of this situation. Like, great work with the virtue signalling, you’re very clever and informed. Maybe try reading the room a bit and being a bit more compassionate toward people who have no influence in these politics?

4gotunameagain 4y ago
I'm sorry, but when somebody tells you "we will ship you 7000 miles away to fight in a different continent" and you accept, you share at least some part of the responsibility. There would be no wars without greedy politicians, but there would be no wars without soldiers too.
- bottled_poe 4y ago
  I hear where you are coming from, but the discussion is out of place, reeks of privilege and lacks perspective.
  - account-5 4y ago
    This and also is naive and knowledge of what a soldier is.
  - aasasd 4y ago
    I've seen and heard many things being said, but calling the Iraqi point of view ‘privileged’ is truly new.
  - canadianfella 4y ago
- smokey_circles 4y ago
  None of that is salient. Propaganda is an effective drag net. We're all susceptible to some form of it. Outright lying works more effectively than it should. You're just looking for a morale high ground, no need to pretend otherwise.

12ian34 4y ago

I think you mean the US invasion of Iraq under completely false pretences