What would you do for your country?

Would you..?

  • Die for your country

    Votes: 9 28.1%

  • Do everything i can, but not die

    Votes: 9 28.1%

  • What my country will do for me?

    Votes: 14 43.8%
  • Total voters
    32
S

shumlya4012

Guest
What would you do for you country?

I'd die for my country anytime, when ever it need me.

list your country by the way
 
too vague ...I guess if I must I'd say option 2 but with more restrictions ... I wouldnt join the military, I wouldnt fight for my country
 
CptStern said:
too vague ...I guess if I must I'd say option 2 but with more restrictions ... I wouldnt join the military, I wouldnt fight for my country
Click to expand...
hypotheticly speaking, what if made a big difference in your countries future by fighting and possible dieing in battle, would you do it? hypotheticly speaking
 
only if my family's life was in danger because the enemy had invaded ...I cant see how fighting in say Iraq would make "a big difference in your countries future "
 
I would fight, yes, but not die. When I was called in I would've fought, but if I was a real bad situation, I would flee.
 
I would not fight or die for my country in a foreign war. If invaded I would fight to the death for my family.
 
i would die for my country, but when i say that, im not dying for the american ideals of freedom and democracy I would die for my family so that they could continue their lives and not be harmed. So i guess that means I would die for my country only to a direct threat (so not phantom WMDs in Iraq).
 
CptStern said:
only if my family's life was in danger because the enemy had invaded ...I cant see how fighting in say Iraq would make "a big difference in your countries future "
Click to expand...
forget about iraq
 
kmack said:
im not dying for the american ideals of freedom and democracy I would die for my family
Click to expand...

so your family is the only thing that u value, if let's say your country will become not free, and a communist, you wouldn't care?
 
CptStern said:
afghanistan then :)

I wont be a pawn in the military-industrial complex machine
Click to expand...

im not going to die for iraqis who havent even suffered (in comparison to other countries think rwanda) and pose no threat to us.
 
kmack said:
im not going to die for iraqis who havent even suffered (in comparison to other countries think rwanda) and pose no threat to us.
Click to expand...


heh I was actually taking to the thread starter :) You and I see eye to eye on iraq
 
kmack said:
im not going to die for iraqis who havent even suffered (in comparison to other countries think rwanda) and pose no threat to us.
Click to expand...
powereful image in your signiture , love it :bounce:
 
shumlya4012 said:
so your family is the only thing that u value, if let's say your country will become not free, and a communist, you wouldn't care?
Click to expand...

yes my family is the only thing i value. I will not kill or die for anybody elses political ideals.
 
shumlya4012 said:
powereful image in your signiture , love it :bounce:
Click to expand...


you dont seem to grasp it's meaning ..those are dead american soldiers who died because of the bush admins lies
 
that's why I use that image from time to time ...far more powerful an anti-war message than mere words
 
My country's government? I choose option 3.
My country's citizens? I choose option 2.
I would fight (i.e. kill or die) if I felt there was a credible threat that could not be dealt with through more peacufull means, like another country invading or whatever.
 
PickledGecko said:
My country's government? I choose option 3.
My country's citizens? I choose option 2.
I would fight (i.e. kill or die) if I felt there was a credible threat that could not be dealt with through more peacufull means, like another country invading or whatever.
Click to expand...

Me too.

I'm not going to fight against "WMD in Iraq", but I'll protect the citizens in my streets. And defend my family.

"Die for your country?" What's the point in that? To shield a nuclear blast from destroying your country by embedding it between your arse cheeks? If you can fight without dying, you'll live to fight another battle. A living hero is far more use than a dead one.
 
A living hero is far more use than a dead one.
Click to expand...

Not always true. Sometimes it is necessary to die to help the greater good. It would obviously be better to live rather than die, but that isnt always realistic.
 
I would die for America, but not for Bush.
 
seinfeldrules said:
Not always true. Sometimes it is necessary to die to help the greater good. It would obviously be better to live rather than die, but that isnt always realistic.
Click to expand...

Mmm, but then there's other people who are willing to die instead of you. You could even convince a gullible enemy to die for the greater good.

Gives me more time to carry out my main plan.
 
seinfeldrules said:
Not always true. Sometimes it is necessary to die to help the greater good. It would obviously be better to live rather than die, but that isnt always realistic.
Click to expand...

wouldnt that be a "lemming mentality" or sheep? pawns if you will ..cannon fodder?

funny cuz I never see politicians throwing themselves into the midst of battle screaming "for god and country"
 
wouldnt that be a "lemming mentality" or sheep? pawns if you will ..cannon fodder?
Click to expand...

No. Look at the recent Medal of Honor winner. His actions saved between 50-100 of his fellow comrades. That is how I would be willing to die. However, I wouldnt be willing to clear a minefield using my body.

Also, there have been plenty of politicans who served honorably in our country's history.

Bodacious, good mention of McCain.
 
CptStern said:
wouldnt that be a "lemming mentality" or sheep? pawns if you will ..cannon fodder?

funny cuz I never see politicians throwing themselves into the midst of battle screaming "for god and country"
Click to expand...


Lots of lawmakers have served in the military and actually fought in a war, Kerry and McCain are two off the top of my head.
 
I'd go if the President/Prime Minister joined the Army and fought alongside, Alexander style.

I would never fight for a "perceived threat" agaisnt my country. I would fight agaisnt a real, tangible threat, that will never happen thanks to US supradominance and world policing :D

And we have nukes (EU :D :D :D )

So, yeah, no way I would fight for my country. My Nationstate sucks anyway. If necessary I'd fight to aid other, helpless people that were in danger. Never, never for an imaginary set of borders (or my "culture"). If Spain invaded and gave us a better life, to the cost of the total elimination of Portuguese language, etc. I wouldn't think twice about moving to a nice Spanish city.

And I have strong beliefs against killing anyone.
 
1 year less (and change) than americans involvement in ww2
 
1 year less (and change) than americans involvement in ww2
Click to expand...

Do you think that people return from Iraq and suddenly find themselves in Washington? It doesnt work that way. You need to establish yourself first. I'd give it 10 years before you start down this path.
 
Nationality is one step up from a tribal Village system, one step below a World government.

If you asked this question back in the days "would you fight for your village?" then people would answer yes.

Now if we could abolish nationality one day, that sure would advance us a lot. In the not too distant future I hope. You'd probably have to destroy religion first though.
 
seinfeldrules said:
Do you think that people return from Iraq and suddenly find themselves in Washington? It doesnt work that way. You need to establish yourself first. I'd give it 10 years before you start down this path.
Click to expand...


well if you land in Dulles then yes :E .

...surely you must be able to find at least one offspring of one politician that is currently in iraq?
 
Early in this segment, Moore states that "out of the 535 members of Congress, only one had an enlisted son in Iraq." The action of the segment consists of Moore accosting Congressmen to try to convince them to have their children enlist in the military. At the end, Moore declares, "Not a single member of Congress wanted to sacrifice their child for the war in Iraq."



Moore’s second statement is technically true, but duplicitous. Of course no-one would want to "sacrifice" his child in any way. But the fact is, Moore's opening ("only one") and his conclusion ("not a single member") are both incorrect. Sergeant Brooks Johnson, the son of South Dakota Democratic Senator Tim Johnson, serves in the 101st Airborne Division and fought in Iraq in 2003. The son of California Republican Representative Duncan Hunter quit his job after September 11, and enlisted in the Marines; his artillery unit was deployed in the heart of insurgent territory in February 2004. Delaware Senator Joseph Biden's son Beau is on active duty in the Judge Advocate General Corps; although Beau Biden has no control over where he is deployed, he has not been sent to Iraq, and therefore does not "count" for Moore's purposes. Seven members of Congress have been confirmed to have children in the military.



How about Cabinet members? Fahrenheit never raises the issue, because the answer would not fit Moore’s thesis. Attorney General John Ashcroft’s son is serving on the U.S.S. McFaul in the Persian Gulf.



Why not count Duncan Hunter's son? Note the phrasing: "only one had an enlisted son in Iraq." Although Hunter's son "enlisted" in the Marines, he is a Second Lieutenant, which means that he is above the rank of an "enlisted man." But why hide from the viewers how many Congressmen really have sons serving in the military in Iraq?
Click to expand...
Are Congressional children less likely to serve in Iraq than children from other families? Let’s use Moore’s methodology, and ignore members of extended families (such as nephews) and also ignore service anywhere except Iraq (even though U.S. forces are currently fighting terrorists in many countries). And like Moore, let us also ignore the fact that some families (like Rep. Castle’s) have no children, or no children of military age.



We then see that of 535 Congressional families, there are two with a child who served in Iraq. How does this compare with American families in general? In the summer of 2003, U.S. troop levels in Iraq were raised to 145,000. If we factor in troop rotation, we could estimate that about 300,000 people have served in Iraq at some point. According to the Census Bureau, there were 104,705,000 households in the United States in 2000. (See Table 1 of the Census Report.) So the ratio of ordinary U.S. households to Iraqi service personnel is 104,705,000 to 300,000. This reduces to a ratio of 349:1.



In contrast the ratio of Congressional households to Iraqi service personnel is 535:2. This reduces to a ratio of 268:1.



Stated another way, a Congressional household is about 23 percent more likely than an ordinary household to be closely related to an Iraqi serviceman or servicewoman.

Of course my statistical methodology is very simple. A more sophisticated analysis would look only at Congressional and U.S. households from which at least one child is legally eligible to enlist in the military. Moore, obviously, never attempted such a comparison; instead, he deceived viewers into believing that Congressional families were extremely different from other families in enlistment rates.



Moore ignores the fact that there are 101 veterans currently serving in the House of Representatives and 36 in the Senate. Regardless of whether they have children who could join the military, all of the veterans in Congress have personally put themselves at risk to protect their country.
Click to expand...

Its taken out of context, but its your answer.

http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm
 
...surely you must be able to find at least one offspring of one politician that is currently in iraq?
Click to expand...

Would you force your child into the military against their will?

Joining the military is a volutary decision. No parent can force their adult child to do anything.
 
I'll fight and die for my country...only if the reasons are just and right.


I won't fight and die to fill some corporations pocketbook.
 
Bodacious said:
Would you force your child into the military against their will?

Joining the military is a volutary decision. No parent can force their adult child to do anything.
Click to expand...

But the simple fact remains : The childs of the lower classes are the ones that constitute the majority of the U.S.A. Armed Forces. A child is simply a metaphor to giving your most loved thing, a life that you bred, to a cause that you truly believe in.
 
No one wants to die for their country, it just sometimes happens.

You can't enlist in any military or any war and choose not to die for your country. You make the other bastard die for his.
 
Im not to sure what country im in :dozey:

It depends on the situation, for example if for some random reason we went to war with America then i wouldnt fight, but if it was against terrorists or commie-nazies then i would
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Solaris
What are you up to these days?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Shem
Shem
Tollbooth Willie
HL2.NET HORROR SLAP
Replies
7
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Lizardizzle
  • Poll
A proposition: ValveTime Half-Life 1 co-op event
Replies
5
Views
1K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
To Those That Stand, Those That Fell
Replies
6
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Back
Top