Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#1476 - eenbobean (11/29/2011) [-]
1. AmeriRichard Simmonss: We've got some pretty cool gay people, so thanks, Man.
2. Sucking: Blowjobs are cool.
3. Legally Retarded: Go potato yourself, man.
4. Economy: Have you taken a look at Europe's economy lately? The whole World's economy is in the ******* right now.
5. Our Healthcare is good...just not free. It's run by big-business, and so is everything else.
6. Government: THEY FIX...STUFF SOMETIMES. No, they suck dick. We're trying to fix them.
7. This is where I will draw the line. The conflict in the Middle-East (Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.) started as a noble cause. We were injured, hurt, and angry. 9/11 had just occurred and we were still reeling over it's impact. On the Mid-Eastern front, Muslims and Jews were killing each other, Women and Children were being slaughtered. We went in with good intentions. We stayed for the cash. Our military personnel do not deserve the stigma you've attached to our government.
8. European Superiority: There is no point in attacking the American people. No one people is superior to another.
- Europe has its' own Obesity Problems
- Europe is economically unstable, as well as the rest of the globe.
- Both The United States and most of Europe are willing to admit the faults of their own homelands (for the most part), and this is something we need to do more.
9. Spelling: It's not that we don't know...thanks to ****** pop-culture, many of today's youth believe it to be "Cool" to be stupid.
10. Umadness: I ain't even mad.
User avatar #1514 to #1476 - kumabear (11/29/2011) [-]
11. The United States military is not the only military in The Middle East, British forces, as well as large forces of NATO troops are there, the majority of troops that took Afghanistan's capital city of Kabul were NATO and British forces, there were a few platoons of Americans, not to mention many other conflicts in the Northern regions of Afghanistan, most of the troops in Helmand right now are European, not American, I know, I was just there.
User avatar #2666 to #1514 - hntngtn (11/29/2011) [-]
No offense but if you are seriously going to claim that it was a NATO achievement and conflict, you are no true soldier. Pick up a book and read that Afghanistan was taken by the United States Delta Force Operators, United States Navy Seals, and the United States Army Rangers. There was a small amount of help from the indigenous population, but the majority was done by United States soldiers and United States air support. We took over the entire country in under four months and eventually had Osama Bin Laden trapped in Tora Bora. However he managed to escape into the Pakistani mountains before we could capture/kill him. After that was accomplished our government made a poor political move and changed the invasion from a grab-n-go to a full fledged political siege.
User avatar #2692 to #2666 - kumabear (11/29/2011) [-]
Because a capital city is taken doesn't mean a nation is taken, it was a joint effort son, NATO had the upper hand as far as troops though, i never said it was all them, and I'm better than a book punk, I was in Kabul the day it was seized, don't **** with experience, there were two platoons of local soldiers that i know of, my unit was tasked to work with them, its possible there were more, spec ops was there yeah, but their teams moved in and out fast, those were search and seizure of hostages, high ranking political figures and what not, Marines, Army, Air Force, and the British and NATO forces were there for the long haul, it took a few days to take Kabul as I recall, and it was majorly NATO forces there, in the North, Helmand, its British and American Forces, of Americas forces on the ground, the majority is marines, but Britain has more foot soldiers there than we do as well, don't try to tell me the history I lived you little ****** , those were the two locations I stated, I didn't say the whole goddamn country, the whole point is we aren't the only ones there.
User avatar #2730 to #2692 - hntngtn (11/29/2011) [-]
You need to calm down and get off your high horse there captain america. I'm glad you are a soldier and I'm proud of you for being a soldier. I personally am not because I know I can better serve my country by creating gear that keeps soldiers such as yourself alive and eventually out of the entire conflict. I will also admit that I did not read correctly your point solely identifying Kabul. I agree entirely with what you said about the siege of the city for it has been reported that way in several reading references. However, the whole joint operation to seize the city was a failure. The higher ranking military personnel that were around Kabul prior to its invasion were strictly told to NOT invade. However the invasion took place anyway because those commanding officers were ********* . As a result special forces teams were sent in there quickly to get out the important things before the chaos of a full invasion began. I agree we are not the only ones there, however I refuse to give credit to those who do not deserve it. America seized the entire country with little help, then the more mixed soldiers took care of table scraps. I am not saying you were not there or did not live it.
User avatar #2749 to #2730 - kumabear (11/29/2011) [-]
First, I'm not excited, nor agitated or mad, so what do I have to calm down for? Second, I never claimed to be better than anyone, Im saying I experienced the **** , so my personal knowledge is better than books written second hand. I agree that our CO's were dip ***** , but the truth of the matter was Kabul was seized after a time, it did take more NATO forces in that one city than most of the rest of the Nation, currently the Brits do have more people in Helmand than we do, notice i say currently, these are the places I've been on all three of my tours, i was stuck behind a desk in between and hated it. Kabul was a massive cluster **** , I remember that we were supposed to go in with the aid of the indigenous and then be backed up by British Paratroops who had arrived 3 days before, we moved in and the troops backed us, but as soon as the **** hit the fan they backed off, we were cut off and only made it out because of the soldiers who were local to the area, we got lucky, that was the initial invasion, i think it was the third attempt that finally seized the city, by the way, we didn't leave till we knew spec ops was out with the precious cargo, we watched their backs and did out jobs, suffered around 20 wounded and 3 dead for it
User avatar #3717 to #2749 - hntngtn (11/29/2011) [-]
I'm not gonna be "that guy" but the book that I got most of this from is Jawbreaker, written by the CIA agent who directed/led the initial advance into Afghanistan. You seem to understand the military a lot better than the majority of soldiers so I apologize for accusing you of otherwise earlier. May I ask what branch you're in? Was it your specific brigade that suffered the losses?
User avatar #3725 to #3717 - kumabear (11/29/2011) [-]
USMC, naw there were a few other units who were ordered out cause of casualties, we just suffered a few, but even one is too many if you ask me
User avatar #3728 to #3725 - hntngtn (11/29/2011) [-]
Yeah I agree. That's why I hate that MOG has been basically forgotten. I have a few Marine friends one of which that just got deployed to Afghanistan. Marines have finally fully switched over to the M4A1 Carbine haven't they? And did you get to see that path out of Kabul where the insurgents fled and we just bombed the **** out of them? I think it was Kabul anyway where they fled and stayed in an essential straight line while leaving and we just obliterated them with airstrikes. Think we even dropped a few "Daisy Cutters" haha
User avatar #3732 to #3728 - kumabear (11/29/2011) [-]
I didn't see, I had my head down most of the time, as soon as that **** hit the fan we were doing a lot of shooting and holed up in a bunch of little houses, I think one of our units called in the air support because we were cut off, yeah, a lot use the carbine, but i still see M16s out there, personally I favor the M249, she is light and powerful, but she can be a bitch too.
User avatar #3734 to #3732 - hntngtn (11/29/2011) [-]
Alrighty. You're a support gunner then I'm assuming? Yeah it's an excellent gun but doesn't overheat like a son-of-a-bitch?
User avatar #3735 to #3734 - kumabear (11/29/2011) [-]
burst fire fixes that, and long breaks, thats why i always requested a M16A4 as my backup, its basically a shortened M4 Carbine, dependent on the make that is, mine had rails
User avatar #3736 to #3735 - hntngtn (11/29/2011) [-]
Isn't the M4 already short as hell? It's almost a CQB weapon now isn't it? Does the M16A4 have the full auto option? I think it was the M16A3 that has single, burst, and full auto but I know they tweaked the fire rate when they went to the A4
User avatar #3737 to #3736 - kumabear (11/29/2011) [-]
If I'm remembering it right yeah, my buddy used to call it the Commando, a lot of Force Recon guys we knew used em with silencers and ACOGS, not to mention fore grips and Laser Sights, i prefer just a plain A4
User avatar #3738 to #3737 - hntngtn (11/29/2011) [-]
Yeah ha some Call of Duty terms with that one. But yeah I've heard of the Commando, pretty sure it was made for advanced soldiers that wanted a light gun with a short barrel but had great accuracy and range. Didn't know it was called the M16A4 though. Eww you like the factory iron sights on the M16 models? I was messing around with one a while back, think it was an A1, and the sights completely threw off my aim; threw off my balance and posture too.
User avatar #3746 to #3738 - kumabear (11/29/2011) [-]
I like the balance, most people don't notice the shift of adding holo or red dot, it was just a nickname my bud gave it a few years back, i use it stock cause its short enough and compact enough to go on my back or chest without bugging me, and it has better balance, in a combat situation you aren't worried about taking time to aim, usually, you're moving too fast for that **** , put three rounds in a chest and next target, if you didn't kill em, next shooter in the firing line will, thats how we did things, i liked it that way, nowadays guys get too spread and can't cover a zone
User avatar #3799 to #3746 - hntngtn (11/29/2011) [-]
Oh alright yeah that makes sense involving the weapon. Yeah I suppose that's something only combat experience can teach you. I appreciate you sharing man.
#1503 to #1476 - monkeygod (11/29/2011) [-]
On the topic of #7 In Iraq Saddam Hussein was killing innocent Shi'ite Muslims.
User avatar #1516 to #1503 - eenbobean (11/29/2011) [-]
Thank you, friend, I was talking of Afghanistan. It seems easy for Europeans to forget about Hussein, and the fact that they were involved in the Iraq conflict.
 Friends (0)