Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threats?

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

I would disagree: Kyle was indeed killing America's enemies. The Iraqi insurgents that sprang up in the wake of the American invasion of Iraq were clearly the American forces' enemies in Iraq and to say otherwise is quite wrong. But you and the other poster have a different opinion. Any force or organisation or movement that is engage in hostilities against the forces of the U.S. are clearly America's enemies.
Ok, so, it is not only the opinion of "many Americans," but also your opinion, that he was killing America's enemies.

America was the invader, and they were killing Iraqis, for no reason. Justifying what America did in Iraq is akin to justifying what Al-Qaida did to the World Trade Centre.

One side is blindly loyal to his country and will slaughter innocent people for that, and another side is blindly loyal to his religion and will slaughter innocent people to that.

I completely disagree with you, because your reasoning is making absolutely no sense to me. I think we can agree to disagree and move on.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

@Redhawk, if I may add, your allegation that these Iraqis were America's enemies is also something I disagree with.

Iraq had done nothing against America. The people who orchestrated the 9/11 tragedy were Saudi and UAE citizens. So, how do the Iraqis or the Iraqi government become America's enemy?

Of course, after the invasion, pursuant to the lie of WMDs, the Iraqis have every moral right to fight against foreign invaders.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

Iraq I think is the biggest strategic mistake of the US. It sucked a lot of US resources into a a war that gratuitously delivered strategic advantage to Iran and China.

As to threats to the US, Iraq no doubt was a threat, not immediate or direct though (by invading Kuwait and using chemical weapons on Kurds Saddam has made himself the target of American regime change efforts). But on a cost-benefit analysis, the cost vastly outweighed any benefit (oil I think was the primary projected benefit, and so long as Democratic Presidents were in power no invasion would have happened).
 

Razor

STABLE GENIUS
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
7,701
Likes
9,099
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

Iraq I think is the biggest strategic mistake of the US. It sucked a lot of US resources into a a war that gratuitously delivered strategic advantage to Iran and China.

As to threats to the US, Iraq no doubt was a threat, not immediate or direct though (by invading Kuwait and using chemical weapons on Kurds Saddam has made himself the target of American regime change efforts). But on a cost-benefit analysis, the cost vastly outweighed any benefit (oil I think was the primary projected benefit, and so long as Democratic Presidents were in power no invasion would have happened).
Of course, by democratic you mean, those who take orders from the US.

The Iraq (eye-raq :lol: ) war happened because Saddam (who was put in power by America) started acting against American orders.
Of course that cannot be allowed.
And so a country was invaded by so called civilized world, based on lies and cooked up stories, a people rendered homeless, children family-less and country destitute and Saddam hanged to death.

Of course the kurds killed excuse, people forget that the chemical weapon ingredients were given by Western companies themselves. And Kuwait invasion during first gulf war :lol: , Saddam asked American permission before commencing attack and the Americans told him (paraphrasing) "We don't care how you deal with Arab-Arab issues, just make sure it is settled quickly."
 

Redhawk

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
578
Likes
263
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

Ok, so, it is not only the opinion of "many Americans," but also your opinion, that he was killing America's enemies.

America was the invader, and they were killing Iraqis, for no reason. Justifying what America did in Iraq is akin to justifying what Al-Qaida did to the World Trade Centre.

One side is blindly loyal to his country and will slaughter innocent people for that, and another side is blindly loyal to his religion and will slaughter innocent people to that.

I completely disagree with you, because your reasoning is making absolutely no sense to me. I think we can agree to disagree and move on.
The U.S. invaded Iraq to secure the Iraqi oil reserves. It wasn't for "no reason". The WMD and regime-change things were pretty flimsy pretexts for invading Iraq, but better than no pretext at all. :thumb:

To me it is entirely obvious and entirely logical that any belligerent forces, no matter who or what they are, engaged in armed hostilities against U.S. armed forces are America's enemies. Full stop.

If you can't see that, then I suggest you re-examine your own reasoning.
 
Last edited:

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

Of course, by democratic you mean, those who take orders from the US.
I meant the Democratic Party f the US. Their last President before GWB was Clinton who clearly do not want to invade Iraq.


The Iraq (eye-raq :lol: ) war happened because Saddam (who was put in power by America) started acting against American orders.
Of course that cannot be allowed.
Naturally.


And so a country was invaded by so called civilized world, based on lies and cooked up stories, a people rendered homeless, children family-less and country destitute and Saddam hanged to death.
To be fair, majority of Iraqis, Shias and Kurds, wanted America to depose Saddam.


Of course the kurds killed excuse, people forget that the chemical weapon ingredients were given by Western companies themselves. And Kuwait invasion during first gulf war :lol: , Saddam asked American permission before commencing attack and the Americans told him (paraphrasing) "We don't care how you deal with Arab-Arab issues, just make sure it is settled quickly."
This tired misinterpretation of an American diplomat's conversation to Saddam. It was standard US position at the time that they do not interfere in Arab-to-Arab issues (diplomatic language). It came with a caveat that these issues must be resolved peacefully through Egyptian mediation. It was not a green light to invade Kuwait.
 

Razor

STABLE GENIUS
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
7,701
Likes
9,099
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

I meant the Democratic Party f the US. Their last President before GWB was Clinton who clearly do not want to invade Iraq.
Okie.
---------
Razor said:
The Iraq (eye-raq ) war happened because Saddam (who was put in power by America) started acting against American orders.
Of course that cannot be allowed.
Naturally.
So then the statement that you made in previous post (shown below in italics) is a lie.
Invading kuwait (after american green light), dead kurds etc were silly excuses, they real reason: Stopped licking Uncle Sam's boots.

As to threats to the US, Iraq no doubt was a threat, not immediate or direct though (by invading Kuwait and using chemical weapons on Kurds Saddam has made himself the target of American regime change efforts).
----------------

To be fair, majority of Iraqis, Shias and Kurds, wanted America to depose Saddam.
Not really. Just because American media or its affiliates say so, doesn't mean it is true.

---------

This tired misinterpretation of an American diplomat's conversation to Saddam. It was standard US position at the time that they do not interfere in Arab-to-Arab issues (diplomatic language). It came with a caveat that these issues must be resolved peacefully through Egyptian mediation. It was not a green light to invade Kuwait.
It is not a misinterpretation.

And please you aren't fooling anyone with such jokes as "standard US position" was non-interference. :lol: (i'm not saying interference is wrong though.)
American policy has been, for over two centuries, one of active interference in all affairs of every significant nation. From Japan (forcing Japan to open its ports), to Russia to China, to korea, to South Asia, to S.E. Asia, to S. America, to C. America, to Africa, to Europe and most importantly West Asia aka Middle East. America is the driving engine behind the globalist agenda.
 
Last edited:

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

So then the statement that you made in previous post (shown below in italics) is a lie.
Invading kuwait (after american green light), dead kurds etc were silly excuses, they real reason: Stopped licking Uncle Sam's boots.
There's no lie. When Saddam started gassing Iraqi Kurds and invading Kuwait it went against American orders.


Not really. Just because American media or its affiliates say so, doesn't mean it is true.
By doing those horrible acts it became easy for people like GWB and his neocon gang to convince Americans to depose Iraq. Had Saddam not been that notorious no amount of Powell powerpoint presentation would have convinced anyone to support the invasion of Iraq.


It is not a misinterpretation.
Yes they do. If you think otherwise then you don;t know the sectarian divide in Iraq.

If there are grumblings now among the more moderate Shias about the chaotic aftermath of the 2003 invasion then that's already hindsight.


And please you aren't fooling anyone with such jokes as "standard US position" was non-interference. :lol: (i'm not saying interference is wrong though.)
American policy has been, for over two centuries, one of active interference in all affairs of every significant nation. From Japan (forcing Japan to open its ports), to Russia to China, to korea, to South Asia, to S.E. Asia, to S. America, to C. America, to Africa, to Europe and most importantly West Asia aka Middle East. America is the driving engine behind the globalist agenda.
You have to understand diplomatic language. When diplomats speak publicly that's what they say.
 

asianobserve

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
May 5, 2011
Messages
12,846
Likes
8,556
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

@Razor

Let's talk about some of the US interference you mentioned above:

1) Japan, on hindsight do you think it was bad for America to forcibly open Japan to modernization? Do you think Japan would have achieved the level of affluence it is now experiencing without American interference? I for one strongly believe that it would have been very hard for Japan to achieve the spectacular modernization it did at the turn of the last century if it stuck to its Feudal-agricultural set up.

Maybe you can ask Japanese now if it was a mistake for the US to forcibly open their country in the 19th century?

2) Russia, well Russia is not an innocent player in international power struggle. It is in the thick of international interference, just look at Ukraine.

3) China, At least the latest American interference, if you can call it at that, during the 1990's (opening up by Clinton) was very good for China. I don't think the Chinese objected to it. The only other interference I see now by the US on China is in the South China Sea plan of the latter. Now, would you rather that America just let China steamroll these smaller SEA countries (Vietnam, Philippines, etc.) You can ask some Vietnamese and the Filipinos if they want the Americans not to interfere now in their spat with China over the contested islands in the South China Sea.

The previous interference of America on Chinese affairs was in the 19th century, but then again everybody were interefering in its affairs including the Russians. Ever heard of the Chinese Soviet Republic? Now are you prepared to condemn Russia in its interference in Chinese affairs?

4) Korea, the AMericans began interfering in Korea only in the late 1940's during the division of that country (Russia was also interfering in support of Kim). Then when communist North Korea invaded America directly interfered there. But you have to understand that it was the Cold War and the US was determined to stop communist expansion (Russia was behind teh North Koreans in everything). So, if you want to harp on American interference there then you should also include the Russians.

But I think one American interference in Korea that even you will agree on is on its support and protection of South Korea. Without American norturing of SOuth Korea it would have long ago ceased to exist or even if it survived the North Korea-Russian-Chinese alliance. Now South Korea is a thriving capitalist country because of American interference (of course coupled with South Korean determination to succeed).

Just like the Japanese, maybe you can try asking South Koreans of all ages now if they think it was a mistake for America to interfere in Korean affairs during the Korean War? Good luck with that.

5) SEA, you mean Vietnam? Well it was the height of the Cold War. After the bloody Korean War America became more sensitive to communist expansion in Asia. The Americans saw the problems in South Vietnam as a communist expansion rather than an independence movement. They were right partly as the USSR was actively supporting North Vietnam.

6) South America, Well it was the Cold War.

7) Europe, I don;t know what American interference you want to point out there. The Europeans are independent right now because of American interference.

8) Middle East, it's very hard to generalize the Middle East. Again, most of American "interference" there happened after WW2 with the waning British power. I think the biggest American mistakes in the ME are Iran and Iraq.

But bear in mind that the USSR jostling for influence in the region after WW2. Their only problem was that they were strategically outmaneuvered and outsmarted by the Americans in most situations. But make no mistake, the USSR equally wanted to influence the ME.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

The U.S. invaded Iraq to secure the Iraqi oil reserves. It wasn't for "no reason". The WMD and regime-change things were pretty flimsy pretexts for invading Iraq, but better than no pretext at all. :thumb:
And because the US wanted to punish Iraq for ditching the Dollar and opting for the Euro.

To me it is entirely obvious and entirely logical that any belligerent forces, no matter who or what they are, engaged in armed hostilities against U.S. armed forces are America's enemies. Full stop.
Yes, to you, and not to me. For a small time period when some US sniper is engaged with Iraqi combatants, yes, they are both enemies, but I refuse to follow your lead and focus only on that narrow time period, and wish to look at it holistically, and when I do so, I realize, the American soldiers landed in Iraq at a time when no Iraqi was the enemy of America, and therefore, . . . (continued after the next quote)

If you can't see that, then I suggest you re-examine your own reasoning.
. . . I can see that, and beyond; as I said, I can see holistically, and I have re-examined my reasoning and your reasoning as well. We have differences. You have tunnel vision, and I have holistic vision.

Sorry, we don't think alike, but I am glad you did not call me an idiot.

[HR][/HR]

Addendum:

To me it is entirely obvious and entirely logical that any belligerent forces, no matter who or what they are, engaged in armed hostilities against U.S. armed forces are America's enemies. Full stop.
I think, Sir, you shifted the goalpost a bit.

It is one thing to say that a person engaged in armed hostilities with another is his or her enemy, and quite another thing to say that a person who kills another person who he is engaged in an armed hostility with (and thus his enemy), is a "hero."

So that I am not accused of paraphrasing and misrepresenting, I will quote you verbatim.

The man was a hero to many Americans because he killed America's enemies. And any soldier that kills the enemies of his country on a large scale is more often than not considered a hero. Look at the Soviet soldier Vasily Zaitsev who, like Kyle, was a sniper and who bagged over 400 Germans and was made a Hero of the Soviet Union.
 

Razor

STABLE GENIUS
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
7,701
Likes
9,099
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

There's no lie. When Saddam started gassing Iraqi Kurds and invading Kuwait it went against American orders.

No.
The Kurds were killed during the Iran-Iraq war. The kurds were killed because they were mostly supporting Iran in the war.
The Iraqis were supported by USA, against Iran. And the chemical weapons etc used to kill the kurds were supplied by amerika. So one could even say that USA is also invloved indirectly in the killing of kurds.
So no, american orders were not violated when gassing kurds or invading kuwait (after american permission.) These incidents (with several added, completely fake stories (done by actors) of iraqi soldiers taking babies out of incubators and so on) were simply used as excuses later on.


By doing those horrible acts it became easy for people like GWB and his neocon gang to convince Americans to depose Iraq. Had Saddam not been that notorious no amount of Powell powerpoint presentation would have convinced anyone to support the invasion of Iraq.

No, not because of doing these horrible acts, though they do help.
The real reason for being able to effectively convince the American people etc. was/is complete control of Main Stream media in America.



Yes they do. If you think otherwise then you don;t know the sectarian divide in Iraq.

Show some neutral polls which indicate what you said is true, then I'll believe. People dancing around fallen saddam statues will not do.

If there are grumblings now among the more moderate Shias about the chaotic aftermath of the 2003 invasion then that's already hindsight.




You have to understand diplomatic language. When diplomats speak publicly that's what they say.

It's pretty clear what she meant when she said (as a representative of the US) that they don't have interest in Arab-arab conflicts and that whatever you do, make it fast.
Inline in red, please.
 
Last edited:

Razor

STABLE GENIUS
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
7,701
Likes
9,099
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

@Razor

Let's talk about some of the US interference you mentioned above:

1) Japan, on hindsight do you think it was bad for America to forcibly open Japan to modernization? Do you think Japan would have achieved the level of affluence it is now experiencing without American interference? I for one strongly believe that it would have been very hard for Japan to achieve the spectacular modernization it did at the turn of the last century if it stuck to its Feudal-agricultural set up.

Maybe you can ask Japanese now if it was a mistake for the US to forcibly open their country in the 19th century?

You can believe whatever you want.
But this is like saying CCP was good for China and KMT was bad or vice versa. You do not know how japan would have evolved if America had not interfered.
You are simply making assumptions in desperate attempt to justify the fact that america has a habit of interfering in internal affairs of other nations.
You said America didn't do that, I said it did do that.
PS: in spite of what the media tells you, japanese people do not have much respect for amrikans starting from the perry incident to nuke bombing, to raping of minors by US "soldiers" stationed in japan, and so on.


2) Russia, well Russia is not an innocent player in international power struggle. It is in the thick of international interference, just look at Ukraine.

US interference in russia starts in late 19th century maybe even earlier.
The current puppet regime america has installed in ukraine is just one among the many many interventions that america/brit has done in russia. If the russians have responded, they have every right to do so.


3) China, At least the latest American interference, if you can call it at that, during the 1990's (opening up by Clinton) was very good for China. I don't think the Chinese objected to it. The only other interference I see now by the US on China is in the South China Sea plan of the latter. Now, would you rather that America just let China steamroll these smaller SEA countries (Vietnam, Philippines, etc.) You can ask some Vietnamese and the Filipinos if they want the Americans not to interfere now in their spat with China over the contested islands in the South China Sea.

The previous interference of America on Chinese affairs was in the 19th century, but then again everybody were interefering in its affairs including the Russians. Ever heard of the Chinese Soviet Republic? Now are you prepared to condemn Russia in its interference in Chinese affairs?

4) Korea, the AMericans began interfering in Korea only in the late 1940's during the division of that country (Russia was also interfering in support of Kim). Then when communist North Korea invaded America directly interfered there. But you have to understand that it was the Cold War and the US was determined to stop communist expansion (Russia was behind teh North Koreans in everything). So, if you want to harp on American interference there then you should also include the Russians.

But I think one American interference in Korea that even you will agree on is on its support and protection of South Korea. Without American norturing of SOuth Korea it would have long ago ceased to exist or even if it survived the North Korea-Russian-Chinese alliance. Now South Korea is a thriving capitalist country because of American interference (of course coupled with South Korean determination to succeed).

Just like the Japanese, maybe you can try asking South Koreans of all ages now if they think it was a mistake for America to interfere in Korean affairs during the Korean War? Good luck with that.

5) SEA, you mean Vietnam? Well it was the height of the Cold War. After the bloody Korean War America became more sensitive to communist expansion in Asia. The Americans saw the problems in South Vietnam as a communist expansion rather than an independence movement. They were right partly as the USSR was actively supporting North Vietnam.

6) South America, Well it was the Cold War.

7) Europe, I don;t know what American interference you want to point out there. The Europeans are independent right now because of American interference.

8) Middle East, it's very hard to generalize the Middle East. Again, most of American "interference" there happened after WW2 with the waning British power. I think the biggest American mistakes in the ME are Iran and Iraq.

But bear in mind that the USSR jostling for influence in the region after WW2. Their only problem was that they were strategically outmaneuvered and outsmarted by the Americans in most situations. But make no mistake, the USSR equally wanted to influence the ME.

blah blah blah and blah blah blah

Essentially you re saying america has every right to interfere in every other country, because the sovereignty of every country is of no consequence, and because somehow in your magical world every intervention was a good thing.
Sure, whatever. Even being an american-malaysian your level of sycophancy is astounding.
Inline in red, please.
Also note that, I have responded to your OT post with an OT, that's all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Kshatriya87

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
10,123
Likes
15,858
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

Well, I liked reading the book very much. He clearly mentions that he enlisted in the Navy, NOT to go to war with Iraq, but to save his country. Personally, he didn't give a "flying fcuk" about the Iraqis.

Impartially speaking, I would have said similar things about them.
 

J20!

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
2,748
Likes
1,541
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

I would disagree: Kyle was indeed killing America's enemies. The Iraqi insurgents, all Moslem fanatics, that sprang up in the wake of the American invasion of Iraq were clearly the American forces' enemies in Iraq and to say otherwise is quite wrong. But you and the other poster have a different opinion. Any force or organisation or movement that engage in armed hostilities against the forces of the United States is a belligerent force and are clearly America's enemies.
The United States forces were a "belligerent force engaging in armed hostilities against" the Iraqi people. The Americans bombed schools, power plants, infrastructure, sewage plants etc etc TWICE!!!! And killed more than half a million Iraqi children through its sanctions regime between the two invasions of Iraq.

Where you expecting the Iraqi's NOT to act in defense of their country?

1. Despite what you and western corporate media portray as the fight against "Moslem fanatics", a very significant portion of those "fanatics" where grassroots movements to repel the American led INVASION.

Yes, Iraqi society is very religious, but turning the whole resistance movement in Iraq post 2003 into a war against "radicals" is misinformation and concerted propaganda in reality.

2. Despite pentagon whitewashing (designating Iraqi civilian deaths as "insurgent" kills), a huge majority of the Iraqi losses post 2003 were civilians, not combatants. And a portion of those civilian kills belonged to your "hero" Kyle. He admits to killing scores of "military age" males in his memoir.

3. Despite the movies resounding success in the MIDWEST AND DEEP SOUTH of the US - which is self-explanatory considering the guns n Bible, neo-con orientation of these societies - "many" Americans do not think racist, kill-a-raghead, Kyle was a hero.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
 

abingdonboy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2010
Messages
8,039
Likes
33,578
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

They look for a particular mentality when selecting candidates for special forces' units. They look for real ruthlessness and the ability to achieve the objective no matter what. They look for the sort of resolve that keeps the individual going and that won't be stopped by anything. Sure, Kyle was an animal, but to be in the SEALs you have to be, otherwise you would never have been selected.

The man was a hero to many Americans because he killed America's enemies. And any soldier that kills the enemies of his country on a large scale is more often than not considered a hero. Look at the Soviet soldier Vasily Zaitsev who, like Kyle, was a sniper and who bagged over 400 Germans and was made a Hero of the Soviet Union. Was Kyle a racist? Undoubtedly. He regarded Moslem Arabs as savages, and they certainly have a history of savagery, and they were easy to kill because he regarded them as lesser, inferior people. And as he said himself, any Iraqi Arab male between 15 and 65 was fair game. And any Iraqi Arab woman who was about to detonate a bomb was also targeted by Kyle if she came into his sights, which did happen. Doubtless he would have targeted first those he could see that were holding a weapon, but then perhaps not. Anyway, he was thoroughly hated by the Moslem fanatic insurgents who put a huge price on his head. That is a pretty good indication that the was effective in killing the fanatical insurgents.

As far as having a movie made about him, Kyle was probably indifferent and couldn't care less one way or the other. People like Kyle are not glory-hounds and don't do the job for recognition and are pretty well indifferent to it when they do get it. People like Kyle do the job they do because they are good at it.

Ruthless and murdering sociopath are two different things.


The fact that Americans glorify Kyle says more about their culture and intellect as a whole than anything else. He killed America's enemies? They weren't enemies until America inserted itself in that part of the world, these insurgents were fighting to get foreign soldiers off their soil, they were hardly enemies of the US, they would never have travelled to the US to carry out violence there. They were enemies of the US military yes but enemies of America? Not really or if they were it was because they were made to be. And Kyle actually said in an interview he wished he had had the permission to kill everyone walking around with a Koran! I seriously doubt even 50% of Kyle's kills were legitimate enemy combatants.

Kyle bragged about going to New Orleans and sniping looters on the street during Katrina (he never did of course), does this not make you question his moral compass at all? If he is willing to execute looters of the same nationality, what would he be willing to do to the "savages"?

He was asked if he had any regrets to which he said only that he hadn't killed more!

As for Kyle being indifferent, if this was true what did he write a book? Why was he a consultant on this film? He was, like Mark Owens and Robert O'neil ,( disgraces to their units and SF community) trying to become famous and make a quick buck from his experiences in the SEALs.
 

abingdonboy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2010
Messages
8,039
Likes
33,578
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

Well, I liked reading the book very much. He clearly mentions that he enlisted in the Navy, NOT to go to war with Iraq, but to save his country. Personally, he didn't give a "flying fcuk" about the Iraqis.
.
Well then he, and any American who follows this reasoning, is a complete and utter idiot. The war in Iraq was never about protecting America and has only increased the risks to America.
 

Kshatriya87

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
10,123
Likes
15,858
Country flag
Re: Does the movie 'American Sniper' cause a rise in anti-Muslim threa

Well then he, and any American who follows this reasoning, is a complete and utter idiot. The war in Iraq was never about protecting America and has only increased the risks to America.
We all know NOW that the war was not about protecting america. But at the time, the soldiers did not know the truth behind these wars. Hence, I think his reasoning was not to be blamed.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top