English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

So many times I have read questions that use terms like "we" "our" or "us" in relation to troops deployed to places like Iraq or Afghan, when in fact they are talking about the troops of their own nation.

Whilst I appreciate that people are worried for their own countries servicemen, it must be remembered that a coalition consists of more than one countries forces.

In fact Afghanistan has troops from 37 diffrent nations assisting under the UN ISAF mandate and Iraq has 22 different nations.

2007-06-17 14:07:08 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

I only asked this because in Feb I returned from Afghan with the British army, and on here people seem to forget that other nations besides the US are involved in these two problems.

Everytime a body was flown home, regardless of nationality, there were contingents from all the other nations at the plane to 'see them off safely'

2007-06-17 14:25:28 · update #1

9 answers

You are absolutely correct! I have noticed this too but, I think that everyone has a tendency to only look at how it directly touches them! So, each person from each country has more data on their own troops. This is were the narrow mindedness comes in as most only see what they are told to see!

2007-06-17 14:15:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Unlike when daddy Bush went to war and created a real coalition, the Coalition that Jr. built is based on bribery. There assistance is minimal at best. It's not really a coalition at all.

2007-06-17 21:27:46 · answer #2 · answered by Zeltar 6 · 2 1

When more than one country offers more than token support, ten Brits die that is a big Deal ten American Boys Die thats an average day. It needs a reappraisal, pull our boys back nuke the gooks put them back with NBC suits and make sure the oil keeps flowing.

2007-06-17 21:50:37 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Hey Zeltar, it might interest you to know that US troops weren't the first to enter Iraq. It was one of your allies. You lot were late in again

2007-06-17 22:01:27 · answer #4 · answered by Nemesis 7 · 0 0

Lavadogs right, the media isn't paying any attention to the casualties that our allies are taking. They are leaving that to the European media to report.

2007-06-17 21:16:06 · answer #5 · answered by Belgariad 6 · 1 0

It will happen when advertisers start supporting REAL journalists. And I suppose that will be when we start getting our news from BETTER sources and stop watching their programs thus causing their ratings to fall.

2007-06-17 21:17:03 · answer #6 · answered by orange 2 · 0 0

when the propaganda media decides to take responsibility for itself and quit worrying about cash money

2007-06-17 21:12:32 · answer #7 · answered by LAVADOG 5 · 3 0

Thanks Ed. I didn't know the numbers but that sure points out some flaws in the argument that "we" are going it alone, doesn't it?

2007-06-17 21:15:26 · answer #8 · answered by John T 6 · 1 1

cause we dont count those little *** licking hemorrhoids that bush considers his paid for friends

2007-06-17 21:14:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 5

fedest.com, questions and answers