“Fighting for our freedom?”

[Justice]

I’ve heard this phrase countless times in my life and I just don’t get it. It’s a serious question. We haven’t been attacked on our soil here in the states since Pearl Harbor. Can someone please explain it to me? 

[LeviF]

11 minutes ago, Justice said:

I’ve heard this phrase countless times in my life and I just don’t get it. It’s a serious question. We haven’t been attacked on our soil here in the states since Pearl Harbor. Can someone please explain it to me? 

 

2,996

[Justice]

6 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

 

2,996

As tragic as a day that was our freedom was never under any serious threat 

[LeviF]

5 minutes ago, Justice said:

As tragic as a day that was our freedom was never under any serious threat 

 

The collective "our?"  No, I suppose not.

 

But part of what the USA was founded on was this idea that her citizens have a right to life and the "blessings of liberty" as the Constitution says.  I'm not fond of every military action nor do I think "fighting for our freedom" is often the best way of describing what American troops are doing, but the line "no attacks on US soil since Pearl Harbor" is deliberately misleading and I think you know that.

[3rdnlng]

1 minute ago, Justice said:

As tragic as a day that was our freedom was never under any serious threat 

9/11 and the numerous other attacks do threaten our freedom and safety. Just because these types of terror attacks may not be as dramatic as Pearl Harbor doesn't mean they don't affect us in our thoughts and deeds. Think of all that has changed since 9/11 and think of what might be if we don't vigorously weed out these deplorable people.

[DC Tom]

35 minutes ago, Justice said:

As tragic as a day that was our freedom was never under any serious threat 

 

It wasn't under serious threat after Pearl Harbor, either.  

[Justice]

8 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

It wasn't under serious threat after Pearl Harbor, either.  

Weren’t we exposed as far as Chicago from the west coast?

35 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

9/11 and the numerous other attacks do threaten our freedom and safety. Just because these types of terror attacks may not be as dramatic as Pearl Harbor doesn't mean they don't affect us in our thoughts and deeds. Think of all that has changed since 9/11 and think of what might be if we don't vigorously weed out these deplorable people.

 

37 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

 

The collective "our?"  No, I suppose not.

 

But part of what the USA was founded on was this idea that her citizens have a right to life and the "blessings of liberty" as the Constitution says.  I'm not fond of every military action nor do I think "fighting for our freedom" is often the best way of describing what American troops are doing, but the line "no attacks on US soil since Pearl Harbor" is deliberately misleading and I think you know that.

No it’s not. Why do some here always assume the worst? I didn’t count 9/11 because it wasn’t an attack from a military force. 

[3rdnlng]

5 minutes ago, Justice said:

Weren’t we exposed as far as Chicago from the west coast?

 

No it’s not. Why do some here always assume the worst? I didn’t count 9/11 because it wasn’t an attack from a military force. 

Ok then, would you rather be shot in the heart by a military sniper or the little girl next door?

[KD in CA]

I agree.  We should call a spade a spade and call it "Fighting to eliminate barbarians"

[LeviF]

8 minutes ago, Justice said:

 

No it’s not. Why do some here always assume the worst? I didn’t count 9/11 because it wasn’t an attack from a military force. 

 

Disingenuous, then.  You know just as well as I do that Al-Qaeda enjoyed state-sanctioned shelter in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.  Furthermore they were involved in military training there as well.

 

This game you're trying to play doesn't work on anyone not willing to do entire sets of cartwheels and somersaults with their brains.

[3rdnlng]

17 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

It wasn't under serious threat after Pearl Harbor, either.  

Japan attacked our homeland by capturing the Alaskan islands of Attu and Kiska and holding them for about a year. They also sent thousands of balloon bombs our way and actually 6 people were killed. They called it "An Evening in Chicago".

 

https://www.wired.com/2010/05/0505japanese-balloon-kills-oregon/

1945:: A Japanese balloon bomb kills six people in rural eastern Oregon. They are the only World War II U.S. combat casualties in the 48 states.

Months before an atomic bomb decimated Hiroshima, the United States and Japan were locked in the final stages of World War II. The United States had turned the tables and invaded Japan's outlying islands three years after Japan's invasion of the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor.

That probably seemed a world away to a Sunday school teacher, her minister husband and five 13- and 14-year-old students near Klamath Falls. Rev. Archie Mitchell was driving the group along a mountainous road on the way to a Saturday afternoon picnic, according to the Mail Tribune, a southern Oregon newspaper.

Teacher Elyse Mitchell, who was pregnant, became sick. Her husband pulled the sedan over. He began speaking to a construction crew about fishing conditions, and his wife and the students momentarily walked away.

 

They were about a hundred yards from the car when she shouted back: "Look what I found, dear," the Mail Tribune reported.

 

One of the road-crew workers, Richard Barnhouse, said "There was a terrible explosion. Twigs flew through the air, pine needles began to fall, dead branches and dust, and dead logs went up."

The minister and the road crew ran to the scene. Jay Gifford, Edward Engen, Sherman Shoemaker, Dick Patzke and their teacher were all dead, strewn around a one-foot hole. The teacher's dress was ablaze. Dick Patzke's sister Joan was severely injured and died minutes later, the Mail Tribune wrote.

The six were victims of Japan's so-calledFu-Go or fire-balloon campaign. Carried aloft by 19,000 cubic feet of hydrogen and borne eastward by the jet stream, the balloons were designed to travel across the Pacific to North America, where they would drop incendiary devices or anti-personnel explosives.

Made of rubberized silk or paper, each balloon was about 33 feet in diameter. Barometer-operated valves released hydrogen if the balloon gained too much altitude or dropped sandbags if it flew too low.

 

In all, the Japanese released an estimated 9,000 fire balloons. At least 342 reached the United States. Some drifted as far as Nebraska. Some were shot down.

Some caused minor damage when they landed, but no injuries. One hit a power line and temporarily blacked out the nuclear-weapons plant at Hanford, Washington.

But the only known casualties from the 9,000 balllons – and the only combat deaths from any cause on the U.S. mainland – were the five kids and their Sunday school teacher going to a picnic.

[Justice]

19 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

 

Disingenuous, then.  You know just as well as I do that Al-Qaeda enjoyed state-sanctioned shelter in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.  Furthermore they were involved in military training there as well.

 

This game you're trying to play doesn't work on anyone not willing to do entire sets of cartwheels and somersaults with their brains.

So you’re just gonna be a dick about it then. Two can play that game. Your thoughts towards me come from an ugly place because you’re an ugly and racist individual. See how that works? I could be 100% wrong about that but I’ll just put it out there like it’s fact.

 

We’re all strangers here and if you can’t speak honestly on a site like this then I don’t know what to tell you. Why even post here then if we can’t be 100% truthful. If I tell you it wasn’t intentional then you should believe it you !@#$. 9/11 was tragic but our freedom was not at risk that day. Whatever laws we passed afterwards was of our own doing. They were unnecessary. 

26 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

I agree.  We should call a spade a spade and call it "Fighting to eliminate barbarians"

If you mean terrorists I agree. They need to be eliminated. Problem is who might be defining that term. Some might say they’re all terrorists in the ME. 

I’ve always wondered what that saying meant and didn’t ask sooner because it might offend. I’ll take any rational answer. I’m not looking to argue or play games. 

[DC Tom]

35 minutes ago, Justice said:

Weren’t we exposed as far as Chicago from the west coast?

 

No.  Japan at no time had any capacity to threaten the continental US.  It's highly doubtful they had the capacity to threaten Hawaii, in fact.

[Justice]

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

No.  Japan at no time had any capacity to threaten the continental US.  It's highly doubtful they had the capacity to threaten Hawaii, in fact.

So what’s your take on this, Tom? Does our military fight for our freedom? 

[LeviF]

10 minutes ago, Justice said:

So you’re just gonna be a dick about it then. Two can play that game. Your thoughts towards me come from an ugly place because you’re an ugly and racist individual. See how that works? I could be 100% wrong about that but I’ll just put it out there like it’s fact.

 

 

Not trying to be a dick, I just don't think you're as ignorant about the subject as you're claiming to be.  If you are, that's fine, but I've long operated under the assumption that you're not.

 

11 minutes ago, Justice said:

We’re all strangers here and if you can’t speak honestly on a site like this then I don’t know what to tell you. Why even post here then if we can’t be 100% truthful. If I tell you it wasn’t intentional then you should believe it you !@#$. 9/11 was tragic but our freedom was not at risk that day. Whatever laws we passed afterwards was of our own doing. They were unnecessary. 

 

2,996 people lost all of their freedom, as well as their right to live, on that day.  The US Constitution is clear: its purpose, among other things, was to, "insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence...and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."  "Fighting for our freedom" may be useless sloganeering and sometimes inaccurate but I wouldn't say it's always inaccurate.  Ousting the Taliban-controlled government in Afghanistan was, arguably, done for the freedom of millions of American citizens.  Al Qaeda was hit hard and only recently have their quasi-affiliates regained some of the strength and power it once wielded.

[Justice]

2 minutes ago, LeviF91 said:

 

Not trying to be a dick, I just don't think you're as ignorant about the subject as you're claiming to be.  If you are, that's fine, but I've long operated under the assumption that you're not.

 

 

2,996 people lost all of their freedom, as well as their right to live, on that day.  The US Constitution is clear: its purpose, among other things, was to, "insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence...and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."  "Fighting for our freedom" may be useless sloganeering and sometimes inaccurate but I wouldn't say it's always inaccurate.  Ousting the Taliban-controlled government in Afghanistan was, arguably, done for the freedom of millions of American citizens.  Al Qaeda was hit hard and only recently have their quasi-affiliates regained some of the strength and power it once wielded.

I’ll accept that. Good answer. Now that’s more like it. 

 

I do realize without them we wouldn’t have any freedom. My issue was with the word “fighting”, when “protecting” is probably the more suitable word. 

Edited December 22, 2017 by Justice

[gatorbait]

I am extremely grateful the United States has the world’s largest and most active military. Could you imagine if Russia or China were acting as the international police instead of us? The US certainly isn’t perfect, but we fight for the belief that every country should be a democracy with a set of rights and freedoms. 

 

We are fortunate and lucky to be born in this country. I would much rather be on the winning side, even if I know the military isn’t 100% moral all of the time. 

[Justice]

2 minutes ago, gatorbait said:

I am extremely grateful the United States has the world’s largest and most active military. Could you imagine if Russia or China were acting as the international police instead of us? The US certainly isn’t perfect, but we fight for the belief that every country should be a democracy with a set of rights and freedoms. 

 

We are fortunate and lucky to be born in this country. I would much rather be on the winning side, even if I know the military isn’t 100% moral all of the time. 

100

[DC Tom]

23 minutes ago, Justice said:

So what’s your take on this, Tom? Does our military fight for our freedom? 

 

No, they fight for our foreign policy.

[Paulus]

Nice bait.