Ok. Im sure this is the 100th time someone has suggested this, but we need a *douchebag invocation to flag videos as containing large quantities of douche. What MG is talking about with the 8 year thing: When you enlist you are committing 8 years to the military. When you sign for say, 5 years, you are committing to 5 years active duty, with the understanding that should the Army require you after your active commitment, they can still call you back.

Lurch, you pretty much nailed it on the head.

Irishman, get ready for the classic youtube favorite: STFU.

15Minutes: Its not an illegal order. Sure, its an illegal occupation, but just because hes been called back in to support the Iraqi War on Terror, doesn't necessarily mean he will be going back to Iraq.

MG: Your awesome.

We are too attacking the people of Afghanistan. We kill dozens of them every month. And that doesn't count the constant humiliation of having a foreign army in your country, searching your houses and picking your leaders.

We really don't know if Al Qaeda was behind the attacks, but that's for another post. And may I remind you that the Taliban offered to turn Osama bin Laden over to us if we'd provide proof he was behind the attacks. But we all know that the idea of Bush providing proof for anything is a total joke.

It's hard to have any sympathy for "the greatest military force in existence" when they are willingly involved in two illegal occupations, and bitching about how annoying the children are.

What pisses me off about you is that you keep showing these videos that make the military look like the best frat party since Animal House, and that's not what it's about.

so ok, that is why i am being strict on the law here, to define what is a war and what is an illegal occupation.

You should say "in a time of pillage" maybe, that would be more accurate.

Let's use good old wikipedia.
"In public international law, a declaration of war entails the recognition between countries of a state of hostilities between these countries, and such declaration acted to regulate the conduct between the military engagements between the forces of the respective countries. The primary multilateral treaties governing such declarations are the Hague Conventions."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war

So ... which country are the US at war with in Iraq?

And as for war crimes...
Dr. Hans Peter Gasser, former Senior Legal Adviser at the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), outlines the basic rules of IHL:

1. Persons who are not, or are no longer, taking part in hostilities shall be respected, protected and treated humanely. They shall be given appropriate care, without any discrimination.
2. Captured combatants and other persons whose freedom has been restricted shall be treated humanely. They shall be protected against all acts of violence, in particular against torture. If put on trial they shall enjoy the fundamental guarantees of a regular judicial procedure.
3. The right of parties to an armed conflict to choose methods or means of warfare is not unlimited. No superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering shall be inflicted.
4. In order to spare the civilian population, armed forces shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and civilian objects on the one hand, and military objectives on the other. Neither the civilian population as such nor individual civilians or civilian objects shall be the target of military attacks. [1].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_humanitarian_law

So that's 4 strikes and you're out as far as i can tell. If you're not in a proper war, and you're not fighting another country's army, the definition of "civilian" gets a bit confusing, right?

Notice how these "barbarians" always attack whoever is on their land stealing their oil. It's not so confusing.

Maybe if we hadn't flushed 1/2 trillion dollars down the toilet of our illegal occupation of Iraq, our government could afford a decent fucking sound system.

While it's important to remember that some good has come out of the illegal occupation of Iraq - unfortunately, the bad outweighs the good. Since the illegal invasion it is estimated that between 392,979 and 655,000 Iraqis have been killed (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1892888,00.html).

It's also good to remember that Glenn Beck is a staunch supporter of Bush and one of the most influential conservative talk-radio personalities. He has led a number of pro-war rallies ignoring the terrible attrocities occuring in Iraq - some of them at the hands of American troops. Personally, I think he is a vile individual. For example has called the victims of Hurricane Katrina 'scumbags'. He approves of torturing terrorism suspects. He has referred to the War on Terror as the Third World War - which is highly irresponsible. And I'm stilled pissed off at the way he interviewed Keith Ellison - he asked Ellison ""What I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies'". If he had done that in the UK he would have been fired and his career would have been over. Furthermore, he said that he was surprised that former President Jimmy Carter did not attend Iran's December conference on Holocaust denial - following the publication of Carter's book on Palestine and Israel.

I won't down vote this post - because it is important to see that there have been some positives. But because the negatives completely outweigh the positives, and because I can't stand Glenn Beck - I certainly ain't voting for it!

Israel has illegally occupied areas in the Gaza strip and the Golan heights repeadetely throught the last 60 years, it's the longest state sancationed illegal occupation that goes against numerous UN resolutions.

It unfairly manipulates state media to make it self look righteous, watch any north american based news report about Israel and it's always "Israel responds to, retaliates to, etc etc" when in reality it's actually carrying out on going military incursions into Palestinian occupied lands.

It builts settlements in Palestine occupied areas shielded from the local residents by IDF forces. Then uses these settlements as bargaining chips to signify that a jewish presence is there, and thus deadlocking land debates, currently jewish settlements carve up Palestinaian held areas.

It imposes large blockades between the various Palestinian settlements and arbitarily shuts down borders or turns away people for lack of documents which are always hard to attain and never promise passage totally.

It destroys the homes of palestinians by imposing land law certificate requirments, a home owner must possess these documents to have a home. However these documents are not avaliable to anyone but jewish settlers. Thus the goverment can 'legally' remove people from their own lands.

I could go on and on. Though am not saying this is all one sided. Currently this history of trying to outdo eachother has created a problem that will never be easy to solve.