0
NoShitThereIWas

OK Serious Topic Here: How many of YOU are between the ages of 18 and 26? Are YOU ready to go to WAR?

Recommended Posts

Quote

if we were attacked by another planet, the world would change. Now instead of primary threats being other countries, we are possibly dealing with who knows what. I'd bet $$$ that the entire world, planet Earth would become a United force.



If invaders from another planet were to attack only some country other than the U.S., would you be in favor of U.S. troops helping that country defend itself?

According to the philosophy you've expressed so far, as I understand it, your answer would be "no". Is that correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Send troops in to keep the peace and prevent killing? No question, do it. Unfortunately, sometimes they have to slaughter children to stop the slaughter of children, as was the case with Iraq. Makes it a gray area. Is it OK to kill 1000 kids to prevent the deaths of 100? How about 100 to stop the killing of 1000? Choose any number you want, but once you choose that number, admit to yourself that killing _some_ kids is OK with you if it has some other benefit.



The amount of good things being done in Iraq far exceeds the amount of bad things due to accidents and the "fog of war".

Furthermore, doing nothing would have allowed a lot of terrible things to continue, with a death toll far higher than that being caused by accidents.

Therefore, on balance, what we're doing in Iraq is a good thing, IMO.

Nothing is perfect, especially in war. But failure to oppose murderous tyrants, is a greater tragedy than war itself.

Murderous tyrants, gone unchecked, last a life time. War is temporary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I went to find the post in the Trash Bin to see what the fuss was about. You most definitely had a personal attack in your post. Any of the moderators here would have deleted it, Bill just happened to get to it first. Bill is correct, you attacked the poster, not her views. It's very different.
She is Da Man, and you better not mess with Da Man,
because she will lay some keepdown on you faster than, well, really fast. ~Billvon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Send troops in to keep the peace and prevent killing? No question, do it. Unfortunately, sometimes they have to slaughter children to stop the slaughter of children, as was the case with Iraq. Makes it a gray area. Is it OK to kill 1000 kids to prevent the deaths of 100? How about 100 to stop the killing of 1000? Choose any number you want, but once you choose that number, admit to yourself that killing _some_ kids is OK with you if it has some other benefit.



The amount of good things being done in Iraq far exceeds the amount of bad things due to accidents and the "fog of war".

Furthermore, doing nothing would have allowed a lot of terrible things to continue, with a death toll far higher than that being caused by accidents.

Therefore, on balance, what we're doing in Iraq is a good thing, IMO.

Nothing is perfect, especially in war. But failure to oppose murderous tyrants, is a greater tragedy than war itself.

Murderous tyrants, gone unchecked, last a life time. War is temporary.



I don't think many people disagree that the overthrow of the Baathist regime in Iraq was a GOOD THING.

What many question is the role the US has taken upon itself as the world's policeman, it's cherry picking of which of many evil regimes it chooses to overthrow, the Bush administration's real motives, the manner in which it was sold to the public and Congress, and the way in which the continued occupation of Iraq is being conducted.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

What many question is the role the US has taken upon itself as the world's policeman



No one else is willing, or able, to do it.

Quote

it's cherry picking of which of many evil regimes it chooses to overthrow



You would prefer that we initiate military attacks agains all evil regimes in the world? I think that if we did that, the same people complaining about cherry-picking, would then complain about attacking all of them.

Not every evil regime is the same. In Iraq, we attacked only after diplomacy had failed for 10 years. In North Korea, diplomacy is still underway. In China, capitalism is taking hold and changing things.

Are you suggesting we should forget about diplomacy and other means of changing regimes, and just go ahead and make a military attack the first and only response?

Quote

the way in which the continued occupation of Iraq is being conducted.



And what would you do differently?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

What many question is the role the US has taken upon itself as the world's policeman



No one else is willing, or able, to do it.

Quote



I think many more nations would have participated if GWB &Co had not denigrated the UN so badly and then gone unilateral based on bogus intelligence.





Quote

it's cherry picking of which of many evil regimes it chooses to overthrow



You would prefer that we initiate military attacks agains all evil regimes in the world? I think that if we did that, the same people complaining about cherry-picking, would then complain about attacking all of them.

Not every evil regime is the same. In Iraq, we attacked only after diplomacy had failed for 10 years.
Quote




Really? I thought I heard they had no WMDs after all. I'm sure I heard that somewhere.

Quote

the way in which the continued occupation of Iraq is being conducted.



And what would you do differently?



Do whatever is necessary to mend fences with our traditional allies and get them involved. Bush I managed to hold together a big coalition, while Bush II has pissed away most of the international goodwill towards the US that followed the 9/11 incidents.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Angela (and anyone else who doesn't vote...)

really curious as to how you think you can change the system (or prevent a draft from occurring) if you don't vote and don't make your voice heard?

I'm not poking, just trying to understand a different frame of mind. To me, voting is a option, and one can choose to use it or not (and since I've turned 18, I have never not voted...). But if one doesn't vote, how does one get heard, and how does one change the system and make things better (if there is a perception of a wrongness)? And isn't the right to vote something that you think makes this country good and special, or not?

Again, not poking, just really trying to learn another position.

Ciels-
Michele


~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek
While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My answer to your question is this and it is only an observation of my own, it isn't like law or fact or anything ...

I have studied many things but mainly biology and criminal justice. My observation is when it comes to humans, "we" operate on macrocosmos and microcosmos. What I mean by that is that we like all things wishing to survive are competitive and we are always looking for a more efficient easier way of not just survival but achievement and self fulfillment. One thing with populations, especially ones who are dominant and begin to overpopulate ... at some point resources run a little low and even may run out. As it impacts that population it in some way impacts every other living creature for the most part either directly or indirectly, short term or long term. We are no different. We are living things who have needs to be met and have drive, desire and intelligence. We live on this planet as a part of the "Animal" Kingdom and I don't think a lot of people get that.

What happens when the lions run out of food? They die off, they starve, they fight for survival just like any of the rest of us would. And yes it is happening in our world today in nations including our own. Close to half of the world goes to bed hungry at night...

Then take a look at crime. See how it starts and how it circulates like the cycle of violence Angela was referring to. IMHO you can just equate violence with crime. It may be "justified" because our government says it is or because it is a means to and end but it is still crime. What does crime do it a nation, to an individual?

Anyway, back to the issue here because I have gone on some tangeant :S...

Yes, I believe if we were attacked by another planet, our world would unite. When you are living in a country and there is war with another country, you may not "like" or agree with your government's course of action but if it is YOUR COUNTRY you will most likely be in favor of "it" getting ahead, being ahead, having the best protection/security, opportunity for the best life, etc and if you cherish those things and see a threat of losing them you will most likely fight to keep them.

If you belong to a certain state in the US and someone asks you in the US where you are from and you say such and such Indiana or wherever ... you most likely would be like YEAH! Don't mess with Texas and I moved to the Show Me State. My point being is some people take pride in where they are from and will generally support their state for whatever reason over another state.

Now you live in a city in a state, take California for example. Lets say you live in San Francisco and you are a 49er fan and when the Raiders were in LA especially, talk about the rivalry and displays of physical prowess or whatever the hell they call that :S. The rivalry at a Raiders 49er Game was intense.

Now you live in a town. And your son plays basketball on a team. You are actively involved in your child's sports and your child's team is playing another team from a nearby town. Who are you rooting for now? Think well, that is "just" a such and such game. It isn't that serious. One child on a team lost his father the night his team played another team in town. His father (referee) was killed when the other father gave several blows to the head and it I remember right he died almost instantly.

Add hormones like testosterone which is a major part of aggression, a dwindling economy, etc. etc. etc.
The point I am trying to drive home is that we are animals. Not animals as we see them because we are way more complex. We are probably the most intelligent animals out there so we are going to utilize all we can to be all that we can with what we have be in on the macrocosmos or the microcscmos.

I don't know if that made one bit of sense to anyone but me but if not, oh well :S
Roy Bacon: "Elvises, light your fires."

Sting: "Be yourself no matter what they say."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I went to find the post in the Trash Bin to see what the fuss was about. You most definitely had a personal attack in your post. Any of the moderators here would have deleted it, Bill just happened to get to it first. Bill is correct, you attacked the poster, not her views. It's very different.



My post probably came across harsher than I intended; however, I still believe my point was valid and the metaphor made a legitimate argument, not a "personal attack." I did not lash out at the other poster in anger or simply to hurt her; I was trying to show how her approach to politics is hurting our nation. I believe a person who neither contributes to the current system of politics nor tries to change it, yet still gains from the system, is only hurting the nation, the way a virus ("parasite" would have probably been a more accurate analogy) hurts its host by taking from it until it is dead. If I have seemed a bit defensive, it is only because I resent the notion that I attacked the poster and not her views. I feel this metaphor clearly attacks the idea that an undesirable system of government should simply be ignored. My original statement was harsh, and the moderators clearly had trouble with the line "you are a virus." Obviously my intentions were misunderstood, and I'm sorry I caused such a ruckus and took us off topic. I'll try to be more sensitive in future postings.

--W. Scott "Douva" Lewis
I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I believe a person who neither contributes to the current system of politics nor tries to change it, yet still gains from the system, is only hurting the nation, the way a virus ("parasite" would have probably been a more accurate analogy) hurts its host by taking from it until it is dead.



That's perfect! That is exactly the way to express your views on this site and not have your posts deleted. When you put it this way, I agree with you.
She is Da Man, and you better not mess with Da Man,
because she will lay some keepdown on you faster than, well, really fast. ~Billvon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0