what do you guys think about war?

[Savant 10+ year member]

Hey LWW..

While I agree that for the most part the US goes into 'war' and kicks ***, then tries to 'rebuild' or at least help the defeated in some manner.. As for dropping food on the citizens while we fight the military, some of that is propaganda (perpetrated on the forgein population).. Here are some links that Gauntlet posted in a different thread..

Know what else the US gave to Iraq during the Gulf War? Poisoned land that is causing un-godly and uthinkable travesties to the Iraqi people..

First you can read this - http://www.ecoglobe.org.nz/nuclear/duarms.htm

Then you can look at these pictures - http://www.guerrillanews.com/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=gnn&Number=117360&Search=true&Forum=All_Forums&Words=samizdat&Match=Username&Searchpage=0&Limit=25&Old=allposts&Main=112883

The US knows this stuff is terrible. They know it can cause serious problems. Even some of our own troops are having to deal with this.. Not to mention the exposure to Chemical Agents that the US refused to admit until there were enough troops showing symtoms, then they finally admitted they knew about it..

As you noted, abscense of war and fear constitute peace.. but dropping bombs and marching through the streets of Iraq isn't gonna do a lot toward removing the fear part. We are 'afraid' he has weapons.. so we get NATO to agree that we need to escilate the inspections and let us go EVERYWHERE.. have a group of soldiers from SEVERAL countries go with the inspectors.. Saddam lifts one finger, try him in an international court.. Kill him for crimes against humanity or something.. But, if he does have these weapons, he will definately use them as soon as the US attacks.. If our goal really is to make sure he doesn't have those weapons, then lets stick to that..

If the US has proof about other 'crimes' of Saddam, then maybe we need to have NATO bring him up on charges and remove him from power? If there is no 'legal' way to do that, maybe it's time the Global population instantiated a law like that, to let the global comunity to remove psycho or out of control leaders *shrug*

 

[LWW 10+ year member]

First - The USA lost the Vietnam war. It's a well known fact to everyone except people who believe Govt. propaganda.

Sorry but I lived through it my friend. The US fell into war following weak political leadership (JFK and LBJ) which neither wanted to accept a humiliation OR fight a war. Under Nixon we negotiated a truce rather than obliterate a nation. Sadly the low point of American history in my opinion.

Second - The US was one of the last countries to enter WWII, and they only entered once Germany started to lose. Basically show up at the last minute, and take all the credit.

Wrong again. The US was involved through monetary support of England from the beginning. At our point of entry Hitler was so close to victory that he declared war on the US because he felt the European theater to be his.

Third - How will another World war which most likely result in the deaths of millions of innocent people in the best interest of the world?

Read your history books. The same argument was used to appease Hitler. A regional war became WWII because of the pacifist left in Europe and America. Don't forget he was named Time Man of the Year for settling on a few small countries instead of forcibly invading France and England.

War is sometimes a quick answer to a problem, but it is never the right answer.

So if a chemical attack is made on the homeland which kills your family you are OK with it? Sorry not me.

The World had a chance to remove Saddam from power 12 years ago and they failed, now they are complaining about his policies - well should have thought of that before.

This one I'll give you, however dropping the ball TWICE makes it better HOW?

Until the US learns tolerance they have no right to police the world. Even then they still don't have the right.

Wrong again. Name me the countries America has conquered and not returned the country to it's rightful owners. By your logic if the Manson family attacks your home neither you nor the police have any "RIGHT" to defend your "way of life".

To think that the US has been a major player in Human history is conceited. There was war before the US was here, there will be war long after the US is gone - unfortunately it's part of human nature.

Wrong again. Wow I think I see a trend. America is THE only nation which has bucked human nature by fighting wars of liberation instead of wars of conquest.

The driving force behind war has been and always will be wealth and power. The only way to abolish war would be to take away wealth and power. The only way to accomplish this is for everyone in the world to realize that everyone/every life is equal.Everyone is equal, that is a policy I have lived my life by. I have never been in a fight, I have never been attacked by anyone, and I will not judge someone before I know what they are like. (sounds like star trek)

This where I can cut you some slack. As a younger man I espoused these same ideals. With a little seasoning I can tell you that wealth and power are the reasons for wars of conquest, and I have seen with my own eyes what the likes of Saddam and others can do to a people. All life is of EQUAL VALUE, on this I agree. Also that all people have equal rights, so far we are talking good old American ideals. Where I differ from you due to life experience is that ALL PEOPLE ARE NOT EQUAL! In rights, in value, yes. In meaning and intent NO. Some people are good to the core. Some hard working. Some lazy. Some lecherous. Some saintly. And sadly some are just plain EVIL.

Saddam, Bin Laden, Amin, Castro, Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, et al...well we know what they are like. Problem being that sometimes the temptation is there to think that this time it will be different.

Know what else the US gave to Iraq during the Gulf War? Poisoned land that is causing un-godly and uthinkable travesties to the Iraqi people..

Sorry. The Gulf War was Saddam's doing entirely. It is sad for sure that some innocents are harmed in every war, and sadly there are no PERFECT answers in these issues. Hundreds die from these things. Millions are saved. Airbags kill some people. They save many more. The US has came to the aid of victims of the war's remnants. Anybody want to talk about the aid Germany would have given to prison camp survivors in Israel had they won the war?

Folks wake up. The fact that we can have this discussion freely proves the point. Why do we have the greatest economy on Earth? Not because we have the most resources, or people, or the best educational system because we don't. Not because we have taken other nations and plundered their wealth because we haven't. The difference is we have a system which gives each individual the equal right to strive for success, and most of those who do achieve it. Government cannot legislate equality of wealth by birthright, nor equality of inate talents, nor certainly not equa;ity of outcome. It can only offer equality of opportunity, and though this may be a goal which is never achieved to perfection, we have achieved it to a higher degree than any nation with us or before us.

PEACE

 

[Savant 10+ year member]

Originally posted by LWW Sorry. The Gulf War was Saddam's doing entirely. It is sad for sure that some innocents are harmed in every war, and sadly there are no PERFECT answers in these issues. Hundreds die from these things. Millions are saved. Airbags kill some people. They save many more. The US has came to the aid of victims of the war's remnants. Anybody want to talk about the aid Germany would have given to prison camp survivors in Israel had they won the war?

PEACE

I think you are missing the point I was trying to make.. Bombing them had to be done.. sure.. I can agree to that.. shooting bullets (30mm etc) needed to be done.. sure.. but we don't need to use depleted uranium to try and be 'effective'.. not when it devistates human life like that.. There are alternatives to using weapons that we KNOW are going to essentially torture the civilian population. I mean, comon'.. we are persecuting Saddam for doing things that are horrific to his own people, but we come in using weapons we know are going to do the same kinds of things (if not worse) to civilians? That's my big issue..

 

[CarAudioAddict 10+ year member]

I'll leave the first one alone, as I wasn't alive when it happened and I only have history and education on that point

Wrong again. The US was involved through monetary support of England from the beginning. At our point of entry Hitler was so close to victory that he declared war on the US because he felt the European theater to be his.

You still don't deny that the US was late in joining the war. But I still don't see how he was close to victory, England, France, Spain, Canada were holding him back from conquering Europe. He had only taken a few countries and lost much of his army trying to invade teh USSR during winter

Read your history books. The same argument was used to appease Hitler. A regional war became WWII because of the pacifist left in Europe and America. Don't forget he was named Time Man of the Year for settling on a few small countries instead of forcibly invading France and England.

You still haven't answered the question. How would another war resulting in millions of innocent deaths be for the better?

So if a chemical attack is made on the homeland which kills your family you are OK with it? Sorry not me.

A chemical attack on my homesoil - yeah I'd be pissed off, and no it wouldn't be ok with me. But the flip side is would it be ok if I went and killed someones family in retaliation?

No, I didn't think so

This one I'll give you, however dropping the ball TWICE makes it better HOW?

I never said it makes it better, I'm saying that 12 years ago they knew what kind of person he was, and they could have removed him from power, but they didn't. Now that he has had a chance to rebuild his army and develop more weapons the world is complaining about him. BTW I still haven't seen any proof that he has weapons of mass destruction. He may have some of the supplies used in building them, but that is NO proof that he has built any (by that reasoning - I have bleach in my house, which is one of chemicals used to make acid and extacy - that must mean I have extacy in my house. The only "proof" I've seen is circumstantial. Things like "activity in military installations before the investigators arrived" - WOW, thats proof. Proof that he has an operational military, thats all. Also intercepted phone calls with statements like "have the weapons been moved yet?" - Once again, no valid proof. What if they were talking about AK-47's -thats hardly a weapon of mass destruction.

Wrong again. Name me the countries America has conquered and not returned the country to it's rightful owners. By your logic if the Manson family attacks your home neither you nor the police have any "RIGHT" to defend your "way of life".

I don't know about you, but the police in my country are paid to defend mine, and everyone elses in the country way of life. If someone attacks my way of life the police are there to protect it.

Wrong again. Wow I think I see a trend. America is THE only nation which has bucked human nature by fighting wars of liberation instead of wars of conquest.

You still haven't shown me how the US has been a major player in human history. Yes, a player and one of the major players of the last 100 years, but 100 years is a far cry from 5000. How did the US affect history in the 16th century, the 10th, the 1st, how about 3500 years ago?

This where I can cut you some slack. As a younger man I espoused these same ideals. With a little seasoning I can tell you that wealth and power are the reasons for wars of conquest, and I have seen with my own eyes what the likes of Saddam and others can do to a people. All life is of EQUAL VALUE, on this I agree. Also that all people have equal rights, so far we are talking good old American ideals. Where I differ from you due to life experience is that ALL PEOPLE ARE NOT EQUAL! In rights, in value, yes. In meaning and intent NO. Some people are good to the core. Some hard working. Some lazy. Some lecherous. Some saintly. And sadly some are just plain EVIL.

Ok we agree, all life is of equal value, which is basically what I meant. Use that argument to justify a war costing millions of human lives along with an unkown number of non-human lives.

 

[lamontjersey 10+ year member]

why do americans think they are the only hard workers, i think people in other countries work harder than americans. americans sit on a chair in front of a computer all day and call that hard work while others in other countries walk 12miles each way a day to sell goods from their village so whos the harder worker? some people work 16hrs a day doing physical labor. i just say this cause im tired of people who feel over worked when in actuality they are just over stressed, acting like their american ideals are superior to other people's ideals.....right is right wrong is wrong, dont think just because we are americans we are the only ones that can appreciate freedom...take a look at bush, taking away the freedom of information act, putting people in jail with no charges for undetermined amounts of time, harrassing arab americas . i guess if its not you its ok. dont forget they are americans too, and if you ask them, bush's new reality is just as bad as non democratic countries.

 

[Savant 10+ year member]

Originally posted by lamontjersey why do americans think they are the only hard workers, i think people in other countries work harder than americans. americans sit on a chair in front of a computer all day and call that hard work while others in other countries walk 12miles each way a day to sell goods from their village so whos the harder worker? some people work 16hrs a day doing physical labor. i just say this cause im tired of people who feel over worked when in actuality they are just over stressed, acting like their american ideals are superior to other people's ideals.....right is right wrong is wrong, dont think just because we are americans we are the only ones that can appreciate freedom...take a look at bush, taking away the freedom of information act, putting people in jail with no charges for undetermined amounts of time, harrassing arab americas . i guess if its not you its ok. dont forget they are americans too, and if you ask them, bush's new reality is just as bad as non democratic countries.

Patriot Act..

I got this from somewhere.. I attach it for your enlightenment (not you lamonjersy, for all who care to see how far Bush has gone)....

http://www.pcisys.net/~savant/PatriotActInfo.html

 

[CarAudioAddict 10+ year member]

Anyone still think bush is right? sane? moral? a "good" leader?

Being Canadian, the only real threats to my country right now are being taken over by a fascist govt (ie. the US) or being bombed during the upcoming war (thanks Mr? President).

Saddam is not a threat - He's done nothing against my country. Bin Laden is not a threat - unless you fear the dead. The biggest threat my way of life is the war that president Bush is about to start.

Another point - Why must saddam dismantle any mass destruction weapons he has, but the US has a 100 megaton nuke not even 500km away from my house (I live 10 km from the alberta/montana border)? hypocrites.

 

[Savant 10+ year member]

Originally posted by CarAudioAddict Another point - Why must saddam dismantle any mass destruction weapons he has, but the US has a 100 megaton nuke not even 500km away from my house (I live 10 km from the alberta/montana border)? hypocrites.

LOL.. he needs to dismantle his weapons because he's been using them on his own pop and his neighboring countries.. the weapons he has been using are some of the nastiest things you can have (bio weapons are really nasty)..

The biggest reason? He's a psycho.. You don't want a psycho to have chem weapons, let a lone bio or nukes.. If he had them for the same reasons the major powers do (started as bluffing power.. now it's pretty much BS since, in theory, we would never use them unless someone else started (that's what they are all saying though) and they started the end of the human civilization..) it wouldn't be too much of an issue.. But, with him having them, he "will" use them (no other major power has any intention of using nukes).. send one to New York cause he's mad.. or Kuwait.. or where ever just to have fun.. That's the base issue there.. and I totally agree that he should have his hands tied as far as his ability to cause wide spread dessimation.. *shrug*

 

[CarAudioAddict 10+ year member]

I'm not saying he should have them. I'm saying that ALL countries should dismantle ALL weapons of mass destruction (womd)

 

[Savant 10+ year member]

Originally posted by CarAudioAddict I'm not saying he should have them. I'm saying that ALL countries should dismantle ALL weapons of mass destruction (womd)

The problem is, as soon as we all knew they were dismantled, someone would start building them again to have the leverage and ability to threaten..

I agree.. the would would be a MUCH better place if noone had to worry about nuklear holocost, but once the tech is invented, there is no putting the geanie back in the bottle.. all we can do is try to keep the bottle out of the hands of psychos //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

 

[CarAudioAddict 10+ year member]

True.

What really sux about womd is that all it takes is one psycho to reduce the world to a float hunk of rock and not the truly beautiful place it is (or used to be).

What else that really sux is most of todays best technology started as a new way to kill people. Nuclear power started as the A-bomb. Computers were originally designed for targeting missles, etc.

Unfortunately Human nature is to try and be better than thy Neighbor, and until we find ways to change this we can't stop ourselves from finding newer and easier ways to kill eachother (even the US develops new weapons). I hope that someday all humans learn how to live in peace with eachother (and nature) and not try to wipe one another off the planet.

 

[Savant 10+ year member]

Originally posted by CarAudioAddict True.

 

What really sux about womd is that all it takes is one psycho to reduce the world to a float hunk of rock and not the truly beautiful place it is (or used to be).

 

What else that really sux is most of todays best technology started as a new way to kill people. Nuclear power started as the A-bomb. Computers were originally designed for targeting missles, etc.

 

Unfortunately Human nature is to try and be better than thy Neighbor, and until we find ways to change this we can't stop ourselves from finding newer and easier ways to kill eachother (even the US develops new weapons). I hope that someday all humans learn how to live in peace with eachother (and nature) and not try to wipe one another off the planet.

The theory is, enlightenment is the goal of 'civilization'.. only, most humans aren't civilized.. they are just hairless apes flinging poo.. *sigh* makes me sick..

Some day (should we not melt ourselves down first) we will 'all' be on the same page.. but that requires 'all' people to want to live for the sake of being alive, not being blinded by 'greed' or the desire to dominate over others..

Power currupts, absolute power currupts absolutely? Yup....

 

[97dakota 10+ year member]

You still don't deny that the US was late in joining the war. But I still don't see how he was close to victory, England, France, Spain, Canada were holding him back from conquering Europe. He had only taken a few countries and lost much of his army trying to invade teh USSR during winter

The U.S. was late in joining the war because of Leftist activists that didn't want to promote the war. I.E. they wanted to save american lives and give hitler a little more time. not my opinion, look it up buddy. as far as england and france holding off hitler. WRONG. France built the inpenetrable wall along the german french border. only hitler went around the wall by way of poland i believe was the county. after this in a matter of months the french laid down there weapons so a repeat of the first world war, in which millions of lives were lost to ultimatly achieve nothing. france was out of the picture years before U.S. was in the war.

Great britian was on the verge of getting there ***'s handed to them on a platter. the germans bombed the shit out of every town in england. as well as there military bases. britian had a few hundred planes left when the U.S. got into the war. the reason why hitler stopped attack england was because he felt that he should focus more on the U.S. and makeing defensive measrues to better his chances.

the invasion while costing him hundreds of troops was a poke in the arm if that. there is a reason they had had little to no resistance in the begining of the war and that is because of blitzcreg(sp).

so yes, the United states, saved the world in WW.II. prove me wrong. you can't so don't try. some of my facts might not be right but the jist is so don't bother.

 

[Savant 10+ year member]

Ok... now I'm confused.. Wasn't WWII when Japan bomed Pearl Harbor? 1941? (or 1942?).. As I recall, we weren't getting involved, but the sneak attack pissed us off.. we launched a full assualt.. and dropped a bomb on Hiroshima, or something?

Had nothing to do with Hitler.. despite his needing his *** beat..

If I have my world wars mixed up, please let me know..

 

[MikeofTulsa Moderator]

same war.....