|
|
| Home Just In Communities Forums Beta Readers Dictionary Search | Login Register Extras |
| Blackbird552's Forums » Politics |
|
|
|||
| Author | Post | ||
Why is it that almost every time I discuss this with someone sharing your viewpoint, Hitler comes up? This is entirely different. But just for the sake of argument, we didn't declare war on Germany because they were killing their own citizens. We did it because they were invading their neighbors, bombing the British, and allied with the Japanese who bombed our country. Honestly, now that I think of it the war hasn't been a complete waste. The Kurdish nation in the north is a great success. Not a single US soldier has been killed in their borders and they have exellent security. Unfourtunately the Turkish Army doesnt agree and that shiny story may come to an end soon. And also, yes. I did know that thousands have returned to their homes. But you put that fact in the wrong context. The people returning recently are the ones who fled because of the mass murders in the streets against ethnic groups. Not because Saddam is dead. Look at the reports more closely and you'll see that fact. Therefore, yes we did know this. And one good point arising after a hundred bad ones doesn't mean we should "shut up about Bush." This is America. You don't "shut up" about your government, you tell them what you want to see. Yes. We also know that Iraq had a nuclear weapons program. The key word being "had," they didn't have one when we invaded on that pretense. Yes they also used chemical weapons against the Iranians. Then they used conventional weapons that we gave them to use against Iran and their soldiers were killed by weapons we gave to Iran to use against Iraq. No, of course everyone did not complain about our invasion. But many people did. Hence your expansive guerrilla resistance. And in response to your firefighter analogy: no. It's not just like that. This is the Middle East. People have been living under dictatorships since the beginning of recorded history. If they want to change, that is their choice. Europe and America changed through the Enlightenment period. No one had to depose their leaders through a foreign invasion. Obviously, the situation isn't the same. Nonetheless, who are we to decide that our way of government is the best? Who are we to spread that way of government where we please? There is something called national sovereignty and its there for a reason. What you suggest would be like someone invading the US in the 1940s on the pretense that blacks had to sit on the back of the bus and couldn't use the same drinking fountains. Of course it's not right. But you can't invade a nation and use that as a means of justification. If good will and justice were the reasons we invaded, then right now we ought to be gearing up for our invasion of Myanmar and Syria and North Korea and, heck, even Russia! But I'm sure everyone will agree that we were doing the right, kind thing by invading all those sovereign nations. You can't argue that their cultures are wrong, huh?
|
|||
We all live on Earth. It doesn't matter what everyone believes, it just matters that everyone is kept safe. America has every right to invade Iraq, just like they have every right to attack back. But NO ONE has any right to say we're doing wrong, because infact there is no right or wrong. We just made up those right and wrongs. As for the Hitler thing, we didn't declare war on Germany. They declared it. Hitler had wanted the US to support them, instead we didn't. We had supported Iraq in the past, now we're invading their country to save people's lives and get rid of the programs. They DO have them. It was showed all over the news, I don't know when, of American Pilots destroying some of the camps. I recently read a article in the News Paper about a elder man who went to Iraq for 3 months. He said, "It has come to my conclusion that I must honor the respect that Iraqis are giving the soldiers. Around 1,000 Iraqis come back everyday, not only because they feel safe with their new approved government, but because of the new security they now have." Your right, we have no right to "spread" our way of life and government. But do you honestly believe the way Iraqis live is right? Yes, I would LOVE to live in a country where my leaders kill me. Yes, wonderful. Again, this is Earth we live on. Technically, no one owns anything just because they signed papers. We are all the same creatures and its our duty to protect one another, even if it means war. Stop bringing up other countries and focus on what America is doing right NOW. Not what they should of done. We are now with war with Iraq, theres nothing you can do about it. My cousin does not support the war one bit, but she does support the troops that are atleast trying to helping another country. Our way of life might not be best, but atleast we're keeping our people safe. If every other country was doing that, wouldn't life be better?
|
|||
No one has any right to say we're doing wrong? No? Last time I checked we have the RIGHT to say our country is doing wrong. Isn't that what America is founded on? "...there is no right or wrong. We just made up those right and wrongs." Yes, we did "make them up" because that's what morality is. Simply because we determine our own morals doesn't mean they don't exist. Also, you contradict yourself. You say there is no reason to say we are doing wrong because there IS no right or wrong. Yet, later, you state "But do you honestly believe the way Iraqis live is right?" If there is no right or wrong, then no I don't think its right, but I don't think it's wrong either. If we can't possibly be doing wrong because wrong doesn't exist, then we can't be doing right because right doesn't exist either. Which brings us back to the point that everyone is acting in their own interest. But personally, I do not believe the way they lived was right. Nonetheless, we cannot point a finger and say "WRONG" then invade a sovereign nation. It is destabilizing and destabilization causes more problems. You said that there were videos all over the news of pilots destroying nuclear weapons programs? You should call the pentagon and tell them, because the entire controvesy is that there was never any evidence of nuclear weapons programs at the time of invasion. There were plenty of videos of destroying al-queda training camps in Afghanistan and Iraqi military installations in Iraq. I don't know where you are getting this information. "Again, this is Earth we live on. Technically, no one owns anything just because they signed papers. We are all the same creatures and its our duty to protect one another, even if it means war." Again, it'd be nice to believe that. Protect each other? From what? In war, you kill people which is the opposite of protecting them. How do we protect one another by warring with one another? I don't understand that logic. Who gets to decide who needs protecting and who needs to die? How do we decide right and wrong if there IS no right or wrong? And, yes actually, there IS something we can do about being in a war. To suggest otherwise would suggest that our nation is no longer a republic. And anyone that doesn't support the war, still supports the troops. I support our troops too. I don't want to see them get killed or separated from their families any more. It is not their decision after all to be over there. So I am in agreement with your cousin. But don't suggest that things are the way they are and they can't be changed. That is never true. "Our way of life might not be best, but atleast we're keeping our people safe. If every other country was doing that, wouldn't life be better?" Would life be better if every country was protecting its people? Well, yes, that's what every country does. Some discriminate and protect only a certain group of their people. So, if they protected all their people, yes it'd be a little better. But, ultimately, gathering economic, political, and military power brings security to people. So protecting your people does not bring peace. In the end, nations protect their people NOT their neighbors' people. If we all lived on this Earth as you describe, then we'd be one big country. It'd be nice, really. But it is not reality.
|
|||
Yeah, there is no right or wrong. But, a right is what we believe in. A wrong is what we don't believe in. The right and wrongs that exsist today are from People's mind. They were "made up". As for the contradicting myself, read above. United Nations. Hence the, 'United' part. United States, states that help eachother. Don't say we don't. Lets see, September 11, Katrina, Floods. All those lovely things. If a country in UNITED NATIONS isn't doing to well, why can't America help? What we do may not be right in some people's thick skulls, but atleast we're trying. Unlike so many countries that are so absorbed in themselves that they could really careless. The video, I can't say much of that. I know what I saw on the News, whether it was fake or not. "Again, it'd be nice to believe that. Protect each other? From what? In war, you kill people which is the opposite of protecting them. How do we protect one another by warring with one another? I don't understand that logic. Who gets to decide who needs protecting and who needs to die? How do we decide right and wrong if there IS no right or wrong?" Oh jeeze, I'm going to have to say this again. United Nations. We may not be able to protect every country, but one thats not so great will make a difference. Yes, we make enemies and allies. We protect our allies from their enemies. I never really said we could protect EVERYONE. I can't see what you said and I honestly can't memorize...So... "And, yes actually, there IS something we can do about being in a war. To suggest otherwise would suggest that our nation is no longer a republic. And anyone that doesn't support the war, still supports the troops. I support our troops too. I don't want to see them get killed or separated from their families any more. It is not their decision after all to be over there. So I am in agreement with your cousin. But don't suggest that things are the way they are and they can't be changed. That is never true." I'm confused by all of that really. Its not their decision to be over there? You DO know that drafting is no longer in use? Its THEIR decision to be over there. You keep saying that my point of view isn't reality. I just want to laugh and scream at the same time. "Impossible reality" shouldn't hold what I believe down. I really do think that everything on Earth could one day actually become a country. Its not impossible, nor is it not reality. Its just something thats a little hard to do.
|
|||
Of course the United States help each other. I won't say we don't, that'd be ridiculous. But using the US as and analogy to the UN: You don't see Iowa invading Texas because Texas has the death penalty. But to Iowa, that's wrong. And to SOME people in Texas, it is wrong. That is what it is like for nations in the world just like states in a country. Yes, America can HELP a country in the United Nations. And we DO! But you can't topple a government on such grounds as helping their people, unless there is full fledged genocide (and even then it's difficult to get support in the UN). It is simply international law, put in place for a reason. "What we do may not be right in some people's thick skulls, but atleast we're trying." It is not their "thick skulls" it's their point of view! And actually, many ohter countries hepl in humanitarian efforts. The Scandinavian countries are the top contributors to international aid. The US is not all THAT close to the top. And any country that isn't really producing much international aid simply can't afford it. They have their own problems. It's not that they are "absorbed in themselves." I doubt the videos you saw were fake. They were just not nuclear weapons programs. "Yes, we make enemies and allies. We protect our allies from their enemies. I never really said we could protect EVERYONE." Again, by making allies and enemies you don't "protect" people. It causes conflict, it doesn't prevent it. Once again, who are we to decide who gets protecting and who is the enemy? Our enemies see us as evil, and we see them as evil. There isn't a fairy tale enemy that we know is evil and he knows it too. What I meant by it is not their choice to be over there: Yes. I know the draft is not in use. But they joined believing they were protecting their country. Not invading one to save some people halfway around the world from a dictator. They don't DECIDE where they go. They decide to join the military. Our leaders decide where they go. So, no, it is not their decision to be over THERE. It is their decision to be a part of the military. "You keep saying that my point of view isn't reality. I just want to laugh and scream at the same time. "Impossible reality" shouldn't hold what I believe down. I really do think that everything on Earth could one day actually become a country. Its not impossible, nor is it not reality. Its just something thats a little hard to do." Well, no, I did not mean it like that. What you suggest really is NOT reality...right now. Sure it could be someday. And yes, we SHOULD all help each other, but its just not going to happen in our lifetimes. Or for many, many more to come. Conflict by definintion will keep us from becoming one nation. Not to mention the economic stratification of rich and poor based on location. I'd love to see what you're talking about come true. But by suggesting that one type of government, one type of economic system, or one culture is right more than another brings conflict. And conflict will make what you want impossible. Therefore, we cannot use invasion or military might to bring about unity. That has been tried time and time again in the past, and it does not work. How can we bring about unity? I don't know. It's far above a PhD question. All I know is that one cannot preach unity through a fracturing war.
|
|||
This is what I got: You believe we should help a country, but not go in and invade their government? Yes, we may be trying to take over their government, but all we really want to do is save people lives. So what if we're "taking" away their culture, killing people isn't right. Its frustrating to know that people in our country honestly go by the book rather than help people. I don't want to say anymore. I haven't lost any pride, nor have I gained any by talking online. I don't see how you can be so cruel.
|
|||
It is not a matter of being "cruel." I am not a cruel person...far from. I don't believe what was done to the Iraqi people (or any other people under such a government) was right. But you simply can NOT save peoples lives through war. The point of war is to kill people. After all, who fights in a war. Not the people you are toppling to "free" the citizen. The citizens are fighting. They man the bunkers, drive the tanks, and fire the rifles. In order to "save" their lives, we would have to decimate their military, which is composed entirely of these citizens. Then once we destroy their army and drop a couple bombs in the wrong spots, killing a bunch more of these people whose lives we are supposedly saving, we strip them of their government and let a power vaccum engulf the nation. Then there is six months of near civil war and mass murders and torture. Then we look reminiscent of Saddam's men when we haul people suspected of being "insurgents" to a prison where they are tortured. At least they are free! I find that solution more cruel. Besides, America didn't invade Iraq to free the people from oppression. They could rot there for years for all our leaders cared. The reason we invaded was because of a threat to OUR people (whether that threat was genuine or not is a whole other topic). As I said before, there are plenty of other countries with worse governments that we ignore. There have been worse government that we have INSTALLED ourselves! War is not the answer to saving lives. War creates enemies, enemies create conflict, and conflict causes death.
|
|||
I found your last statement interesting. It seems common belief that war has only negative affects, and war is avoidable. Both statements are wrong. War is inevitable. It is created when two bodies, with maybe only slight differences, have a disagreement. Tension is created between the two bodies, and that tension leads to war. The larger the gap between the point of creation of tension and the war, the worse the war. But after the war, when there is a true victor accepted by the winning body and the losing body, there will be peace between the bodies for at least a few generations. And war does not only have negative affects. On the losing side, an adaption to the winning side's ways may benifit them in survival. On the winning side, the body gets both respect and fear for forcing the losing side into submission. War is not made to kill people. War is made to resolve conflicts. It may not be the prettiest way, but it is the way that has longer-lasting results.
|
|||
| Moderator(s): | |
| Rule(s): |
|
| Members: |
|