Do Conservatives like War?

[Rik]

This whole 'poll' is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to try and paint conservatives as blood thirsty monsters who think the answer to every question is to start a war.

Conservatives don't "love war". But most of us recognize and understand that whether we like it or not, there are people in this world who want to destroy our country and our way of life. And there are evil people who will gain positions of power and the only deterrent that can stop them is force. That is never going to change. For every evil dictator that is overthrown, another one will take his place. All of us would like nothing better than to be able to live in a world where there is no war and every country gets along.

Thank God that there are people in the US who understand the need to fight sometimes. They save us fom the people who don't.

 

[xMinionX]

I'm inclined to vote to the second option, but I don't think it would be fair to lump all conservatives into such a broad description. Therefore, I abstain.

Do some like war? I'm sure some do. Do most? I doubt it very much. However, as one said above, they are more likely to resort to violence to achieve their ends. But that doesn't mean they enjoy doing it.

 

[Jetgirl]

True, but thats what happens painting with a broad brush. All the Republicans I know are Christians who love Bush, so that tends to creep into my views of them.

Well, hopefully that brush is a just bit smaller now, at least. There are at least three or four of us here, and I know a number more IRL.

 

[xMinionX]

That's an Outstanding song. My wife bought my oldest grandson a Bear that plays that song. She bought it shortly after the One Year Anniversary of 9-11.

I hate that song...

 

[InnerPhyre]

*sings the R.C. Collins chant*

War! War! Gotta get some!

 

[AngCath]

hard question because it assumes a lot of generalizations.

 

[StromRider]

This whole 'poll' is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to try and paint conservatives as blood thirsty monsters who think the answer to every question is to start a war.

So? And conservatives don't make biased polls?

Conservatives don't "love war". But most of us recognize and understand that whether we like it or not, there are people in this world who want to destroy our country and our way of life.

So that's why the US invaded Iraq, because he had the desire and ability to destroy the US? No, that's not it....

And there are evil people who will gain positions of power and the only deterrent that can stop them is force.

So that's why the US invaded Iraq, because he was much more of a threat to the US than [size=-1]Kim Jong Il of North Korea? No, that's not it

[/size]

Thank God that there are people in the US who understand the need to fight sometimes. They save us fom the people who don't.

So that's why the US joined the rest of the world right away in dealing with the greatest threats civilization has ever seen, WW's I and II. No, it was just over two years for WWII and over 2 1/2 for WWI before the US joined the global coalition of the willing.


W is an opportunist who couldn't attack 'terrorism' so he created a boogeyman in Saddam who needed invadin'. Many conservatives are now confusing 'supporting the troops' with 'supporting the war.' They aren't mutually exclusive. I detest the war (along with most everything else about W) but feel an affinity for the troops brought on by wearing an army uniform for 16 years.

There was no need to invade Iraq. If conservatives would stop blindly supporting W for other reasons - his attempts to turn the country into a theocracy, remove reproductive rights, enshrine bigotry and hatred in the constitution, and look at the stated reasons for starting the war they would realize W is either a liar, stupid or both.

But that's not going to happen. So we will see several more years of 'support the troops in Iraq' stickers because to not put them on your bumper stickers means you might have to acknowledge that so many young men and women have been killed and maimed needlessly.

 

[mutantleader]

W is an opportunist who couldn't attack 'terrorism' so he created a boogeyman in Saddam who needed invadin'. Many conservatives are now confusing 'supporting the troops' with 'supporting the war.' They aren't mutually exclusive. I detest the war (along with most everything else about W) but feel an affinity for the troops brought on by wearing an army uniform for 16 years.

My boogeyman is hiding in the hills between Afghanistan and Pakistan (to the best of my knowledge).

Not directed at you StromRider, but...
I wonder if liberals were up in arms when our great president decided to invade Afghanistan?

 

[Higher]

If you voted yes You've either never been there or Flew F-86s in 1953. I'm voting on the former.

 

[neverforsaken]

i can tell you that i do not hate war, but i can also assure you that i do not love it. to have either feeling regarding war is to deny rational argument. such black and white distinctions are moronic at best. But i have no illusions on the necessity of avoiding war at all costs. Armed conflict has solved more problems throughout history than simple inaction. There are many wars that we have fought as a nation that do not seem to be important. many ask what is the purpose of iraq, vietnam and korea? certainly what happens there is none of our business. that is a very very dangerous set of mind. When you refuse to help another man if it is within your power to do so because it is not your problem while enjoying safety and security you become a hypocrite. I will never tollerate oppression. And i will always demand action against governments who oppress their people. I live in a nation of rights. As such, i believe that it is every human beings right to live in a free society.
Now, i am a feminist (although im a man) the reason is because i have a mother and other women family members that i love very much. i cannot stand the idea that someone would consider them to be less equal due to their gender. In that same respect, i look at my brother and ask myself if i would tollerate his living in a nation where his rights are threatened. And as i would not tollerate his oppression, why then would i tollerate anothers oppression due to his or her location? So of course i dont support war for any reason, but there are many reasons why i do support wars, one of them being that inaction can cause many more deaths.

 

[ZaraDurden]

I think that war is the tool for the liberation of the slaves and oppressed of the world. As surely as we gained our freedom through a war, so shall others; the tyrant and the wicked man simply do not lay down their arms.

Interesting. That's what Bin Laden thinks, too.

 

[ZaraDurden]

However, to me war represents a holy struggle of the human being against the slave-drivers that push him into the ground.

The problem here being that half of this country, not to mention the rest of the entire world, sees the United States as the slave driver in 2005.

 

[Jetgirl]

not to mention the rest of the entire world,.

Now now Zara, have you actually polled the "rest of the entire world" on this?

Given I have friends, family and in-laws from Denmark to Zimbabwe that do not see the US this way, your statement is a little wide.

 

[ZaraDurden]

Now now Zara, have you actually polled the "rest of the entire world" on this?

Given I have friends, family and in-laws from Denmark to Zimbabwe that do not see the US this way, your statement is a little wide.

Even if it was true my statement would be a little wide. I only wish it was more of an exaggeration.

 

[Rik]

The problem here being that half of this country, not to mention the rest of the entire world, sees the United States as the slave driver in 2005.

Bit of an overstatement there. I know plenty of Europeans (and more than a few Asians) who wouldn't agree with you.

Even your assertion of half of the US is a little off. There are plenty of Americans who are against the war yet don't view the US as trying to take over the world.


R

 

[neverforsaken]

and to add to that, there are some of us who feel that the spreading of democracy is an important cause, but due to bias against anything we do without permission, that it would ultimately hurt us with little gained.

 

[Rik]

So? And conservatives don't make biased polls?



So that's why the US invaded Iraq, because he had the desire and ability to destroy the US? No, that's not it....



So that's why the US invaded Iraq, because he was much more of a threat to the US than [size=-1]Kim Jong Il of North Korea? No, that's not it

[/size]

So that's why the US joined the rest of the world right away in dealing with the greatest threats civilization has ever seen, WW's I and II. No, it was just over two years for WWII and over 2 1/2 for WWI before the US joined the global coalition of the willing.


W is an opportunist who couldn't attack 'terrorism' so he created a boogeyman in Saddam who needed invadin'. Many conservatives are now confusing 'supporting the troops' with 'supporting the war.' They aren't mutually exclusive. I detest the war (along with most everything else about W) but feel an affinity for the troops brought on by wearing an army uniform for 16 years.

There was no need to invade Iraq. If conservatives would stop blindly supporting W for other reasons - his attempts to turn the country into a theocracy, remove reproductive rights, enshrine bigotry and hatred in the constitution, and look at the stated reasons for starting the war they would realize W is either a liar, stupid or both.

So by your reasoning, GWB was sitting around and thought to himself, "Man, I need more war....I think I'll go start one for absolutely no reason. I love war! I just can't can't enough of it!". Just because you and many others don't agree with the reasons behind invading Iraq doesn't mean that there was absolutely no reason for it. You anti's make it sound like one or two people in Washington fooled a whole country into invading Iraq when a very sizeable part of the population agreed with it and Congress approved it. Yeah, yeah, I know, everyone was duped by GWB's lies.

As far as WWI & II, have you ever considered that many of us learned a valuable lesson from them, namely that we need to confront the threats right away before they get too big and cost even more lives? Probably not, as your mind just can't seem to get past "Bush lied!".

 

[Doctrine1st]

Conservatives like fiscal responsible Governmental policies. It's the those neocons with a Christian alliegance with Bush who, well, I hope they don't like war, but they certainly are extremely chicken hawkish about it as with their much praised leaders.

 

[StromRider]

Probably not, as your mind just can't seem to get past "Bush lied!".

I don't care if Bush lied, everyone does, certainly every politician. It's when those lies have led to the needless killing and maiming of thousands of Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis, that I get a little teed off about it.

 

[Rik]

I don't care if Bush lied, everyone does, certainly every politician. It's when those lies have led to the needless killing and maiming of thousands of Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis, that I get a little teed off about it.

Well, we could debate whether he did in fact purposely lie, but that would be a little off topic. Besides I think that arguement is going on in just about every other topic on this forum...