What type of belief do you hold on war?

Extirpated Wildlife · Jan 30, 2003

I just wanted to see where people fall

Ryder · Jan 30, 2003

Who is the 'You' we trust in the fourth option, the president?

cenimo · Jan 30, 2003

Not enough choices....

scripture says there will be no peace until the Prince of Peace brings it...

strathyboy · Jan 30, 2003

Is this meant to be in regards to the imminent war on Iraq, or in regards to war in general? My answer in the poll is the same in either case, but I wanted to know for purposes of discussion.

ocean · Jan 30, 2003

I am 100% against war in all situations. War is mass murder.

Ryder · Jan 30, 2003

So if I invade your house you'll sign over the deed and walk away?

strathyboy · Jan 30, 2003

Originally posted by Ryder Veldhuis
So if I invade your house you'll sign over the deed and walk away?

Although I can't speak for ocean, I would say that there is a significant difference between war and self-defence in many cases (at least at the larger, political level).

gwyyn · Jan 30, 2003

so france, holland, poland, russia, america shouldn't have fought back when attacked in World War 2. I mean our fighting back then wasn't in self defense??

Ryder · Jan 30, 2003

Well said Gwyyn, I think at some level anyone would endorse a war of self defence (even unknowingly).

strathyboy · Jan 30, 2003

Originally posted by gwyyn
so france, holland, poland, russia, america shouldn't have fought back when attacked in World War 2. I mean our fighting back then wasn't in self defense??

I didn't mean to imply that war and self defence would always be different things. But there are things that happen in war that would not happen in a simply home invasion. Perhaps it's merely a matter of scale, but I don't think so.
And I was partly referring to the war on Iraq when I used the term "war". Sorry for the confusion.

Ryder · Jan 30, 2003

A pre-emptive strike has got to be one of the hardest things to clearly justify beyond doubt. In a sense the war on Iraq could be called self defence if Iraq plans on using weapons of mass destruction against us. However, a pre-emptive attack eliminates the opertunity to see conclusively the very reason for the attack in the first place. Consider if the US president attacked Japan first in WW2 (percieving their eminent hostilities with the US). Then the war with Japan would have a small cloud of doubt over self-defence evermore........ Nevertheless, would it have been worth the lives of those at pearl harbor? (not to mention a potentially shorter war without an initial setback like pearl harbor). Iraq isn't all defence though, I think it's alot of principles too.

Extirpated Wildlife · Jan 30, 2003

But wouldn't Iraq have to drop a smallpox bomb before those people would call it defensive? Still wonder if Osama is alive.

eldermike · Jan 30, 2003

In the USA the lines of responsibility and athority are clearly defined in the area of war. There is no replacement for war, no plan "B" exists. If we are attacked (let's say a couple of large buildings get knocked down) plan A (war) is all there is. I am amazed that folks do not know we went to war on 9-11, all we are really discussing now is target selections.

Brimshack · Jan 30, 2003

Hi Eldermike:

"I am amazed that folks do not know we went to war on 9-11, all we are really discussing now is target selections."

Part of the problem here is that it is not really clear who we went to war with. The most common catchphrase since then is "war on terrorism." That phrase tells us very little, and I have a bridge to sell anyone who thinks we are going to stamp out terrorism on this one. As for target selection, it appears the enemy was kept vague for a reason, so Bush can choose to attack whoever he ants when he wants (thus making Congressional authority over declaration of war meaningless). There is little evidence that Saddam was involved in the attacks, though he was probably happy to see it happen. The fact is that Osama and Saddam have always been enemies. And so, the attempt to link the war on 'terror' with a war on Iraq appears to be a rather convenient confusion.

cenimo · Jan 30, 2003

In W II Americans were figthing Japan. During Viet Nam, Americans wounded in Viet Nam where being medevaced to US military hospitals in Japan. Go figure.
We were fightint Germany and troops wounded in Desert Storm, and most recently in Afghanistan, are medevaced to Germany.

20 years from now.... who knows?

This time we are not facing a country that desires world domination though, we are facing factions of a religion - that reaches across many countries - that want world domination. Last time this happened, the Christian world was kept in tact thanks to Divine Intervention and Charlemagne.

This time ...

Ryder · Jan 30, 2003

As far as world domination goes, Europe chills me more than the muslims. But, admittedly, I've neither the prepared evidence or time to argue that now.

sbbqb7n16 · Jan 30, 2003

Too many people these days are passive... would you rather our President decide based off the information he has that we should go to war now for the best of everyone? OR Should we wait and get bombed... THEN go to war? See too many people have been pushed into that last section. "I mean who cares about the suffering in another country as long as we're not affected, right?" That's the attitude of many anti-war people these days. War does not increase death. Everyone dies sometime... either from the mistreatment they get in Iraq or we go to war and some lose their lives now to make a better future for their country. People will die either way.

"Why does America always think that it is our job to "butt-in" to the problems of the rest of the world?" I hear this question a lot... when war is an issue. Think about this though... how many people ask that question about our foreign aid spending? hmmm Aren't we butting in there too? Going to war would remove a tyrant and hopefuly establish a better world for the future of that country. Foreign aid helps people... war would eventually help that country... but at least you can't have a dictator misspend "war." I see how our foreign aid helped North Korea... don't you? How did war affect Germany during the WW's?

Now we can either choose to trust those in power with the resources and infromation... or we can whine and complain and allow the people over there to remain in horrible conditions and do nothing about it except fund their dictatorship. Which do you choose?

**The above is all my own personal interpretation of the way things are. Any comments made should not be taken offensively, but rather objectionably as the views of one person. (In other words... please don't get hacked off at what my thoughts on the situation are )

stray bullet · Jan 30, 2003

Aggression in wrong, but war in general isn't.

If someone is running at you with a knife you don't have to wait to get stabbed to shoot.

ocean · Jan 30, 2003

What would be the point of this murderous campaign in Iraq? Iraq has not attacked us, they aren't planning to attack us, they don't have the equipment needed to attack us, they are really no threat to America.

America is going to war over 2 things, oil and money. It's not about eliminating "terrorism" or protecting the American people, it's about making money.

stray bullet · Jan 30, 2003

Originally posted by ocean
What would be the point of this murderous campaign in Iraq?[

There is no point to a murderous campaign in Iraq. There is a point to having a war to outst there murderous leader.

Iraq has not attacked us, they aren't planning to attack us, they don't have the equipment needed to attack us, they are really no threat to America.

That couldn't be further from the truth.
Iraq currently possess weapons of mass destruction. Iraq has tied to terrorists and could easily give their weapons and research to terrorists.
Iraq has attacked us literally, about a thousand times. They continue to fire at our planes, sometimes as much as twice a day for a whole month.

America is going to war over 2 things, oil and money. It's not about eliminating "terrorism" or protecting the American people, it's about making money.

Half a million people are dying every year because of Saddam. People are being mutilated and tortured.
If America is so bad and Iraq is such an ok place, why don't you move there and see what their leader has brought?

This is about stopping terrorism before it starts. I think all the deaths and letters from 9-11 victims makes George not want to repeat that day again, but on a large scale.

Saddam must obey the UN resolutions or be removed, it's as simple as that.

What type of belief do you hold on war?

What type of belief do you hold on war?

Absolutely no reason to go to war, EVER!

I can be swayed that war is a valid response, but don't think I'm swayed easily.

I trust you. Let's Go! But if i see body bags, I am OUT!

I trust you. Let's Go! Our Forefathers sacificed alot to be where we are. We can sacrifice for ou

Wanted: Room to Roam

Whatever was the deplorable word

Jesus Had A 12 Man A-Team

Well-Known Member

Banned (just kidding)

Whatever was the deplorable word

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Whatever was the deplorable word

Well-Known Member

Whatever was the deplorable word

Wanted: Room to Roam

Pray

Well-Known Member

Jesus Had A 12 Man A-Team

Whatever was the deplorable word

Veteran - Blue Bible Dude

God Made Me A Skeptic

Banned (just kidding)

God Made Me A Skeptic

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency