Photos from Iraq
- Thread starter rinard
- 489 comments
- 12,607 views
- 5,677
Sorry about that.
- 995
I'd like to say this is just pissing me off trying to find the right words.
The saying, "Eye for an eye, and soon everyone will be blind.", is almost stupid. It proves an excellent point, but I doubt any of us will see something like this in our life time. It seems like revenge is in our nature. If someone pisses us off, by hitting us, or cutting us off, we find the need to do that right back to them. To teach them a lesson. I think it's a maturity issue that a lot of people need get past, including me.
In fact... the more I think about this... It almost has nothing to do with wars. Wars are fought to stop people, or a belief, not to value life. If politicians or anyone truely gave a dick about people's lives, there wouldn't be wars or killings. Only a solution and death comes from them. Have any wars been stopped from too many casualties? (Really, a question, I don't know)
I don't condone anything that Sadam, Bin Laden or other people have done. What they've done is wrong, in our eyes. But in their eyes, everything is different. We look at them as madmen and the believe they're doing the right thing. I bet they're looking at us the same way. I'm not going to say we're right, and they're wrong. But I would say what most people see as humane coincides with my own thoughts.
None the less, the war is going on and it's going to continue. No matter how many protest, no matter how many people want to. It'll happen. It'll solve something. And people will die. Yes, it sucks, but thats life.
- 2,767
No, I actually think that Saddam being removed is a good thing for Iraqi people (once they'll realise it, and this may take some time, it's hard for them to see us as saviors after being choked by our economic sanctions even if Saddam was to blame for them, or seeing America backing up Israel - which is the main reason we are hated in the middle east).
I was saying that a lot of atrocities occured in many other countries and we couldn't care less about them... saying that we saved the Iraqi people from Saddam was only an excuse for this war. At least we can say that this one is proven, unlike so called WMD or Al Quaeda links...
- 5,677
Another priority of the war was to make sure that the oil plants didn't get destroyed. Oil is the lifeblood of every civilized society in this world. Oil is what keeps America and the rest of the world running. If fighting for oil, which is also fighting for the lifeblood of this country isn't worth it then what is?
I know that atrocities occur in other places but we can't take on everything at once. We have to take things slow and not spread ourselves to thin. Why does America always have to be the one to start things?
///M-Spec
Staff Emeritus
- 4,928
Originally posted by Goomba
I'd like to say this is just pissing me off trying to find the right words.
Try harder
What if a war is fought under the premise of protecting lives? Do you think this so impossible to believe? Policemen shoot dangerous criminals all the time. Don't tell me you think they don't value life.
If all people gave a dick about other people's lives, we would have no need for politicians. In fact, we would have no need for laws. But such a idealic la-la land simply doesn't exist. There will always be people who are ready to kill for an goal or ideal. Welcome to the human condition.
Well, all wars end due to too many casualties. I'm not just trying to flip here, but this is true.
Bah. Moralistic relativism. Fooey. Let me ask you something. If someone was out to kill you and could not be otherwise reasoned with, would you sit around and wax poetic about your view and his view or would you protect yourself?
M
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
Not to mention the fact that Rwanda (terrible conditions not excused) did not invade its neighbor and then make a lot of noise and smoke about developing weapons powerful enough to inflict further damage on its enemies throughout the area.
This is not a first strike on the Coalition's part. This is retribution that is coming 12 years too late. Rwanda's conditions are a travesty, yes, but they were not invading their neighbors and making noise about being able to throw chemical and nuclear missles around.
If Saddam was truly a peaceloving, misunderstood kinda guy,and Iraq was so innocent, all he had to do was grant the UN inspectors full and immediate access to the country, instead of dicking around for 12 years.
This is not a first strike on the Coalition's part. This is retribution that is coming 12 years too late. Rwanda's conditions are a travesty, yes, but they were not invading their neighbors and making noise about being able to throw chemical and nuclear missles around.
If Saddam was truly a peaceloving, misunderstood kinda guy,and Iraq was so innocent, all he had to do was grant the UN inspectors full and immediate access to the country, instead of dicking around for 12 years.
XzifT
(Banned)
- 2,674
I dont get it at all.. Its not our country, its not our job to run their country. All we have to do is prevent attacks, we don't need to spend millions upon millions of dollars to set up their government. Our government sucks as is, maybe we should work on ours before someone else's..
They obviously don't want us there, so why not pack up and leave? They can bomb us, but then we'll own them harshly.. ah, oh well..
They obviously don't want us there, so why not pack up and leave? They can bomb us, but then we'll own them harshly.. ah, oh well..
- 7,965
And how-so? I kind of think you just wanted to say something, so you just copied someone else's line in the thread.
- 5,677
Exactly. Oil may not be the only motive but you would have to be stupid to think that it didn't have some kind pressure on the decision to go into Iraq.
- 7,889
- SolidFro
- RRoDzaaah!
We (the US and the Coalition) are not governing Iraq. The Iraqi Governing Council is. How does our (the US) government 'suck'? I'll assume you have a well paying job, go to school, buy things, speak freely, take vacations, vote in elections, post on internet websites, etc. I fail to see how our government 'sucks'.
That would be called 'Cut and Run.' Most Iraqis want the Coalition there, but after the job is done, should leave as soon as possible. The reason why we left Viet Nam was that not only because it was a very unpopular political war, but that the war might spread into China, which would have likely meant a nuclear war. I don't see that problem with Iraq.
- 995
Originally posted by ///M-Spec
Try harder
I hurt myself trying. Owwwwiiiee! Definatly need to get back to school.
Very true. I didn't think of it all the way down to this level. It's still sort of the same in wars, we're protecting innocent people. One thing I forgot to mention in my "final draft" was none of this was going to happen. I mean, there will be killings, all the time. It's just how some people are, either through their up-bringing or a chemical imbalance. In order for no homocides to occur, everyone would have to hate it and think of other ways to solve things. But it's not going to happen. Violence does solve things, and is typically the easy way out.
I'm with stupid. ^
I was thinking about that. Yes, it's true. People run out of lives to fight for their cause. But what if there was an endless supply of people? Would you hear someone give up because too many lives have ben lost?
Haha, yes, I would protect myself. I just said they have their own views on their ideas, and I have mine. I don't respect them, but I hate when people say, "Your thoughts, your ideas, everything you think about... IS WRONG.".
- 21,190
- United States
- nk4e
why do they blame religion?
and i think the slogan for the police force is
"to protect and serve " if they are protecting our lives, why would they kill another just to protect like a group
"if one starts one thing , another will do the same and it will repeat" try to figure it out what im trying to say
and i think the slogan for the police force is
"to protect and serve " if they are protecting our lives, why would they kill another just to protect like a group
"if one starts one thing , another will do the same and it will repeat" try to figure it out what im trying to say
- 7,889
- SolidFro
- RRoDzaaah!
Who blames religion? If you ask me, the whole world would be better off without religion.
The needs of the many outweigh the few.
That's an understatement.
I think you are confusing this with Afghanistan. The US never gave Iraq weapons. The US gave Afghanistan weapons to fight off the Soviet Union.
- 24,344
- Midlantic Area
- GTP_Duke
Actually that's not true.
However, a person or country who has initiated violence opens themselves to receiving violence. A person who is threatening violence and who refuses to obey legal authority opens themselves to the power of that legal authority.
- 413
by the way, the US forces gradually pulled out from the vietnam war after both sides signed a peace treaty. once the US forces withdrew from the country the viet cong and all their little commie friends rolled over and took over saigon forcefully. they gave little respect to the peace treaty.
that war is not similar to the situation in iraq.
that war is not similar to the situation in iraq.
///M-Spec
Staff Emeritus
- 4,928
I suppose if we're talking about one side cutting its losses and getting out of war that was going badly for them without achiving any military objectives, it has happened many, many times in history.
Alexander the Great in India. The Mongols in western Europe. The Crusades. The Mongols in Japan. China in Vietnam. In modern history... Hitler in Russia. Hitler in North Africa. Hitler over Britain. France and the United States in Vietnam. The USSR in Afganistan. S**t happens, you know?
Precisely my point. The hallmark of free civilization is that people can think different things and not have to kill each other over it. The benefit of a society protected by free exchange of goods and ideas.
The fact that the Saddams of the world spent years telling his own people their "thoughts, ideas.. everything" were wrong and he was going to punish them by murdering their families and torturing them to death should in fact make you deeply offended, should it not?
Why would you grant a person like this the benefits of civilization when he does not grant it to people under his own rule?
M
///M-Spec
Staff Emeritus
- 4,928
