posted 10-24- 04:25 PM               

li'l b

posted 10-24- 06:54 PM               

But the rules are certainly never the same for both sides... Look at the way Gen. Washington committed barbaric acts... fighting in a new a dirty way for the times - anything to win. But look also at how we treated prisoners in WWII compared with Japan. Certainly some countries are more or less civilized in their war.

I have never heard anyone say that we avoided all civilians during WW2, that would be, of course, incorrect for at least the 2 big reasons you mentioned in your post.

But I am just as sure that countless Americans gave their life in the act of protecting innocent civilians during war... so many stories... plans were created to protect them at the extra risk of our troops.
Certainly some care about the innocents more than others.

When there is war, the trading of life is inevitable. Taking thousands of lives here can spare millions there. If you can't handle making that choice, then you have no option but to surrender.

I don't think the arguments you put forward can make any sense during a war situation... only many years after the fact. As soon as you and all you know are dying around you, then life has different meaning.

All I can say is that we won, and thank God we won, and praise be to every bomb we used that got us one step closer... and sorry for each bomb and human life or achievement that was toppled for no gain.

If you seek blame, look no further than the offenders... those that created the war. For anyone to suggest that the allied acts where "useless terrorist acts" must also suggest that we would do such a thing if we were not at war, just for no reason at all- that is the definition of useless.

But there was a war, and no one can explain the accountability for each bomb... once the chaos of war is unleashed, all we can do as men is our best... and that is what we did. Maybe some were bad, and some were certainly saints - but such is life even in the best of times. War only magnifies both the greatest and most misguided of humanity.

Fortunately it has been proven that good triumphs over evil, unless you believe that human kind has made no progress since the dawn of our time. And if that is your belief, then you would be traitor to your own kind and you would have no home.

You would put forward that the offensive German bombing of England is merely the same as our defensive bombing of Berlin. If this was true, then the world would not look like it does today... because in that world all offensive behavior would be rewarded victory, and defense would be an unknown condition.

But agreed that we should know and not forget what we have done - and what it meant to all involved. Truth and rational thought are our shields and will protect us from defeat. The good always triumph, good is stronger than evil - because good must always be smarter than evil. The truth is strong, and misguided assumptions become extinct; thus is progress fueled.

All men fight for what is good and true, but only some men fight for what is closer to ultimate truth, and the score is kept in their victories and their defeats.

posted 10-25- 03:54 PM               

The 5.000 victims of the D-Day were just a number before reading Ambrose's book about it (and watching "Saving Private Ryan")...

The millions tons of bombs dropped over the world were nothing until I saw the videos shot over Berlin, Hiroshima, London after the attacks...

Every single person who die in a war is a victim, victim of other's decision, victim of ideals, of religion, of mistakes...

War takes out the worst of us, that's for sure, and unfortunately there are no real winners, but only losers...

Think about german women raped by russian soldiers in berlin, or the jewish victims of the delirium of just one man...

Men are part of history, and sometimes a man makes the story himself...

Millions of people took part to it, millions of lives, everyone with a family, a photo album, a success, a love, a hope...

So please don't say "thanks God we won", because whenever a single human being suffers or dies, there are no winners...

li'l b

posted 10-25- 06:40 PM               

I much rather die while fighting for good than to be killed for sport by the evil people.

There is no such thing as a world without war. All we can hope for is less violence and death in war... and less of it. But a life without war must be also a life with no reasons for living.

It is a false dream to believe that people can all agree in everything in the world. Only dead people don't fight. Life is for the living - and for expressing your views... and hoping to contribute to the world - the best you can - to make life more and more wonderful.

And I have proof that I am right and you are wrong. The world has gotten better and better. Today people think they live in the worst horrible place with terrorism... but if they look at their daily lives, it is totally full of everything our past man has dreamed of. THEIR dreams were real! They DID make a difference! We have freedom, and health, and leisure time, and so much wonderful art and culture. Are lives are full of love and play.

All those who are bitter about the modern world are thankless... they need to understand what they take for granted.

I was brain-washed every day of my liberal upbringing and education to see that war was only evil. I was made to personally live each death... and read books like "All quiet on the western front" again and again... and movie after movie. I loved them and I believed.

I was kept away from the great legacy of my kind... such shame on those people who kept this from me! All that people have worked for and sacrificed for. From the creation of language, to settling the land, through religions and economic ordering... every life given - lived in full to contribute to the story and the process. Such is life! To compete and strive and succeed! Even to fail... even the failures play their part arguing the other side and seeing a different vision.

To say those lives were wasted is not to understand what a man is at all. If we had no reason to live... no challenge - no hope. We ARE these things.

It is like taking a tiger out of the wild and putting it in a cage to show people. But you have no tiger to show... all you have is a potential tiger, a tiger seed. I tiger is a gazelle killing machine... with no gazelles there are no such things as tigers.

So I have been put in this earth to prove my manhood. I am here to contribute to the whole... to be part of the story and serve life and the living. What I do it who I am.

What is life to me if I must sit all day in a cage? Where is the meaning of life if one is kept as a child through life. I want to live - and make life better.

And it is so easy for me compared with my ancestors. We have learned of the progress of man now - and I see the wonderful truth that the future is never ending wonderful progress.

No matter if so many people disagree with me, it is so hard to argue against our long history... no matter how many might fall back today, we are ultimately bound for progress. Two steps back means three steps forward, it always has, and it always will.

You try to tell the innocents, the optimists, the children... that the world is a bad place and that man is bad. Nothing is sadder for me to see than this...

Each person who died for a dream that we now live today, you claim that they were victims. I have never heard anything so sad in my life... all the books I had to read in school, all the movies - nothing can touch this thought.

Well I plan to give my life to the living, and I am not doing it because of other's decisions. I won't believe that my efforts are meaningless. We ALL give our lives for our fellow man, we are all here for a short while, and none of us can know the true meaning of life. This is what we are made of, and what we do with this time is our measure. If you manage to avoid all evil in your life and know no sadness or hardship, then you owe humanity the air you breathed and the food you ate. No one escapes their duties of their life as a man.

This is the hardest thing for people to understand... that even the evil people (defined by our views) are doing their part. They have earned their keep in the ranks of great men. Only if you believe that YOU yourself know for certain what is right and what is wrong can you say that you are not the evil one. We are all obligated to understand the truth as much as possible so that good triumphs. And it will, as it has.

What is the dream of the pacifist? It is like heaven for the Christians, it can not be defined in Earthly terms... because it can not exist on Earth. So for the pacifist to try and bring this place to Earth, is impossible and it is wrong.

Man's heaven exists now on Earth.. in moments and places all around us. It comes and it goes. We fight so that it comes more than it goes in our mind, but in reality it is the fight itself that is the heaven.

And this truth does not take away from the fact that violence and human killing is a terrible and tragic thing. It does not at all even come close to justifying it. But it doesn't have to. It just is. So we must think - all the time, deep and long and with a keen mind. We must think of what the right thing to do is, it is never as obvious as it seems.

My personal hope is to funnel the fight of war into the play of game. That is why I love business, it is a war of ideals fought with no death or violence, and there is little injustice. Many think that business is all evil and unfair, this is very false.

But business is just one part of our practical life. Our more important beliefs and visions beyond economic ones and the most hard to control and funnel. But we are doing it right now, we are writing - and expressing ourselves. This is the same thing as fighting. And our great accomplishments of democracy and justice are giving shape to this new idea of life... of intellectual fighting.

But very few people can fight like this without being driven to anger and violence. So writing is the best tool for insisting violence... but soon it will also spell the end of violence.

posted 10-25- 08:11 PM               

Anyway the death of Bin Laden won't solve a thing,what u want is just revenge.
U feel the right to bomb a WHOLE country just because a small part of the inhabitants are defending a man who is just SUPPOSED to be the principal of the awful 11th september attacks to NY.
Bombs didn't solve the Bosnia chrisis, nor the Kosovo one, and if I'm not wrong that asshole of Saddam Hussein is still bossing ppl around down there in Iraq...
That's not the way to solve the world chrisis, why don't u ask yourself where does all this hate for the U.S.A. come from instead of screaming "Revenge!!!"?
Did that stupid Bin Laden say "Yes, that was my idea!", NO! He just said "I thank Allah for what happened, but it wasn't my idea":well it doesn't sound like a confession..

The truth is that there haven't been no real rivendication, and of course your president can't play the part of the stupid of the village, so let's feel better dropping bombs over Afghanistan...

If that's the solution to the terrorism, well let's flatten Afghanistan and build a big car parking over it...

SV, I guess u were pretty inspired when u wrote your answer, but maybe u r talking about competition, not war...
How can u think to turn every conflict into a "wargame" or a businness?
Did u guys ever read or study anything about Islam? Do you know what is the reward for a "hero" who dies for the "Jihad"?

We already know that several civilians have been wounded or killed by the american bombs in these days, how can you justify this?
"Sorry, shit happens!" or "we've had 6,500 victims, so if 14 of them die it's not a problem..."

...I'm so ungry I dunno what else to say...

posted 10-25- 08:21 PM               

quote:

---

...I'm so ungry I dunno what else to say...

---

... of course I meant "angry"...

li'l b

posted 10-25- 09:14 PM               

1. We are NOT bombing the whole country of Afghanistan. If we were why is the Taliban hiding out in civilian areas for protection? Why is the Taliban moving it's military equipment next to Mosques? It's because they know we are bombing Taliban military and political targets and going to great extremes to avoid civilian casualties and destroying religious structures. Did you hear about the Taliban attack on a Northern Forces held town 2 days ago? Two civilians were killed and 13 injured. Why aren't you condeming them for "attacking the whole country of Afghanistan". If you didn't hear about it ask yourself why not.

2. This is not about revenge. It is about world-wide terrorism and self-defense. When Pearl Harbor was bombed,we didn't just go after a handful of Japanese aircraft carriers and the people who planned it. We went after the system that created a mentality that thought they could attack America so it wouldn't happen again. In Europe we didn't just go after Hitler, we went after Nazism. If we hadn't you'd still be living under Musolini's descendents. Is that what you want?

3. How can you compare mass rape of innocent women with what we are doing in Afghanistan? Your values are so warped and out of proportion it's a wonder you can function.

4. The "asshole" Saddam Hussein is still going strong because of people like you who wouldn't let us finish the job.

5. Why don't we ask ourselves why some evil cowardly mass murderers hate us? If someone rapes your wife and butchers your children does it really matter why? Cold blooded murder just because you don't agree with someone never has a justification. If you remove these psychopaths from the equation maybe the rest of Islam wouldn't hate us so much. And even if they do hate us, is mass murder the solution?

The bottom line is they hate us because we support Isreal and we stand for everything they are against. There are no democratic Islamic countries - guess who the biggest and oldest democracy in the world is. They are against the preaching of any religion but Islam. Guess what country has the greatest plurality of religions and the greatest religious freedom in the world. They are agains women having any sort of civil rights. Guess who has the strongest feminest movement in the world. They are against any contamination of Islamic/Arab culture. Guess which country, through it's size, wealth and world-wide media has the createst influence on world culture.

As for Israel....if abandoning millions of our democratic allies to certain death at the hands of the Muslim world is the price to be "loved" by Islam then the price is too high.

posted 10-25- 11:36 PM               

Too many people judge the actions of people "out of time" and this is simply not fair. As an example, consider this. Much is made about "The Greatest Generation" and how they defeated the Nazis etc. However, if I want to be a revisionist I could say the vast majority of them were hipocritical racists based on how blacks were treated in the U.S. at the time. Doing this I would be insulting them and diminishing their accomplishment. The basic fact is that most people were racist at that time, but to condemn them only on their bad points and ignore their achievements is simply unfair. Thankfully, societies grow and change. To judge people in the 1940s by 1990s standards is just ridiculous. Doing so, you invite future generations to do the same to you, and given the many flaws in our society, I certainly hope that future historians will be kinder to us than many revisionist historians have been to those in during WW2.

The same can be applied to WW2 bombing policy and it all comes down to simple political and military necessity. Case in point, the RAF "area bombing" campaign. Having read much on this subject, I think it's fair to say that the RAF would have loved to have directly and accurately attacked German industry, and did so as much as it possibly could. However, when daylight operations proved almost suicidal, there was no choice but to resort to less accuarate night bombing in the hopes of killing or at least "de-housing" the people who worked in the factories. To have come forward in 1942 and said "We shouldn't bomb Germany because we're killing civilians even though it might help the war effort and save many Allied lives" would have been politically and militarily ridiculous with Rotterdam, London, Coventry, and countless other cities in ruins from German bombing. Such a position would have been indefensible in any practical arena.

Theory this and theory that, no one in 1939 knew for sure whether a strategic bombing campaign could win a war, it had never been possible. The Americans tried it one way, the British another. To categorically fault them over half a century later is grossly unfair and not worthy of respectable historians.

Personally, the only really legitimate moral question I see about WW2 bombing policy involved the disconnect between U.S. tactics in Europe and over Japan. Why was our policy in Europe one of pinpoint attack yet we did not hesitate to mount area attacks on Japan? Now there's a sticky question . . .

posted 10-26- 12:15 AM               

"All men fight for what is good and true, but only some men fight for what is closer to ultimate truth, and the score is kept in their victories and their defeats."

Most Nazis and/or Germans in the German army/airforce/navy thought they were fighting for what is good and true. To them, fighting for the Fatherland was the just and right thing to do.

"If you seek blame, look no further than the offenders... those that created the war"

We (The Allies of Warld War One) actually were the root cause of World War 2, both on the European and Pacific fronts. It was the harsh conditions we made Germany agree to after WWI and the trade policy we had with Japan that started World War 2 incase you have forgotten... Maybe you still are brain washed?

li'l bastard,

"War takes out the worst of us, that's for sure, and unfortunately there are no real winners, but only losers..."

If thats the case, then I bet you would just love to live under Nazi rule yes? After all you said there are no winners, so what's to loose? Only your basic rights and freedoms...

War will never be collateral damage free... Its war for Christs sake! If war were meant to be clean, it wouldnt be war. I suggest a few of you look up the definition of war for future reference....

3dp,

"Why was our policy in Europe one of pinpoint attack yet we did not hesitate to mount area attacks on Japan? Now there's a sticky question..."

Because the U.S. govt. had a new, basicly untested weapon, and they wanted to test it. Plus everyone was sick of war by that time and wanted to get it over with quick. As simple as that...

posted 10-26- 05:30 AM               

1. If the Talibans are moving near to civilian or religious areas don't u think it's time to stop the bombing and go w/ the ground troops? Modern war is intended to be effective, fast and precise, but the so called "new kind of war" looks to me like the Gulf war...

2. What do u want from the rest of the world? Eternal gratefulness for having erased the nightmare of totalitarism? Well I can say thank you, but that's it.
U really think that to stop terrorism u have to hit just a county (or a part of it). The trouble w/ therrorism is that u never know when, where and how they'll attack, and that's the feeling around the world in these days.

3. My values aren't warped at all, it was just an example to show u how everybody, being "the enemy" or not, suffers and dies (40.000 ppl in germany committed suicide after that mass rapes were made...but that's war...). Btw why don't u explain this to the Afghan kid who has lost his hands and legs during a strike... "Well I'm sorry pal, but that's a price WE gotta pay to fight terrorism..." U really think that a boy (with no influence from adults) gives a fuck about smashing America?

4.Hey, who the fuck u think u are to say this? Despite having a small air force, we took part to it and did our job as the others. American and British planes are still there, dropping some cookies once in a while just to say "Hey fellas, we're still here ready to turn u to dust!"
I always said that the only solution was to turn Iraq to dust, but just to catch Saddam.
U had enuff time to catch him, but weren't just able to, and while he was laughing in his bunker u had to come home... and they call it a succesful war...

5. Ask that to Truman, or to the Government, who spent a lot of money on the Manhattan Project and said "Hey, aren't we going to use our toys against those beasts of japs?!?" who's the mass murderer...

I just wanna demonstrate u that americans always need to appear as the "good guys" to start a war, and they never say "Damn! We did something wrong!"... Does the word "Vietnam" tell u anything? U fail, like any other country, u just had the luck of fighting the war out of your country, so there wasn't nothing to reconstruct, that is the advantage that allowed u to be the first coutry in almost everything; but that doesn't mean that u don't make mistakes!

li'l b

War is the same for everybody, the Allies saw the Axis as the bad boys and viceversa, but if the Axis would have won (and thanks to God it didn't, I'm not a fascist if that's what u mean, ArgonV), they would have been the good guys...

posted 10-26- 07:31 AM               

quote:

---

We (The Allies of Warld War One) actually were the root cause of World War 2, both on the European and Pacific fronts. It was the harsh conditions we made Germany agree to after WWI and the trade policy we had with Japan that started World War 2 incase you have forgotten... Maybe you still are brain washed?

---

What a laugh! Well then EVERY killer and bad-guy in the world in not at fault then, they were tempted by money, or tempted by the way the chick dressed, or made that the guy got their job.

Germany lost the first war that THEY started. THAT was the root cause... how can you blame us for defeating Germany in WWI?

It did not have to do with the treatment of the Germans after WWI, it had to do with their reaction to the treatment and their reaction to their own defeat.

America is the largest power on Earth... so we have a choice to either be involved in world affairs (policing). For many in the world it is GREAT that we get involved... we lend stability and economic markets, etc. But for others they HATE us because they see us as interfereing.

In the end this is a standard case of "you can't please everyone." We are not evil, nor saints. We are a big ass country who have the largest impact on the global economy and security bar far. This also makes our job the hardest job... it is much easier to be some small country complianing all the time about us.

BUT, I do see the complaints... America sees the complaints. But for people of the world (and worse in America) to think we are an "evil" nation out to screw everyone... that is just ignoarance and bad attittude. Maybe we happen to be screwing some people, sure - let's stay attentive and work through trouble spots. But general anit-Americanism has nothing to do with America itself, but rather just people rebeling against globalization and the fact that there are other nations and that we all need to get along.

posted 10-26- 07:46 AM               

Shouldn't we think we are on the good side? If we believe that we are right and our views are the true ones, how can it be wrong to accept this?

Are you suggesting that the world should flip upside down? Would it make us better people if we admit, without any reason, that we are wrong and our enemies are right? And now they do the same?

What would this accomplish? In this would Hitler would fight Nazi America, what is the difference?

Are you trying to say that we are generally not good? Are you trying to say our enemies have not been generally wrong? Are you saying there is no such thing as good and evil and right and wrong?

I agree with you very much that each side is "good" and "right" in their own view... and that the victor's views become the "right" views after they win, this is the whole purpose of war!

But I still don't think that this fact makes the quest for the truth irelevant. People have right and a duty to argue about what is good and bad and then choose what is good as their belief system.

Just because other people disagree with your logic and views doesn't invalidate them as you suggest.

But people also need to change their views over time... and accept that things we used to do seemed right for us at the time but now we know they were not right.

And we do this... in fact we dwell on this too much in America... I spent almost 90% of my history education in school learning how evil we were to kill the American Indians, to enslave the Africans, etc. etc. To suggest that we never admit we are wrong in Amerivca is a total joke. In fact in America today, we NEVER admit we are right! Nothing we do ever seems acceptable, and so we have a very weak culture now.

I know business people who run nice small businesses, but they still feel guilty that they make a profit! Almost every wealthy person I know feels that they must be bad people because in America having money means you did something bad.

And I think anyone in the world needs to think that they are the good guys. It is silly to think that people should do what they do and believe in while admitting that it is wrong. That doesn't even make any sense.

So "we are the good guys" will always be true.

posted 10-26- 08:10 AM               

We gave them support... and we had issues with them, and them with us. But now they are keeping our enemy in their country and siding with the enemy. They are now an enemy, so we will fight until they give us what we need, or they no longer exist in power so we can just take it.

They have decided that they want war with America, and now they have it. Are you saying that we are atticking them for some evil gain?

We are just doing what we need to do to protect America. Once again, they are on the offensive here, it is the Muslim extremists who want to occupy the entire planet. They want land gains and power gains.

Of course America is an issue they should deal with, we do take sides as part of our concearn with how the world works. Anyone can see how things we do could piss them off. But THEY need to decide how to deal with this issue as well... they have choices. They need to know full well that if they attack America directly in an act of war that they better be prepared to fight.

They made the decision to go to war, not us. They could have done allot of other things... even deadly things... but attacking us in they way they did could only have the result it is having now.

Their big problem is their ignorance. They just don't understand some important things about the world and about America. This is the same mistake Hitler made, and Japan made. They all thought that America would be too soft to fight, to full of the good life. They all think we are weak and unresolved. They think we are all cowards... and they all think God is agianst us.

But each time we prove them wrong, and this time is no differnt. The poor enemy, they just don't know better.

But we have had our share of defeat as well... like in Vietnam. Here in this case, WE were the onse who didn't know better. But we had the sense to eventual abandon the effort.

Our war against communism and the balance of communist power in the world was a good one... but in the end, commuism is self-destructive.

I also believe very strongly that the Muslim extemist cause is self-destructive. Regemes like the Taliban will never last... all we really need to do is wait them out, while keeping at least some pressure on them. I have no fear that Muslim extemists will take over the world... globalization, modernization, and democracy will win over time - because it benefits the people, and they undertand it when it happens.

But until it does, we have an old-world mentality, a system that has done very well for many over so much of our evolution. They have the few leaders giving the vision, and the masses following wiht loyalty. It is a great thing, but less great than the next evolutionary step... to self government and freedom.

posted 10-26- 08:16 AM            

I will let the Yankees statement slide, this time

Guys-- this is quite an interesting thread...with everyone making great points...which is why I would hate to send it to the graveyard known as Flame Wars....but let's keep this intellectual...and stop the petty assaults on each other...I get enough of it at work...I don't need to read it in my leisure time.

------------------

Brought to you by the campaign for a better Dauntless!

posted 10-26- 08:28 AM               

"Germany lost the first war that THEY started. THAT was the root cause... how can you blame us for defeating Germany in WWI?"

Im not blaming us for defeating Germany in WWI. Im blaming us for the unfair surrender terms our country (Aswell as France and Britain) laid upon Germany. Inflation soar, thousands of jobs were lost, the economy crubled and much more... We didnt do that to Japan or Germany in WW2. We rebuilt and helped the countries we defeated in WW2. Why? So no more wars would start on the basis of what we did to Germamy in WW1. We realised that what we (The Allied powers of WW1) did, caused WW2 to occur. If we had treated Germany fairly, WW2 most likely never would of happened. (Why would the German people need a leader to revolt against the WW1 surrender terms to bring power back into a country when it already has power? Thats exactly what Hitler did and the people loved him for it. Why? Because Hitler created jobs...)

P.S. Germany didnt start the first World War. I suggest you re-read your history books. It had to do with the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Turkey. And even then there were many factors before the war that caused it to happen... Germany didnt start it, but it jumped in to help her ally. Hopefully you know the rest of the story after that...

"It did not have to do with the treatment of the Germans after WWI, it had to do with their reaction to the treatment and their reaction to their own defeat."

posted 10-26- 08:51 AM               

Also that little story about what started WWI is cute, but the real cause of the war was German ambition... alone not a bad thing, but they were just way too confident of their quick victory. The reality of modern warfare was a shock to all. Before they could re-think, it was too late.

They expected sweeping victories and great conquest, not stalemate in trenches.

The history of WWI is not something I know many many detailes about, but it has interested me because of the aviation ramifications. Germany in WWI is very interesting... it really started out as an old fashioned war - and then quickly disovled into the first modern war.

Old fashioned war is so interesting compared with modern war...

posted 10-26- 09:48 AM               

The above is of course just academic, after-the-fact mind games. Read David McCollough(?)'s bio of Truman or watch the PBS adaptation and you'll understand that there was no decision to be made really. It was going to be used. Period.

The U.S. policy disconnect was brought up only to spark debate. I wasn't even saying the policy in Japan was wrong under the circumstances. It's just that much of what I've read suggests the the U.S. policy makers were a bit "high and mighty" towards their British counterparts, being heavily critical of the RAF area bombing campaign. My knowledge of the U.S. side on this is only moderate (despite being American, my main interest is the RAF), so I'm always interested to learn more to move my opinion in one direction or the other.

Finally, I completely agree that the a-bomb was a different thing altogether. I was thinking mainly of the fire bombing of Tokyo when I raised the issue.

posted 10-26- 11:56 AM               

I don't know what post you took my phrase from, but it was probably from my thread about the real enemy being the people, not the government.

I really don't have the information to know if that is true or not... if it is true, then we are doing the right thing. But if the Taliban is not the popular governmen of Afgahnistan, then you have a point.

posted 10-26- 01:11 PM               

1. The ground troops will come, be patient. I'm bewildered by your desire to start hand to hand combat in the cities where even more civilians will die. You think artilery, rocket launchers and tanks are more accurate than bombs?

2. Eternal gratefulness, no. But Europeans, of all people, should not forget that there are "good" wars in the sense that to not fight them is a greater sin than fighting them. That freedom is worth dieing for.

3. Yes, your values are warped. As with all pacifists, you believe that if a single innocent life is lost then war serves no purpose. Sorry, but those Afgans you want to protect have been fighting among themselves for over ten years and killing themsleves by the thousands, mostly civilians. Where is their respect for life? The Taliban has executed, on purpose, more women for wearing makeup and breaking other Islamic restrictions than the US has killed "accidently".

Again, for you to compare the intentional rape of thousands of German women by Russian soldiers to the accidental killing or injuring of some Afgans, then your sense of proportion and morality is most definitely warped.

4. When I say "people like you" I mean you personally, not Italy. You don't want to prosecute war to a final conclusion. You don't feel the need for war at all. You don't want anyone but paid professional soldiers to get killed. If the bleeding heart politicians throughout the world had let the military finish the job in Iraq the world would be a safer place today. But, it would have involved going into Baghdad and some civilians would have been killed. And you would be at the head of the line complaining about it! You say we needed to "turn Iraq into dust". How do you propose we do that withou killing any civilians?

By the way, if you want to continue using language like you used here, come on over to the Flame Wars where I'll rip you a new one.

5. Truman's dead, I can't ask him.

What is the source of your quote "Hey, aren't we going to use our toys against those beasts of japs". Maybe Italian history books are different from ours.

To kill people you are at war with, during a military action, is not murder. The Jews were not at war with Hitler, the people in the WTC and the Pentagon were not at war with Al Queda...this mass murder. Again, your values and perceptions are warped. To you all killing, regardless of the reason, is equally bad. You are wrong.

You say that Americans "always need to appear as the 'good guys' to start a war. Tell me again about all these wars that we "started". Tell me how we started WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Persian Gulf and the current conflict. Tell me where we fired the first shot. Tell me where we invaded first.

Who said we don't make mistakes? Vietnam was a mistake, but only in the way it was conducted. Our reason for being there wasn't much different than our entry in the Korean war. But you know what? The Vietnamese don't hate us. They want us to resume normal relations with them. They aren't sending terrorists to bomb our cities.

posted 10-26- 01:13 PM               

So you see Sv, I was correct afterall.

Was the policy really honestly made? I think not... We (The victors of WW1) wanted our revenge on Germany, and it back fired on us. I dont think we wanted another war, but I do think we did make that policy extra harsh on purpose.

German ambition didnt cause the war, it fueled it. Theres a differnece. True everyone was over confident of their strength in WWI... But you know what happens when a bunch of over confident war ready men get together, dont you?

Many countries prior to WW1 feared each other greatly. Britain feared Germanys growning Naval strength, Germany feared British naval supremacy. The Italians wanted to expand their territory aswell as the French. (The French wanted to win back Alsace and Lorraine conqured by Germany in 1870) The Serbs wanted a way to get to the sea easier. Almost every one (Russia, Serbs) wanted the Slavs to fight against the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Italy, believe it or not, was Germanys ally from 1887-1914, but hated Austria-Hungary.

There were many steps leading to WW1, and to WW2. It is said that the killing of the Austrian heir to the throne by a Bosnian student sympathetic to Serbia was the main cause of WW1. This simply isnt true. It was just the final spark that set it off. Its true that Germany was the first country to declare war on another country in WW1, but she was not the first to mobilize...

posted 10-26- 02:23 PM               

Refugees are as much a part of war as casualties. When you go to war, you accept such things in the name of the greater good. It is far too early in my humble opinion to condem any of the campaign. Under such circumstances, we must give our leaders a chance. If I fault them for anything, it's that they did not prepare the general public for this. They only spoke of U.S. casualties. Check my other Off Topic/Flame Wars posts on this subject and you'll see that I was worried about the lack of public education on the civilian casualty issue from the word go.

I'm a card carrying bleeding heart liberal athiest and I agree with much of what Jerry said in his point-for-point rebuttal a few posts back. Conservatives would be upset if I lumped them all together as an idealogical monolith, so please don't do the same to us.

posted 10-26- 02:48 PM               

3dp also said it well when he said 'beware of revisionist history'. The plain fact is that all war is terrorism, of differing classes. Where it all comes together is that it always causes death and destruction, and private citizens are often the ultimate target as it is really they, and not the professional armies, who can bring about end of war time. One thing we can always try to remember is that, as countries, we are each of a different philosophical mind set. The only way to truly 'win' a war is to defeat the 'will' of those fighting it.

Whether done on a broad base, through world political influence and hostage taking, or on a narrower scope - like Hitler's air attack on Britain, which in reality was designed as much to defeat the people's will to resist as it was to defeat the RAF and Royal Navy - or to use one's national pride or one's religion against a society, it all comes down to targeting civilians as well as military.

Where one loses is when one fails to understand the 'attitude' of whomever one is at war with. In WW2, and even today, there is a wide difference between the national social consiciousness of the Japanese people versus the German people, between the religious zeal of the Islamic versus the Buddhic versus the Christian...well, to make a long statement even longer, every different society base. But, ok, did we or did we not target civilian areas as well as military in WW2? Deliberately?

I don't know...wasn't involved in the decisions. Wasn't in the minds of those involved. I can say that if the decision were mine....the answer would be yes. Whatever action I feel I must take to preserve my own welfare and that of the ones I care about is all the justification I would need. That's why I'd make a lousy politician. But probably a good terrorist.

I firmly believe in the adage 'It takes a Thief to catch a Thief', in fighting a fire at it's base and not it's apex....but sometimes you have to destroy the apex to get to the base; deprive it of what it needs for fuel, and you beat it. Maybe. I do not believe in using it to attack...but in defense, I will pull out all stops. I hate fighting of any kind; even as a kid, I never had a 'friendly' fight, and never fought unless attacked....but when it happened, I generally had to be forcibly removed from my opponent.

Peace is best. Fighting sucks. But if one is going to fight, one should be prepared to kill or die...for me, it's the only logical outcome. When it comes to the current 'crisis', the question has to be - who is more willing to die? Their people, or ours?

------------------
nealg=FC=

posted 10-26- 03:17 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by BurkeyMK2:
Jerry, if thousands die of starvation and famine in Afganistan, i won't accept that as 'accidental killing'.

---

I agree.

From what I know about the state of affairs in Afghanistan, before 9/11, there was going to be mass starving in any case. There has been a drought there for two years. We are not bombing the farms or market places. We have dropped several hundred thousand food packages. America has, in the past, been the number one supplier of humanitarian aid to Afghanistan, even after the Taliban took over. It is the Taliban who has attacked and taken over several UN food warehouses.

So if there is starving are you saying it is America's fault?

The rest of the world has already committed to rebuilding Afghanistan, including the US. There is no doubt that a more moderate government replacing the Taliban will receive enormous aid. If the Taliban care about their people why don't they just turn over bin Laden and the Al Queda? Whatever happens to the Afganistan people, other than an occasional US caused casualty, must be blamed on their own government and it's obscene perverted devotion to Islam.