knapplc Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I pruned a bunch of posts out of here. Please restrict your personal disputes to the Woodshed. Link to comment
Sub-Husker Posted February 3, 2012 Author Share Posted February 3, 2012 Civilians don't die during warfare, unless there is a war going on. If the US was truly concerned about civilian deaths, we would not be leading Occupy Iraq, Occupy Afghanistan and Occupy Bahrain... nations wher we are not wanted. And instead of pushing for wars in Syria and Iran, we should look at the cluster-fubar we created in Libya and spend our money at home where it will do some good. Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 A generic "war is bad" stance is pretty myopic. Nobody wants war. Sometimes war is necessary. Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 A generic "war is bad" stance is pretty myopic. Nobody wants war. Sometimes war is necessary. I absolutely agree with the bold. However, I strongly disagree with the middle statement. I know a lot of people who want wars. In fact . . . that might be a neo-con plank. Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 A generic "war is bad" stance is pretty myopic. Nobody wants war. Sometimes war is necessary. I absolutely agree with the bold. However, I strongly disagree with the middle statement. I know a lot of people who want wars. In fact . . . that might be a neo-con plank. I was implying the Average Joe with "nobody." There are always going to be the tiny minority for whom war is profitable. Almost always those are not the people in the front lines. Alexander the Great being the exception that most readily comes to mind. Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 A generic "war is bad" stance is pretty myopic. Nobody wants war. Sometimes war is necessary. I absolutely agree with the bold. However, I strongly disagree with the middle statement. I know a lot of people who want wars. In fact . . . that might be a neo-con plank. I was implying the Average Joe with "nobody." There are always going to be the tiny minority for whom war is profitable. Almost always those are not the people in the front lines. Alexander the Great being the exception that most readily comes to mind. I think if we polled the American people we would find that a substantial proportion would want to go to war. (Iran would probably be the flavor of the month for that crowd.) Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I think if we polled the American people we would find that a substantial proportion would want to go to war. (Iran would probably be the flavor of the month for that crowd.) That substantial proportion would drop dramatically if the question is not "Should the U.S. go to war?" but "Will YOU go to war?" Vaguely I'm sure there are a sizable percentage for whom the concept of war is OK. But put them in the foxhole and they're suddenly pacifists. Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I think if we polled the American people we would find that a substantial proportion would want to go to war. (Iran would probably be the flavor of the month for that crowd.) That substantial proportion would drop dramatically if the question is not "Should the U.S. go to war?" but "Will YOU go to war?" Vaguely I'm sure there are a sizable percentage for whom the concept of war is OK. But put them in the foxhole and they're suddenly pacifists. No doubt. Link to comment
Sub-Husker Posted February 3, 2012 Author Share Posted February 3, 2012 A generic "war is bad" stance is pretty myopic. Nobody wants war. Sometimes war is necessary. Gernerally speaking war is bad. An amputation is a bad thing, but sometimes it is necessary. However Saint Augustine wrote the official Christian dogma on what a "Good War" is, and it seems that the avereage Christian is more likely to support war than the population in general. I think if we polled the American people we would find that a substantial proportion would want to go to war. (Iran would probably be the flavor of the month for that crowd.) Yep. Link to comment
Sub-Husker Posted February 3, 2012 Author Share Posted February 3, 2012 A generic "war is bad" stance is pretty myopic. Nobody wants war. Sometimes war is necessary. I absolutely agree with the bold. However, I strongly disagree with the middle statement. I know a lot of people who want wars. In fact . . . that might be a neo-con plank. As an open question: since the end of WW-II which, which of our wars have been good? Link to comment
HSKR Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 A generic "war is bad" stance is pretty myopic. Nobody wants war. Sometimes war is necessary. I absolutely agree with the bold. However, I strongly disagree with the middle statement. I know a lot of people who want wars. In fact . . . that might be a neo-con plank. As an open question: since the end of WW-II which, which of our wars have been good? There are about 50 million South Koreans who could give you an answer to that. Unless you think they would have rather been run over by the north? Link to comment
Sub-Husker Posted February 4, 2012 Author Share Posted February 4, 2012 Oops... http://news.yahoo.com/surveillance-drone-crashes-somali-capital-134652928.html Link to comment
HSKR Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 Oops... http://news.yahoo.co...-134652928.html "the drone crash Friday into a hut made of sticks, corrugated cans and plastic bags." Wonder if it was Obama's brother's place?? Link to comment
MLB 51 Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 Oops... http://news.yahoo.co...-134652928.html "the drone crash Friday into a hut made of sticks, corrugated cans and plastic bags." Wonder if it was Obama's brother's place?? Obama's brother's place. Link to comment
Sub-Husker Posted February 4, 2012 Author Share Posted February 4, 2012 OK... simple minds are not curious as to why it crashed. Link to comment
Recommended Posts