posted on October 9, 2001 10:43:40 AM
For those who say this war is unfair and is killing innocents, I want to hear your views as to why we are wrong for going over there and bombing the sh!t out of them. This is what has been in my head today:
If terrorists say they want us out of their holy land, why did they not bomb or make war on our military bases? Why did they pick civilians, steal our planes to slam them into a workplace and possibly plant biological germs in business, mail services and who knows what else since its still being investigated, etc? Why civilians?
For those peacemakers who insist WE are killing innocents over there, would you feel the same way if it was YOUR father, brother, sister, mother who died from anthrax yesterday or caught it today or tomorrow? What did YOUR brother, sister, father, mother, son do to warrant being poisoned with germs from a group of people who have a problem with the government that just happens to be your country?
posted on October 9, 2001 10:58:20 AM
Afghansitan is just one of over 60 countries that are harboring these terrorist organiszations.
Though I do believe the Taliban in Afghanistan needs to be shattered, I don't think in the final analysis that this war is going to be won with cruise missles. I can't imagine the USA bombing every country that may or may not be involved. This war will be fought in a different way in the end and we won't be getting morning reports on which targets have been hit.
posted on October 9, 2001 11:23:49 AM
My point is, it is like blackmail. Taliban wants us out of their holy land. THEN they will stop. But first, we also have to stop assisting Israel. Oh, then we have to cease butting in to their business with what they do with their women. On top of that, we have to not do this...and furthermore, we have to stop doing that. Or else. BTW, they planted some nice germs with us, just for good measure. If they think of anything else, they will be sure to let us know AFTER they kill more innocent civilians with said nasty germs. Im sure they will think of lots of things, and we are to sit here and beat our brows over THEIR innocents. Who said war was fair?
I doubt that some arguing against military force actually believe their statements. It's simply a game for some. I hope I'm not giving them too much credit, but it is impossible for me to believe some actually believe the US should just roll over and lets a small group of fanatics dictate the terms the US must live under.
Congress let their voice be heard, 518 agree military force is necessary, 1 felt negotiations was the way to go. The government's opinion is the one that really matters.
posted on October 9, 2001 11:35:56 AM
Uaru, I am also thinking of the men and women in the military. Once before, there was peacemakers who showed their displeasure, by calling those who returned home baby killers, murders, and were shunned and spit upon. Some of those same servicemembers who were treated as such are now saying THIS war is not wanted or needed. So how will they treat those who are over there fighting? Will they give to them what they received? Or will they not hold the servicemen and women responsible for the actions of the government? Is this war different? How so? War is war and people get hurt. We didnt steal their planes and crash into their mosques to make a point.
posted on October 9, 2001 11:39:13 AM
"For those who say this war is unfair and is killing innocents, I want to hear your views as to why we are wrong for going over there and bombing the sh!t out of them."
I love that. You define the content and parameters of an "other" position and then challenge people to defend it.
posted on October 9, 2001 11:42:04 AM
Donny, I am trying to figure out what is in my own head, and posting it may make it come out cockeyed, but it is helping me to understand the confusion I am experiencing myself. If you dont like how I post it, avoid my thread and troll somewhere else.
posted on October 9, 2001 11:47:14 AM
Uaru, some are saying it isnt needed. Thats whay Im trying to understand...their mindset (as well as my own). What is the solution? How do we fight it if it isnt with bombs and missiles? What is their suggestions on how to fight this?
posted on October 9, 2001 11:47:25 AM
The War in Vietnam was not supported by many people in the USA. The Draft was in effect, there was never any threat to USA soil.....and many many people felt that the USA should not have even been in Vietnam and there is probably not many people who can even tell you why the USA was there.
posted on October 9, 2001 11:49:48 AM
Zazzie, then the difference is the purpose or lack thereof? Our military today, now, will be seen as heroes and protectors because of what happened on our soil, but because of what they did in Nam, it is different? Yes, I think so, too. Still, I wonder of the many reasons of WHY this is.
posted on October 9, 2001 11:50:29 AM
Isn't the fact that people have the freedom to protest USA military involvement is what it is all about in the end?? That they do have the right and freedom to do so??
You don't have to agree with them or support them---but to silence them would be a very sad thing.
posted on October 9, 2001 11:56:31 AM
If your military is fighting something that most can see no purpose, it is hard for the population to celebrate the military as heroes--even though in battle many of their endevours were heroic. I think the Vietnam War was like this.
posted on October 9, 2001 12:04:18 PM
Zazzie, have you noticed that your words wind up in many posts in many boards? Bloviating and piffle. Many of us thank you, lol.
posted on October 9, 2001 12:06:47 PMFor those who say this war is unfair and is killing innocents...
I don't recall anyone actually saying that, to be honest. I remember a lot of people discussing whether going to war was the best or most effective option, but not whether it was the "fairest" option.
I, for one, am still concerned as to whether we can actually accomplish what we've set out to do [i.e., eradicate terrorism world-wide], and I wonder whether there were any other actions that could have been taken (whether instead of, or in conjunction with, the current attack on Afghanistan).
But my worries have little if anything to do with a belief that our attack is "unfair" because it is "killing innocents ".
Of course, that probably means you weren't talking to me in the first place, right?
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
[edited for clarification]
[ edited by godzillatemple on Oct 9, 2001 12:09 PM ]
posted on October 9, 2001 12:23:43 PM
Zazzie - You said: and there is probably not many people who can even tell you why the USA was there. Your saying that brought to mind something our eldest son recently shared with me. He was born in 1969.
We were talking about the US sending group troops to Afhganistan and I was mentioning the terraine and how rough it was going to be, especially in the mountains during the winter months. Then he makes the statement that in high school they never studied anything about the Vietnam Conflict. My mouth was on the floor. I couldn't believe it, and said I had no idea....just always thought they would normally be taught that as part of our US history. But they weren't. Sad.
posted on October 9, 2001 05:06:13 PM
A friend of mine recently sent me this..I thought I would share:
For your guidance here is an 8 step process for dealing with Kumbayas, steps
5 thru 8 are iterative:
If you happen upon a peace rally by stupid naive hemp-shirt-wearing college
idiots and would like to teach them why force is
sometimes needed:
1) Approach dumb rich ignorant student talking about "peace" and saying
there should be, "no retaliation."
2) Engage in brief conversation, ask if military force is appropriate.
3) When he says "No," ask, "Why not?"
4) Wait until he says something to the effect of, "Because that would just
cause more innocent deaths, which would be awful
and we should not cause more violence."
5) When he's in mid sentence, punch him in the face as hard as you can.
6) When he gets back up to up to punch you, point out that it would be a
mistake and contrary to his values to strike you,
because that would, "be awful and he should not cause more violence."
7) Wait until he agrees that he has pledged not to commit additional
violence.
8) Punch him in the face again, harder this time.
Repeat steps 5 through 8 until they understand that sometimes it is
necessary to punch back.
I just want to add..I support there right to protest...but they still pi** me off! My 51 year old brother, (who is a veteran and did 2 tours in Vietnam), called to tell me he volunteered to be reactivated. Granted they probably will not need him or take him...but he felt he had to DO something. My husband is retired from the Army, my Father was an Air Force veteran who fought in WWII and all my friends are wives of active duty soldiers. They are all sitting on pins and needles waiting and wondering if their husbands will be deployed.
I read in our local paper that a group of peace protesters were supposed to come here, (Fayetteville, Ft. Bragg), to do a march....but I believe they backed out. They probably realized they would not receive much support!
Sorry this was so long...but this subject touched a nerve! I had to vent!
