![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Jose wrote: But you appear to think that there are wars we should be in. Which are those? Can you think of a single argument in favor of going to war with, say, Hitler or Tojo that does not apply equally well to Saddam, Kim Il Sung, the leaders of Iran, or of Somalia? In short (but mindful that real life is never this simple), When a nation attacks us, we have the moral right to defend ourselves, to attack back, and to defeat the enemy. When a nation attacks our allies, we have the obligation to our allies, according to the terms of our alliance, to help them defend themselves - in exchange presumably they would do the same or some equivalent for us. When a nation attacks a non-allied nation, we have no moral obligation to send our children to risk their lives in something that is none of our business. In fact, we have an obligation to stay out of it. In the case of 911, we were not attacked by a nation. We were attacked by a handful of rogue individuals. We have the right and moral obligation to root them out and destroy them and their support structure. However, we do not have the right to attack other countries just because they "look the same", nor do we have the right to use this attack as an excuse to the American People to wage war on other countries not involved. Would we have the right to attack a country that was harboring those who planned 9-11, funding their activities, and training them? Would you consider that country to have attacked us? Hitler and his allies attacked us (with Japan as the proxy). Saddam did not. (at least not since 9-11) Apparently a lot of people believe he did by paying rewards to suicide bombers' families, firing missiles at our planes, etc. There is a difference between an attack, a threat of attack, and a threat of threat of attack. Blurring the line risks turning us into the very demon we claim to fight. It must be done with extreme caution, because there is no hindsight, and I don't trust our politicians to have foresight. Is it just Republican politicians that you do not trust, or do you not trust any of them? Do you really think the world would be better off if we simply allowed Islamic extremists to destroy Israel, unite all of the Middle East and South Asia under an aggressive Islamic flag, overrun some more African nations, and threaten Europe and America with nuclear weapons? No. But our inaction may not cause it to happen. In fact, our =action= may hasten it. We are dealing with a differnet kind of enemy. Well, Iran's president is a Holocaust-denying politician (do you trust him more than your own politicians?) who has publicly stated on the floor of the United Nations that he believes it his personal responsibility to bring about Armageddon. He wants Israel, our ally, destroyed. He has sent supplies, men, arms, and money to people who use them to attack our soldiers. By these criteria he has attacked both us and our allies. Would you suggest attacking him? Or would you wait for him to acquire a nuclear weapon and use it on Jerusalem or Berlin before attacking him? Let us suppose that an enraged man who cannot be reasoned with bursts into your home screaming that he is going to kill you and your entire family. He points a gun at you. Do you wait for him to fire first before you shoot him, or do you shoot first? What if he is out in the public street? What do you suppose we would have to do to appease these people in order to finally stop the killing and find peace? I don't think they can be appeased. Nor can they be destroyed. So we just cave into their demands? I think, if you want to work for peace, that you need to find serious answers to these serious questions... I can give you a simple, complete, and foolproof answer to all these questions, once you supply me with a number that is greater than six and less than four. Obviously. Are you saying that your own philosophy has painted you into a logical corner? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
North Korea Denounces US Stealth Bomber Deployment | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | July 2nd 04 09:20 PM |
what bout north korea? What about it? | Anonymoose NoSpam | Military Aviation | 2 | May 5th 04 09:15 PM |
N. Korea Agrees to Nuke Talks | Dav1936531 | Military Aviation | 1 | August 2nd 03 06:53 AM |