Pointless WAR!! - Page 3

nouserpif · 02-02-03, 03:18 PM

You can bomb the world to peices, but you can't bomb it to peace.

Anarchy not Artillary!
Dan Conner

katev17 · 02-02-03, 04:54 PM

HAHA Love it, Lisa.

Kate

Them and Us · 02-02-03, 06:47 PM

TheGino: okay you are correct . i do not know they haven't or have. but wouldn't the government prefer having the support of their people? and they would have so much more support and believe it or not a little from me if we were told that Iraq was directly threatening us.

Haha Lisa. I love it. very funny

tHeGiNo · 02-02-03, 07:13 PM

Yes true but imagine the chaos there would be if we all knew that the country was going to be attacked with nuclear bombs. I'm glad you didn't take what I said offensively as a lot of people like to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

Sir Hiss · 02-02-03, 07:18 PM

Concerningt the nuclear bombs. I was very necessary to drop the bombs. Like I said the Japanese plan, for which I forget the name but could find it if you wanted me to, was to take over the whole world. Their soldiers would NEVER give up. They made an oath to kill themselves before they did anything against this plan. In ordre for us to defeat Japan we would have had to invade the island. Our military geneals estimated the U.S. would lose over a million lives in order to get n the island. That did not inlude all of the Japanese lives which would have to be close to that number. It was absolutlely imparative the we drop the bombs. Be glad that we had them and that our Presisdent was strong enough to order it done. But please don't get me wrong. I don't support the killing of anyone not even our enemies. I would have a very hard time making the decision that Truman made. But presented with the facts above, I would have t agree with what he did, whether I like killing or not. And by the way we were hardly close to winning the war. It has been said that we have always been taught that we were really winning against Japan, but as mentioned in this thread we cannot always trust in what the government tells us. And trust me no person would drop these bombs on Japan if we were so close to winning. Further more they would not do it to show the world what we had. Truman would have just invited them to New Mexico to do that. Read history and you will see that we were never really close to beating Japan.

Them and Us · 02-03-03, 03:28 PM

The Gino : in re-thinknig, its a catch 22. we want some proof or some initiative but then again is it safer to not know? the thing is , is that a person is smart. but people are stupid and panicky. it would be cold war era bunkers all over the place again.

Sir Hiss: I do read history and I particpate in discussions with others and what I have read and concluded to myself was as I already said. You agree. I disagree. Many World War 2 soldiers, teachers in school and politicians disagreed with those bombings. and many also agreed with them. we can not determine which way would have been correct as we do not know what the outcome would have been if other actions were taken. No one is to say which was the right way. and as long as there is someone to challenge the other there will be no certainties. whats done is done. I'm just saying i don't agree with what happened and you do and we both have our reasons and proofs. and thats great. healthy arguing. nothing better. it shows thought. and in this day and age we need more thinkers and less rock stars. althought rock stardom is appealing.

tHeGiNo · 02-03-03, 05:58 PM

Personally, I feel the Americans dropped the bombs to end the war, to cut the killing of people around the world and limit it to Japan, which would therefore result in the forfeit. We all know USA did not HAVE to dropped the bombs but if they hadn't many more innocent lives would have been lost, the outcome would be the same no matter what there choice. It was either all the countries involved would lose lives or drop the bombs on Japan, and end the war. Whether it was the right decision, as you said we cannot know as we do not know the outcome if they decided not to. Also, without any hate or anything of the sort, I think Japan had every opportunity to forfeit, but they continued.

JeffT · 02-03-03, 07:18 PM

ya Bush really isnt too smart. Hes been is power for such a short time and hes going into his second war already. If ANY war should be fought it should be in Israel where people are being attacked day after day just because the cant fuc*ing get along. I mean everyday on the news it says another 20 people have died do to suicide bombers and gun men. That country need serious peace keeping.

Them and Us · 02-03-03, 10:02 PM

Well if we are going to discuss the problems there then we will be bringing religion into this argument and thats three of the conversation warnings haha. putting them together is like crossing the streams in the Ghost Busters movies.

Sir Hiss · 02-03-03, 11:20 PM

Them and Us: I am glad people in this form believe and practice a civilized and controlled debate. I am serious. It is just stupid to have a dumb debates and that is what happens on a lot of forums. So it's cool.

shaggybill · 02-04-03, 01:29 AM

I was just reading all these comments and I was just hopin that everybody realizes that these are just opinions. Lets discuss, not cut each others throats.

Anyways, I'd have to say that Bush rocks. He's right.

All the anti-war people complain that that innocents will die if we go to war. That argument is stupid. Innocents are going to die no matter what we do. If we fight a war, they will die, and if we let that idiot Saddam go, innocents will die, and in probably greater numbers.

What we have to decide is: Do we want innocents to die while we are fighting for the freedom of others? Or do we want them to die while we sit back and watch Saddam kill them with deadly gas and torture chambers?

Its a question of morals and principles.

Have you read any stories of some of those people who have escaped that country and his oppression and came to America. They torture children in front of their parents to get the parents to talk. Who knows what other horrors they face?

And you just wanna sit back and let him go? Thats insane!

C'mon people.

And its not all about the oil. Thats just something some freakin anti-Bush wacko thought of to make an argument against him. Maybe Bush just has a conscience. Ever thought of that?

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

Ho hum....this is my first post and I probably already have everybody hating me.

Oh well, I hope we can still be cool with each other.

Jeromerules · 02-04-03, 04:30 PM

hey buddy easy> You sound a bit harsh. just chill a bit. Everybody has there own decisions here. No need for you to say things are stupid. This forum is not to cut down ideas but to express yours. i respect your decisions. But why not take him out and then his weapons later? Destroying the weapons includes destroying innocent people. Nobody can find the perfect way to prevent war and chaos but we can find a just way somehow. I don't know how. And I really wish I did. if people would just be peaceful then the world would be great. Global disarmament. Including the United States. Would be awesome. But somethings just can't happen because unfortunately evil still lives on. Ohh well
That's my opinion and thanks for reading

tHeGiNo · 02-04-03, 05:42 PM

LoL Jerome no offense bud but he didn't appear to me as coming off harsh. Not at all. I think he made a strong point regarding anyone supporting "anti-war". I was going to say that myself in my previous post but thought it might stir up something, however it is absolutely true. People are going to die no matter what we do, if we stop them, then only the guilty will die, and the innocent will strive on. I do not feel he was cutting down anyone's opinions, just stating his.

Quote:

But why not take him out and then his weapons later? Destroying the weapons includes destroying innocent people. Nobody can find the perfect way to prevent war and chaos but we can find a just way somehow.

Well have you ever thought that if we tried taking out Sadaam, and failed, the weapons he may or may not have may be used in retaliation? These are things you have to think about and I think Bush is going a great job of dealing with the situation. Also I may be wrong but I do not think they are killing anyone in the midst of destroying any weapons they may have? Also it takes two to tango. If we want to create peace the other party must as well, and apparantly peace is at the end of the list for terrorists and such individuals as Sadaam.

Again as you and many others have said, these are only opinions, so please do not take offense to them.

Jeromerules · 02-04-03, 06:25 PM

yeah I got ya man. I know about the retaliation and that's why I don't think anybody could find a better way to solve this problem. The best way would be to just have everyone be perfect which is impossible so really I don't know how to achieve peace. I Still do not support the war or bombing. George busch has been pressuring Canada and it's been our decision to join this war. By the way did any of the americans hear about the canadian soldiers who were killed by american bombers?I talked to many americans since this summer and no american had a clue of what I was talking about. I don't know if your gov'nt keeps that under wraps but that is a major decision in joining the USA to go fight against Iraq. I believe that it is the USA's responsibility and that if they want to get their noses into it they should do it themselves otherwise it's getting others involved and it makes more countries hate the countries in which are getting involved. If that made any sense then please say so.
Thanks
Jerome

shaggybill · 02-04-03, 11:01 PM

Hey, Jerome, I didn`t mean to come off harsh. Sorry dude. I was thinking about Saddam and how mad he made me with all these stories I hear about his method of getting his way in his own country, and it probably came across in my writing.

About those people who didnt have a clue about those soldiers we accidentally killed, they must not keep up with the news, because it was all over the place. And even though it was an accident, it shouldn`t have happened.

Anyways, if Saddam would step down and all that stuff, I would love for there not to be a war. But I dont see that happening. I can see him going nuts and bombing everyone with chemicals and whatever else he has. Plus, they have good reason to believe he's paying $25,000 to families who kids offer themselves as suicide bombers. I just read that in an article, so I dont know if thats true or not.

But how can we topple him without war? Its not like we can go over there and snipe him off, though I would gladly volunteer.

Anyways, I do respect your opinion. And I do not think there is going to be a perfect resolution to this. But personally, I think it would be better to get rid of the injustice at the cost of a few innocents, rather than let injustice rule at the expense of probably many more innocents.

If we did go to war, really, how many civilians would die? I doubt that many. Its not like we are going to go bomb the middle of Bahgdad and kill as many people as possible.