Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
When you are brain washed from your earliest childhood to believe that you country is the best one in the world and that any criticism of it is paramount to treason then it is easy to fire up people to go to war as in Iraq.

Sounds like my thoughts about your health care ideas, but hey, another topic, another time.

In this context, again I ask, why does loving peace carry a positive connotation for you in the Middle-East but such a negative one in the West?

It's an enourmous question, one that I certainly can't answer. Doesn't make much sense to me to have the two view points. Why doesn't Germany act?! Why did Syria act?!

The with us or against us concept comes to mind. Generally, when Western nation's act with military force, it's in our perceived best interest. With Middle Eastern countries act, it's generally against our interests.

That may be completely what it comes down to. Germany and France (and Canada) refused to support US interests in Iraq, so it seems like they are almost against the West?

You see what I mean? I don't think I'm explaining this very well.

I mentioned when I feel a war is justified on another board...

1) If there is a direct threat to your own country.

2) If there is a direct existential threat to a people.

Rwanda, Darfur, and even Bosnia do qualify under category 2.

We should have then sat out of World War One? (I actually think we should have...)

I do agree with your criteria... I suppose that those cases have to be made everytime a nation goes to war. A majority of the US public voted for Bush the second time around... I think they were convinced of the first. The biggest dent in Bush's support on Iraq has come from those that now see there was never a threat of Saddam doing anything or supporting al-Qaeda.

I think the number one case was met when Bush invaded Iraq, at least in the American's minds. So I have a hard time blaming them when they were misled by either Bush or CIA people with an agenda. Americans thought Saddam was a threat to their safety, of course they are going to support his removal.

RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game")

--

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      11,015
    • Most Online
      2,945

    Newest Member
    agackibal
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...