au, You see, it is "heartless." I hope I don't become "heartless." c.i.
Walter:
In the eyes of God all men and women were created equal.
c.i.
From the heartless one. Unless you do not know in a war the object is to kill, wound and destroy the assets of the enemy with the least amount of casualties sustained. Yes, I morn the loss of even one American boy. And that is why I fear the strike against Iraq.
It's man's nature to defend himself/herself when threatened. Those who don't, could die.
au, In a war that the US starts without the ethical justification for it that kills innocent Iraqis is wrong. If Saddam starts the war, and our military goes to "defend" our allies, that's a different scenario. There's a big difference between justified war and unjustified war. What GWBush and company is trying to do is wrong. c.i.
C.i.
The question of who starts the war and lose of American life are entirely two separate subjects. Once the war starts for whatever reason my hopes and prayers are with our troops not the Iraqi's And therefore my "heartless" statement stands.
When the terrorists flew the planes into the WTC, that was wrong.
When Islamic terrorists terrorize Israeli children and adults by blowing themselves up,that's wrong.
To not defend yourself against possible destruction by nuclear weapons, poisoned gas, etc.......that's wrong.
New Haven
Add one thing more. To side with the enemy in time of war. That's wrong !!
au, To conclude from my posts that I side with the enemy - is wrong. c.i.
To wage war "preemptively" is wrong. Or was the attack on Pearl Harbor justified?
To trump up reasons to start such a war is wrong.
To bribe, bully or threaten other nations into joining you in such a war is wrong.
To pretend that such a war can be waged surgically and precisely to minimize "collateral damage" -- i.e., the death of uncounted innocents-- is wrong.
To avoid combat yourself and then send other people's sons and daughters into harm's way for specious reasons is wrong.
What war? That's my main question. It seems to me that the Bush people have fastened their teeth upon Saddam Hussein, while not talking about the Iraqis at all. So, if we go to war, what is it?
It is undeniable that there will be innocent and civilian casualties; there is no way out of that. But all Bush talk has carefully steered away from any mention about the Iraqis. All emphasis has been upon Hussein. So, when they talk about war, exactly what is meant? Doesn't it seem a little strange that we have about 125,000 troops, ships, airplanes, coast guard all massed over there, and there is no talk about an Iraqi army, about an Iraqi force armed and militant against us? It's all Saddam Hussein and WMD, and nothing will ever satify that Bush league that there may have been other and better ways of going about that.
This has been, so far, a PR war, and one in which we have not really won over people. Even those the Bush people claim as allies (except for GB) have been bought in some way or other. And here there is not the enthusiasm it was thought.
So when the battle begins, and we start having casualties, it won't matter much. Dead is dead. And au, there has not once been any mention of Iraqi forces, so, while I mourn in advance the loss of American lives, I mourn too the loss of the Iraqis, who really wanted no part of this, nor have they yet shown any desire for this.
c.i.
Of course not. All I am saying once we engage my only interest is the safety of the American service people. I am sure you know from my past posts that I am not in agreement with Bush's actions. However once the die is cast it matters little whether I agree or not.
au, The only difference between us is that I value all human life. It does not matter whether they are Americans or not. c.i.
I've said it before, and I'll repeat it here: I consider myself a citizen of the world as number one, and a citizen of the US as number two. c.i.
au, it does come election time!
c.i.
For me the US with all it's warts is number 1. It is where the oppressed of the world have always and continue to run for refuge.
Blacksmithn has got it right.
Yes Blacksmithin has got it right. However,once we are in it justly or unjustly we must support our nation and the our engaged forces.
Unlike c.i. I am a citizen of the US first, foremost and only.
To support your nation while it engages in an unjust war is, IMO, an immoral act. It's our DUTY as citizens in a democracy to speak out, to protest, if necessary to throw ourselves into the wheels of this vast military-industrial machine (to paraphrase Mario Savio), to prevent such a thing. Or our vaunted freedom is for naught and we are simply "good Germans" aiding in the crimes of our nation.
I support the troops, they are but the machines driven by the tyranny!
blacksmithn
The time for that is before it starts. Not while we have our sons and daughters in the field and in harms way.
