Why do you insist on making comments into a personal war? Because you haven't taken many political science courses and many more courses on "peace" or whatever does not give me the right to insult you about what you think peace is or what war is or anything else.
There are studies done for the escalation of troops as well. There are also people and organizations for it, including troops themselves and members of the government. He was stating his opinion as were you, with all of his biases and life background, as were you. That does not give you, nor him, the right to insult someone.
Ok, the next comment will be "stop protecting your boyfriend" or something like that. He and I have had numerous discussions about Iraq and other political debates, and I would have commented about how his views should be expanded upon. Instead of simply asking him, as you did in the first paragraph you continued on to insult him, so I see no need to comment further on his remarks. Like I said before, if you want to make this a personal matter, I believe you have both of our screen names on AIM, if not his you certainly have mine, feel free to use them.
Peace is kept through military force. Plain and simple and if you can't handle that move to France where soon they will be an islamic state because appeasing and surrendering makes the aggressor stronger.
"Peace" doesn't not mean "appeas[ement] and "surrender." And peace does not, necessarily, need to be kept by force.
Look at Martin Luther King Jr; during the civil rights movement, his house was bombed one evening while he was out when his wife was home and she nearly died. MLK's followered nearly stormed the police and attacked them, however, they did not. Luther kept the peace and was able to move forward with the civil right movement by following a policy of non-violence and after speaking to the crowd, they were calmed and went home without any one being hurt because of what happened to him. And no, this wasn't a small group either; it was quite large. The entire civil right movement he preached followed non-violence and he's become one of the best known people of the age and his policies are now in effect in our nation.
Martin Luther King was an idiot. He was an advocate for black rights and look what that race has done with it. NOTHING. AS matter of fact blacks are responsible for more death in this country then any other race. So don't bring him up until his ideas have come to fruitian. They haven't and won't.
Ghandi is another retard. If the British were smarter they would have just let him die on one of his fasts. And his followers were complete dumbasses walking up in line to get a beat down over salt. If you know your going to get hurt for doing something and you do it anyawys with no way to protect yourself and not protecting anyone else physically then you deserve every bit of a beating you recieve simply for be able to procreate and spread your tainted genes.
People like that need to be killed. Get it through your head that humans are animals and we like violence. It will always be a part of who we are.
I was not making this into a personal war. I said nothing about peter in particular but asked him to explain why. I wasn't trying to attck him and I wasn't going to say "stop protecting your boyfriend." I was just make the point that if he feels i am simply for "defeat" that it needs to be expanded upon since many peace organizations also agree with my view.
I don't plan on making this personal. If anything, he attacked what I stand for which has become quite a big part of what I'm doing first and I simly asked for an explanation.
As for the reading on peace, it's the fact that I don't feel like sitting here going into Ghandi, Martin Luther King, and other non-violence discussions because it's difficult to make someone understand where I'm coming from on that and how it's not "defeat" i'm for, but something different without having that background. I'm not trying to insult you for what anyone thinks is peace or war; I just feel like if you're going to say that I (and many other peace organizations) are simply for defeat, you better back it up.
He "attacked" opinions that you have, that is not a personal attack, the pesonal attack I was referring to was the one where you pretty much refused to talk with him about this since he hasn't studied peace like you have. He made many valid points in his argument to contradict your many valid points. The whole point of discussing something like this is not to convince someone that your views are right, but to help them to understand why you feel the way you do so they can think about why they think the way they do.
While you may have many organizations that share in your belief, there are also organizations that share other people's beliefs. Simply because you can name off 3 or 4 does not make you any more right or wrong than someone else. If you took the time to explain things, you might make more of a difference than if you shoot someone down because they simply have a different background of knowledge than you.
it's not that i didn't want to talk to him because he hadn't studied peace. there's a lot more to "peace" than simply surface stuff and it would take me a very long time to explain the reasoning behind a lot of these opinions if you don't have some background with some of the basic ideals of non-violence. the reason i brought up was because "I don't feel like taking the time to explain all that" when i'm short on time as it is in my life. it's not an attack on him, it's (as you said i should do when i don't have the time) an acknolegdement of the fact that i don't have the time to explain that background if you'd never heard any of the basics before. if he wants to continue it else where, he can ask to. but this conversation on livejournal isn't going to give me enough time to explain it without giving up too much of my time. i can go through and explain ghandi's ideas of non-violence, i can go through all that... but honestly, i don't have the time to do this this week and i have the feeling peter won't take from it what the basic idea was anyways (based on his response already to ghandi being mentioned). i figured this is where it was going and that's why i said if he doesn't have the background, i don't have the time to do this right now.
i understand that there's many organizations that support his view too. i was simply asking how if all the major organizations for peace share virtually the views i do, how i can simply not be for peace and life? i was just asking for him to clarify that aspect and that's why i named the organizations.
There are studies done for the escalation of troops as well. There are also people and organizations for it, including troops themselves and members of the government. He was stating his opinion as were you, with all of his biases and life background, as were you. That does not give you, nor him, the right to insult someone.
Ok, the next comment will be "stop protecting your boyfriend" or something like that. He and I have had numerous discussions about Iraq and other political debates, and I would have commented about how his views should be expanded upon. Instead of simply asking him, as you did in the first paragraph you continued on to insult him, so I see no need to comment further on his remarks. Like I said before, if you want to make this a personal matter, I believe you have both of our screen names on AIM, if not his you certainly have mine, feel free to use them.
Reply
Reply
Look at Martin Luther King Jr; during the civil rights movement, his house was bombed one evening while he was out when his wife was home and she nearly died. MLK's followered nearly stormed the police and attacked them, however, they did not. Luther kept the peace and was able to move forward with the civil right movement by following a policy of non-violence and after speaking to the crowd, they were calmed and went home without any one being hurt because of what happened to him. And no, this wasn't a small group either; it was quite large. The entire civil right movement he preached followed non-violence and he's become one of the best known people of the age and his policies are now in effect in our nation.
More details if you ask.
Reply
Ghandi is another retard. If the British were smarter they would have just let him die on one of his fasts. And his followers were complete dumbasses walking up in line to get a beat down over salt. If you know your going to get hurt for doing something and you do it anyawys with no way to protect yourself and not protecting anyone else physically then you deserve every bit of a beating you recieve simply for be able to procreate and spread your tainted genes.
People like that need to be killed. Get it through your head that humans are animals and we like violence. It will always be a part of who we are.
Reply
I don't plan on making this personal. If anything, he attacked what I stand for which has become quite a big part of what I'm doing first and I simly asked for an explanation.
As for the reading on peace, it's the fact that I don't feel like sitting here going into Ghandi, Martin Luther King, and other non-violence discussions because it's difficult to make someone understand where I'm coming from on that and how it's not "defeat" i'm for, but something different without having that background. I'm not trying to insult you for what anyone thinks is peace or war; I just feel like if you're going to say that I (and many other peace organizations) are simply for defeat, you better back it up.
Reply
While you may have many organizations that share in your belief, there are also organizations that share other people's beliefs. Simply because you can name off 3 or 4 does not make you any more right or wrong than someone else. If you took the time to explain things, you might make more of a difference than if you shoot someone down because they simply have a different background of knowledge than you.
Reply
i understand that there's many organizations that support his view too. i was simply asking how if all the major organizations for peace share virtually the views i do, how i can simply not be for peace and life? i was just asking for him to clarify that aspect and that's why i named the organizations.
Reply
Leave a comment