(Untitled)

[madtimes]

An interesting point for going to war. I slowly find my self being a bit more pro war. Probably far behind the power curve, as far as prowar goes. But damn the Administration has completly botched the job. Hope someone enjoys this as much as I did.

As a lifelong lefty of the commie- pinko-faggot variety, I was shocked to wake up one day and find

Comments

[hemlock_martini]

But what right do we have to impose our values on them? About as much right as we had to impose "our" values on them Germans.

The US was the last to fall in to the Allied cause. Were we "imposing our values" or just pitching in?

A bullet shot into a man's brain will teach him nothing about the values you preach.

"Bombs just make more terrorists." Really? We dropped more bombs on Vietnam than we dropped on Europe during World War II. Where are all the Vietnamese terrorists?Because Vietnamese history widely regards the Vietnam war as just another period of occupation by another culture, seeing as how they had been previously occupied by the Chinese, the French, et al., etc. There's some bitterness and resentment in Vietnam now, but largely their attitude towards America is one of "live and let live." Whereas, Islamic young men who see their fathers die for a cause will see their chance at martyrdom and take up arms against those who they see as the oppressor. Martyrdom is hardwired into both Christianity and Islam (see the

[hemlock_martini]

P.S. I understand you didn't write this, but I felt compelled to pick apart a few points.

[madtimes]

Not biting on the oil thing. ;P

[hemlock_martini]

I agree with you for the most part. Hugs and diplomacy won't solve everything, and of course, neither will bunker busters. I pray it's not too late for a "hearts and minds" campaign to help smooth things over with the Islamic world; though I have a feeling it is

[airscale]

That's quite a load of puritanical propaganda there...

[madtimes]

It's very politically correct ;P
Found the humor of it. I think I've been reading the anti-war movement more because I haven't liked what the president has said about the pro-war. But I have been reading a bit more of the cognitive pro-war side and I am agreeing with it a bit more.
What makes the article so puritanical? Or is that a joke? My use of the English language isn't as mature as yours.

[airscale]

airscale
2005-08-12 23:18 (link)
Comment Posted Successfully
"because we have to start remaking the Middle East somewhere."

First off, it’s not anyone’s job to remake the middle east. We certainly don’t need more faux american democracy spreading it’s seed into other countries. There’s a reason 90% of all Iraqis think of America soldiers as occupying their land instead of liberating it.

"the equality of the sexes, religious freedom, the separation of church and state, tolerance, and secularism are superior to religious fascism as practiced in Saudi Arabia and secular fascism as practiced in Iraq."

Most those things are only practiced in theory in this country currently. To say that one side is superior in anyway to another is simply foolish. Sorry that doesn’t work for me. It sounds more like a excuse to run oil up to 67 bucks a gallon.

"And then there's the small matter of the Islamo-fascists' stated desire to impose their values on us."Of course that’s only because we’ve been imposing it on themselves for a few decades

[balamuthia]

airscale has pretty well summed up anything I could add to this...

My basic, most broad opinion on the article is, just because we've always had wars, and they've always (at least from a shallow, one point perspective) "cleared things up", doesn't mean they're the correct way to handle disputes. If they were effective, then eventually they'd cease to happen....they haven't.