There would be NO wars if people refused to fight!

2»

Comments

  • Heineken HelenHeineken Helen Posts: 18,095
    PJ_Saluki wrote:
    Yup, it's pretty easy and, sorry HH, naive to say there would be no wars if people refused to fight. Ain't neva gonna happen. As long as somebody has something some other group of somebodies wants, there will always be war. To think otherwise seems like a flight of fancy to me. Pacifists might get their reward in heaven, if you believe in it, but they get shit on in the real world.
    Hey, I know it's never gonna happen... I'm just saying it in reply to all the 'support the troops' bullshit and how GWB seems to be the only person to blame for the whole thing. He's barely set foot in Iraq. He hasn't personally killed any Iraqeeees, has he? People need to stop crying for the troops... they're the ones DOING the killing... albeit in somebody elses name... but tell me how that works :confused:
    The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
    Verona??? it's all surmountable
    Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
    Wembley? We all believe!
    Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
    Chicago 07? And love
    What a different life
    Had I not found this love with you
  • spongersponger Posts: 3,159
    There would be no wars if there were no lies. Every war since the beginning of time was fueld by lies in some form of another. People have never actually fought for what they believed they were fighting for. It's always been a matter of conjuring up a cause that in the end lines the pockets of the powerbrokers.
  • Heineken HelenHeineken Helen Posts: 18,095
    sponger wrote:
    There would be no wars if there were no lies. Every war since the beginning of time was fueld by lies in some form of another. People have never actually fought for what they believed they were fighting for. It's always been a matter of conjuring up a cause that in the end lines the pockets of the powerbrokers.
    That's not true... people have never fought for what they believed they were fighting for? :confused: what about those who defend their homes against invasion? While Britain may have been wrong invading Ireland, should we have just LET them invade? Therefore avoiding war altogether? But if you mean that in the case of the invaders... then I'm sure there's one or two that were justified :o
    The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
    Verona??? it's all surmountable
    Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
    Wembley? We all believe!
    Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
    Chicago 07? And love
    What a different life
    Had I not found this love with you
  • AbuskedtiAbuskedti Posts: 1,917
    Pretty simple, eh? I'm sick of hearing about how the poor goddamn troops are over there against their will. Sure they can face prison for refusing to fight but isn't that better than being 'forced' to kill people? (George Bush ain't in Iraq). I would certainly rather go to prison than do something that goes against everything I believe. And I would safely say that when the war began, a vast majority of the troops were in favour of it. Just cos they change their mind halfway through the war shouldn't make anyone feel sorry for them.

    We need troops to defend us.. or we will be conquered. That is sad but definately a fact. If given the choice, those that must actually do the fighting would certainly fight far less. Which is why we have decided to have the choice made by our elected officials - apart from the fear and with all the necessary information.

    Please don't place the blame of those decisions on those facing death every day - they have agreed to an absolutely necessary contract - and to offer their lives in defense of our freedom and safety. The racially and economically motivated destruction of Iraq is blood on the hands of the US government - not the men and women dying.
  • Heineken HelenHeineken Helen Posts: 18,095
    Abuskedti wrote:
    We need troops to defend us.. or we will be conquered. That is sad but definately a fact. If given the choice, those that must actually do the fighting would certainly fight far less. Which is why we have decided to have the choice made by our elected officials - apart from the fear and with all the necessary information.

    Please don't place the blame of those decisions on those facing death every day - they have agreed to an absolutely necessary contract - and to offer their lives in defense of our freedom and safety. The racially and economically motivated destruction of Iraq is blood on the hands of the US government - not the men and women dying.
    I can see where you're coming from if you were talking about a DEFENSIVE force... but you certainly don't have one of those! By putting their lives on the line in order to kill and maim and cause destruction, they are not defending your freedom and safety... they are endangering it. It's pretty simple and obvious to an outsider. This war has nothing to do with freedom and safety for anybody... I thought we were all agreed on that.
    The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
    Verona??? it's all surmountable
    Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
    Wembley? We all believe!
    Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
    Chicago 07? And love
    What a different life
    Had I not found this love with you
Sign In or Register to comment.