Opinion on war?

[red_Marvin]

MAKE LOVE NOT WAR PERIOD

I like violent games, but war NO.


edit: 21.21 WE19 03 03 heard on news USA has atacked

[wildcard]

Yeah, when you are quiet and calm in your home while people is dying 5000 miles away, peace isn't the only option.

Yes it is very easy to comment about things far away. It is also easier to see things as all rosey and nice. Most of the world have very little information about the situation, I'd venture to say that most of us here are unqualified to give an opionion. One of top producing nations of refugees in the world is Iraq, and that is without a war. Saddam has declared war on his own people and family for far too long, he has killed his own family/relatives to stay in power.

I was part of Amnesty International, so I did learn a lot about many countries; I live in South Africa for the first 18 years of my life. I have seen and heard of many atrocities. There is no nice way of this mess; if there was a peaceful solution to the problem it would have been found.. but after a decade surely people realise he isn't going to suddenly leave or start being nice.

[toonski84]

negatory. that's just some jackass spreading rumors. usa is going on an airstrike tonight.

edit:
on the topic of people dying, consider this: while only 300 americans died in the gulf war, 300,000 iraqis were killed, and that's a conservative count. Saddam's done some sick things, but i doubt very many of those iraqis deserved to die. yeah, they're in the military, but do you think they want to be there or kill other people?

and on the same topic, cuba has killed thousands on live national television, right after the bay of pigs, and fidel's sat on his throne much longer than saddam, has. hundreds of p.o.w.s have been gassed in chambers in afganistan by the new "liberated" government. arial sharon has killed an estimated 20,000 non-military people in jorden and palestein in the 40 or so years he's had power, and he's our ally. and communist china has killed millions of its own people. these are only the a few of the people around the world we dont touch even though they have such things on their record. so if we want to say we're attacking saddam because he's a ruthless dictator we'd have to acknowledge all the other horrible things that go on in the world.

the sad, sad truth is, we just dont care. out of sight, out of mind. the reason the united states is attacking saddam is political, and political alone.

[wildcard]

negatory. that's just some jackass spreading rumors. usa is going on an airstrike tonight.

Not only but theres always been "something" for years now. They have been protecting the no fly zone for years..

[Jocke The Beast]

We had this discussion before and I think it's a interesting and useful discussion.

I still support a war against Iraq.

I think that a war against Iraq is the "only thing to do" and I still support USA,England and their coalition in this issue.
Sometimes it's un-avoidable to use "tough actions", in order to keep the world "safe". I know we all have different views on this subject but in my opinion war isn't always a "evil" action.

Of course I hope that this war (which seems to start this night) will go quick and I hope that the number of casualties will be low.

Ps. I listened to President Bush "speach" (47 hours ago) and I must say I liked some of the things he said.

[na_th_an]

I also listened to Bush's lectures, but he looked like he thought he was talking inside the silverscreen, in the middle of an epic movie where the good guys, with the help of God which always blesses America, are fighting the evil monsters. He talked about "durable freedom" "liberty shield" and "iraqui freedom", expressions in the "Bush style" that fit better in a pulp comic.

I guess if that there won't be such an interest on "freeing Iraq" if Texaco didn't belong in part to the Bushes.

Why does America want to save the world? Superman, and Captain America are just comics, but they depict Bush and his follower's illusion of life.

It happened with Corea, it happened with Vietnam, it happened in the former Yugoslavia, and it happens now in Iraq, Afghanistan... . First Cold War, now that evil terrorists... Nice TV-war serials to watch eating peanuts in a comfy sofa, hundred of millions of brand new dollars form a new set of war movies during the following years, new Van-Damme flicks and nice gas-masks for children with mickey mouse ears merchandising (I've seen that: completely terrorific).

America always says he's up to preserve democracy and freedom, but they only preserve it when there is a political or an economical/tactical/wathever matter involved in doing that. Also, a country with such a democratic fail as Mr. Bush raising with vote miscount in HIS state of Florida, and with and old and outdated democratic system with 228 years old should not be considered as the "democracy preservator".

[wizardlife]

We had this discussion before and I think it's a interesting and useful discussion.

I still support a war against Iraq.

I think that a war against Iraq is the "only thing to do" and I still support USA,England and their coalition in this issue.
Sometimes it's un-avoidable to use "tough actions", in order to keep the world "safe". I know we all have different views on this subject but in my opinion war isn't always a "evil" action.

Interesting to hear that opinion from Sweden. Is that a general consensus there?

Ps. I listened to President Bush "speach" (47 hours ago) and I must say I liked some of the things he said.

I've really liked his speeches as well. The one just now (Wednesday evening) was good too. Obviously they're written by other folks and he reads them off the teleprompter, but they still reflect a very strong stance, and (at least apparently) a firm belief in his cause and in God.

It sure beats the wishy-washy Canadian position. Andrew Coyne tore it apart in a brilliant column in todays Post... once it's online I'll post a link.

[wildcard]

The media like always show things incorrectly or dramatically. I think there would be less problems if there wasn't a media like there is.

The stance that america are only fighting for oil is mute, they aren't going to get anything major from Iraq. As far as I know Iraq is apart of Opec and Opec sets the prices.

And with the notion that America shouldn't step in, I couldn't disagree more. There are many countries where they should. Zimbabwe for one, but unfortunately there are too many cowards to do anything. And Mugabe is only a threat to his own people not others. I believe in the notion that good people don't let bad things happen if they can help it. A peaceful loving wholly united world is a nice dream, and may be possible in the future; but I seriously doubt it as there are always evil people or even bad people in any large group of people.

[na_th_an]

U.S.A. won't act in Zimbabwe: it is not interesting. I am not against U.S.A. acting in conflics searching for something interesting and valuable, I'm against them being that cinic, saying that they are the saviours when they just are there for the money. No money in Zimbabwe, no acting in Zimbabwe.

What is more, the U.S.A. financed Pinochet's take over Chile's government ("to stop communism" ooooh), causing two decades of pain and dictatorship. They moved some threads in Argentina as well. When they say "God Bless America"... Are those exploited south-american countries "included" in America? They have leeched those poor southamerican countries until burst. Please don't say they are agains't dictatorship and lack of freedom. They put up Pinochet and some others. Ben Laden was trained by the C.I.A. ..., Ariel Sharon, one of the greatest genocides in history, is heavily supported in the U.S.A.

Please don't make me laugh telling me that war is for humanitary, freedom and wisdom purpose. It is the plain contrary.

[wildcard]

Yes they've taken chances by training people. But anyone can turn out how they want to, you seem to bring across they america are wrong. They are not purely wrong, they've made lots of mistakes; but name a country that hasn't. Spain has caused its fair share of problems, all countries in the world have.

Arield Sharon has an impossible task so I wouldn't use that as an example. You try defend a country from bombs let alone suicide bombers; its almost impossible.

Remeber that Saddam did start the war by invading Kuwait. The only problem is that, he wasn't beaten properly.

Edit/addition:

Please don't make me laugh telling me that war is for humanitary, freedom and wisdom purpose. It is the plain contrary

Such a general statemtent to make is always going to have a problem. It is incorrect, war can be used to free people. A very simple example is Scotland in the 13th Centuary.