Peace without war.

[flyinclockchoke]

Szczepankiewicz

Assuming that I wasn't bullshitting you, and that everything I said was accurate, would you be pissed off?

[Szczepankiewicz]

FlyingClockChoke

I am not pissed off. Why would I be pissed off at you? You have done nothing but argue with me. That's not anything bad. It's not like you slapped me on the butt or anything.


I would find it very hard to believe that everything you said was even close to accurate.

But preach on, oh my brother, preach on...

I don't know if I could make it through without a daily dose, especially since you think I'm cute!

[sccr06]

FCC:
As long as there is oil there, the US will always have a vested interest in the Mid East. And our relationship with Israel is our easiest conduit into that region. That's just fact. Like it or not.

But to think that all our problems will simply disappear if we stop supporting Israel is ridiculous. By your rationale, we should back off because some fanatics are telling us too. **** that.

Bin Ladin would still hate us even if we totally cut-off Israel today. His hate is borne out of the Afghan war. He feels he was personally screwed by the US during that conflict. All this Israel bullshit is just icing on the cake.

You are correct about the Jewish lobby being very influential in the US but to make statements alluding to some shadowy Israeli-puppeteering of all US foreign policy is pure ignorance.

As for your statements that the Middle East hates us solely because of Israel that's just wrong too. They know why we support Israel and they can generally live with it regardless of whether or not they like it. A lot of this current situation is a direct result of the Gulf War. Hussien's hatred of us and particularly Bush and the Muslim-extremists hatred of our military presence in Saudi and Kuwait.

[brothaman]

Solutions.

I think...
Both of you have valid points but neither of you are completely right.

We could still be at War whether we support Israel or not however Jewish Religious influence in US foreign policy sure doesn't help much either.

My question is simply this.

IF there 'was' a way to settle these problems peacefully what might they be?

Please challenge yourselves to come up with real ideas.

Thanks,

BM

[sccr06]

Which problems are you talking about?
The war? It's too late for a peacefull solution now.

The Middle East in general? The Israeli-Palestinian issue?

There is a peaceful solution to the I/P issue but it takes time. The Israelis need to reign in their citizens in and near Palestinian territory and Arafat needs to crackdown on the militants in Palestine.

But that in itself would not change the situation in Iraq, Iran or Saudi or even Afghanistan. They are all separate issues. Tying them into US-Israeli alliance is simply a nice excuse for them to attempt to unify the Muslim world against us. Fortunately it isn't working....yet.

The terrorists are criminals. You don't negotiate with criminals, you arrest them and incarcerate them.

[flyinclockchoke]

what is your definition of terrorism?

... and what is your definition of a terrorist?

is killing 100,000+ japanese civilians an act of terrorism?

is truman a terrorist? should the united states be put on trial in an international criminal court for "terrorism" and "crimes against humanity" ???

just curious to find out what your standards on terrorism are...

[Szczepankiewicz]

Killing 100,000+ Japanese was an act of war. I believe the choice was either to use nuclear weapons or to invade Japan. The invasion of Japan would have devastated the entire island, not just two of it's cities. I believe about a million people would have died after that was all said and done. But I don't have the facts to back that up, it is purely speculation.

In war atrocites are committed by both sides. As I recall, the US government interned American citizens into camps along the west coast. That was an awful act.

However, I don't remember hearing of them firing up the gas chambers, or having prisoners of war march the entire length of California without food, water or shelter from the elements.

[flyinclockchoke]

why drop the bomb?

Because the US forces had already learned an extremely valuable lesson at Normandy... there was gonna be a lot of dead AMERICANS! Dead 18 year old boys... Dead sons, dead brothers, dead fathers... DEAD BODIES... It is inevitable in a sustained ground campaign.

And that is unacceptable...

So, the alternative solution is to liquify 100,000+ innocent civilians instead...

I guess from a USA NATIONAL INTEREST standpoint, it would be perfectly OK to murder civilians to prevent AMERICAN casualties.

Doesn't it suck how in the end, it's always the civilians who are getting the short end of the stick... It doesn't matter if the civilians are in Hiroshima or in New York... their lives are equally as valuable.

There should not be a double standard when it comes to innocent human life. I hope you agree.

Nuclear explosion is far worse than any gas chamber or death march. At least the land is still good... Radiation poisoning and deformities still occur today in Hiroshima. The entire area is polluted, not just from radiation, but from all the horrible suffering and death that has occured there...

[Szczepankiewicz]

For once, I honestly agree with your post.

It is unacceptable to kill innocent civilians.

But I think the US did it to prevent millions of deaths that were inevitable had they chosen the other route.

In the context of the situation however, Japan and the US were at war, each side knew it, declared it officially, and had been fighting each other for years. Japan was resolute and were going to fight to the very last man if necessary.


Looking at Hirshoma and Nagasaki in and of themselves were a great tragedy. I think Truman actually stated later in life that he regretted that action.

Looking at it in context of the war at the time, the other choices available were less practical. I guess it's like our presidential elections every four years, the lesser of all the evils.


08/06/1945 and 09/11/2001 are not as comparable as you might think.


"Thou shalt not kill." Pretty simple and straight foreward, yet we find a billion and one reasons to justify it....

Here's an interesting link to Hirshoma and Nagasaki.

http://www.dannen.com/decision/index.html

[flyinclockchoke]

no justifications...

Szczepankiewicz,

The USA were trying to prevent AMERICAN casualties. When you're fighting a war, you try and kill as many enemy soldiers as you can. You use any means necessary to win the war. Without the bombs, could Japan have ultimately overpowered us in the Pacific and eventually have land troops in Hawaii... then the west coast? Who knows? Probably not, but why would we take that chance? Of course Japan is going to fight until the last man if necessary. Just like the United States. You think we wouldn't have fought to the last man?

So of course we are gonna prevent so many AMERICAN casualties from happening... even if it means murdering innocent civilians. The other choices were less practical for AMERICANS. So if it is in AMERICA's best interest to murder civilians, then we will... and we justify it by calling it the lesser of the two evils... Because a ground invasion would cost more lives, yes that's true... More AMERICAN lives. If Japan didn't give up, and the USA had more bombs, would we have continued to drop more nukes and killed every single last one of them if we had to? Yes we would have. Would we have tried to launch a ground offensive if we had bombs and no AMERICAN soldiers had to die? No, of course not. We would have continued to drop bomb after bomb, until the Japanese gave up. Nice and easy... NO AMERICAN CASUALTIES. So, don't use the excuse that AMERICA was trying to prevent millions of deaths... America was only looking out for itself.

Like I said, it doesn't matter what context you try to put it in... the slaughter of innocent civilians is ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE IN ANY CONTEXT.

The United States has been at war with Bin Laden for the last 10 years. The CIA has even stated this. But because this is not a conventional war, but rather a guerrila war, it doesn't mean that it's not a REAL WAR. There are real bullets, real guns, real explosions, and real people dead... Nobody has to "officially" declare war. Besides, how do you declare war against an individual? Bin Laden has certainly declared his WAR against the United States, long before Sept. 11. And even though the United States hasn't officially "declared" a state of war against Bin Laden, the USA has managed to bomb his training camps and weapons factories, etc... Just because there's not an official piece of paper that says "WAR", doesn't mean anything. Just because we declared official "WAR" on Japan means murdering of innocents is condoned? I don't think it should be so.

MURDERING INNOCENTS ANYTIME, ANYWHERE, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES IS STILL JUST THAT... MURDER!!!

[kikboxr1]

peace...

What I don't get, is that I have met so many people who are against war, but not one of them has offered a reasonable solution. If the US just sat on its laurels, we would be attacked again for sure. And again, and again, until America was taken over by terrorists. I would gladly change my opinion that a strike on Afghanistan is necessary, if only someone could offer a solution that makes sense. People may say that once we get bin Laden there will always be more, but in my opinion that is basically why we need to put the smack down. Their forces will only get stronger if we choose to do nothing.

[Maui Jim]

Snake Pit

There always 5% that snake at your feet and can kill you.
I want to feel safe, crushem before they bury us and return the world back to the 13th Century with a NuckCase stuck in the wall of the white house on a timer.
New York was the mother of all Rubicon's, we can't go back.
If you ask that 5% "What do you what us to do?" .......
They say......DIE
Them or you?
root'em out like weeds in the field.
It's our turn to be sleepers in there world.
Seminars over.

[Szczepankiewicz]

You take the trash out every week. You fill the cans, drag them to the curb. The trashmen come and empty them out. You bring the cans back in.

Repeat ad nauseum.

Sure there's more trash that replaces the old trash. But what happens when you don't do your part and take the trash out?

Or if the trashmen don't come empty the cans?

Then what happens?


Then my friend you move to Beijing and live happily ever after.

[Szczepankiewicz]

You keep pointing out that the US Government is only looking after the best interests of the United States.

I don't think I was making excuses for the US, I think I was trying to explain the rationale used by the men at that time. Ever heard the phrase "hind sight is 20/20". It is easy to sit behind your keyboard and complain and criticize about how messed up the US has been, and still is.

I don't remember the US attacking Japan first? I don't remember the US overrunning the Korean Penniunsula, the Philippines and killing thousands upon thousands of Filipinos, Koreans, Chinese and anyone else who got in the way.

In an absolute sense, killing innocent civilians is wrong. Killing anyone is wrong. Do you not agree?

In a relative sense, it's kill or be killed. Thousands of American GIs were killed in the Pacific Theater taking island after island. Many thousands more would have been killed in the invasion of Japan. The US could have continued with a conventional war and completely wrecked the island of Japan, similar to what happened to Berlin and the rest of Germany. There would have been many, many civilian casualties.

Given the choice between killing 100,000 of the enemy after 5 long hard years of combat where 6 million Jews were incinerated, and a million(?) or so Asian civilians were raped, tortured, and executed or only killing 50,000 of the enemy and killing 50,000 of your own citizens which would you pick?


You seem to think that the US is somehow responsible for the entire world, where every other nation is only responsible for themselves. You repeat over and over that the US is only looking out for themselves. The US is concerned first and foremost with the well being of the US.

Duh?! Self interest is what drives every human being, whether they like to admit it or not.

I would agree that the US has done some pretty crappy things, but for anyone to say that the US is nothing but a terrorist nation with a history of terrorist acts is only seeing what they want to see.

[flyinclockchoke]

Szczepankiewicz

I never once said that the USA was NOTHING but a terrorist nation. I was simply stating that their should not be any double standard. If it's OK for us to kill civilians, we shouldn't be surprised when others do the same to us.

As for attacking first, do you think it was Bin Laden who first attacked the USA, or was he retaliating against something? He's a rich oil tycoon... Does he have nothing better to do than build bombs and spread terror? He does it for fun I suppose...

So because the Japanese attacked first, then it's justified (in a relative sense) for us to kill their civilians. Well, by your own theory, Bin Laden was justified in his attack on the world trade center. He didn't start the war man. He was retaliating against the USA.

YES, kill or be killed. What do you think Bin Laden is doing? He's subscribing to your ideology. Kill or be killed. Can you see that war is a never-ending cycle of violence that doesn't solve anything? Has Bin Laden solved anything with his attacks on the United States? Will we give up and cave in to his demands? Then why would Bin Laden cave in and give up, now that we're attacking Afghanistan?

Of course you should be concerned for your own well-being. Anyone who isn't is a moron. But just because you're concerned for your own well-being doesn't mean you should step on others or deprive others of their rights. If you end up doing that, how can you not expect for others to hate you and retaliate? Self-interest doesn't have to include stepping on others.

Why do you think Israel is surrounded by countries who detest them? They forced themselves onto that land. The took it from the local inhabitants and made it their own. That land that they took already had roads, bridges, buildings, irrigation and infrastructure. It doesn't matter what their Torah says. Yes, they have the right to an independent nation. Yes they should be allowed peace. But, how they took the land was messed up, and that's what the fighting is all about. JEWS were looking out after their own interests only, and stepped on a bunch of people along the way. Now the people that they stepped on are out to get them. Is that what we want for the United States?