Welcome to Gaia! ::

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. I mean, I agree that war is bad. I hate war too. But sometimes it is necessary. I hate death, but if no body ever died, it would be awful hard to live; We'd be packed like sardines, if no one in the history of humanity had ever died.

And sometimes you have to fight for what you believe in, sometimes you have to kill for what you believe in. As paradoxical as it sounds, I do believe that sometimes you have to kill the killers to stop the killing. Because people like Saddam and Hitler would've kept killing for no good reason if we hadn't gone in and taken them out. confused

Getting rid of the problem when there is no other way is one thing.

An all-out war where bombs explode and children cry and women are raped and bodies lay scattered like Christmas ornaments is another.

I still fail to see how killing someone to prevent them from killing someone else is about your morals or about murder. It is in defense of others. Waiting for Roe v. Wade to be overturned to prevent abortion from going on, is like waiting for negotiations with the middle east to bear fruit. Eventually both might happen but a lot of people will be killed in the meantime. If person A kills abortion doctor B, then why is it not defense of the children he/she would have killed?

I am pro-life but I also realize that sometimes some lives need to be taken in order to save many more. If you could have shot Bin Laden to prevent 9-11 would you have? If you could have killed Hitler to prevent the Holocaust would you have? I would love to see someone try and explain to either of them that jews are equal people, I'm sure talking to them would really work.

i don't think Bin Laden didn't cause 9-11 he just admitted that he was glad that it happen but I don't think he was in charge (and I believe their in the wrong country if they are looking for certain people. I believe some knew about the terrorist and the guy that owned the trade center just got insurance just before it happened like he knew. There is more to it then what was said I think).

Sadly, talking to some people might not work but some of the followers might have listened and change their minds.

But killing an abortion doctor would make them just as bad, their not saving themselfs so it isn't self defense and often causes more problems. Now for something like a war and to save many lives and people you might have to bomb some people to stop them from killing more.

bombing to kill terrorists only works in theory. remember, terrorists have lives- they live with family and friends who have nothing to do with anything, who may not even know. they live in cities surrounded by innocent people. when we drop a bomb on a city, it is convenient to believe that we only hit the bad guys. unfortunately, that is not the case. we hit children, women, innocent men. and this only fuels their rage.

I guess it wouldn't really work out then

Sorry that this might be offensive. Touchy issue.
rolleyes No, I must admit no such thing. A US Air Force bomber can put a precision bomb right down a chimney.

And actually my father, uncle, and many friends are in the military. and I know that their families are innocents. I also aready said that the families of the Iraqis are innocents, but it doesn't matter.

You know what the difference is, though? America doesn't kill innocent people purposefully. Those that die are collateral damage, and their deaths are sad and regretable but unavoidable. If we were a nation that did the things Saddam did, and if we had previously invaded other countries with the intent of conquering them, yes, I would understand that in order for them to kill my father I would die. Although, in reality, they would be far more likely to kill my father while he was at work at a base; We have no weapons in our house, we would be no threat to them. This is assuming that the positions were exactly switched, and Iraq was a country that would -care- whether you were armed or not.

Do you think that no civilians died in Germany? Or France, while we were liberating it? You certainly seem to realize that innocents died in Japan. And Hiroshima and Nagasaki were definitely regrettable and wrong, but at the same time I understand the strategy: You know what those nukes did? They saved Japan. Yes, two whole cities full of civilians burned, and that's wrong. We should have chosen military targets. But with those deaths Japan was cowed into surrender, saving millions. Because Japan is a proud nation, and if we hadn't shown our absolute superiority, they would have fought to the last man.

neutral Hitler never laid a finger on us. Japan attacked us. Once. Just once. Then we brought them, and their allies the Germans, to their knees.

See the connection? The simularities?

Terorrists attacked us once. Just once. Now we are hunting them down, and bringing their allies, Afganistan, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, to their knees.

*Sigh* I'm not justifying the war in Iraq by 9/11. 9/11 served as a springboard for the invasion of Iraq, yes, because the country was pissed off at terrorists and was willing to attack a country that is known to harbor terrorists and is also known to hate us. A country known to have previously had chemical weapons and suspected to have the capability and will to create chemical weapons again for the purpose of hurting us. We have a taped conversation of an Iraqi general talking with Saddam about attacking the US, right before we went in.

I acknowledge that we used the mood to press our advantage. There's no way we would have gotten nearly as much approval any other time; You have to strike while the iron is hot. And if we hadn't struck then, Iraq would have gotten WMDs and used them.