|
This feature is taken from E.A.9.11, Group 7.
See the entire discussion: Do we have a right to have this war?.
I want your opinions about whether or not war is right or wrong. First of all, I find it to be wrong. So what -- some guy came over and killed our people. What right do we have to kill the innocent people of Afganistan? Think about it: The OKC bombing didn't start a civil war. How is this really any different?
|
Gray |
11:24am Apr 3, 2002 EST |
|
 |
|
War...I think it's how we show the universe we're stupid.
I sort of agree. I mean, it's somewhat pointless, only in that in 3rd World countries like Afghanistan-- what's there to blow up? Because those countries are so corrupted with their own acts of violence, there's nothing left to destroy; they've destroyed it all themselves. So what's left for the U.S. to hit? Innocent civilians. Does this make us any better than the terrorists? No.
I'm all for catching Bin Laden and those associated with him, but we have to be realistic about it. I doubt he's even in Afghanistan any more, but meanwhile, we continue to fight the people of Afghanistan.
I believe we are being realistic about it - and we are not killing innocent civilians. In order for 9-11 to not repeat we must root out terror and we won't JUST by killing Osama Bin Laden.
Ok, so that means that we should kill the people of Afghanistan? Are they the root of terror? The fact is that USA holds terrorists. I mean jesus we train latino american soldiers to become terrorists at the School Of the Americas. I really don't think we are being realistic about it considering we are handling it the wrong way.
Yes, We are killing innocent civilians. Not on purpose, really.... but they are getting killed. And war... Step back from it a sec. Okay. Now. You have a disagreement when you're a little kid. 5 years old. What does your mom tell you when you hit the other kid? You should talk it out. Now you're... Oh... 11. Someone in your nieghborhood is shot. Its horrible. Everyone says so. Killing dosen't solve problems... right?
Now, you're my age, and I'm seeing people a.) Getting sentenced to death for killing people. or b.) Getting a freakin medal for it. Why? It makes NO sense.
True, the OKC bombing didn't start a civil war. True, a lot of people died. The reason it didn't start a civil war is because this country has already gone through a civil war and we all know how stupid it is.
The similarity between the OKC bombing and 9/11 is that our people-innocent civilians like you and me- were killed for no reason. The difference is that we did nothing to provoke these people..we let them have whatever they wanted. We helped the Arabs get into the country. We taught them how to fly planes. We gave them access to our jobs and schools with them knowing minimal English. Yes, the government was stupid to do it and even now that we have tighter airport security, they are still getting in here on temporary visas and they stay after the visas expire. This is why people here are so paranoid.."oh my god a terrorist could be sitting here next to me." and stuff like that. It is so stupid.
The war in Afganistan is quite a stupid concept..blowing up sand just makes more sand. But what would you rather happen: 1. people dying in Afganistan for no reason, where there is nothing, no nuclear plants, etc...or 2. have the war on your own soil, in a civilized nation where there are nuclear plants in every state (we have at least 2 that I know of) and where there are millions more people to get killed, where if we were taken over we'd all be placed in concentration camps (ever hear of the holcaust?), etc.
The only reason the men get a medal for killing the terrorists is for just that: killing the terrorists. The death penalty is a real thing, war is a real thing, and they are both things that many people, including myself, do not agree with. However nowadays they are both necessary things, even though they aren't practical. They're never gonna make sense.
Haha woah woah woah lets slow down here. First of all if we weren't conducting this propoganda war nobody would take over our country and put us in concentration camps. How would we have the war on our own soil, this I do not get.
We did everything to provoke them!!! Considering we are allies with Israel and back them no matter what land they take over thats not even theirs, or how many people they kill.
If you feel that war is wrong than how can you say it's necessary? Right after 9/11 the US government defied international law, the highest law in the world. They could have easily worked with the UN to capture terrorists. I think the point seselian was trying to make was that we are giving people medals for killing other people. We celebrate when our troops come home after they have killed many innocent civilians.
It seems to me rainydaygirl that on your moral agenda killing is wrong, but you accept it, as it seems a lot of things, cause you feel its the only option. WAR IS NEVER NECESSARY. There are always alternative options, it comes down to the question of if your going to consider those options.
First of all Israel did not run airplanes into the WTC, the Pentagon, or a field in Pennsylvania. Second of all, yes I do see the contradictions in what I said...however this "battle," if you will, with the terrorists has been going on for as long as I can remember. It was only a matter of time before something like this happened and yes, we should have been more prepared.
However, just because we are (or were, I dunno) allies with Israel did not give them the right to knock those towers down and kill all those innocent people. I still find it hard to believe that it happened. The reality is, it did happen and we have to do something to stop it from happening again.
As for fighting on our own soil, there was a brief period of time when we thought it was actually going to happen. A lot of my friends who are on active duty were stationed in all the major cities.
The UN has unsuccessfully tried to capture terrorists time and time again. We celebrate when our troops come home, not because they killed civilians, but because maybe they made a difference. Maybe they killed some major "evil" mastermind, or hell I dunno. So what if I think war is the only option? Sometimes it seems that way. Killing is wrong, but the way I see it, if someone hurts you, you hurt them. Paybacks are a bitch.Oh and one more thing: what alternative options? Some examples would be nice...
|
Gray |
08:33pm Apr 4, 2002 EST |
|
|
|
:::jaws dropped...slowly walks out of topic:::
Beautiful use of language there.
Ideas: I don't know. We have a CIA, and they have spies. Why couldn't we just send in some of themto find and kill Osama Bin Laden. That would have soooooooo much simplier and would not have put innocents at risk.
|
Locke |
10:13am Apr 5, 2002 EST |
|
|
|
Freek403663,
I'm going to give you my reasoning as to "Why couldn't we just send in some of them to find and kill Osama Bin Laden."
You see, the American people want instant gratification. If we sent spies in to capture bin laden and his associates it'd be years before we accomplished anything. By then the American people would be rowdy, wanting action done to right the wrong. So you see, rather then tough it out Bush decided on the quick answer.
...punch and pie
|
