Quote:
But this is getting off topic, so we should probably end that discussion here. |
or we could go back to my reply to your last big post, and you could reply to that.
since that was on topic and had nothing to do with robot dictators, i think you should reply to it. |
Quote:
I am aware that we have supported dictators in the past. Why we did, I will honestly say I don't know. Maybe there was something to gain from it. My opinions today, however, would have been the same back then; these dictators, no matter how insignificant or lacking in power they are, are a threat to somebody. The fact that they are a threat to somebody, to me, is a reason any country, not just the US, should intervene, because if they are a threat to, say, their own country, what's to stop them from threatening other countries? Next; I'm getting sick and tired of the whole "war causes suffering" argument. That's like the most obvious thing. Even I can see that. But some suffering is necessary (to some people). For imperialist nations, suffering is just collateral damage. How can an empire hope to expand it's boarders? Negotiating? Sitting on lawn chairs with picket signs while going on a hunger strike saying " surrender your country or we'll starve to death?" That's what war is; necessary force to destroy all opposition. Any regard for human life is a weakness in war, especially in wars based on conquest. And again, as I said, when I said "conquest for the greater good," more than likely that is for the greater good of the country trying to expand it's boarders. Why would that be good, killing "innocent" lives? Resources, land, money, power, and more people to take in and make part of the empire. People die. Get over it. And about Iraq's Al-Queda Connections; we now know they had none. But you can't tell me that there was a remote possibility there could have been connections. I know there weren't, but Saddam could have benefited from having connections like that. I keep saying that Saddam was a potential threat, and I don't think I'm being clear; by "potential," I mean he had the ability, he was in the right position to gain enough power to become a greater threat to other countries, like he was in the Gulf War. He just squandered his power and wasted it on oppressing his own people. He could have gone on like that, leaving his country to stagnate, or he could have gotten smart and start making connections with organizations like Al-Queda, which could help him gain resources and whatever he needed to run a small war. He didn't, obviously. I'm saying he COULD HAVE! |
Man, it takes skill to contradict yourself as much as you do.
You say that dictators are threats, but then you go on and on about how good conquest and imperialism is. Imperialism is good for a very small sector of a nation, and to say that it is an overall good thing is to basically show contempt for human life. This comment is particularly interesting: "I'm sick of this whole war causes suffering thing. It's the most obvious thing" When the 'most obvious thing' about a certain institution (in this case, war) is that it causes immense suffering, to be able to justify it, especially for the 19th century reasons you've given justifying it, is sickening. I think, that in this argument, and, perhaps in all facets of your life, your logic is fundamentally flawed. You have total apathy for human life. "People die, get over it" Yeah, people do die. But not prematurly and in droves and in the most inhumane and painful ways imaginable. You basically present the argument that a police state is 'good' (I'm not sure what you mean by good, obviously not good for the general population) and then go on about how dictators are threats. You must really pratice that contradiction, you've got it down pat. Really there is no point arguing an unjustifiable war in any type of rational way with someone who is so out of touch with reality, and rationality himself. |
Quote:
David Bowie - Saviour Machine President Joe once had a dream The world held his hand, gave their pledge So he told them his scheme for a Saviour Machine They called it the Prayer, its answer was law Its logic stopped war, gave them food How they adored till it cried in its boredom 'Please don't believe in me, please disagree with me Life is too easy, a plague seems quite feasible now or maybe a war, or I may kill you all Don't let me stay, don't let me stay My logic says burn so send me away Your minds are too green, I despise all I've seen You can't stake your lives on a Saviour Machine I need you flying, and I'll show that dying Is living beyond reason, sacred dimension of time I perceive every sign, I can steal every mind Don't let me stay, don't let me stay My logic says burn so send me away Your minds are too green, I despise all I've seen You can't stake your lives on a Saviour Machine |
Quote:
I think conquest is justifiable. Those dictators probably perceive everybody else around them the way I perceive them; a potential threat. And what do they do; they strike first. And that's what I think. If we don't strike first, they will. |
Well I want a robot dictator.
I think you guys are just pessimists. |
Only after we endure the worst do we become stronger.
|
Quote:
Also, I'm pretty sure Bush was told by the CIA that Saddam had no connections with Al Qaeda before he decided to invade Iraq. So that can hardly be used as an excuse. |
That's not why he invaded Iraq.
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:58 AM. |
© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.