Which Wars Work Best?

[5-0 Kenpo]

Britain did not allow Hong Kong it's independance, the lease was up and we had to give it back to China, Hong Kong belongs to them now.
You may have considered the banking rates a good deal but when the country is bankrupt it wasn't. Do you know how much rebuilding it took just to try to get the country to a barely livable condtion? How many homes, factories, streets, schools, dockyards, railways had to be rebuilt? a bargain? did you know how little food and raw supplies there actually was in the UK? It was a long and horrible war for ALL of the British.The war in Europe had finished but the war in the Far East hadn't, that still had to won.
I take it you have never been to the Middle East? if you think all of it is stuck in the Middle Ages I think you'd be in for a surprise. I don't know if you realise how rascist you sound when you talk about the Iraqis and the Muslims? No I'm not accusing you of being one, just concerned that you may not realise how your words can be read.

Ok, but don't be, as you say, cynical because the U.K. got billions of dollars and only had to pay for less then 1/6th of that amount back. I feel for the struggles of the British people of the time, who were, and still are, our best ally in the world. I haven't got a single problem with them. And don't try to make us feel bad for being proud of our contributions, nor try to minimize the affect that we actually had in that war.

And we shouldn't feel bad about the fact that we honor American soldiers with movies regarding what they did and call them lies. Your country, I'm sure, does the same thing. These movies show the American perspective, that's all. Granted, they are movies, which are usually embellished, but that is on all sides.

And I knew the racist thing would come up. If anything, the Middle East is stuck in a time warp because of their religion, not for being Arab. So if anything, call it a religious bias, but definately not racial.

And by 2nd century, I mean the mentallity of the region, not the actual geography. Sure, skyscrapers may abound, but you tell the women that there isn't a backwards thinking.

And I may sound racist, but that's only because I don't give in to the politically correct sound bites that most people seem to think that I should. I don't mean to be rude, but honest, even if at times brutally so.

 

[elder999]

. Life in Viernam certainly wasn't easy but while there was oppression there weren't massacres. http://countrystudies.us/vietnam/40.htm

Oh and from your source, noted above:

In its quest for a new socialist order in the South, Hanoi relied on other techniques apart from socialist economic transformation and socialist education. These included thought reform, population resettlement, and internal exile, as well as surveillance and mass mobilization. Party-sponsored "study sessions" were obligatory for all adults. For the former elite of the Saigon regime, a more rigorous form of indoctrination was used; hundreds of thousands of former military officers, bureaucrats, politicians, religious and labor leaders, scholars, intellectuals, and lawyers, as well as critics of the new regime were ordered to "reeducation camps" for varying periods. In mid1985 , the Hanoi government conceded that it still held about 10,000 inmates in the reeducation camps, but the actual number was believed to be at least 40,000. In 1982 there were about 120,000 Vietnamese in these camps. According to a knowledgeable American observer, the inmates faced hard labor, but only rarely torture or execution.

From what we know of "reeducation camps," between substandard food and living conditions, combined with hard labor, they themselves not only could constitute a form of torture, but also guaranteed untimely death.

Some Western observers, however, have estimated that as many as 65,000 South Vietnamese may have been executed.

Finally, for a somewhat biased if more orderly perspective on Viet Nam in the years immediately following U.S. withdrawal, I suggest the article here

 

[elder999]

I do think tha Elder999 has an idealist view of American. He seems to be forgetting slavery, the genocide of the Native-Americans, the rasict treatment of many other cultures.

I'm probably the last person on this board who'd forget about those things....

Oh, and Tez3?

Hag orim same'ah!

 

[Tez3]

You quote the military deaths not the civilians? I'm not trying to make anyone feel bad about the American contribution to the war effort in the Second World War but if I had never met any Americans which luckiily I have, I would be rather more sympathic to the Middle Eastern point of view after reading your posts. If you idea of being a higher civilisation is being to buy a Snickers bar I'm rather sad. As for defending yourself in the UK very few of us have a problem. I actually live in an area that hasn't has a violent death for years. I don't want to turn this into an argument over whose country is better your's or ours. We may not think living in places that don't have our modern amenities is proper but we don't have the right to force our beliefs and way of living on anyone. Human rights in the Middle East is horrendous but can you put your hand up and say your house is perfect, that there are no human rights abuses in the US? I can't say that about my country, only thankfully there are still people willing to address the problems.
Thinking about it the Snickers bar remark has made me think that trying to debate this issue is rather pointless as you are so entrenched in your ideas and can't see pass the statistics to see the suffering of the people. Perhaps I'm getting too old and seen too much of it. Every death in Iraq and Afghanistan is a loss. I can be proud of the sacrifices made by people to give us freedom in the Second World War but this war leaves me shamed and heartsick.

 

[Kensai]

Info on Japan? From British Foreign Office briefings, Humint. I will try and find a link for you but the nationalist movement is growing.
The Iraqis do not want us there full stop.I like the idea that the US/UK forces are there only because the UN said to! Mmmm I wonder who could have pushed the UN into that one then, a couple of countries with the veto in the Security Council?
The supplies America sold us did enable us to survive but we were paying back America for many years afterwards, thats why rationing went on long into the fifties.Russia too bought their supplies. These weren't donations so a cynical person could say America did well out of our war but of course I couldn't possibly comment.
Why not get upset when lies are told in films, when people have died for their country and that is turned into a mockery?
I never said governments were the same for thousands of years I said we'd survived for that long through all sorts of mayhem and havoc.


Kensai, I loved your abbreviation of The War Against Terror!

That's what it was referred to in the RN during Op Telic.

Veto's from permanent security members, i.e P5? Well informed mate.

I too have heard about Japan's increasing dissatisfaction with their special relationship. My source was the BBC news website.

 

[Kensai]

To Kenpo 5-0 and elder999.


I don't have a problem with feelings. I don't have a problem being considerate towards others in an increasingly global community. It's that lack of "feeling", or perhaps understanding of other cultures that has caused this conflict with Islam at large. Funding various mujahadeen groups throughout the 80's in Afghanistan, to fight the Red Army, and then embroiling yourself in the 1st Gulf war at the start of the 90's has to some extent led to this point in time and set of circumstances. Complex sets of events don't just happen for no reason. 1000 million people didn't just wake up one morning and decide that the time was up for the US, that for no reason whatsover, a group of Muslims would fly aircraft into the side of buildings, other than the pretext that they were American. As for the Chinese considering themselves at war with the West, what are your scources for this? If that's bad, it doesn't strike me as bad as America seemingly being at war with the world. Then-again, when you spend $500 billion dollars a year on defence, you HAVE to have someone to fight. All you need to do then, is find an enemy, convince the public that it needs fighting, and you're away. Jobs 'a' good-un. Only perhaps the next time the US feels the need to invade somewhere for the good of that country, perhaps you could do it alone? As mentioned, I served in the 2nd Gulf, was shot at many times, had mates killed, flew helo missions into southern Iraq, served in ALL theatres, air, land and sea, and I am truly saddened by this whole situation. All needless, all pointless and all for American big business and George Dubya Bush.

The point about US culture, was merely to point out that no-body besides Americans wants it. The American Dream (c)? Enforced democracy? If that's your concept of the land of the free, then please, feel free to keep it.

How would I propose to educate a people that live in the 2nd century, and who want to kill you if you don't want to follow their religion? How do you propose to "win" a war fighting them? Would you advocate a "kill 'em all" policy? Would you propose the killing of a 6th of the worlds populace? What then? The Chinese? Finish of the Russians perhaps? Then there's those pesky North Koreans, or what really is going on with those Europeans? Never trusted them anyway! Forgive the pedanticity there, but the slow but steady impression I'm gaining here, is almost of that view. All this talk in US politics over the last few days of "are we winning the war"? WHAT'S there to win? Freedom? Where? From whom? Saddam Hussein? Great, he's no longer here, but what we've replaced it with is total, and utter sectarian violence that makes Northen Ireland look like the pre-match entertainment. Are we winning for Democracy? Are we winning, or forcing democracy on a state that couldn't point to a democratic parliament, much less want one, because it suits "us"?

Clearly there's little further we can all say to each other, as our views are apparently polarised. I used to believe in this. I really did. I believed that might is right, that Islam was a threat that HAD to be neutralised to preserve "our" way of life. Then I went to Iraq, or Eye-rak, and had an epiphone. Believe away that this is right, that there are right wars and wrong wars to fight, perhaps there are? Perhaps there aren't. I've given it much thought, just do me one favour, a little one, just once, only once, ask yourself if this is the right thing to be doing, if you trust Dubya with everything that is dear to you. If, perhaps, there may be another course of action, just give it deep, sincere thought. If it is, then so be it, fair enough, if however you are just 1% hesitant, then it's a whole 'nother game.

Again, respectfully,

Kensai.

 

[elder999]

You quote the military deaths not the civilians?

Again with Korea you forget how many British soldiers fought and died there

So, I’ll point out that you’re the one who made it about American contributions, vs. the rest of the world, or the British, at least, and also the one who turned it into an argument about one country vs. the other. I was trying to make a point about warfare and its conduct, one you seem to have missed in zeroing in on what you see as some sort of distinctly American prejudice on my part.

I'm not trying to make anyone feel bad about the American contribution to the war effort in the Second World War but if I had never met any Americans which luckiily I have, I would be rather more sympathic to the Middle Eastern point of view after reading your posts. If you idea of being a higher civilisation is being to buy a Snickers bar I'm rather sad. As for defending yourself in the UK very few of us have a problem. I actually live in an area that hasn't has a violent death for years. I don't want to turn this into an argument over whose country is better your's or ours. We may not think living in places that don't have our modern amenities is proper but we don't have the right to force our beliefs and way of living on anyone. Human rights in the Middle East is horrendous but can you put your hand up and say your house is perfect, that there are no human rights abuses in the US? I can't say that about my country, only thankfully there are still people willing to address the problems.
Thinking about it the Snickers bar remark has made me think that trying to debate this issue is rather pointless as you are so entrenched in your ideas and can't see pass the statistics to see the suffering of the people. Perhaps I'm getting too old and seen too much of it. Every death in Iraq and Afghanistan is a loss. I can be proud of the sacrifices made by people to give us freedom in the Second World War but this war leaves me shamed and heartsick.

Chalk it up to my quirky sense of humor, or some across the pond gulf in communication, but the Snickers bar comment was a tongue in cheek remark based upon actual experience, though I wasn’t the one jonesing for a Snickers where there were none to be had…and, while I’ll stand by my statements about capitalism-with one notable exception among many that I will get to in a bit-in no way did I mean that we should force-feed democracy, American style or otherwise, on the world. Indeed, that tactic has proven to be our principle failure in Iraq. If American history teaches us anything, it is that democracy must rise from the people; it is not something to be imposed. The only way it was imposed in Germany and Japan was, because as you rightly pointed out, those countries did have a democratic tradition to fall back upon, and, they had been virtually defeated to the point where they simply had no resources, no infrastructure, and were dependent upon their conquerors to attain them. Their success, however, is indicative, again, of the inherent virtues (as well as many of the ills) of capitalism.
While the “Coalition’s” conquest of Bagdhad, and defeat of the Iraqi army was a military victory, the aftermath has been a complete disaster, and, in the years to come, I believe that many analysts will point to a failure to follow the Powell doctrine. Of course, the U.S. administration wasn’t at all interested in completely disabling the Iraqi infrastructure as much as they were interested in restoring it, for reasons pragmatic and nefarious-the reasons why we invaded that nation in the first place, and ones that again fall back to the question of what we’re doing there in the first place, and whether this would have been a better war-as I’ve posited-not being fought.

Prior to 9/11, the words we constantly heard from the administration in reference to Iraq, in the persons of Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell, were containment, contained, and not a threat. In this context, analysts will (are already, in fact) framing a variety of non-war strategies that would have achieved the administration’s Middle East objectives-at least, in Iraq-without the loss of life, both military and civilian.

I should add, that while I do not and have never (or almost never) supported the invasion of Iraq (Afghanistan is another, somewhat nuanced and ugly matter) I continue to be proud of our troops, who sacrifice their lives to, as they swear defend the Constitution, against all enemies foreign and domestic. I believe they are being sadly used.

As far as the suffering of the people, again, you are missing the entire point of my post, that the best wars are the ones we do not fight, and thus, suffering is reduced.. Iraq is a perfect example of this. Saudi Arabia is another-though it is the one notable exception I mentioned, as it has a capitalist economy, and it’s most troubling elements are products not of the disenfranchised and poor, but of the middle and upper class. Saudi Arabia and Egypt-all that speculation about Syria and Iran notwithstanding-are going to prove to be really problematic for the so-called Western World (yes, that means you in Europe, Tez) in the future.

As far as the whole war aginst Islam thing goes, I’ve posted elsewhere that not only is this not possible, and morally indefensible, but that it’s not Islam that’s at war with us, but a corruption of that faith-a heresy, in fact, coupled with a long list of greivances, some legitimate and some contrived. I have nothing but love and respect for Islam itself, and have knelt and prayed with Muslims from around the world many times, especially Sufis. (Please see this post)

I’ll also add that I’m probably one of the biggest, most consistent bashers of my country’s administration on the Internet, as well as a critic of much of what passes for culture here-it wasn’t my intention to promote either my country’s current policies or culture as cure-alls for the world’s ills.

Only capitalism.....isn't that enough of an argument in and of itself??

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

You quote the military deaths not the civilians? I'm not trying to make anyone feel bad about the American contribution to the war effort in the Second World War but if I had never met any Americans which luckiily I have, I would be rather more sympathic to the Middle Eastern point of view after reading your posts. If you idea of being a higher civilisation is being to buy a Snickers bar I'm rather sad. As for defending yourself in the UK very few of us have a problem. I actually live in an area that hasn't has a violent death for years. I don't want to turn this into an argument over whose country is better your's or ours. We may not think living in places that don't have our modern amenities is proper but we don't have the right to force our beliefs and way of living on anyone. Human rights in the Middle East is horrendous but can you put your hand up and say your house is perfect, that there are no human rights abuses in the US? I can't say that about my country, only thankfully there are still people willing to address the problems.
Thinking about it the Snickers bar remark has made me think that trying to debate this issue is rather pointless as you are so entrenched in your ideas and can't see pass the statistics to see the suffering of the people. Perhaps I'm getting too old and seen too much of it. Every death in Iraq and Afghanistan is a loss. I can be proud of the sacrifices made by people to give us freedom in the Second World War but this war leaves me shamed and heartsick.

It seems as if your combining the worst (in your opinion) of two different individuals ideas, and then addressing them at the same time. I honestly don't know how rebut such statements, because I can't talk for someone else.

I don't care whether they have indoor plumbing, or have to go outside to use a porta-potty. As long as they don't try to do me harm, which is what they are doing.

Why is it that you believe that just because someone sees this, or any other war as just, that all they look at is statistics when they are cited. Although not the be all and end all of an argument, they do show pertinent facts supporting ones argument, or defeating anothers. And just because I haven't "seen" the suffering that is occuring in Iraq, does not mean that I have not seen suffering at all, and can be sympathetic to anothers plight.

I would tell you this, based on all of your statements: American should go back to being an isolationist country. We never should have become involved (even to the point of giving supplies) in WWII because it was not our fight. It was a European battle. You should all be speaking German. But no, we did help, as much as we could at various times of the war.
And what sacrifices in WWII should we be proud of, other then the defeat of Japan, who attacked us. Remember, it was a European war. Not to mention WWI.

This way, regarding the current state of relations regarding Muslims, they could take over in France (as the riots of 2005 showed, and their growing population there). Or the Muslim protest regarding cartoon depictions of Mohammed, which caused further protests and riots. Hey, not our problem.

Perhaps the U.S. does look at itself as the big brother to the "righteous" nations of the world. Uh.... sorry..???

And for some perspective as to the radical, extreme wing of Islam, have a look at these ordinary people (especially look at what the signs say):

http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/muslimprotest.asp

It's not about trying your house being perfect, but if the dishes are dirty, clean them up.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

I don't have a problem with feelings. I don't have a problem being considerate towards others in an increasingly global community. It's that lack of "feeling", or perhaps understanding of other cultures that has caused this conflict with Islam at large. Funding various mujahadeen groups throughout the 80's in Afghanistan, to fight the Red Army, and then embroiling yourself in the 1st Gulf war at the start of the 90's has to some extent led to this point in time and set of circumstances. Complex sets of events don't just happen for no reason. 1000 million people didn't just wake up one morning and decide that the time was up for the US, that for no reason whatsover, a group of Muslims would fly aircraft into the side of buildings, other than the pretext that they were American.

Yes, how evil of us to have assisted the Muslims of Afghanistan in their struggle against an invading Soviet Army. How can we not understand why they hate us.

And the first Iraq war. What audacity to think that we should defend Muslims from, oh, wait, other Muslims. What were we thinking?


And then to defend Muslims in Kosovo too. What is our problem?​

As for the Chinese considering themselves at war with the West, what are your scources for this?

Two Chinese colonels, Colonels Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, in their book, Unrestricted Warfare:

"From this point on, war will no longer be what it was originally," the colonels write, but will be unrecognizable as it is waged in the heart of American society. "Does a single hacker attack count as a hostile act or not? Can using financial instruments to destroy a country's economy be seen as a battle..?"

"If the attacking side secretly musters large amounts of capital without the enemy nation being aware of this at all and launches a sneak attack against its financial markets," they write, "then after causing a financial crisis, buries a computer virus and hacker detachment in the opponent's computer system in advance, while at the same time carrying out a network attack against the enemy so that the civilian electricity network, traffic-dispatching network, financial-transaction network, telephone-communications network and mass-media network are completely paralyzed, this will cause the enemy nation to fall into social panic, street riots and a political crisis."


and:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071505A.shtml


and:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/28cfe55a-f4a7-11d9-9dd1-00000e2511c8.html


Put two and two together and you get top Chinese officials who want war with the United States, and are willing to try "unconventional" means to do it.​

If that's bad, it doesn't strike me as bad as America seemingly being at war with the world. Then-again, when you spend $500 billion dollars a year on defence, you HAVE to have someone to fight.

No, you don't need to fight anyone when you spend that much on your military. That's just needless rhetoric.

While the overall U.S. military budget has risen over time, as a percentage of its GDP, the United states spends 4% on military. This compares higher than France's 2.6%, and lower than Saudi Arabia's 10%. This is historically fairly low for the United States. While the spending budget has been slowly rising, the spending rate has been in a slow decline since peaking in 1944 at 37.8% of GDP. Even during the peak of the Vietnam War the percentage reached a high of 9.4% in 1968.

(source: wikipedia)

So although we spend more than absolute dollars, we do not necessarily spend more in relations to GDP in comparison of other countries. And considering what we both in and for the world with our military, is it any wonder that we spend so much?

​

All you need to do then, is find an enemy, convince the public that it needs fighting, and you're away. Jobs 'a' good-un. Only perhaps the next time the US feels the need to invade somewhere for the good of that country, perhaps you could do it alone? As mentioned, I served in the 2nd Gulf, was shot at many times, had mates killed, flew helo missions into southern Iraq, served in ALL theatres, air, land and sea, and I am truly saddened by this whole situation. All needless, all pointless and all for American big business and George Dubya Bush.

Again, needless rhetoric.

The point about US culture, was merely to point out that no-body besides Americans wants it. The American Dream (c)? Enforced democracy? If that's your concept of the land of the free, then please, feel free to keep it.

I hate to be sarcastic, but, you must be joking. We have more people immigrating to the U.S. (both legal and illegal) than any other country in the world. If they don't want the American dream, then why are they coming here? And what do you think the pro-illegal alien crowd is saying: they simply want a better life then they can have in their own country.


Are you kidding me.
​

How would I propose to educate a people that live in the 2nd century, and who want to kill you if you don't want to follow their religion? How do you propose to "win" a war fighting them? Would you advocate a "kill 'em all" policy? Would you propose the killing of a 6th of the worlds populace? What then? The Chinese? Finish of the Russians perhaps? Then there's those pesky North Koreans, or what really is going on with those Europeans? Never trusted them anyway! Forgive the pedanticity there, but the slow but steady impression I'm gaining here, is almost of that view. All this talk in US politics over the last few days of "are we winning the war"? WHAT'S there to win? Freedom? Where? From whom? Saddam Hussein? Great, he's no longer here, but what we've replaced it with is total, and utter sectarian violence that makes Northen Ireland look like the pre-match entertainment. Are we winning for Democracy? Are we winning, or forcing democracy on a state that couldn't point to a democratic parliament, much less want one, because it suits "us"?

You have agreed that education is the key to solving the problem, but you have yet to answer my question.

Clearly there's little further we can all say to each other, as our views are apparently polarised. I used to believe in this. I really did. I believed that might is right, that Islam was a threat that HAD to be neutralised to preserve "our" way of life. Then I went to Iraq, or Eye-rak, and had an epiphone. Believe away that this is right, that there are right wars and wrong wars to fight, perhaps there are? Perhaps there aren't. I've given it much thought, just do me one favour, a little one, just once, only once, ask yourself if this is the right thing to be doing, if you trust Dubya with everything that is dear to you. If, perhaps, there may be another course of action, just give it deep, sincere thought. If it is, then so be it, fair enough, if however you are just 1% hesitant, then it's a whole 'nother game.

If you believed that might made right, then I'm glad you've changed your ways. But just because I believe that going into Iraq was the right thing for my country to do, doesn't mean I believe that.

And I only trust my wife and my parents with "everything that is dear to me." Just because I agree with him that going to Iraq was the right course of action, does not mean that I believe he will do everything that I think is right. More pointless rhetoric on your part.

And I have considered that I may be wrong, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't have gone. Any introspective, thoughtful person will analyze his thought and beliefs (and courses of action) on a daily basis. Even if there was a possibility of another way, I have to way it against many considerations. I shouldn't say the war is wrong simply because I have a 1% chance of doubt. If that were the case, no one would get anything accomplished.​

 

[Kensai]

Yes, how evil of us to have assisted the Muslims of Afghanistan in their struggle against an invading Soviet Army. How can we not understand why they hate us.

And the first Iraq war. What audacity to think that we should defend Muslims from, oh, wait, other Muslims. What were we thinking?


And then to defend Muslims in Kosovo too. What is our problem?​

Two Chinese colonels, Colonels Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, in their book, Unrestricted Warfare:

"From this point on, war will no longer be what it was originally," the colonels write, but will be unrecognizable as it is waged in the heart of American society. "Does a single hacker attack count as a hostile act or not? Can using financial instruments to destroy a country's economy be seen as a battle..?"

"If the attacking side secretly musters large amounts of capital without the enemy nation being aware of this at all and launches a sneak attack against its financial markets," they write, "then after causing a financial crisis, buries a computer virus and hacker detachment in the opponent's computer system in advance, while at the same time carrying out a network attack against the enemy so that the civilian electricity network, traffic-dispatching network, financial-transaction network, telephone-communications network and mass-media network are completely paralyzed, this will cause the enemy nation to fall into social panic, street riots and a political crisis."


and:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/071505A.shtml


and:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/28cfe55a-f4a7-11d9-9dd1-00000e2511c8.html


Put two and two together and you get top Chinese officials who want war with the United States, and are willing to try "unconventional" means to do it.​

No, you don't need to fight anyone when you spend that much on your military. That's just needless rhetoric.

While the overall U.S. military budget has risen over time, as a percentage of its GDP, the United states spends 4% on military. This compares higher than France's 2.6%, and lower than Saudi Arabia's 10%. This is historically fairly low for the United States. While the spending budget has been slowly rising, the spending rate has been in a slow decline since peaking in 1944 at 37.8% of GDP. Even during the peak of the Vietnam War the percentage reached a high of 9.4% in 1968.

(source: wikipedia)

So although we spend more than absolute dollars, we do not necessarily spend more in relations to GDP in comparison of other countries. And considering what we both in and for the world with our military, is it any wonder that we spend so much?

​

Again, needless rhetoric.

I hate to be sarcastic, but, you must be joking. We have more people immigrating to the U.S. (both legal and illegal) than any other country in the world. If they don't want the American dream, then why are they coming here? And what do you think the pro-illegal alien crowd is saying: they simply want a better life then they can have in their own country.


Are you kidding me.
​

You have agreed that education is the key to solving the problem, but you have yet to answer my question.



If you believed that might made right, then I'm glad you've changed your ways. But just because I believe that going into Iraq was the right thing for my country to do, doesn't mean I believe that.

And I only trust my wife and my parents with "everything that is dear to me." Just because I agree with him that going to Iraq was the right course of action, does not mean that I believe he will do everything that I think is right. More pointless rhetoric on your part.

And I have considered that I may be wrong, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't have gone. Any introspective, thoughtful person will analyze his thought and beliefs (and courses of action) on a daily basis. Even if there was a possibility of another way, I have to way it against many considerations. I shouldn't say the war is wrong simply because I have a 1% chance of doubt. If that were the case, no one would get anything accomplished.​

What a patronising, sarcastic, pleasant little post. If I've made posts containing "pointless rhetoric" then you have been pedantic, and unwilling to consider others POV's. You reap what you sow, and you get what you deserve. You wouldn't be willing to listen to ideas anyhow. See ya.

 

[Jade Tigress]

Mod Note

Please keep the conversation polite and respectful.

Pamela Piszczek
MT Sr. Moderator

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

What a patronising, sarcastic, pleasant little post. If I've made posts containing "pointless rhetoric" then you have been pedantic, and unwilling to consider others POV's. You reap what you sow, and you get what you deserve. You wouldn't be willing to listen to ideas anyhow. See ya.

I have considered your point of view, and rejected it. Just as you are free to do to mine.

But just curious, what exactly in your argument was supposed to convince me or your viewpoint? Your passion over the issue, because you certainly haven't given me any facts to support your position. I'm not overly formal when it come to arguments, or else I might say something like the following:

What you are engaging in is called an ad hominim argument: replying to an argument or assertion by attacking the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself. It is a logical fallacy.

And it's funny that you call me pedantic, yet ask for the sources of my information the one time I don't give it. Ironic.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

5-0 Kenpo, I agree Britain was months away from defeat, but then we'd been fighting Germany and Japan for over 2 years before the US graced us with her presence.

BTW, how did that go for ya?

 

[Tez3]

BTW, how did that go for ya?

What does that mean?

 

[Kensai]

BTW, how did that go for ya?

Tez3, it isn't even worth arguing with idiots, they always drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience.

 

[Jade Tigress]

Mod Note

ATTENTION ALL USERS

Please return to the original topic.

Pamela Piszczek
MT Sr. Moderator

 

[Tez3]

What disturbs me is the use of statistics to bolster an argument. Statistics are not the precise science that people would like to believe they are, nearly every set of statistics comes with an agenda.In short they prove nothing. There are also a great many "facts" too that are not facts. How many people believe Humphrey Bogart said "play it again Sam"? If you watch the film he actually says "Play it Sam, you played it for her you can play it for me". Yet it's the first that has passed into common belief.
The problems in the Middle East situation including Israel started a long time ago, just after the first World War when it was divided by the Allies into , for them, convenient countries. This caused wars between them that have carried on to this day. Anti western feeling has always been there. I work with an ex-Para who fought in Aden in the 60's, my husband was injured fighting in Doha in the 70s (google SAS). The Americans killed in Lebanon haven't been mentioned, is that a war fought or a war not fought?
Perhaps the Afghans hate the fact that you weren't helping them because you believed in their freedom but because they were fighting your enemy? The first Iraq again wasn't about defending other Muslims, it was about OIL. it's self deluded of us to believe anything else.
On the internet these days you can find 'facts' and figures to support every viewpoint you may have in the same way sadly they say you can find every sexual perversion you can think of and a great many you can't. For every factual report on there, there will be another contradicting it, to argue using these sources is pointless, as is relying on these reports to invade a country because the internet says it has WMD is also pointless unless the information proves a point that you want it to.
I know what I think as I wave off another coach load of young soldiers on their way to RAF Brize Norton to fly off to Iraq and I know what I think when the same aircraft fly back into Brize with their coffins.No amount of American rhetoric about American being the best country in the world, the best democracy, the best for everyone comforts the bereaved.
I have met many Americans, thank god, who don't push this missionary line. In this world we are more alike than unlike. We worry about having enough money to pay the bills, if single we worry about finding the right partner, if married with children we worry about our children, their futures, will they be happy, will they get on in life etc etc. people all over the world worry about the same things. We should be talking about the things we have in common not the things that push us apart. being proud of being an American is good, you should be, it's not a perfect country, who's is, but please understand we also have the right to be proud of our countries and for the most part most of us like our way of life. personally I wouldn't want to be a woman in a Muslim country but we can support their struggle for freedom without patronising them, asking them what they would like us to do not wade in and say "hey our way of life is best, it's our way or nothing" that's as bad as the tryanny they are trying to escape from.
Don't quote me figures, for example of the deaths in the Second World War because for every number in that figure you quote I can show you a family who lost at least one member who was lost in that war. I can take you round the graveyards in Europe showing you where the soldiers are buried, they aren't figures, these are people. I can't discuss the numbers dispassionately, my mother was the only survivor of her family from the concentration camps. So america sent us money, that was gratefully recieved but you have no idea what it was like to have to rebuild your life after losing everything in the Blitz. You comdemn the Muslims in the Middle East but you have no idea what their lives are like, you just berate them for not wanting the American way of life. Compassion and empathy would stop more mores starting, that and smaller egos.

 

[Kensai]

What disturbs me is the use of statistics to bolster an argument. Statistics are not the precise science that people would like to believe they are, nearly every set of statistics comes with an agenda.In short they prove nothing. There are also a great many "facts" too that are not facts. How many people believe Humphrey Bogart said "play it again Sam"? If you watch the film he actually says "Play it Sam, you played it for her you can play it for me". Yet it's the first that has passed into common belief.
The problems in the Middle East situation including Israel started a long time ago, just after the first World War when it was divided by the Allies into , for them, convenient countries. This caused wars between them that have carried on to this day. Anti western feeling has always been there. I work with an ex-Para who fought in Aden in the 60's, my husband was injured fighting in Doha in the 70s (google SAS). The Americans killed in Lebanon haven't been mentioned, is that a war fought or a war not fought?
Perhaps the Afghans hate the fact that you weren't helping them because you believed in their freedom but because they were fighting your enemy? The first Iraq again wasn't about defending other Muslims, it was about OIL. it's self deluded of us to believe anything else.
On the internet these days you can find 'facts' and figures to support every viewpoint you may have in the same way sadly they say you can find every sexual perversion you can think of and a great many you can't. For every factual report on there, there will be another contradicting it, to argue using these sources is pointless, as is relying on these reports to invade a country because the internet says it has WMD is also pointless unless the information proves a point that you want it to.
I know what I think as I wave off another coach load of young soldiers on their way to RAF Brize Norton to fly off to Iraq and I know what I think when the same aircraft fly back into Brize with their coffins.No amount of American rhetoric about American being the best country in the world, the best democracy, the best for everyone comforts the bereaved.
I have met many Americans, thank god, who don't push this missionary line. In this world we are more alike than unlike. We worry about having enough money to pay the bills, if single we worry about finding the right partner, if married with children we worry about our children, their futures, will they be happy, will they get on in life etc etc. people all over the world worry about the same things. We should be talking about the things we have in common not the things that push us apart. being proud of being an American is good, you should be, it's not a perfect country, who's is, but please understand we also have the right to be proud of our countries and for the most part most of us like our way of life. personally I wouldn't want to be a woman in a Muslim country but we can support their struggle for freedom without patronising them, asking them what they would like us to do not wade in and say "hey our way of life is best, it's our way or nothing" that's as bad as the tryanny they are trying to escape from.
Don't quote me figures, for example of the deaths in the Second World War because for every number in that figure you quote I can show you a family who lost at least one member who was lost in that war. I can take you round the graveyards in Europe showing you where the soldiers are buried, they aren't figures, these are people. I can't discuss the numbers dispassionately, my mother was the only survivor of her family from the concentration camps. So america sent us money, that was gratefully recieved but you have no idea what it was like to have to rebuild your life after losing everything in the Blitz. You comdemn the Muslims in the Middle East but you have no idea what their lives are like, you just berate them for not wanting the American way of life. Compassion and empathy would stop more mores starting, that and smaller egos.

I can add nothing further to that. *claps at screen.*

 

[Tez3]

Thanks, Kensai!

War should never be discussed dispassionately, it should raise the emotions, make you angry and it should never be accepted. It may be necessary but never should it be accepted. It's not an academic study for non soldiers. If a war is inevitable it should be carried out like a surgical procedure, done as fast and as precisely as possible with the least damage to all possible. War isn't honourable, it isn't fun, it's not glorious it's hell on earth. It should never be reduced to bland figures, collateral damage, acceptable casualties. Use the words that descibe war properly... death, rape, destruction. Rage against wars, talk till you your voice goes then start writing if there's a chance it can stop a war. Swallow national pride and ego if it prevents a war. You don't have to bow down to tyrants but you don't have to become that tryant. Stand up for what is right but do it humbly not as a rabble rouser. On this forum of all places as martial artists we should understand violence, humility and doing the right thing perhaps more than anyone.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

What disturbs me is the use of statistics to bolster an argument. Statistics are not the precise science that people would like to believe they are, nearly every set of statistics comes with an agenda.In short they prove nothing. There are also a great many "facts" too that are not facts. How many people believe Humphrey Bogart said "play it again Sam"? If you watch the film he actually says "Play it Sam, you played it for her you can play it for me". Yet it's the first that has passed into common belief.
The problems in the Middle East situation including Israel started a long time ago, just after the first World War when it was divided by the Allies into , for them, convenient countries. This caused wars between them that have carried on to this day. Anti western feeling has always been there. I work with an ex-Para who fought in Aden in the 60's, my husband was injured fighting in Doha in the 70s (google SAS). The Americans killed in Lebanon haven't been mentioned, is that a war fought or a war not fought?
Perhaps the Afghans hate the fact that you weren't helping them because you believed in their freedom but because they were fighting your enemy? The first Iraq again wasn't about defending other Muslims, it was about OIL. it's self deluded of us to believe anything else.
On the internet these days you can find 'facts' and figures to support every viewpoint you may have in the same way sadly they say you can find every sexual perversion you can think of and a great many you can't. For every factual report on there, there will be another contradicting it, to argue using these sources is pointless, as is relying on these reports to invade a country because the internet says it has WMD is also pointless unless the information proves a point that you want it to.
I know what I think as I wave off another coach load of young soldiers on their way to RAF Brize Norton to fly off to Iraq and I know what I think when the same aircraft fly back into Brize with their coffins.No amount of American rhetoric about American being the best country in the world, the best democracy, the best for everyone comforts the bereaved.
I have met many Americans, thank god, who don't push this missionary line. In this world we are more alike than unlike. We worry about having enough money to pay the bills, if single we worry about finding the right partner, if married with children we worry about our children, their futures, will they be happy, will they get on in life etc etc. people all over the world worry about the same things. We should be talking about the things we have in common not the things that push us apart. being proud of being an American is good, you should be, it's not a perfect country, who's is, but please understand we also have the right to be proud of our countries and for the most part most of us like our way of life. personally I wouldn't want to be a woman in a Muslim country but we can support their struggle for freedom without patronising them, asking them what they would like us to do not wade in and say "hey our way of life is best, it's our way or nothing" that's as bad as the tryanny they are trying to escape from.
Don't quote me figures, for example of the deaths in the Second World War because for every number in that figure you quote I can show you a family who lost at least one member who was lost in that war. I can take you round the graveyards in Europe showing you where the soldiers are buried, they aren't figures, these are people. I can't discuss the numbers dispassionately, my mother was the only survivor of her family from the concentration camps. So america sent us money, that was gratefully recieved but you have no idea what it was like to have to rebuild your life after losing everything in the Blitz. You comdemn the Muslims in the Middle East but you have no idea what their lives are like, you just berate them for not wanting the American way of life. Compassion and empathy would stop more mores starting, that and smaller egos.

If we don't use statistics or other facts, then what can we use as the basis for making decisions, especially those relating to going to war? It is understandable to want to avoid the death and destruction that go along with war, but even as you say, in your next post, that a war may be inevitable. Upon what basis do you then make that decision? That is my hard part in understanding where you are coming from.

And not everyone here gets there facts from the internet. I, for one, point to facts on the internet because it would be hard for them to try to verify, "well, one of my supervisors is on the FBI's Joint Terroism Task Force and he stated....."

Yes, perhaps for every fact you can find another that purports to contradict that fact. But we cannot stagnate ourselves into indecision because we cannot have 100% reliabilty for information that we have. Otherwise nothing will get done.

And I know people, too, who have had loved ones killed in WWII. Both of my grandparent fought (and one injured in the battle of Iwo Jima) during that war. I tear up everytime I hear a person talking who has had someone lost in Iraq. I know people who've fought in Iraq and Somolia. Please don't claim some special insight into the toll that wars and combat take on families and friends of the deceased and injured. But that doesn't mean that those sacrafices weren't worthy or honorable.

It is my opinion that sometimes, the greater good can come from war (and "violence") then by any other means. You tell me another way to have stopped Hitler. I hate to see children spanked for running acroos the street without regard for traffic, but I know its for their own well being.

And you tell me how you know that the first Iraq War was about oil. Why is it that you have this insight that not everyone shares? I personally think its arrogant to speak of others as self-deluded when they don't agree with your particular viewpoint on this issue.

As a side note, I did, though indirectly, speak about the Lebanese, when I stated that terroists have been attacking the U.S. since the 1970's (Marine Barracks bombing in Lebanon. And it was a war that was fought.

Again, I want to make the point, as to some it may remain unclear. I feel saddened at every loss in this, and any other war. But sometimes these sacrifices are for the greater good, not only of an individual country, but perhaps the world as well. And if we could do away with war and fighting, I would be more than happy. Unfortunately, man has not evolved to that point yet, which is yet another reason why we all do martial arts.