![War has started... [n/t]](/img/uisvg/forum-heading/general.svg){kind=icon}
Originally posted by royalchickenOK, I obviously touched a raw nerve for some and there was no intention to offend or be stupid. However, I sometimes make a post for the effect of raising the "other side." Sometimes I do it with sarcasm, as may have been experienced in the post. Sometimes I do it with humor. Sometimes a little of both. There have been a few times when I have been blunt. The point I missed making due to my deciding to be short and somewhat sarcastic was not that the Iraqis were responsible for 9/11. Just that there are innocents on both sides of these conflicts. Sometimes I read the posts and I really feel like the minority opinion, which is OK because I am the minority opinion. But I, like everyone else, can post. And posting invites others to respond and sometimes criticize. But for the most part I enjoy the exchanges even when we don't agree. So I'll leave it at that. Kirk
It depresses me that someone of your obvious intelligence and level-headedness can say things like that. If the Iraqi government had any hand in the tragic events of 11 September 2001, I'm sure retaliatory action would have been taken sooner, and rightfully so. However, the fact that the current aggressive actions of the US were apparently planned as ...[text shortened]... on for past events. Even if there WERE a connection, does that justify revenge of that nature?
It truly boggles me how anyone can feel justified in this war. I respect everyones opinion, but I fall utterly short of understanding it. On that ill fated September day, many innocent US citizens died needlesy. By all means, this is a great tragedy. The greatest shame of it though as I see it is not the innocent people who died that day, but rather how many more innocent people shall die because of it.
Speaking from my own heart, I truly hope that if I ever die by anothers hand that it shall mean something. I hope that if I should ever befall such needless violence, that by my death others might live. It is my opinion that we dishounor those who fell that day. I would honour them by striving to preserve life, above all that of the common man.
I am but a man. For while I cannot change my country from this course of action I am shamed for it. How many innocents must die, because of the innocents that have died, so that other innocents shall not fear of dying? I tell you all truly, this is madness! Madness in its wickedest form! At this moment, all I can really think of is how I wish I could take the place of just one child in Iraq.
I'm sorry everyone, for my sorrow is beyond my ability to articulate. Perhaps later I can comment in a more structured manner. God be with us all. :'(
Sorry, I didn't mean any offense. I realize that the first part of my comment was somewhat out of line, and I agree with your defense of innocents on both sides. Having spent this morning arguing with a pack of jingoists (read: my teachers), I was a bit on edge when I made that post about this subject.
Originally posted by OmnislashThat is a commendable post. I second it.
It truly boggles me how anyone can feel justified in this war. I respect everyones opinion, but I fall utterly short of understanding it. On that ill fated September day, many innocent US citizens died needlesy. By all means, this is a great tragedy. The greatest shame of it though as I see it is not the innocent people who died that day, but rather how ma ...[text shortened]... to articulate. Perhaps later I can comment in a more structured manner. God be with us all. :'(
The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral,
begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy.
Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it.
Through violence, you may murder the liar, but cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth.
Through violence, you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate.
In fact violence merely increase hate. So it goes...
Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper
darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out
darkness -- only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate -- only love can do that.
--Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King
Originally posted by legionnaireThis quote should be sent to the Isreali cabinet. I think they need a leason from a great human.
The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral,
begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy.
Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it.
Through violence, you may murder the liar, but cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth.
Through violence, you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate.
In fact violen ...[text shortened]... n do that. Hate cannot drive out hate -- only love can do that.
--Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King
-mike
I certainly meant no insult to Kirk. I'm sure no-one else did either. But Kirk also made a comparison that was demonstrably invalid, and I merely responded, albeit too strongly.
I find your remark about chess quite insightful. I go to a school where about 20 of 900 people play chess regularly, and the school is, by and large, a pack of jingoistic people. So can we conclude that warlike games like chess actually have a peaceful influence?
I heard that there was a convention of referring to people formally by their first name in Arab countries. If so, the "Saddam" is not necessarily rude. Not that politeness matters when one is dealing with a psychopathic dictator, who relishes doing the dirty work of torture himself. "Mr. Hussein" indeed!
Originally posted by royalchickenI heard that there was a convention of referring to people formally by their first name in Arab countries. If so, the "Saddam" is not necessarily rude. Not that politeness matters when one is dealing with a psychopathic dictator, who relishes doing the dirty work of torture himself. "Mr. Hussein" indeed!
Until the news media stops referring to Mr. Hussein as "Saddam" and everyone else as "Mr." or "President" or "Prime Minister" + "last name", I will refer to the US president as "George".
Originally posted by PawnokeyholeOh. I was unaware of that. If that is the case, then "Saddam" is justified. I did not suggest "Mr. Hussein" out of any kind of respect, but rather out of a desire for consistency.
I heard that there was a convention of referring to people formally by their first name in Arab countries. If so, the "Saddam" is not necessarily rude.
Originally posted by IRC58Hear, hear. Notice how the participating Western leaders claim to be fighting for the security of their nations, when almost any American I've talked to does not feel threatened?
I always thought a "War " was ...... you bomb us ...... we will bomb you
Not a bit of bully stuff.................