Pages: 1 2 3  Next -- Posted by Spiral at 4:13 pm on July 12, 2008 I hate how this is used as an excuse for murder. I think anyone who can kill is fucked up in the head, war is no exception - I am almost ashamed to think that some of my ancestors killed in the war and used this as an excuse. "Fighting for your country" seems like it's glamorizing murder, making it acceptable. It is almost as bad as terrorists who use their religion as their reason for murder and destruction. You'll probably all disagree, but wanted to hear other opinions. -- Posted by greatescape at 4:20 pm on July 12, 2008 In a perfect world, yes, there would be no war.  No one would attack another person and we would all live in peace and harmony. This is not a perfect world.  Contries attack each other and wars happen.  When you are in a situation where you are being shot at, you shoot back and if you don't you are a fool. It is not as bad as terrorists, because terrorists attack unprovoked.  They attack innocent civilians who do not intend to harm them in any way. -- Posted by barnabas at 4:22 pm on July 12, 2008 I disagree, greatescape. There are more important things than life. Higher values, better causes, bigger loyalties. -- Posted by gnr90 at 4:31 pm on July 12, 2008 well, you would love to believe that if the soldiers were not in the middle east, we'd be war free, wouldn't you?...bullshit...Osama attacked America on our soil...so you think we are supposed to let them get away with it and keep killing thousands of innocent people? you are a complete fool if you think that the soldiers are fighting for their country just to murder...you wouldn't be alive today if it wasn't for soldiers fighting for your life...mainly because the nazis would have taken over and destroyed all of europe and most likely the world by now...so thank god you have those brave people willing to defend you. -- Posted by tkster at 4:32 pm on July 12, 2008 I'll admit, I have mixed feelings.  In some ways I see fighting violence with violence as falling victim to Irony.  We could play semantics and claim that we are justified because we view a certain group as evil, yet they could say the same as us from their point of view. However, when it comes to countries, I am highly unpatriotic.  Although there may be causes that I would fight for, I would never fight on the basis of a country.  If a country supports a cause, then I understand it as the cause that I support; patriotism can be a very dangerous and easily manipulated thing if people are not putting it to the test of critical thinking. tk -- Posted by gnr90 at 4:36 pm on July 12, 2008 Quote: from tkster at 4:32 pm on July 12, 2008 I'll admit, I have mixed feelings. In some ways I see fighting violence with violence as falling victim to Irony. We could play semantics and claim that we are justified because we view a certain group as evil, yet they could say the same as us from their point of view. However, when it comes to countries, I am highly unpatriotic. Although there may be causes that I would fight for, I would never fight on the basis of a country. If a country supports a cause, then I understand it as the cause that I support; patriotism can be a very dangerous and easily manipulated thing if people are not putting it to the test of critical thinking. tk this is a good point...I am very patriotic, but that is because, overall, our cause is freedom...islamic terrorists do not like democracy...they don't like our way of life...which is why they attacked us...we are fighting for democracy and freedom, two causes most people take for granted.... -- Posted by tkster at 4:41 pm on July 12, 2008 Quote: from gnr90 at 6:36 pm on July 12, 2008 Quote: from tkster at 4:32 pm on July 12, 2008 I'll admit, I have mixed feelings.  In some ways I see fighting violence with violence as falling victim to Irony.  We could play semantics and claim that we are justified because we view a certain group as evil, yet they could say the same as us from their point of view.    However, when it comes to countries, I am highly unpatriotic.  Although there may be causes that I would fight for, I would never fight on the basis of a country.  If a country supports a cause, then I understand it as the cause that I support; patriotism can be a very dangerous and easily manipulated thing if people are not putting it to the test of critical thinking.    tk this is a good point...I am very patriotic, but that is because, overall, our cause is freedom...islamic terrorists do not like democracy...they don't like our way of life...which is why they attacked us...we are fighting for democracy and freedom, two causes most people take for granted.... Indeed as long as you understand then that it the cause you support.  People like you are thinking, whereas those who hold up the flag and just love America because it's America scare the Hell out of me.  Make no mistake, the Nazis were patriotic, but their cause was wrong. Self-reflection is important so that we evaluate whether our cause is moral or immoral.  To give the opposing view, I do not see America's cause as moral because saying "we are fighting for freedom" by pushing democracy on people doesn't come off as very "free" (yes, I know this is one of the themes of Team America).  But I subscribe to more Ghandi-like views in terms of war. tk -- Posted by Assaultrifle at 7:27 pm on July 12, 2008 I disagree. Killing enemy soldiers in war is more than justified and I would gladly do it if I get sent to war after i join the Marines. The terrorists are way worse than us. If you think the number of deaths on 9/11 was bad, you should see what they do to villages full of people of an opposing Islamic sect (Sunni or Shi ite). You should also see what they do to their own children. Also perhaps you didn't know that the terrorists believe that they will go to heaven if they die while killing civilians, and that they will gain heavenly rewards for killing non-muslims. Oh and perhaps you've forgotten how the terrorists have made videos of themselves cutting off civilians' and soldiers' heads with a knife as they sing religious songs and praise God. I can show you such a video if you're not convinced. -- Posted by Spiral at 4:49 am on July 13, 2008 Quote: from Assaultrifle at 3:27 am on July 13, 2008 I disagree. Killing enemy soldiers in war is more than justified and I would gladly do it if I get sent to war after i join the Marines. The terrorists are way worse than us. If you think the number of deaths on 9/11 was bad, you should see what they do to villages full of people of an opposing Islamic sect (Sunni or Shi ite). You should also see what they do to their own children. Also perhaps you didn't know that the terrorists believe that they will go to heaven if they die while killing civilians, and that they will gain heavenly rewards for killing non-muslims.   Oh and perhaps you've forgotten how the terrorists have made videos of themselves cutting off civilians' and soldiers' heads with a knife as they sing religious songs and praise God.   I can show you such a video if you're not convinced. So because the terrorists are doing worse things, that makes it perfectly alright for us to kill because it's not as bad as what they are doing? -- Posted by Assaultrifle at 2:06 pm on July 13, 2008 They killed and attacked our people and our allies' people, and they continue to destroy American and our allies' property (Embassies, bases). That makes them enemy soldiers and a threat that must be destroyed so they don't attack our homeland again. They attacked the U.S.S Cole in 2000, blew a 30 foot hole in it and killed 17 sailors. This is an act of war. Then they blew up various embassies. This is also an act of war. Then of course they blew up the twin towers on our homeland and killed 3000 people (act of war) and attacked the Pentagon (act of war).They also declared war on us and all of our allies.   Then they blew up an underground train in the UK and a bus (an act of war) .   Not to mention the countless attacks and terror in Israel. Car bombings, shootings, IEDs, sniper attacks, suicide bombings with children as young as 14, etc. And this of course only sums up some of the major things they did to the US and its close allies.   They also do plenty more terrible things to other civilians and nations like i mentioned above. All these terrorists care about is killing Americans and/ or the people of any Western nation so they can go to "heaven". We must destroy them so they can't attack us or anyone else again. -- Posted by nikki at 2:47 pm on July 13, 2008 I think this is a tricky concept. We don't live in an ideal world. If people didn't sign up to fight for their country, the government would just draft unwilling citizens into the war anyway. Wars happen, and if you're in a situation where your life is at risk, you would do anything to stop yourself from dying. It's the human survival instinct. We want to live - and when our lives are put at risk, we fight to survive. It's kill or be killed, essentially. -- Posted by exceedinglyrare at 4:10 pm on July 13, 2008 Quote: from Spiral at 7:13 pm on July 12, 2008 I hate how this is used as an excuse for murder. I think anyone who can kill is fucked up in the head, war is no exception - I am almost ashamed to think that some of my ancestors killed in the war and used this as an excuse. "Fighting for your country" seems like it's glamorizing murder, making it acceptable.   It is almost as bad as terrorists who use their religion as their reason for murder and destruction. You'll probably all disagree, but wanted to hear other opinions. First...it's technically not murder. Murder is the unlawful killing of another person and, in a wartime situation, killing another person who's trying to kill you is perfectly lawful. Secondly, it really depends on the situation. Are some wars unjustified? Sure, but there are also plenty that are entirely justified. As everyone in this thread has stated, in an ideal world, war would be unnecessary, and threats on the lives of innocent people could be alleviated by simply talking it out, but unfortunately, this is not an ideal world and force is sometimes necessary to prevent the loss of innocent lives. Really, though, war is ugly no matter how you slice it. All sides will always believe that they are fighting for the greater good, and both will be able to justify what they do in their own minds by saying, "it's for the greater good of these innocent people." -- Posted by boothy at 7:50 am on July 15, 2008 Quote: from Assaultrifle at 3:27 am on July 13, 2008 I disagree. Killing enemy soldiers in war is more than justified and I would gladly do it if I get sent to war after i join the Marines. The terrorists are way worse than us. If you think the number of deaths on 9/11 was bad, you should see what they do to villages full of people of an opposing Islamic sect (Sunni or Shi ite). You should also see what they do to their own children. Also perhaps you didn't know that the terrorists believe that they will go to heaven if they die while killing civilians, and that they will gain heavenly rewards for killing non-muslims.   Oh and perhaps you've forgotten how the terrorists have made videos of themselves cutting off civilians' and soldiers' heads with a knife as they sing religious songs and praise God.   I can show you such a video if you're not convinced. Do you want a list of the equally horrific things America has done, is still doing, funds others doing and enables? My-Lai Massacre being the obvious case. So 4,000 US troops have died in Iraq. 93,000 Iraqi civilians. Sickening. -- Posted by boothy at 7:53 am on July 15, 2008 Quote: from gnr90 at 12:31 am on July 13, 2008 well, you would love to believe that if the soldiers were not in the middle east, we'd be war free, wouldn't you?...bullshit...Osama attacked America on our soil...so you think we are supposed to let them get away with it and keep killing thousands of innocent people? you are a complete fool if you think that the soldiers are fighting for their country just to murder...you wouldn't be alive today if it wasn't for soldiers fighting for your life...mainly because the nazis would have taken over and destroyed all of europe and most likely the world by now...so thank god you have those brave people willing to defend you. One terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. If you look into the reasons of the so-called "terrorism", then you'll find America's hands are redder than most, and the UK too. The "America Saved Europe" shit makes me laugh. You were cowardly, sit back and watched Jews being massacred and Europe being devastated, only when your precious Pearl Harbour got hit did you join - and by that time Hitler was on the losing streak. What you effectively did was come into the war at the last minute, speed up our victory and then take all the credit. -- Posted by Assaultrifle at 9:59 am on July 15, 2008 Do you want a list of the equally horrific things America has done, is still doing, funds others doing and enables? My-Lai Massacre being the obvious case. So 4,000 US troops have died in Iraq. 93,000 Iraqi civilians. Sickening. Um ok the My Lai massacre was 40 years ago. I'm talking about things the terrorists have done recently to make us go to war with them. The vast majority of civilians that die in Iraq die by accident, they are not massacred by our troops purposely. One terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. If you look into the reasons of the so-called "terrorism", then you'll find America's hands are redder than most, and the UK too. The main reason the terrorists attacked is that America supports Israel. So because we send money to Israel which is our ally, and trade with them a lot, we deserve to be attacked on our homeland? Hell no. The terrorists also attacked us because of all the "Muslims we killed" in Iraq in 1991. Funny, because Osama's country, Saudi Arabia, asked for our help against Iraq. Osama offered to send Al-Qaeda troops to Iraq to help Saudi Arabia but the Saudis wanted the US' help instead. So why would Osama be angry that we were helping his country against his countrt's enemy? Because he is a twisted, evil extremist. He believes US troops are not allowed to kill Muslims because they are non-muslims. So he claims that the US is evil for attacking Iraq in 1991. Strange isnt it?  This is also funny because in the 80s when the US was funding Al-Qaeda to fight against the Russians, Osama didn't complain about the US being on Muslim land at all. Hypocrite much? Now hopefully you've gained some more insight into the terrorists' true reasons for attacking us: They have evil, twisted extremist beliefs, they are traitors, and hypocrites. The "America Saved Europe" shit makes me laugh. You were cowardly, sit back and watched Jews being massacred and Europe being devastated, only when your precious Pearl Harbour got hit did you join - and by that time Hitler was on the losing streak. What you effectively did was come into the war at the last minute, speed up our victory and then take all the credit. If i'm not mistaken, in 1941 the world did not know about the Jews being massacred. They knew the Germans didn't like Jews, but they didn't know the Nazis were committing genocide. How could they have known when no German death camps had been discovered yet? In 1941 the Germans were still quite strong. We came into the war in late (December) 1941, about 3.5 years before the end of the war which had started in Sept. 1939. If you can do the math, we were there for over 50% of the war, therefore the majority of the war. Yes we did speed up the victory against the Nazis. And before we actually sent troops, we were always sending money and equipment to Britain and other allies. And we liberated our share of nations including France. We then went on towards Berlin, destroying countless German positions and taking back many cities on the way. We almost single handedly destroyed the Japanese Navy completely, and took all of their positions in the Pacific. During the war in the pacific we also protected Australia from invasion by the Japanese. We then ended the war with the nuclear bomb. So yes America did help to save Europe, not single handedly but they played a HUGE part. And we defeated Japan. -- Posted by nigeltheoutlaw at 3:39 pm on July 15, 2008 I personally agree with the quote "Patriots always talk of dying for their country, and never of killing for their country." That being said, I would gladly die for my country if necessary. In this current conflict, it is unnecessary. Another WWII or a full scale invasion of our country would constitute my joining. -- Posted by mattchew at 9:51 pm on July 15, 2008 I don't seem to find human life so sacred and valuable as most here seem to. Yes, if it were one of my friends/family I would say differently, but in general, the herd needs culling in my opinion. Anyway, I would gladly die, or kill, for my country, even though i do see it falling away from where I think it should stand. Comparing it to terrorists is extremely insulting and disrespectful to our troops. They attacked us, and are currently doing so in Iraq, and once Obama wins and withdraws troops, they will attack us again, and again unless he sends troops. Sometimes violence is the answer. I know i sound cruel, oh well. -- Posted by obvious child at 11:09 pm on July 15, 2008 Quote: from Assaultrifle at 6:59 am on July 15, 2008 If i'm not mistaken, in 1941 the world did not know about the Jews being massacred. Some in the world knew as early as 1940 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9502E6DA1731F93AA15754C0A96F958260 The Germans sent a letter to a Chilean diplomat in the Prague in November 1941. If you can do the math, we were there for over 50% of the war, therefore the majority of the war. If you go by European records. The Chinese would disagree. Yes we did speed up the victory against the Nazis. And before we actually sent troops, we were always sending money and equipment to Britain and other allies. And we liberated our share of nations including France. We then went on towards Berlin, destroying countless German positions and taking back many cities on the way. Funny how you fail to mention the USSR by name. After all they were responsible for 70% of the Reich's causalities. To the Russians, the Western front from a fracking sideshow. We almost single handedly destroyed the Japanese Navy completely, and took all of their positions in the Pacific. Aussies would disagree. We then ended the war with the nuclear bomb. Questionable. No singular event within the bombing accounts for why the Japanese surrender.   -- Posted by Daleacus at 11:03 am on July 24, 2008 I agree with the very basic principle - anyone willing to go into an occupation which they know involves killing other people, regardless of cause, is a very twisted individual to me. I don't even believe most soldiers have a cause they truly believe in; it's just something they do. It disgusts me. However, the benefits of using such people are obvious. -- Posted by Silence of Thought at 9:15 am on July 26, 2008 What I hate is that so many people put so much blame on the average soldier for the terrors of war. The job of a soldier is not to kill people, but to say, "yes, sir". Soldiers don't just give their lives for their country, they give up their freedom to a chain of command, in which a superior's order is the law. If an officer tells a private to charge a hill, the private doesn't contemplate the morality of killing the enemy on the hill, (s)he charges the damn hill. Why do soldiers give up their rights? Because they know that the security of their country depends on two things: a strong, obedient force (which is themselves), and leadership that these soldiers can trust to tell them to do the right thing (politicians, whom WE elect). So do not bring your quarrel to the soldier, for he's just obeying orders. Bring your quarrel to the government, the people. As for this argument about the European theater of WWII, I would say that the Soviets should get most of the credit for Nazi Germany's defeat, but then again they should be blamed just as much for Germany's early success. However, Germany was so close to winning the war, that the absence of the United States would unquestionably mean the downfall of Europe. So I'll admit that many Americans take a little more credit than they deserve for WWII, but the United States did play a huge role in WWII that shouldn't be taken for granted. -- Posted by Assaultrifle at 11:27 pm on July 26, 2008 I agree with the very basic principle - anyone willing to go into an occupation which they know involves killing other people, regardless of cause, is a very twisted individual to me. I don't even believe most soldiers have a cause they truly believe in; it's just something they do. It disgusts me. However, the benefits of using such people are obvious. Hmm according to you, then, I should be in a mental hospital. Lmao. Many soldiers have a cause they believe in, it's called serving your country and being patriotic. I don't seem to find human life so sacred and valuable as most here seem to. Yes, if it were one of my friends/family I would say differently, but in general, the herd needs culling in my opinion. Anyway, I would gladly die, or kill, for my country, even though i do see it falling away from where I think it should stand. Comparing it to terrorists is extremely insulting and disrespectful to our troops. They attacked us, and are currently doing so in Iraq, and once Obama wins and withdraws troops, they will attack us again, and again unless he sends troops. Sometimes violence is the answer. I know i sound cruel, oh well. I agree with this post. Not all human life is equal, I hate it when people say that. If someone is shooting at me, I don't give a damn about if they are "a human just like me", and "have feelings just like I do", and all that other pacifist sh!t. I'll f*cking blast them. And you don't sound cruel at all, you sound correct.   -- Posted by Daleacus at 3:28 pm on July 28, 2008 Quote: from Assaultrifle at 7:27 am on July 27, 2008 Hmm according to you, then, I should be in a mental hospital. Lmao.   Many soldiers have a cause they believe in, it's called serving your country and being patriotic. Please quote properly so that it shows on quote lists - I didn't know you'd tried to rebut my point. I'm fully aware of the definitions of those words. You should be in a mental hospital or jail, unless you're in the armed forces - the only place such behaviour is acceptable. If you are currently a soldier, then you should be out there shooting things. As I said, the advantages of using people like you for a purpose are obvious, even if the way your mind works and the things you have to do repulses me. -- Posted by medjai at 5:58 pm on July 30, 2008 I really wish that I could respond to this topic and post my views but Apotheosis would forward them to my command and try to get me kicked out. -- Posted by nigeltheoutlaw at 7:39 pm on July 30, 2008 Quote: from medjai at 5:58 pm on July 30, 2008 I really wish that I could respond to this topic and post my views but Apotheosis would forward them to my command and try to get me kicked out. Anonymous maybe? Or is Apotheosis a moderator? -- Posted by medjai at 8:39 pm on July 30, 2008 I refuse to post anonymously, it's cowardly and gay. -- Posted by nigeltheoutlaw at 8:52 pm on July 30, 2008 Quote: from medjai at 8:39 pm on July 30, 2008 I refuse to post anonymously, it's cowardly and gay. All right. I was just saying there is a way around if you want it. -- Posted by Blackadder at 9:26 am on Aug. 4, 2008 Quote: from gnr90 at 12:31 am on July 13, 2008 well, you would love to believe that if the soldiers were not in the middle east, we'd be war free, wouldn't you?...bullshit...Osama attacked America on our soil...so you think we are supposed to let them get away with it and keep killing thousands of innocent people? you are a complete fool if you think that the soldiers are fighting for their country just to murder...you wouldn't be alive today if it wasn't for soldiers fighting for your life...mainly because the nazis would have taken over and destroyed all of europe and most likely the world by now...so thank god you have those brave people willing to defend you. perhaps the greatest irony is that if hitler did succeed in world domination it seems likely that one important thing would flow from that; world peace. -- Posted by Silence of Thought at 10:41 am on Aug. 4, 2008 Quote: from Blackadder at 12:26 pm on Aug. 4, 2008 perhaps the greatest irony is that if hitler did succeed in world domination it seems likely that one important thing would flow from that; world peace.   I doubt it. In a sense, yes there wouldn't technically be any "wars" since all of humanity would be under one nation, but there would be two results of world domination that would compensate for war: 1. There would be a lot of civil wars and rebellions that would take just as many lives as war. 2. Repression or racial extermination would claim just as many (or possibly more) lives. -- Posted by nigeltheoutlaw at 11:43 am on Aug. 4, 2008 Quote: from Blackadder at 9:26 am on Aug. 4, 2008 Quote: from gnr90 at 12:31 am on July 13, 2008 well, you would love to believe that if the soldiers were not in the middle east, we'd be war free, wouldn't you?...bullshit...Osama attacked America on our soil...so you think we are supposed to let them get away with it and keep killing thousands of innocent people? you are a complete fool if you think that the soldiers are fighting for their country just to murder...you wouldn't be alive today if it wasn't for soldiers fighting for your life...mainly because the nazis would have taken over and destroyed all of europe and most likely the world by now...so thank god you have those brave people willing to defend you. perhaps the greatest irony is that if hitler did succeed in world domination it seems likely that one important thing would flow from that; world peace.   For what? Multiple ethinicities would have been extinguished, with any other, none Aryan ones at the best being second class citizens and at the worst being enslaved or dead. Wow, wonderful. We should've let him win, huh? -- Posted by Blackadder at 8:30 am on Aug. 5, 2008 Quote: from nigeltheoutlaw at 7:43 pm on Aug. 4, 2008 Quote: from Blackadder at 9:26 am on Aug. 4, 2008 Quote: from gnr90 at 12:31 am on July 13, 2008 well, you would love to believe that if the soldiers were not in the middle east, we'd be war free, wouldn't you?...bullshit...Osama attacked America on our soil...so you think we are supposed to let them get away with it and keep killing thousands of innocent people? you are a complete fool if you think that the soldiers are fighting for their country just to murder...you wouldn't be alive today if it wasn't for soldiers fighting for your life...mainly because the nazis would have taken over and destroyed all of europe and most likely the world by now...so thank god you have those brave people willing to defend you.    perhaps the greatest irony is that if hitler did succeed in world domination it seems likely that one important thing would flow from that; world peace.   For what? Multiple ethinicities would have been extinguished, with any other, none Aryan ones at the best being second class citizens and at the worst being enslaved or dead. Wow, wonderful. We should've let him win, huh? Yes, we should have, thats exactly what I am saying. Pages: 1 2 3  Next