 |
|  |
 |
|
Tingkai
|
|
To find the Northwest Passage
Aug 2001 time: 13:30
|
|
Okay, so I've been drunking and its late so bear with me, but I've got this moral and would be interested in people's opinions.
I'm reading news stories and I come across one that says that possibly eight American soldiers were killed in an ambush. My first reaction is ahh sh!t. No matter what I think about the US government, reading about American soldiers being killed is, me being a Canadian, like hearing that a neighbour's son has died. It sucks.
But on a big political scale, if the US has an easy ride in Iraq, that will only encourage American politicians to invade other countries which will cause more death and destruction. So maybe it is better than more American soldiers die now to prevent future wars that will cause more deaths. But wanting that sounds sick because it means that more "neighbour's" sons dying which I don't want.
So what's the solution to this dilemma, or am I just so drunk that I create a false dilemma?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Tingkai
|
|
To find the Northwest Passage
Aug 2001 time: 13:30
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DAVOUT
No dilemma at all. There is a state of war, and people are dying, civilians and military. Those casualties are a direct consequence of the initial decision to go to war. The dilemma is for those who have to decide what to do next. |
I don't know, maybe you're right, but it seems like a bit of cop out. The US is a democratic system so the people who decide are the people, and the people are part of a world community and can be influenced. you know what I mean.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Tingkai
|
|
To find the Northwest Passage
Aug 2001 time: 13:30
|
|
UR: What are you doing up so late?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
st_swithin
|
|
10069
Nov 2002 time: 05:30
|
|
Tingy: It's all your fault. Those people died because of that Matzoh ball you didn't eat last year.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001 time: 00:30
|
|
quote: But on a big political scale, if the US has an easy ride in Iraq, that will only encourage American politicians to invade other countries which will cause more death and destruction. So maybe it is better than more American soldiers die now to prevent future wars that will cause more deaths. But wanting that sounds sick because it means that more "neighbour's" sons dying which I don't want. |
Did it occur to you that if the U.S. has an "easy ride" in Iraq, that just might mean a good result for Iraqis? I doubt it, since IIRC, you're one of those who bought the "war for oil" line.
The thing that might trip up future military adventures is probably the dollar figure, to be honest. Lots of people who were pro-war are appalled at the $87 billion figure. Sure, I think they're morons for thinking this would be cheap, but what can I say? Add in the death toll we've already suffered (or maybe not the overall number, but rather the tempo - 1-2 guys seem to get killed every day, on average), and it's enough to give people pause.
-Arrian
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
human life above all why the us bombed
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30. Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|