A Moral Quandary - For The Pro-War Asylum ResidentsFollow

Translation: Nothing.

Thanks, that's what I thought.

I'm a moderate democrate, so I'll ask another important question.


If the 3 people in town square, as talk about before, were not the killers themselves, but people who helped the murders. Now if the REAL killers have killed 5 people already(and themselves at the same time), is it ok to kill 150 incocent people in order to bring the 3 men who HELPed the killers kill.

I'm going to assume that 99% of the people here, will say no. Some would say yes just to be trolls.

But regardless of weather Iraq had anything to do with terroristm, which they did not, nor did they have WODs. Heres what happened

Now this is how it happened in real life. A group of killers killed themselves and over 5000 americans. We then liberated a country fool of terrorist, and made the world a better place. But then we decided there are more terrorist who "May" have helped the orignal group of killers. So we go in, and kill over 150,000 iraqie civies. Thats 150 to 1. Not very fair in my books.


So yeah, if you think it is ok to kill 150 inocent people, to get people who helped killers murder 5 people, then you most think this Iraq war...oh wait it isnt a war...what is it?

It is 150 to 1, just I switch which I said first silly billy.

As for moderate democrate. I think abortion is murder, I strongly support the 2nd amendment, and I think gays should be able to get marriage. As well as supporting truely free speach and speration of chursch and state.

"If no, then how can you justify using such methods against the residents of another country?" --Rognar

War is war and police work is police work. One is based on the idea that you are to break the will and fighting spirit of an enemy country and the other is predicated on a justice system of which the police are the apprehending arm of the nation's law-- that is unless you are comfortable with police having arresting powers, and may act as judge, jury, and executioner.

The two concepts are completely independent of each other.

Totem

Given the mental capacity and political orientation of many here, yes, you absolutely have a valid point, TStephens.

Totem

Is your keyboard broken?

I was there for New Years and I've never seen more cops in one place in my entire life.

this has been another random usless comment by me



BTW, your OP reminds me of Running Man.
"Buut Zayer Ah innocent Vemon and Childron doon Zer!! Ta Hell Wi Zue!!"

"the Butcher of Bakersfield!!"

Based on your logic, anyone in America not currently In Iraq is aiding the terrorists. Heck, EVERYONE who isn't there is aiding them by that logic. Why not bomb every country, after all, they're not stopping the terrorists, so they are aiding them.

Im interested in your choice of words. "Terrorist" in particular. Iraq has NEVER done terrorist acts on American soil.



Take your own advice and give us facts that Iraq was linked to 9/11

I find it interesting that when thousands of innocent people are killed in our country, the ones responsible are monsters, but if the same happens in Iraq, the people responsible are heroes.

I have a question, not to be sarcastic or rude, I really just want to know. Bush supporters are quick to dismiss anything that makes our president look bad, despite all the proof that he has done horrible things. How is it that you can support someone who has no good act to his name?

Fancy yourself an acerbic wit? Attempting to stay above the fray with aloof commentary and anemic jabs? What is it? I really am curious. A trolling pedant. That about sums it up, wouldn’t you say? One who obviously is happier taking the wet wipe Michael Moore offers to clean off the money shot than bothering to make an accurate analogy. Good times.

First off, somewhat by definition, the President of the US cannot be a criminal when he uses the military at the behest of a Congressional Resolution. One would think that if you are going to call him a criminal, you'd be able to at least tell us what law he's broken?

Secondly, I hate to break this to you, but most of the rest of the world has hated the US for quite some time. The only difference is that in years past they expressed that hatred in little indirect ways like abusing the Kyoto accords in a way so as to completely remove them from the original goal (reducing worldwide pollution) and turning them into a way to punish the US economically. Today, they just come out and say it. Horray for honesty.




Funny. That's exactly the kind of mindset that created the conditions in which we needed to liberate France in the first place.

The whole point of the formation of the UN was to prevent those sort of things. But over time, many members have decided to retreat back into the "We don't want to mess around with anyone else" attitude. In this case, the US is the only nation actually acting based on what history has taught us needs to be done to avoid larger conflicts and greater loss of life. Too bad you can't see this.





Did this "independant research" by any chance involve reading sites that simply quoted or restated sections of Moore's film? I'm sorry, but your statements are ones that can *only* be made if you're primary source of information is the propaganda piece that is F911. No other legitimate source makes those claims (although a lot of moronic bloggers out there keep repeating them as though the fact that they were in a film makes them true).

This thread is ugly.

I respect Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) more than any person in Washington, and even though I was ashamed to see him interviewed in a Michael Moore film, what he has to say needs to be investigated.

Why was bin Laden's family allowed to leave the nation within days after 9/11 when the rest of the nation was grounded? Quite frankly, it seems to me that our President is guilty of treason. Was it diplomacy? Were we trying to get back in bed with Saudi Arabia? Come on, here. The most important pieces of intelligence available as to why the attacks on 9/11 happened were on our own soil, and the Bush Administration aided their escape. I'm sorry, but if we are at war, that is simply unacceptable.

I'm convinced that George Bush doesn't give a rat's *** about the war on terror or for the victim's of 9/11.

To all of you gung-ho pro-war pshychotic hypocrates, the military needs soldiers. Enlist your children, or enlist yourself. Until you do, your pro-war arguments mean nothing, for you are preaching a double standard. I do not respect any ******* who is unwilling to put his neck where his mouth is. Pick up a rifle and go kill innocents in Iraq if you're so dead set on turning the world against us. I'll respect your argument then. Oh, you're too *********** to go fight people who actually have live ammo? Then what gives you the right to dictate death onto others?

The most important weapon we have in the war on terror is propaganda. Our enemy uses it against us, and they use it well. We don't know how to use propaganda. Instead, we just continue to give free aid to our enemies by continuing on a foreign policy with absolutely no cohesiveness whatsoever.

If American is going to lead the world, then America needs to be consistant. Until that happens, we are living in a world with no leader. We are living in a world where religious fundamentalists are fighting religious fundamentalists, terrorists are fighting terrorists, and aggressors are fighing aggressors. The Bush administration is on the same side of the political spectrum as al Qaeda, and that scares the **** out of me. The fact that the Bush administration has done nothing to apprehend the perpetrators of 9/11 while spreading our military too thin by unnecessarily invading another country makes me wonder who the true villains are.

If we have to ask ourselves "why do they hate us so much?", then we have already lost.

If we have to restrict freedoms in order to get a feeling of safety, then we have already lost.

If we have to use torture in order to gain intelligence, if we have to imprison people without due process of law, if we have to kill innocents in order to achieve our goals, then we become them. That is exactly what our enemy wants.

So far, we have played into our enemies hands, which leads me to believe we did not learn our lesson from Vietnam. Propaganda killed us in Vietnam. It is killing us again. Even if attacking Iraq was a necessary task in our fight against terrorism, how could President Bush undergo such a task while leaving so much doubt? How did a President who is stupid enough to leave a plethora of unanswered questions get re-elected?

Thank you for listening, and feel free to rate me down.