Who wants war?

Who would like to see US go to war with North Korea or Iran or Syria etc..

Basically, I want to know who just wants to see another war and for things to get even uglier.

Be honest.

cos there can never be peace....

we're in war, get used to it. as for someone to war with, i want the third and final to come.

god:the humans will not destroy themselves through their own hatred

satan: third times the charm

Who else voted for the bottom blank?

XAS

very realistic choices but I think anyone in thier right mind would choose the second as I did.

No one wants war (except maybe those who will gain financially).
The first choice may appeal to some primal instinct in many of us males but you know what? I would be much happier just watching them demonstrate military capabilities in a deserted wasteland on dummy targets.
Loss of life is loss of life in 99.9999999999% of cases I hate it. Some though need to be pulled like weeds from the garden. Now we just need to get back to assasination of those who truly deserve it and spare the rest.

Originally posted by Fry2
very realistic choices but I think anyone in thier right mind would choose the second as I did.

I'm sorry, what would have been more realistic for you? Actually, I believe they are pretty realistic. Maybe you are speaking for your own personal opinion.

I do for a fact know there are people who do indeed love watching men at war and seeing them being blown into pieces as crude as that may sound.

*EDIT* Do you not remember the CNN reporter and crew caught laughing as bombs were being dropped on Baghdad the first night?

I also know for a fact some people would like to see America go to war with more countries to see them be defeated. Maybe asses stomped in was a bit harsh for you.

Are the 3rd and 4th choices also not realistic being you would see them as being poles in the media?

Anyway, if you don't see your personal choice folks you can always post it in a reply.







[Edited on 6-6-2003 by Total Enslavement]

[Edited on 6-6-2003 by Total Enslavement]

the asses stomped in thing. Not likely without a large coalition and even then you are talking about the end of the world.
The "axis of evil" was a lame statement to begin with and yes I think some of these coutries are a threat but "War" is not always the only option and diplomacy does not always work. There can be some middle ground.
I still root for assasination of the scumbags that oppress people for power and money.

My first answer was, "Heck, yeah, War was a pretty cool band! Who didn't like "Low Rider?!?", but then I realized I was listening to too much music again!

Absolutely, the choices from which we are to choose are not good. Here's the one I want so my thoughts can be represented:

"War is a terrible thing, but so is having people trying to destroy your nation. I want war no more than my forefathers wanted war, I want to live in peace. But I refuse to cower and allow another entity destroy my home, family, friends and nation!"

Additionally, I'm sure I'm not the first citizen of this or any other nation to pray that we are doing the right thing.

LOL
Great song TC

Can I switch my vote to what he just said? That sums it up nicely

Originally posted by Fry2
The "axis of evil" was a lame statement to begin with and yes I think some of these coutries are a threat but "War" is not always the only option and diplomacy does not always work.

I agree, I just thought that option should be there for the folks that watch FOX news religiously and reflect a mirror image of everything said.

At least, so far, no one has been blind enough to vote for diplomacy as the cure all end all.
Whoever voted for the blown to bits part really should join the military though. They may change sides when a buddys brains are splattered all over him/her

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Absolutely, the choices from which we are to choose are not good. Here's the one I want so my thoughts can be represented:

"War is a terrible thing, but so is having people trying to destroy your nation. I want war no more than my forefathers wanted war, I want to live in peace. But I refuse to cower and allow another entity destroy my home, family, friends and nation!"

Basically that would fit under diplomacy from where I stand because no one is attacking us and your only real enemy is your own insecurity.

No one is trying to destroy America but rather America destroying itself through it's own fear and insecurity. Therefore making preemptive strikes on other nations.

Relax, I feel that vote was tongue-in-cheek instead of stupidity.

I'm not the only smart aleck with a loose screw around here, you know!

[Edited on 6-6-2003 by Thomas Crowne]

I'll let TC handle that one

Naw, dog, no one is attacking us. The World Trade center attacks, of this decade as well as the last, the Cole; heck, I'm not going to go down the list again.
I'll just say that just because you make a statement that totally disregards the facts doesn't mean that those who are cognizant of them have to sit back and agree.

Therefore, I disagree.

How many times do the Islamic groups have to declare war against us and carry out attacks before you realize we are in a real war? Is it because they kill predominantly civilians and do it without the use of tanks and fighter jets that has you confused?

Fact of the matter is the middle easterners are devout believers in deception, they bel;ieve that one cannot "lie" to their perceived enemy and that one only makes a treaty with the enemy so as to prepare to destroy them at a later time. They rewrite current history (the last 100 years or so) and tell their new lie so often and loud so that others who are not familiar with the truth will believe their lie.

These people are not stupid, they possess cunning the likes most Americans can't comprehend. That is our downfall; try to overcome reality with philosophy, and underestimate everything about others because they aren't "us".

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Naw, dog, no one is attacking us. The World Trade center attacks, of this decade as well as the last, the Cole; heck, I'm not going to go down the list again.
I'll just say that just because you make a statement that totally disregards the facts doesn't mean that those who are cognizant of them have to sit back and agree.

Therefore, I disagree.

How many times do the Islamic groups have to declare war against us and carry out attacks before you realize we are in a real war? Is it because they kill predominantly civilians and do it without the use of tanks and fighter jets that has you confused?

I'm not even going to speculate on 9/11 for the truth hasn't even been told on that subject in my opinion.

For argument sake, lets say we are at war with terrorists. Well I don't want to be the one to break this to you, but you simply cannot stop terrorists. If someone decides to kill a bunch of people there is nothing you can do, period end of story.

Going into other countries attacking them without proof of them planning on attacking you will not only never stop terrorism but it will create more. This is a fact.

The bottom line TC is the real terror happens to be the fear that has rocked America and the fear that's allowing it to be destroyed.

Soon TC in the name of terror you are going to have to fork over your guns. What do you think you are going to do about that?

me!!!!

i voted for the bottom blank @ xaos

Darn it, T-E, you broke it to me anyway!!

You can stop terror by destroying either those who are carrying it out or by destroying their will to continue the war.

Certainly, nobody wants to destroy entire populations to get to the ones who are hiding among them. In some cases, you have groups within the populations, supported and hidden by portions of the populations, and often times financed and supported by governments. But you can stop it, with sufficient application of force, and then unwavering commitment to use force again against those who attack us.

Weak policies, bending to international opinions and the degredation of both our military and intelligience gathering capabilities made it abbundantly clear that we were a weak nation. Several times we were struck during the previous administration and each time the administration said that the perpetrators would be hunted down and dealt with. This was never the case, unless the aspirin factory and the few tents struck by a few cruise missiles were owned by the enemy and that was what was considered proper retaliation.

For decades, we've been led to believe that our strength is wrong and that even though we lead the world in almost every aspect, we are no better than the third world nations that we support. We've been led to believe that unless we are attacked with all-out nuclear weapons, we have no business using our weapons for our own cause, they should only be at the disposal of the U.N. and its interest. We've got to get out of that mindset, protect ourselves properly and endeavor to ensure that the survivors of those who attack us know never to try it again as it isn't worth it.
Then, you will stop terrorism against the U.S.

As far as the disarmament of the U.S. citizen, there is only one entity that can make that happen, and that is the U.S. citizenry. If we become disarmed, it'll be our own cowardly fault.

Maybe I was wrong, P-C, anyone who thinks some kind of Utopian communism can occur just might actually wish for the destruction of the U.S.