It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A Hypothetical Question to Anti-war People.

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 11:03 PM
link   
Let me start by saying this is purely a hypothetical. I don't want to start a debate, nor do I want any flaming. If this turns into another "Bush is good, no Bush is bad" debate, I'll request to have it locked. Here's my hypothetical situation:

In a stunning turn of events, the U.S has found the WMDs Saddam was hiding, completely put a stop to all terrorist activity in the middle east, captured Bin Laden, turned Iraq into a working democracy, and a survey was done of every single Iraqi citizen showing that 100% of them are happy with what has happened and support it.

How would you feel? Basically what I'm doing here is trying to gain insight to the other side of things. I feel that this has turned into such a side war, there seem to be a few people who would actually be happy to see us fail here. So what would be your reaction?




posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 11:25 PM
link   
You realize IF that happened the war would be over, right? So no Anti-War protestors for there would be no war....... Kind of screwed that up.



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jestaman
You realize IF that happened the war would be over, right? So no Anti-War protestors for there would be no war....... Kind of screwed that up.


Yeah, it would be over. How would the people who were against it feel?

Again, this is purely hypothetical. I'm not trying to bait anyone, just trying to gain insight.



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 11:32 PM
link   
Again there would be no Anti-War people for the war would be over, refine the question, how would they feel afterwards. Of course how many died? Can you prove they were Saddams and that Rumsfeld didn't find the ones he planted? Can you prove that the survey's weren't tainted in any way? Also you know many people think we already caught his ass and that Bush is hiding him so he can dump more money in the bottomless pit, so if he was "caught" many people would just use this as proof we had him the whole time. A guy with a dialysis(sp?) machine in a cave, not to hard to find with all our advanced technology. Can't be to many caves with outlets can there?



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jestaman
Again there would be no Anti-War people for the war would be over, refine the question, how would they feel afterwards.


Just re-read my post. You know exactly what I meant, geeze! It wasn't a difficult question. If the war ended, and everything worked out peachy, how would they feel.


Of course how many died? Can you prove they were Saddams and that Rumsfeld didn't find the ones he planted? Can you prove that the survey's weren't tainted in any way? Also you know many people think we already caught his ass and that Bush is hiding him so he can dump more money in the bottomless pit, so if he was "caught" many people would just use this as proof we had him the whole time. A guy with a dialysis(sp?) machine in a cave, not to hard to find with all our advanced technology. Can't be to many caves with outlets can there?


Like I said. It's a hypothetical question. Pretend everything worked out perfect. I'm not here to debate you on this, I just want to know how you would feel.



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Herman
Let me start by saying this is purely a hypothetical. I don't want to start a debate, nor do I want any flaming. If this turns into another "Bush is good, no Bush is bad" debate, I'll request to have it locked. Here's my hypothetical situation:

In a stunning turn of events, the U.S has found the WMDs Saddam was hiding, completely put a stop to all terrorist activity in the middle east, captured Bin Laden, turned Iraq into a working democracy, and a survey was done of every single Iraqi citizen showing that 100% of them are happy with what has happened and support it.

How would you feel? Basically what I'm doing here is trying to gain insight to the other side of things. I feel that this has turned into such a side war, there seem to be a few people who would actually be happy to see us fail here. So what would be your reaction?


Violence is not a solution. In your scenario the U.S.A. still goes and attacks entire countries that have not attacked it and doesn't treat the terrorist events of 9/11 like the civilian criminal act that it was. Not to mention I cannot support war of any kind, such as so-called "good" wars.

So my reaction would be to decry the use of military force upon a civilian criminal matter and an imperialist takeover of two nations that weren't attacking another country, but have a sigh of relief once all the major violence is over with. Violence begets violence, so to assume that this would be the end of it would be foolish.

[edit on 26-8-2005 by Frith]



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Herman
Let me start by saying this is purely a hypothetical. I don't want to start a debate, nor do I want any flaming. If this turns into another "Bush is good, no Bush is bad" debate, I'll request to have it locked. Here's my hypothetical situation:


Well, considering we haven't found WMDs
We've actually increased terrorist activities in the middle east.
We haven't captured Bin Laden
We haven't turned Iraq into a working Democracy, but rather a theocracy subjected to Islamic law
The people of Iraq don't want us there

What I want to know is how you'll react to it? Will you place the blame on the media and the liberals and everyone else, or will you readily admit that it was awful bloody mistake to invade? That our president, however well intentioned, was also misguided.

Because, I can admit, given your perimeters, that I was wrong. I would humbly submit myself and apologize. I would support President Bush as one of the greatest Americans who've ever lived, and a groundbreaking voice of both freedom and forethought.

I actually would.

Because, however bruised my ego would be, I would know that the world was a better place for me and my children, and my children's children. I would be able to sleep lighter at night, knowing that the world would keep spinning for many more rotations, and that the bell of truth would be ringing for all the world to hear.

I would be able to believe in the power and the glory of God, and I would have renewed faith in the power and the grace of the chruch as an instruement of social change and good will. It would bring forth a new age of prosperity, where science and religion could co-exist on the same plane. It would introduce a new word into the American Lexicon, that being the word "HUMBLE", and maybe, just maybe, our elected officials could begin to serve us, rather than their corporate constituents to make the air breathable and the skies blue, and the water clean enough to drink again.

But, I can't do that, because he's been an absolutely dismal failure on just about every front that I can possibly think of, from domestic to international.

So, what will you do if it ends in absolute disaster?



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 11:51 PM
link   
If it ended in absolute disaster, and Bush admitted it was all false. I'd admit it, be pretty angry that I was lied to, and eventually move on.



posted on Aug, 26 2005 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Herman
If it ended in absolute disaster, and Bush admitted it was all false. I'd admit it, be pretty angry that I was lied to, and eventually move on.


AND, Bush admitting it were false.

I think that's just about the most intellectually dishonest thing I've read all day, because at no point did I mention the veracity of Bush, nor use it in my theoretical framework. It's a cowardly way out of answering my question, but not entirely unexpected given the conceit of your original post.



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by brimstone735

Originally posted by Herman
If it ended in absolute disaster, and Bush admitted it was all false. I'd admit it, be pretty angry that I was lied to, and eventually move on.


AND, Bush admitting it were false.

I think that's just about the most intellectually dishonest thing I've read all day, because at no point did I mention the veracity of Bush, nor use it in my theoretical framework. It's a cowardly way out of answering my question, but not entirely unexpected given the conceit of your original post.


Wow, you got very cold, very fast. I was merely trying to answer your questoin. And there I was about to compliment you for your post earlier... My hypothetical situation was without a doubt Bush being right, so the contrary would have to be Bush without a doubt being wrong.... If this were the case, I would admit it and be pretty displeased with the situation. And what do you meant he conceit of my original post??? I'm just asking an innocent question. Why do you feel threatened by it?


because he's been an absolutely dismal failure on just about every front that I can possibly think of, from domestic to international.


Gotta love hyperbole...

[edit on 27-8-2005 by Herman]



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frith
Violence is not a solution.






posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 02:14 AM
link   
so really you are just asking if the end justifies the means?

really, sometimes war can be justifiable, and needed.
if that really happened thern of corse yes it would



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 06:22 AM
link   
I'd be very happy it was over.

But the hypothetical post is flawed anyway *shrug*.

Most protesters are angered because the war was waged under a false premise; if this premise turns out to be true, then there'd be far less protesting going on to begin with and some of us would actually stand up and say "Ok, we were wrong, that sucker did have WMDs".

I'm honestly not seeing the validity of the original question though, as it's basing the hypothetical upon a series of events that simply cannot happen.



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
I'm honestly not seeing the validity of the original question though, as it's basing the hypothetical upon a series of events that simply cannot happen.


Not really. These things pretty well could happen, other than the 100% of Iraqis saying they support it thing. It's my belief that Saddam did have the WMDs, and probably hid them somewhere. Most likely Iran. But that's just my opinion, and not what I made this thread to talk about.

We've had some good replies so far. Keep it up!



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 10:56 AM
link   
How is "success in Iraq" going to stop terrorism in the middle east? To go with the hypothesis means we'd have to agree on this happening, and the events leading up to the cessation of those terrorist acts.

That's my bigger question of the moment.

(And part of why the hypothetical seems a bit out of joint)



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower
How is "success in Iraq" going to stop terrorism in the middle east? To go with the hypothesis means we'd have to agree on this happening, and the events leading up to the cessation of those terrorist acts.

That's my bigger question of the moment.

(And part of why the hypothetical seems a bit out of joint)


I guess we can change it, if you'd like, to just terrorism in Iraq then. But most of the terrorism going on is coming from Iraq, so the seem to be kind of linked. Anyway, change it if you will.



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 11:43 AM
link   
(I'm sorry. I really don't mean to sound pedantic...but....)

Iraq has only become part of the terrorist hotspots in very recent times...but even allowing for that, there's a far greater (and more deadly) history of terrorism surrounding the Israeli/Palestine problems, and those have nothing to do with Iraq, Hussein, WMDs and/or the War on Terror.

Ok. So, given everything that's been said so far....gah, I'm sorry, I still can't go with the hypothesis. Too many unjoined dots, if you will.

Having said that, Brimstone put it quite, quite perfectly.


Well, considering we haven't found WMDs
We've actually increased terrorist activities in the middle east.
We haven't captured Bin Laden
We haven't turned Iraq into a working Democracy, but rather a theocracy subjected to Islamic law
The people of Iraq don't want us there............because, I can admit, given your perimeters, that I was wrong. I would humbly submit myself and apologize. I would support President Bush as one of the greatest Americans who've ever lived, and a groundbreaking voice of both freedom and forethought.

I actually would


I just don't see it happening.



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tinkleflower

Well, considering we haven't found WMDs
We've actually increased terrorist activities in the middle east.
We haven't captured Bin Laden
We haven't turned Iraq into a working Democracy, but rather a theocracy subjected to Islamic law
The people of Iraq don't want us there............because, I can admit, given your perimeters, that I was wrong. I would humbly submit myself and apologize. I would support President Bush as one of the greatest Americans who've ever lived, and a groundbreaking voice of both freedom and forethought.

I actually would


I just don't see it happening.



Again, this isn't what the threads about. I could debate you on these points, and damn I'd really like to, but I'm not going to because that's not what this thread is about. It's a simple hypothetical, really. If we found WMD's, it would mean that Bush wasn't wrong (Wrong being the keyword, not lied), and everything else could follow suit. Capturing Bin Laden, and restoring peace to Iraq. I still believe that we're going to restore peace to Iraq, and eventually capture Bin Laden (If he's not already dead). But again, my personal opinions in this thread don't matter. When asked what I would do if Bush was beyond a doubt wrong, I gave a simple answer without any off-topic comments. I'd appreciate it if others would do the same here.



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Herman
In a stunning turn of events, the U.S has found the WMDs Saddam was hiding, completely put a stop to all terrorist activity in the middle east, captured Bin Laden, turned Iraq into a working democracy, and a survey was done of every single Iraqi citizen showing that 100% of them are happy with what has happened and support it.

How would you feel? ... So what would be your reaction?


I would feel sardonic. My reaction would be that BushCo completely lucked out. I would still believed we were lied to, that the invasion into Iraq initiated the terrorism there. I would question the validity of the 'found' WMDs (did the US plant them?) and I would question whether they had Bin Laden in custody all along and chose to 'capture' him when it was convenient.

I feel like know too much to be happy about the outcome of this disaster. The ends wouldn't justify the means in other words.

I would however be happy for the people of Iraq as long as they were happy. I would feel that somehow, some good came out of this mess, however accidently.

I would stll mourn for the loss of life all around and feel that it was not worth it.

Had this fantasy happened in 2003, without all the discoveries since then (Downing Street Memo, 9/11 Commission report, PNAC, 9/11 conspiracy, etc.) I would have felt justified because I supported the war at that time. But since then, I have educated myself and have come to see that it was all a huge deception.

So even if everything did turn out peachy, in my opinion, it would be quite analogous to a murderer breaking into a house and finding a burglar there. The murderer kills the burglar as the authorities arrive only to be handsomely rewarded for his heroism. Akin to stumbling into accidental success.

Now, if I found out that the Downing Street Memo, 9/11 Commission report, PNAC, 9/11 conspiracy, the lies of the administration, etc. were all faked, then I would gladly admit that I was terribly wrong. I would be embarrassed and feel foolish for being so against this war and so sure I knew what I was talking about.



posted on Aug, 27 2005 @ 02:19 PM
link   
Now that's the kind of reply I was looking for, BH!
I knew I could count on you to not try and turn this into some silly partisan debate.

Good post!




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join