Hey Seagull, thankyou for your replies, and yes, I think that we can agree to disagree. All the best, kia kaha.
Ka kite ano
Why do we need to respect soldiers? I don't get it., page 14
privacy
reply posted on 20-11-2007 @ 12:59 PM by Lonestar24
reply to post by Enrikez
But it is still an illusion. The only substantial thing a soldier does is fulfill the will of a higher authority. Soldiers are ONE of several tools used by policymakers (which can also reside within the military, but that is irrelevant in this context), nothing less but also nothing more. The military can be used to protect certain society standards; it can´t claim responsibility for the standards themselves. As an example, soldiers fought for the american independence and its ideas. But the development of the civil society itself was responsible that the independence and the new ideas were even warranted for.
The statement by "zoso28" is comparable to a mechanic demanding respect that he and his colleagues built your new car to such high standards - omitting that they built it on behalf of a carmaking company, using tools made by others, according to the designs of a separate engineer bureau and, not the least, because the customer is willing to pay for it.
As numerous examples from overarmed but "underdeveloped" countries around the world show, the defining factor of any society is the niveau of its cultural and social development. No amount of soldiers was ever capable to sustain a society order that did not come from within the people.
But it is still an illusion. The only substantial thing a soldier does is fulfill the will of a higher authority. Soldiers are ONE of several tools used by policymakers (which can also reside within the military, but that is irrelevant in this context), nothing less but also nothing more. The military can be used to protect certain society standards; it can´t claim responsibility for the standards themselves. As an example, soldiers fought for the american independence and its ideas. But the development of the civil society itself was responsible that the independence and the new ideas were even warranted for.
The statement by "zoso28" is comparable to a mechanic demanding respect that he and his colleagues built your new car to such high standards - omitting that they built it on behalf of a carmaking company, using tools made by others, according to the designs of a separate engineer bureau and, not the least, because the customer is willing to pay for it.
As numerous examples from overarmed but "underdeveloped" countries around the world show, the defining factor of any society is the niveau of its cultural and social development. No amount of soldiers was ever capable to sustain a society order that did not come from within the people.
reply posted on 19-3-2008 @ 08:14 AM by BlueRaja
reply to post by MrsEsterhouse
We are fighting for freedom- ours and theirs. It's a pretty narrow view to think that the freedom of others isn't a valuable/noble goal. Democracies tend not to war with one another, so it's in our interest to support them when possible, especially when the region in question is involved.
We are fighting for freedom- ours and theirs. It's a pretty narrow view to think that the freedom of others isn't a valuable/noble goal. Democracies tend not to war with one another, so it's in our interest to support them when possible, especially when the region in question is involved.
reply posted on 19-3-2008 @ 12:38 PM by BlueRaja
reply to post by MrsEsterhouse
We haven't killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, or forced them to be free. We set the conditions where they could write a constitution and vote on candidates that they wanted to(risking their lives to do so). Iraqis have been fighting along side us against the insurgency, and joining the military and police in droves. We protect our freedom by setting conditions- (i.e. the more democracies out there, the fewer the anti American tyrants). Like I said earlier, we fight for Freedom, not just for "our" Freedom. The more freedom that is out there, the fewer enemies that are out there.
We haven't killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, or forced them to be free. We set the conditions where they could write a constitution and vote on candidates that they wanted to(risking their lives to do so). Iraqis have been fighting along side us against the insurgency, and joining the military and police in droves. We protect our freedom by setting conditions- (i.e. the more democracies out there, the fewer the anti American tyrants). Like I said earlier, we fight for Freedom, not just for "our" Freedom. The more freedom that is out there, the fewer enemies that are out there.
reply posted on 19-3-2008 @ 02:09 PM by MrsEsterhouse
from
www.washingtonpost.com...
One of the first attempts to independently estimate the loss of civilian life from the Iraqi war has concluded that at least 100,000 Iraqi civilians may have died because of the U.S. invasion.
Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
Previous independent estimates of civilian deaths in Iraq were far lower, never exceeding 16,000. Other experts immediately challenged the new estimate, saying the small number of documented deaths upon which it was based make the conclusions suspect.
Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
Ok I was wrong on the numbers. Somewhere between 10,000 and 100,000
Iraqi civilian deaths. My point is still valid though.
For the record, I do deeply respect our men and women in armed service. This respect does not keep me from questioning our motives for being in iraq. I do not have one ounce of respect for the higher-ups that lied to us about this war. We have enough problems in our own country. We need to be dedicating our own resources to our country! Wars can bankrupt countries! where do you think this money goes?
www.washingtonpost.com...
One of the first attempts to independently estimate the loss of civilian life from the Iraqi war has concluded that at least 100,000 Iraqi civilians may have died because of the U.S. invasion.
Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
Previous independent estimates of civilian deaths in Iraq were far lower, never exceeding 16,000. Other experts immediately challenged the new estimate, saying the small number of documented deaths upon which it was based make the conclusions suspect.
Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
Ok I was wrong on the numbers. Somewhere between 10,000 and 100,000
Iraqi civilian deaths. My point is still valid though.
For the record, I do deeply respect our men and women in armed service. This respect does not keep me from questioning our motives for being in iraq. I do not have one ounce of respect for the higher-ups that lied to us about this war. We have enough problems in our own country. We need to be dedicating our own resources to our country! Wars can bankrupt countries! where do you think this money goes?
reply posted on 19-3-2008 @ 02:18 PM by BlueRaja
reply to post by MrsEsterhouse
If you count civilians being killed by insurgents as having died because of the US invasion, then you can make all sorts of interesting statistics up.
It is not accurate to say that the US has killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. We haven't even killed hundreds of thousands of insurgents, who are the folks we're trying to kill, much less folks we're not trying to kill.
If you count civilians being killed by insurgents as having died because of the US invasion, then you can make all sorts of interesting statistics up.
It is not accurate to say that the US has killed hundreds of thousands of civilians. We haven't even killed hundreds of thousands of insurgents, who are the folks we're trying to kill, much less folks we're not trying to kill.
reply posted on 20-3-2008 @ 05:30 PM by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by zoso28
sorry to jump into this discussion so late but this statement is most likely entire crock
did you fight in world war 2?
if not, shut up.
every was since ww2 has been an aggressive war in defense of nothing but the interests of the few.
sorry to jump into this discussion so late but this statement is most likely entire crock
did you fight in world war 2?
if not, shut up.
every was since ww2 has been an aggressive war in defense of nothing but the interests of the few.
