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.

 

WAR, what is it good for? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by ObviousTroll
 


obvious troll, what an apt name to your comment

You do bring up a certain aspect of war...............................DEATH and DECEPTION.

Oh well, best not to discuss this huh? Best not to question authority?

One must ask oneself, does allowing 4,000+ deaths to enact retribution for 2,000 murders, one must have their head on incorrectly.

All it would have taken is ONE missile to retaliate, but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO we have to move in and do what?

I am still looking for answers to THAT question.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


You need love in your life and the God of everything! He can get in done and make peace. There is a hippe inside all of us bro. Just let him out of you!



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
Funny how now that the Democrats/Socialists/Progressives/Communists are in power, War is good.


This is the best single damn point ive seen posted EVER here since I started up on ATS back in 2007.

STAR AND FLAG






posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 07:07 PM
link   
It goes far beyond political parties my friends..

War is great at keeping people in a spiritual coma and oblivious to things other than strictly survival-related issues and consumerism. It's really good for that.

You could say every recent war has been orchestrated as a clever distraction from things beyond the imagination of ordinary civilians. Think ET cover ups and your getting close.
edit on 22-12-2010 by Mayura because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 07:19 PM
link   
considering america was modelled after rome, the most blood-thirsty, imperial power to grace the earth until now, america is living up to expectations.

the roman republic, just like america, uses democracy and a senate. just like rome, only the wealthy and elite qualify for office and just like rome they vote amongst themselves on who to invade, how to divide wealth and who would lead and implement military conquests.

and just like rome, america will fall, lose it's power and just be an empty shell with fat, overweight people living in ruins that will remind them of better days.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by randomname
considering america was modelled after rome, the most blood-thirsty, imperial power to grace the earth until now, america is living up to expectations.

the roman republic, just like america, uses democracy and a senate. just like rome, only the wealthy and elite qualify for office and just like rome they vote amongst themselves on who to invade, how to divide wealth and who would lead and implement military conquests.

and just like rome, america will fall, lose it's power and just be an empty shell with fat, overweight people living in ruins that will remind them of better days.



And below, I am filling the room with reasonable and intelligent people who are responding to the above post:

:@ @:
:@ @:
:@ @:
:@ @:





posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 07:26 PM
link   
War is murder. Technology will be used to wage war without the approval of the people...ANY people, for the benefit of only those that EVER benefited from war. The elites.
In other words, war will be waged in your/our name without US, and without our permission or consent, and against us.
In fact, it already is being waged.
Whenever I see a new tool of war, sometimes sent to me by email by a friend that is in awe of the technology and OH so proud, I realize that this weapon can be used against me. So, no, I am not in awe nor proud, just saddened at the level of ignorance.
Self-defense, and that of our loved ones, is our highest calling. It is pure NATURE. It is why we are indoctrinated to believe that we can't do it alone, we need AUTHORITY to do it.
Good is bad, up is down, left is right.
Thanks Salt for the thread.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 07:31 PM
link   
Deep down, we all love war. We love the blood, the guts, the explosions, the excitement, the thrill of the hunt... Because deep down, we are hunters of prey. War will end when we have evolved more and have faded far from our animal side. I'm hoping we will get the ball rolling and go the unnatural route; using some biological engineering.
edit on 22-12-2010 by sliceNodice because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   
I take exception to the very idea that we went to war here in the US over slavery. I know that progressives are busy re-writing history, but that's just untrue, and to state so willingly is to deceive and outright lie.

War is the remedy available to men who cannot agree.

And it's not all that much of a pain if you do it right.

A couple have done so. Alexander. Ghenghis Khan. Never lost a battle nor a campaign.

Do it well, and you benefit.

Fight a war of attrition, and you'll ruin your nation.

Since WWII, we've fought limited wars in wars of attrition.

Thus, our American misery.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by IAF101
 


War is a tool, it is to be used in extreme times.

You do not pull war out when it is not necessary. Retaliation is a better tool in my opinion.

Nation building is foolhardy at best, symptomatic of problems prevalent in current conditions also in my opinion.


Extreme times ? Who decides that ? You ? Me ? Somebody in a committee ??

War is not possible when one party decides to go to war. War is only possible when "TWO" parties fight. You can't conduct a war by yourself. Retaliation is merely a pretext for war.

As for nation building, maybe if you told Eisenhower that when they divided Germany with the Soviets he would have left Germany in tatters and gone home. Or maybe you should have told General MacArthur that when he stayed back in Japan after Hirohito threw the towel and they stuck around to build that nation back from rubble after we bombed them to bits. You should have told the folks who brought down the "Berlin wall" that nation building was BS. You should have told the Kazaks, Uzbeks, Kyrgyz, Turkmens, etc Central Asian republics how futile nation building is and how they should have stuck with Gorbachev.




posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by svetlana84
Good point, and we in europe are glad that allies saved our ass. But think what was the real problem ?
Adolf Hitler ? - Part of. The real Problem was they started a WAR

Hussein ? Part of. The real Problem; he started a WAR (BTW backed by the US back in the Iran/Iraq war days)

See where i want to go ?


First, if you read history, Adolf Hitler didn't start a "war" in his opinion, he was just finishing the "previous" war and getting back what was rightfully Germany's according to him. But he could have given any pretext and it wouldn't have mattered. If the Allies wanted, we could just have let Hitler keep France and Belgium and Switzerland and Hungary and whatever else he wanted. England would have escaped war, America would have escaped war. So what is your point exactly ? He started "war" and that was the problem ?? NOPE. The problem was Europe screwed the Germans over in WW1 and that is why people like Hitler came to power and convinced a whole nation to do horrible things in the name of nationalism. It was because European attitudes towards those weaker than them didn't change, Europeans continued to exploit the weak and oppress those they had power over. Hitler saw this and thought the use of force and power to get his way was legitimate and right. That "attitude" was shattered and led to an era of decolonization because Hilter was going to make colonies of the "colonial masters" themselves.

As for Hussein, he was removed the second time we went into Iraq, not the first time when he started pounding the crap out of the Kuwaitis. It doesn't matter if it was Hussein or Pol Pott, their excuses are irrelevant, they were eliminated because "war" forced people to make the choice to stop spectating and start participating in their surroundings and doing what they felt was right.

So, no, I really don't see how you can say that "war" was the cause and "war" was what ended up being the answer.



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by saltheart foamfollower
 


Just curious, what is your view on people who defend themselves from war?



posted on Dec, 27 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   
700,000 dead Americans for something that ended peacefully in every other country on the planet due to technological innovation making slavery obsolete.

Slavery ended due to moral compunction, not technological revolution. We had industries in America that could work better than a man, but cotton still had to be picked by hand, fruits still had to be harvested by human hands. Just like it is done today, except today we use Mexicans. The war was about economics vs human morality. Morality prevailed.

Needlessly rose to power because of the sanctions imposed on Germany post WWI - Hitler never would have come to power without the destruction and sanctions imposed on Germany by other nations. Any time a country is economically isolated by sanctions, they have little choice but to use violence to acquire more resources since they can't access resources through trade.
The reasons are frankly immaterial, the end result was the moral, economic, technological progress of the world and the right to freedom, liberty and self-determination for millions of people through the fall of colonialism. And a true appreciation for the value of peace that didn't exist before and brought people together to ensure the same.

The entire war with Japan could have been avoided.

So you were fine with the Rape of Nanking, the thousands of sex-slaves that the Japanese army kept or the rapine and pillaging of thousands of people across Asia as the Japanese horde swept across ? OR the brutal Japanese use of prison labor to subjugate millions of people across Asia ? The sick belief in a man-god-emperor who decided the fates of millions by perpetuating a sick culture of cult worship around him ??

I'm sorry but that attitude of "not my problem" died out in WW2 after US soldiers walked into their first Nazi death camp.

War was not necessary to deal with Pol Pott, just as it wasn't necessary to deal with Stalin. Communism always implodes on itself since economic central planning always results in a completely destroyed economy. The Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of its bureaucracies and so too would Pol Pott's regime.

Funny, you should go and tell that to the Vietnamese Generals who saw thousands of their soldiers face off against the Khemer Rouge and their psychotic soldiers. Also funny that you compare Stalin to Pol Pott because if history is correct, Stalin took his time getting to his grave and along the way send over 40 million odd people through starvation, executions and forced labor to their deaths. I'm sure they would find comfort in knowing that you saw the slow withering and misery of an entire nation as the natural progression towards collapse. And funny that like Stalin Pol Pott also died as an old man living a full life that he didn't deserve, at least war brought an end to his imparting misery on countless other lives.

The US is about to implode itself for these very same reasons. The market will end the State.

Yeah, we've been here for 300 years, don't count us out just yet. Especially when we are still the richest, most technological competent and militarily superior nation on the planet.

Totally worthless war. Now an even more corrupt group of oligarchs is running the State. Iran's influence has grown, not diminished. Iraqi poverty has increased, not decreased. Hundreds of thousands of civilians have needlessly died because of our invasion. While Saddam was a jerk, it was the people of Iraq's responsibility to deal with him if they didn't like him as a leader, not ours.

LOL, your audacity and naivety is frankly astounding. Why don't you tell the Kurds that they should have "tried harder" instead of being gassed so easily by Saddam ? Why don't you tell the Shia's how it was their "responsibility" to rid themselves of Saddam if they "didn't like him" ??

Poverty is a much better state that slavery, maybe you can't fathom this but the Iraqis sure can.

The US invasion of Iraq has increased the misery of the Iraqi people exponentially.
Yeah, freedom is so much more onerous that standing in a line to get shot at dawn or getting gassed and buried in a mass grave because you happen to be born Kurdish and Saddam Hussein doesn't like the way you look or that your wife and daughter are suddenly fascinating playings for some sick Iraqi general who likes to make you watch ?
Yeah, bad on "us". I guess the Iraqis should put up statues to remember the "fun times" huh ??


Several million dollars per missile to kill some goat herders in the mountain regions of a god forsaken wasteland.

Good job government.

Yeah, same "goat herders" planting IEDs and engaging US Marines in Helmand province.bring this years casualties to 2000 lives lost. Guess those goats can be real rowdy huh ?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join