Oh Sh*t, Here We Go (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Bjerknes
- Start date
.....
I like your theory, don't get me wrong.
Just say we weren't needed.
Just say we weren't needed.
How do you know they have a choice? most of the time they come from unpriveliged, uneducated backgrounds.
The difference is one is the aggressor, while the other is defending his country. Action, reaction, don't invade other lands, you won't get yourself blown to smithereens. Simple, and easy.
You're more detached from reality than a liberal in this case, i'm sorry.
A foreign army is invading your land, what do you do? have them over for lunch?
Making the aggressor and the aggressed upon equal is your mistake here.
They might love America as a country, as a people. Nobody loves the American government though. I work in an American university, and the Americans over here are the nicest people i know. I have no problems with Americans, or America(planning a visit there this year actually). My problem along with Nzoric and the vast majority of the worlds population is with the American government and its foreign policies.
As for being a soldier being a noble occupation, by that same logic, actually defending your own country from foreign invasion is even more noble.
"Risking their lives" If thats your criteria for an occupation being noble, then these suicide bombers who attack the US army in Iraq go even further and sacrifice their lives. So by your own logic, you should consider these suicide bombers even more noble.
Nobody said anything about that being noble
Nobody said anything about that either. Its kind of the same thing though, both are killing innocent people in lands foreign to them. Both do not deserve any sympathy, a foreign invador and a terrorist killing innocent people in foreign lands in the name of religion.
The difference is one is the aggressor, while the other is defending his country. Action, reaction, don't invade other lands, you won't get yourself blown to smithereens. Simple, and easy.
You're more detached from reality than a liberal in this case, i'm sorry.
A foreign army is invading your land, what do you do? have them over for lunch?
Making the aggressor and the aggressed upon equal is your mistake here.
They might love America as a country, as a people. Nobody loves the American government though. I work in an American university, and the Americans over here are the nicest people i know. I have no problems with Americans, or America(planning a visit there this year actually). My problem along with Nzoric and the vast majority of the worlds population is with the American government and its foreign policies.
As for being a soldier being a noble occupation, by that same logic, actually defending your own country from foreign invasion is even more noble.
"Risking their lives" If thats your criteria for an occupation being noble, then these suicide bombers who attack the US army in Iraq go even further and sacrifice their lives. So by your own logic, you should consider these suicide bombers even more noble.
Nobody said anything about that being noble
Nobody said anything about that either. Its kind of the same thing though, both are killing innocent people in lands foreign to them. Both do not deserve any sympathy, a foreign invador and a terrorist killing innocent people in foreign lands in the name of religion.
People stil larguing about the word noble 
For that first part, ever heard of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder? I suggest you look into it.
How do you know that would still be the case? Suicide bombers are extremists, lead by religion. Do you really think they still wouldn't do shit like that even if their place hadn't been invaded? There's countries where culture begins to change. A certain few don't like that and decide to attack the country they feel is the most influential for that change.
Hutzilopochtli is not impressed.
Action/reaction? What kind of reaction is suicide bombing? Or flying planes into buildings?
And I can't think of a government people don't speak badly of. Maybe in countries like Canada and Norway or whatever but in that case the people are the ones who need fixing.
For that first part, ever heard of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder? I suggest you look into it.
How do you know that would still be the case? Suicide bombers are extremists, lead by religion. Do you really think they still wouldn't do shit like that even if their place hadn't been invaded? There's countries where culture begins to change. A certain few don't like that and decide to attack the country they feel is the most influential for that change.
You didn't join in on the European scene 2 years after 1937, D-Day was 6th of June, 1944
To put my argument into perspective, this is the Eastern Front in April 1944 - they've almost reached Warzaw.
To put my argument into perspective, this is the Eastern Front in April 1944 - they've almost reached Warzaw.
Hutzilopochtli is not impressed.
Action/reaction? What kind of reaction is suicide bombing? Or flying planes into buildings?
And I can't think of a government people don't speak badly of. Maybe in countries like Canada and Norway or whatever but in that case the people are the ones who need fixing.
what's the difference really if you invade a country on economical grounds or religious ones? they are one and the same under a different name. they believe there is something to fight for, and kill the innocent regardless. and I agree with the action-reaction thing. there's always the aggressor, which will result in the defender, and the cycle just continues.