Krappyappy wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
Well, I have a simple question for you. When the international media defines people like Osama as evil and murderous, do you think it's a worldwide conspiracy to conceal the truth, or is it really the truth?
international media? like who, CNN? the BBC? you get all your news from western sources, i bet. rest assured that there are news services which do not define bin ladin as evil and murderous. the impartiality of these services are questionable, but there's no such thing as neutral media.
Can you find a non-Islamic source that does not define Osama as a murderous terrorist? That's what really concerns me about the Islamic world. Plenty of non-Western sources still view terrorism the way that the West does. It's usually only certain Islamic sources that are more forgiving of people like Zawahiri. It's as if they are willing to pardon someone of the same faith rather than logically assessing someone's actions.
Krappyappy wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
I think the media twisted the nature of how terror cells work by making them look more organized than they really are, but other than that, I find it hard to believe that our own government is more evil than say.... Zawahiri.
let me repeat myself, there are no good or bad guys in war, only winners and losers. when you start talking about good and evil, that starts sounding suspiciously like religious or political propaganda.
So, you're saying that someone who willingly blows themselves up in a bus full of random people (often with children among them) is on the same moral level as a soldier. I'm atheist, but even I have a set of morals. This isn't about religion, it's about logic.
Krappyappy wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
For the most part, I'm Libertarian, so I have a thorough appreciation for the distrust of government, and I'm well aware of the military industrial complex's power in our government. I think it was the primary force driving the war with Iraq, but once we had to take over the responsibility of running Iraq, it became less about fighting and more about reconstruction.
i agree. the reconstruction was always a major part of the war plan, because there's big money involved. see halliburton, etc.
I agree. I think Halliburton is being run by some very corrupt people. However, I think the everyday consultants, aid workers, and others are mostly good people. Reconstruction is only possible with a large amount of manpower made up of people willing to risk being kidnapped or killed. There is plenty of corruption in the corporate side of this mission, but I'm not going to condemn the everyday worker in this.
Krappyappy wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
Unfortunately, the insurgency has made it nigh impossible for us to get anywhere in this, and the complete lack of regard for their own people makes it impossible for me to assume they are virtuous in any way.
what, did you think they'd just let a foreign country saunter in and take control? and their own people? the reason they're fighting is because they don't consider opposing factions 'their own people.' the only reason sectarian violence hasn't happened in iraq in the past 3 decades was because saddam hussein wouldn't let it.
True, but rational people would at least unite against occupiers like us. Instead, they actually kill each other more than they kill us. That works out well for our soldiers, so I'm thankful for that in an ironic way. However, it also demonstrates that these sects are not rational enough to be reasoned with. If we wanted to truly complete this mission, we'd kill off all of the militias without hesitation.
Of course, we don't want to become the next Saddam. It would be more practical, but it would only degrade us further. If we leave now, we can save ourselves a lot of trouble.
Krappyappy wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
Let me give you an example. A recent terror attack involved a man driving a truck into the middle of an area where several hundred poor unemployed people were looking for work. The man in the truck made it look like he had some jobs offers for them. When the people crowded around his truck, he blew it up. 60 or so people died. Another 100 or so were severely injured.
To me, acts like that tell me that we really are the good guys by comparison, if nothing else. Our enemies only like two things: chaos and the power to oppress people with fear.
source please. i will not consider stories to be evidence without proof.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/12/ … topstoriesKrappyappy wrote:
look, what's so hard about admitting the truth? the US is a superpower, it wants iraq, it goes in and takes iraq. it's that simple. people need to stop being pussies and trying to rationalize with all this 'we're good, they're evil, they kill kittens' bullshit. this is the way the world works, might really does make right and the winners write the books after. or do i really need to remind you of a history of the past 5 millenia?
What defines us as a Western nation is a concern for morality as defined by secular humanism. This is why imperialism should run counter to our ideals. Unfortunately, the Republicans seem to have forgotten this.
If we were to revert back to the imperialistic ideals of Ancient Rome, then your advice would ring true. Unfortunately, it is true when we look at neoliberal foreign policy. We have behaved like an empire for the last 50 years. However, that doesn't mean we should continue. The failure of Iraq is a golden opportunity to show why the old ways are no longer a viable way of life.
The future should be about limiting war to an absolute last resort.
Unfortunately, it looks like we will instead head in the Roman direction. We're already slipping away from the rest of the West in a militaristic way....
Last edited by Turquoise (2006-12-29 21:04:39)
