ILikeDubyah
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2005
- Messages
- 172
- Reaction score
- 0
- Location
- Phx
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
gordontravels said:If you want to discuss Atilla the Hun or Alexander the Great then start another thread. I believe those were direct wars and not insurgents on a terror campaign. Not that there isn't terror in war but there is a difference in terror, all out war and resistance. No, you say:
(Before you read this, please know that I support this war & the USA, 110%. I'm just saying how I can see how comparing the French resistance & the Muslim Extremeists makes sense to me.)
Since I don't see how this can make sense; meaning it is not a reasonable way to look at things, I say you don't understand. This is closer to fantasy than reality and that is what Hitler's mind was all about. "If Hitler had won!" Some will confuse fantasy with a political agenda but I certainly try not to be one of them. Believe what you want. I know that when someone with your take on history or "understanding" says:
"I'm not playing word games, you're just reading and interpreting things the wrong way."
I'm doing exactly what I should be doing and your opinion is to build a defense or explanation after the fact. I will repeat, I read your words and respond. So I'm not only interpreting wrong but reading wrong as well? Gosh, I'd better be more careful when reading and interpreting what you write; especially when comparing Osama to Atilla or Alexander the Great.
Have Christians and Muslims killed each other in history? Of course. Do Christians say it is a tenet of their religion to convert or kill? Do Muslims say it is a tenet of their religion to convert or kill? One answer is no and one is yes. Then comes the terrorism. Iraq has a government and everyone, including the terrorists, could work within that government as a means to their end. That is democracy. Terrorists want to impose, not debate. Hitler wanted to impose, not to debate. Alexander tried to debate, then imposed.
Your last paragraph makes absolutely NO sense to me, as we are still a target for Fundamentalists. As for where they are taken care of...Better there than here (though that has nothing to do with this debate.)
Really? Didn't you say you support the war 110%. I expressed what I thought was a good reason to support that war. Let's tie up the terrorists in Iraq or Afghanistan and kill them there rather than having to kill them here. What's your reason for supporting the war?
On a totally different note, How were you shot & which war were you in? (Not to be mean, but even if you were in a war, it has no bearing on this debate either...Just because you may have been, doesn't mean you have all the answers....Look at Kerry & McCain....totally clueless about most things.)
You won't ever find me saying I have all the answers, far from it. I want to debate and I always hope that debate leads to more learning on my part either from being taught or by realizing my own purpose and determination.
You asked me to "breathe, breathe" in a post acting as if I were out of control. I referenced being shot in Vietnam because that's what the medic was saying to me on the battlefield. Because I actually fought in war doesn't give me more "understanding" than you. It may give me a different perspective on where that understanding comes from, that's all. Those that don't go to war are just as important as those who do. The term is "keeping the home fires burning".
Otherwise, I read what you write and only interpret what I read; your words. Your history and understanding of it is bogus in my eyes being based on "ifs". Terrorism and all out war are two different things. Terrorists and resistance fighters are two different things. Islamic Fundamentalists interpreting the Koran and what the Koran actually says are two different things. You thinking it makes sense and any agreement from me are two different things. Your cohort in agreement says I only see things in Black and White. I say "good". :duel
First off, I forgot to say in my last post that I completely & totally respect anyone who has gone to war for this country (willingly or otherwise), so I thank you & my hat's off to you.
I wasn't "discussing" Atilla the Hunn or Alex the great, just making comparisons...both senselessly murdered women, children & people having nothing to do with their war. (From that aspect, you could say the same of the American Gov't VS. the Native Americans during the Manifest Destiny expansion, as another example.) My point was that war is constant. 2/3 rds of the last 500 years have been racked with war.
I agree that this is not a "responsible" way to look at things, especially for an American, and again, I do not look at the situation this way....but I can see how OTHERS would/could.
As for your "convert of kill" comment.....How many Christian Crusades were there, again????
Tone, influction, and expressed meaning are completely lost when putting pen to paper, that's just the way things go....Why do you think that in every English class you were in, the bulk of the work you had to do was "interpret what the author is saying"....and notice how there was never 1 right answer? That's because you can draw your conclusions from casual or artistic writing...If this were a specification manual or instructions of some sort, then I'd agree with you, there's no other way to interpret what I meant.
No, you don't see things in black and white, because if you did, You would UNDERSTAND both opinions, choose one and argue for it.....Instead you have your opinion and refuse to hear the other opinion or the basis of it, and you just counter with "that doesn't make sense", or say "that's not a reasonable way of looking at things." To some people (NOT ME) it is.
You want my opinion on what needs to be done? Finish up operations in Iraq & afgh. Let the CIA find Osama, Leave the people of these countries to their own devices, bring the troops home, Close the borders to ALL foreigners immigrants, and set up walls @ canada & mexico, and ocean fences miles off each shore (with gates, of course) & have both types deterants patrolled regularly (creating many, many jobs here to boot.) The military is fro a "strong national defense", not offense....we've done our job, we brought democracy to 2 countries with prior brutal regimes. at the end of the day, we can be proud. now we can end it, and "provide for the common defense" at home (For now anyways.)
"Iraq has a government and everyone, including the terrorists, could work within that government as a means to their end. That is democracy. Terrorists want to impose, not debate."
I totally agree with you on this, but as seen by liberals, we're terrorists according to your last sentence there. We debated nothing before "shock & awe, and "imposed" democracy on a country that's never known it.....how could we be so sure it was the best thing for them & would work? THIS WOULD BE A LIBERAL's POINT OF VIEW< NOT MINE!!!