GuyClinch wrote:Ok ok. I give up. Yes, we should kill citizens of every country that doesn't bow down to the US. Happy now? People like you really need to experience war to see how horrible it is. It's pathetic that you cry for some dogs Michael Vick made to fight each other, while you feel like these people deserve to have their families killed, limbs blown off, cities destroyed, etc. All because they are "brown terrorists."
Way to dance around point. You give up because your support a position that no thinking person would. A country demands 50% of our countries gross profits - and you would give it to them. Because <g> War is only an option when we are being "invaded" because its so terrible.
People fly planes into the US killing 3000 - and OMG war isn't an option. Why? becaues they didn't invade us.
The Germans kill off millions of jews in concentration camps and march into the countries of our allies and war isn't an option for you because we weren't invaded.
LMAO. Your lame attempt to turn any oppostion to your ridiculous view into the idea that we should blow up any country that doesn't bow down to us is some weak sauce. I never said that and of course no thinking person would.
I personally don't think the Iraq war was justified. That doesn't mean the ONLY reason to go to war is an invasion of our soil.
As I said before this country was started with a war because of taxation without representation. Essentially the British were robbing us. Do you think the revolutionary war was unjust? There are some thing worth fighting for.
Pete
Well to be fair terrorists did invade our country and posed as "normal citizens" duping us into training them and "arming them". The 9/11 attacks do not happen if the terrorists do not enter our country and intel suggests that the plans of 9/11 were known well before the time it occurred without any action by our administration.
Our own Revolutionary War may have been started because of "taxation without representation" but the ignition of the war was over the Intolerable Acts most notably the closing of the port of Boston and the Quartering Act which allowed British troops to occupy the colonies and take whatever housing they saw fit if it was not provided for them. A previous Quartering Act had the colonies providing the stationed British troops during the French and Indian War but the troops remained even after the French was defeated and the war was over! In essence the British troops invaded not only our land but our homes as well to enforce unjustified and unconstitutional laws which we had no say in ourselves.
Most of these Acts were passed even after the Boston Massacre where British troops slayed "a mob" of Bostonian citizens who were not armed with guns. These killings do not happen if the British troops were allowed to remain in the colonies AFTER the French and Indian War was over!
And yes you can say the "bad guys" during the World Wars and even the global conflicts in recent times never had a direct "invasion" on to U.S. soil....but they did attack and invaded our allies soil and it's obvious that if you attack our friends we would come to aid....yet in most cases the U.S. were slow in direct aid and reluctant to get directly involved because they knew war meant death and they were not going to send boys over to die unless it was the last resort.
War on Iraq does not seem like a last resort. There was no invasion of another country and no hiding of weapons of mass destruction. Their leader is defeated and dead (reportedly) and now we are still over there for what?
When was the last time you heard of a citizen stopping a terrorist attack through the use of a licensed firearm?
