thedrifter
03-06-04, 09:33 AM
Some wars have justification
By John Williamson
The BG News (Bowling Green State U.)
03/04/2004
U-WIRE) BOWLING GREEN, Ohio -- "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
Since my brother is currently serving in Iraq, I thought I needed to submit my thoughts and corrections.
War by nature is deadly and harmful and should not be taken lightly. With that in mind, it is safe to assume that it is at least possible that the U.S. and in fact the world was wrong about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
As Matt said, civilians die in war, but his source for information is very misleading. If he had taken the time to look further into his source, he would have seen that 75 percent of the deaths that the site reports are the result of terrorist bombings primarily against civilian targets.
Taking that into account still leaves roughly 2,000 civilians killed as a result of U.S. action which is indeed regrettable but does not represent the type of crisis to which Matt is alluding.
He makes an attempt to say that all war is bad, but I am not convinced. Take for instance the situation in Haiti. How many more civilians and foreigners would have been killed had the U.S. not sent in Marines to protect them? Or maybe we should ignore the atrocities in Africa where ethnic wars have within the past decade killed over a million people?
The U.S. is not the cause of all wars. Therefore, if the U.S. were to adopt a "just say no to war" policy, the only message it would send would be that the country will no longer be there to help those in need or to stop those who seek to abuse their power and oppress others.
After nearly a year in Iraq, we have lost over 500 of our family members -- which is always tragic -- but their sacrifice has freed a population of 24 million from oppression. For the first time in over two decades, the Iraqi people will decide what their government will do and who will lead it.
How do you weigh the loss of 500 Americans and 2,000 Iraqi civilians with the prospect of freedom from fear and tyranny for millions?
For me, any decision to unilaterally ask the U.S. to "say no to war" would be an acceptance that American lives are inherently more valuable then the millions in underdeveloped countries. I find that unacceptable.
http://www.uwire.com/content//topops030404001.html
Sempers,
Roger
:marine:
By John Williamson
The BG News (Bowling Green State U.)
03/04/2004
U-WIRE) BOWLING GREEN, Ohio -- "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
Since my brother is currently serving in Iraq, I thought I needed to submit my thoughts and corrections.
War by nature is deadly and harmful and should not be taken lightly. With that in mind, it is safe to assume that it is at least possible that the U.S. and in fact the world was wrong about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
As Matt said, civilians die in war, but his source for information is very misleading. If he had taken the time to look further into his source, he would have seen that 75 percent of the deaths that the site reports are the result of terrorist bombings primarily against civilian targets.
Taking that into account still leaves roughly 2,000 civilians killed as a result of U.S. action which is indeed regrettable but does not represent the type of crisis to which Matt is alluding.
He makes an attempt to say that all war is bad, but I am not convinced. Take for instance the situation in Haiti. How many more civilians and foreigners would have been killed had the U.S. not sent in Marines to protect them? Or maybe we should ignore the atrocities in Africa where ethnic wars have within the past decade killed over a million people?
The U.S. is not the cause of all wars. Therefore, if the U.S. were to adopt a "just say no to war" policy, the only message it would send would be that the country will no longer be there to help those in need or to stop those who seek to abuse their power and oppress others.
After nearly a year in Iraq, we have lost over 500 of our family members -- which is always tragic -- but their sacrifice has freed a population of 24 million from oppression. For the first time in over two decades, the Iraqi people will decide what their government will do and who will lead it.
How do you weigh the loss of 500 Americans and 2,000 Iraqi civilians with the prospect of freedom from fear and tyranny for millions?
For me, any decision to unilaterally ask the U.S. to "say no to war" would be an acceptance that American lives are inherently more valuable then the millions in underdeveloped countries. I find that unacceptable.
http://www.uwire.com/content//topops030404001.html
Sempers,
Roger
:marine: