It's people like you who will ultimately destroy this country, Lucas. Funny, I've often thought it was people like me who have stood up against those who would try to take our freedom away.

No it "is" people like you. Just HOW do you think those freedoms came to be in the first place? By the blood of your fellow Americans! Do "really" think the British at the time would have sat down to negotiate with the colonists? They proved otherwise. Do you think Hitler would have sit down to talks? He also proved otherwise. So you can talk the talk but won't walk the walk. how typical.

No it "is" people like you. Just HOW do you think those freedoms came to be in the first place? By the blood of your fellow Americans! Do "really" think the British at the time would have sat down to negotiate with the colonists? They proved otherwise. Do you think Hitler would have sit down to talks? He also proved otherwise. So you can talk the talk but won't walk the walk. how typical.

I may not be willing to shed blood over it, but that does not mean I won't strive for rights other ways. Okay?

I'm just tired of the violence, the hate, the death, the...crap. I'm tired of dealing with that shit, ive had my fair share. I'm done.

Do "really" think the British at the time would have sat down to negotiate with the colonists?

If the right chips were on the table, yes.

As for me being sympathetic to Muslims, how could I/ all they want to do is eradicate Jews. Not ALL do want that. Right?

(Citizen)SilentPoetNovember 14, 2006 22:13:56

not all, but that is really a stupid statement Lucas, truly stupid.

How can you think I would condone the murder of nine hundred thousand people? But yet you indirectly condone the death of Muslims by sympathizing with this post

The only Muslim deaths I condone are the terrorists., and no NOT ALL OF THEM EITHER.

Frankly MM, I don't wish death to anyone. Not even the terrorists themselves.

lets see how that works when one of them is butt fucking you while cutting your throat. you just do not get it Lucas, they want you dead. period.

would not seek revenge or their death if they killed one of my family members, you know why? Because i would pity them, for going down the path of murder. I would forgive them, mourn the loss, and move on - trying as hard as i can to spread peace, and not war.

this last statement is the dumbest most ridiculous statement you have ever made.

(Citizen)ModeratemanNovember 15, 2006 14:41:28

Dumb because I disagree? Dumb because...you think it is wrong?

Please, tell me why.

I don't think you get that I understand what you are saying, all of you. Still, I choose to believe what I want, period.

If the right chips were on the table, yes.

Earth to Lucas! Time for you to deplane from your astral flight.

That has to be the stupidest comment I have ever seen! Oh wait, are you going to tell us Hitler would have been talked out of it as well? Please do, so we have a new stupidest statement.

SilentPoet:

That's Righwingers point, "diplomacy" has killed far more people than any war. How so?

Didn't you even bother reading Rightwinger's article?

I guess to you all the people starved under the "humane" diplomatic sanctions in various countries are fine, since they weren't killed in a war. I guess Hussein starving, torturing and killing his people as he builds palaces with the "oil for food" program money is just A-OK, since those weren't the result of war.

Diplomacy has failed to protect any of the people of the nations of Africa run by criminals.

Diplomacy prevents anyone from assassinating people like Castro who kill their own people.

Yes, it's good for leaders of nations to get together to hash out differences, but that's not what happens is it. From what I can see, "diplomacy" is just the way spineless leaders say, "yeah, you can kill anyone you want, just don't use bullets."

Do "really" think the British at the time would have sat down to negotiate with the colonists? If the right chips were on the table, yes.

LMFAO! That's the silliest thing I've ever heard. You obviously don't know jack shit about the Revolutionary War . . . go read David McCollugh's (sic) 1776 and you tell me exactly what chips could've been brought to that table to keep that war from happening.

If people with this idea were in charge of our country there'd be two countries here right now - the United States of America and the Confederate States of America. You think they didn't try TALKING for twenty damn years before the Civil War started?

Eventually, whether the insipid believe it or not, some conflicts will come to a point where "diplomacy" isn't an option. There was no other way to stop the Civil War. There was no other way to stop Hitler. There was no other way to gain independence.

Now, about the Iraq War, I keep my opinion to myself. But to be so painfully, profusely ignorant of the history of your own country is simply a gas. Thanks for the great laugh, buddy. Eat the pie, Lucas.

Lucas, I guess I misunderstood your post; I apologize for getting so upset. Now, having said that......

That's where we part, I don't think it is often a necessary thing. I'd much rather solve things through diplomacy, etc...anything but the shed of blood.

---SilentPoet

I have news for you....diplomacy only works if BOTH sides are reasonable and amenable to acheiving a solution.
When you have people, especially fanatics, who do not wish to negotiate, in good faith, on any playing field, level or otherwise, it will not work.
FundamentalistIslamics---and please note that I did not use the generic term "Muslims", meaning all of them---(including those in power in Iran who will very, very soon have the means to build at least two nuclear bombs a month) want us dead. Also, their faith sees it as a virtue to deceive infidels. Negotiation with them is pointless. All you can do is kill them and work at keeping them away from home and hearth. End of story.

Most of it comes from the fact that I became very much a pacifist after dealing a certain family figure for many years. I don't like conflict, war, death, any of it.

---SiPo

Understood, and I do sympathize. My father was a moderately combative alocoholic who, when I was 14, accused me of being gay because I wasn't a star athelete and hadn't had a girlfriend yet. Took me years to get over that, and to forgive him, but I did, and as he got older, things slowly changed and got much better between us. When he died, all the old, long-broken fences were mended. As things proceed in your situation, and though I admit that I know little of that situation, I can say with some certainty that they will improve for you, too.

However, a familial conflict is not a proper analogy for the situation in which the nation presently finds itself. I seriously doubt the person in question wants to kill you and your progeny for no good reason other than the fact that you exist and they don't like you. Or to subjugate what remains under their system of faith and law.

Funny, i've often thought it was people like me who have stood up against those who would try to take our freedom away.

---SiPo

You're free to feel that way; I don't. if I had time, I'd go into it in detail, but right now I can't. Let me just say three words: Gun Control Laws.

I do see that. What I don't see as being justified, is interning nearly all, if not all of the germans and japanese in the US. Can you honestly justify that, in any way?

---SiPo

Well, let me say this: no Germans-AMERICANS were interned during WW2; German POWs, yes.
Now, the Japanese-Americans, called "Nissei", were interned, but then, it was the Japs who drew first blood and attacked us directly, and took American lives, not the Germans. This created a level of anti-Japanese hysteria that equalled the anti-German hysteria in WW1. they were seen as spies and possible saboteurs. Also, let's face it; Japanese were easier to pick out of a crowd than Germans, which made it much easier to round them up.
To their credit, thousands of them signed up for military service, were sent to Europe, and became the most-decorated division in the ENTIRE WAR. Of any nation. They did this to prove their loyalty to their country and to defend it and its freedoms. They understood what was a stake, and wanted to help out; unlike many people (ahemLucasahem) today.
As a side note, when I see thousands of American "moderate" Muslims stampeding toward, and crowding into, military recruitment centers, volunteering to defend their country and their religion from their zealot brethren, then I'll feel a lot better about them.

Have I ever said we weren't? No, no I have not.

---SiPo

Perhaps I misspoke. Again, I'm sorry.

You know, I love it that the lefties who posted here all seemed to love the first paragraph or so, when I was talking about giving up. They really liked that. The US would fail, be knocked down a peg or two, and nothing would make them hapopier. I don't get it. More later.

he US would fail, be knocked down a peg or two, and nothing would make them hapopier. I don't get it.

Well it could be handy. Maybe my leaders would start acting in the interests of my own country rather than in the interests of yours.

I'd rather it not come to that though. There are better ways of gaining independence of thought and policy than by having one's allies destroyed.

It's kinda funny how Silent feels that diplomacy is the best alternative yet he can't seem to convince anyone, not even liberals on this article, that his way is the right way. Like RW said, diplomacy only works if both sides are willing to give up something. So far Silent has proved the opposite. We are not talking about a group of people who want us to leave them alone, we are talking about people who believe that we should be exterminated, eliminated from the face of this planet, who consider us infidels and that the only solutions to this problem is death. This from a religion that is said to be "a religion of peace".

Do you seriously believe that a group of people seeking WMD have a desire to sit down and work things out? I'm sorry Silent but I think it's time for you to come back to reality and realize that, while most people would rather spread love than death, in the end death is a natural solution to many of our problems. We have a business called extermination, the death of things such as roaches, rats, ants, weeds (not pot), for crying out loud we even have people who have committed crimes where the death penalty is the punishment.

'm just tired of the violence, the hate, the death, the...crap. I'm tired of dealing with that shit, ive had my fair share. I'm done.

You can be tired of it all you want, but neither you nor anyone on this planet, not even all of us together have the power to eliminate hate, to stop violence, to avoid death. All is part of life, whether you like it or not. You have no choice but to live and deal with it. Violence is normal, otherwise we would not need police, violence is sometimes necessary in things like sports, just imagine a football player being nice when tackling the opposing team player. Boxing would not exist, martial arts would be a dance. Hate can not be avoided, people can hate certain foods, certain music, certain people. I'm sure you would not be jumping of joy if a family member, such as your mom or dad, would die (God forbid this happens because I said it). Death is the only thing certain in life, every thing we do every day causes someones death indirectly. The car you drive, your garbage, the gas you put in your car (which pays these same countries who hate us), etc.

No diplomacy will ever eliminate violence, hate or death. Regardless how much we may be able to use our minds compared to animals, in the end we are all animals and survival is an instinct built into our genes.

Sorry Silent, but dismissing who we (humans) are will not make the problem go away. Death and destruction has been part of our human nature since we walked on this planet for the first time. Your beliefs are admirable, but not realistic.

Do you often find proposals for mass murder funny? Does the thought of human suffering make you hard? If so, perhaps you need psychiatric assistance.

Have you ever read my blog? Especially my satires of "personal tragedy, disasters, war (and other things that just plain suck)? If I'm up for satiring hurricanes, 9/11 attacks and even my own Near Death Experience, I'd say that finding the irony in Rightwinger's article isn't too far a stretch for me. ;~D

Well it could be handy. Maybe my leaders would start acting in the interests of my own country rather than in the interests of yours

---cacto

Maybe your leaders better perceive the Islamic Fundie threat than you do. You are, after all, extremely biased by your contact with people of that faith.
A decent analogy could probably be drawn here between US-Australia today and the Great Britain-US alliance in, say, 1940-41, before Pearl Harbor.
We were helping them out in their defense efforts, against the better judgement and wishes of a large portion of the American population. This was because Roosevelt understood the Axis threat to American interests even though they hadn't yet attacked us. The wishful attitude of the people he governed didn't make him any less right.

Maybe your leaders better perceive the Islamic Fundie threat than you do. You are, after all, extremely biased by your contact with people of that faith.

I strongly support the Australian government's work in Southeast Asia to deal with fundamentalism. It's clever, multi-tiered and to some extent goes to the very heart of the problem. I do not support a foolish war in Iraq that has achieved nothing that's in Australia's interests. It's made us a minor target when before no one outside Asia knew where we were and made our subversive aid programs harder to implement. Our front is in Asia, not the Middle East, and it would be much wiser to deal with our own problems than get involved in yours.

In any event I seriously doubt any Middle Easterner is going to be a greater threat to Australia than Australians, Indonesians, Malaysians or Phillipinos, and that's due to geography as much as anything.

WWII is an irrelevant comparison because the US is unlikely to fall to Islam any time soon. Britain, on the other hand, was seriously threatened by the Axis. I'm also dubious as to how Australia's potential contribution could ever be so great as to reverse the tide of a war that threatens the territorial integrity of the US.

Do "really" think the British at the time would have sat down to negotiate with the colonists? If the right chips were on the table, yes.

If that's what you truly think, then you need a reality check old man. They would NOT have sit down to talks. We (the US) wanted our freedom from their oppressive rule. They on the other hand would NOT let go of that much power or property! So then what do you do if the "diplomatic" scenario fails?

Lucas, I guess I misunderstood your post; I apologize for getting so upset.

It happens to the best of us, no worries.

You think they didn't try TALKING for twenty damn years before the Civil War started?

From what I've read, there was little talking, and mostly total bull shit. It was, again - as i see it today - all "my way or the high way," it happened then, and it happens now.

Oh wait, are you going to tell us Hitler would have been talked out of it as well?

I believe he couldve, again, if we had the right chips.

guess to you all the people starved under the "humane" diplomatic sanctions in various countries are fine, since they weren't killed in a war. I guess Hussein starving, torturing and killing his people as he builds palaces with the "oil for food" program money is just A-OK, since those weren't the result of war. Diplomacy has failed to protect any of the people of the nations of Africa run by criminals. Diplomacy prevents anyone from assassinating people like Castro who kill their own people. Yes, it's good for leaders of nations to get together to hash out differences, but that's not what happens is it. From what I can see, "diplomacy" is just the way spineless leaders say, "yeah, you can kill anyone you want, just don't use bullets."

No, I don't, but at least they have a chance at living instead of getting gunned down. At least they have people that care for them enough to get food for them, or at least try. Whereas if you were in a war, I bet you, very few people would still hold the same care. They'd be all scared shitless of going in, cause they (note, *they*, not those in need), might get shot, or killed.

I find it funny, you bash sanctions...when the US did the same, and does the same if im not mistaken.

Diplomacy can work, and all i say, is give it a chance before there's the decision to go and blow people away, alright?

lets see how that works when one of them is butt fucking you while cutting your throat. you just do not get it Lucas, they want you dead. period.

Okay, it's not like there won't be people who want me dead. I'll fight them, but my own way, and I will try as i might, not to kill them.

this last statement is the dumbest most ridiculous statement you have ever made.

How so, because i won't take revenge...spilling their blood?

The only Muslim deaths I condone are the terrorists., and no NOT ALL OF THEM EITHER.

Well you don't get that point across MM.



I've been thinking...

I admit that war is an option, but..the FINAL option only. Until all other options have been exhausted, i say no to war.

I would fight...for my family and friends.

While I would feel sorry for all others, my family and friends come first.