Chrono Compendium
Zenan Plains - Site Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Burning Zeppelin on July 17, 2006, 12:42:21 am
-
BEFORE GETTING YOUR MOLOTOV COCKTAILS READY, I'M ACTUALLY ASKING A QUESTION, NOT PORTRAYING A VIEW. HOPEFULLY THIS WILL MAKE GOOD DISCUSSION.
I was watching Bowling for Columbine yesterday. Believe me, it is quite hard to think during commercial breaks about "what do four hot babes do in one apartment in the Gold Coast", but even so, I found the film quite enlightening, even though I had watched it a couple of years back. We all know Moore bullshits a lot, but most of what he said was true, even if it was extremely selective. The film portrayed some rather disturbing facts. Not only was the actual Columbine shooting incredibly disturbing (a shooting in a school is quite horrendous, because that is one of the places people are meant to feel extremely safe), but why they did it was horrible too, the usual society-crushing-down on them. But whatever, the main point of this thread is this: why is America such a violent nation?
First off, we look at America's history, wonderfully put in a sort of slideshow, with "What A Wonderful World" playing in the background:
- 1953: U.S. overthrows Prime Minister Mossadegh of Iran. U.S. installs Shah as dictator.
- 1954: U.S. overthrows democratically elected President Arbenz of Guatemala. 200,000 civilians are killed.
- 1963: U.S. backs assassination of South Vietnamese President Diem.
- 1963-1975: The Vietnam War, supported by the U.S. military, kills an est. 4 million people in Southeast Asia.
- September 11, 1973: U.S. stages a military coup in Chile. Democratically elected president Salvador Allende assassinated. Dictator General Augusto Pinochet installed. 3,000 Chileans murdered.
- 1977: U.S. backs military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorans and four American nuns were killed.
- 1980s: U.S. trains Osama bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets. CIA gives them $3 billion.
- 1981: Reagan administration trains and funds Contras. 30,000 Nicaraguans die.
- 1982: U.S. provides billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill Iranians.
- 1983: The White House secretly gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis.
- 1989: CIA agent Manuel Noriega (also serving as de facto military leader of Panama) disobeys orders from Washington. U.S. invades Panama and removes Noriega. 3000 Panamanian civilian casualties.
- 1990: Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from U.S.
- 1991: U.S. enters Iraq. Bush reinstates dictator of Kuwait.
- 1998: Clinton bombs “weapons factory” in Sudan. Factory turns out to be making aspirin.
- 1991-date of the film: American planes bomb Iraq on a weekly basis. U.N. estimates 500,000 Iraqi children die from bombing and sanctions.
- 2000-2001: U.S. gives Taliban-ruled Afghanistan $245 million in "aid."
- The final instance in the montage depicts the September 11, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center, with a title card adding that Osama bin Laden uses his expert CIA training to murder 3000 people.
So here we find out that America has a history of using violence as an answer. In the movie, some random Canadian kid's even speak on this, saying the US basically goes "go by us or die". Also, the whole killing Native American's and Africans adds to this violent history. Many people blame the culture of violence on this history, however, the Brits, Germans, Japanese and even Australian's have a history of violence, yet their gun murders are significantly lower (even taking to account the population differences).
Another theory is gun possession, in which the US excels in, due to the 2nd Amendment. Canada has an even LARGER gun possession rate, yet it's homocide rate is incredibly lower.
One other theory is the media. No doubt the media has a lot of influence of kid's, such as movie's, music ("let's shoot Marilyn Manson!") and video game's. But EVERY country has video gamers, EVERY country has people watching violent movie's, and if Home Star Runner is to teach us anything, EVERY country, especially Scandinavia, listens to death metal-ish music!
The last theory is, according to Charlton Heston, mixed ethnicity, but who listen's to him anyways.
Remember, the thing's mentioned above are NOT the be all end all, they are just idea's and theories. Be free to prove me and ol' Mikey wrong; in fact, if you can, do so! It will result in good discussion.
-
one qusiton can you make that shorter to were ME the sappose to be stupid person can understand that sounds like your talking about the war or you think that life is crule or something
-
it sounds facinating i just dont understand it and i want to if it sounds facinateing
-
one qusiton can you make that shorter to were ME the sappose to be stupid person can understand that sounds like your talking about the war or you think that life is crule or something
Uh...I'll make the question shorter, because I am ever-so nice.
Why is the US such a violent place?
Point's I've given were:
- A History of Violence
- Foreign Violence
- Gun Possession
- Media
-
#1 its all crule because well i dont like killing i think we sould all just STOP with the killing of the guns and rap i mean come on if you cant get non get over it and africans have you seen how there treated by white men just because there a different coler does not mean they sould be slaves me i think the movie are CRAP because all the langage WE ALL USE came from mostly rap music and violent movies i addmit when im mad i use it to and having a possession of a gun just makes it worse
-
Bowling for Columbine is a pure propoganda piece. The availability of guns is not the cause of the tragedy, merely the means. If they didn't have guns, it would have been molotovs and knives. The United States was by and large isolationist up until WWII, and during the Cold War, the threat of nuclear war was a very real and very frightening one.
-
but why have a war any way its point less all for grass and dirt (land)
-
I think a history of violence and foreign violence are the largest issues. Media isn't too much of an issue depending on the intelligence of the person viewing/hearing the media. As long they can seperate reality from fiction, media has nothing to do with it. The availibity of the guns isn't an issue either. I agree with Radical_Dreamer in that the guns were simply the tools chosen by the kids and that there would've been something else used to kill people had they not had access to guns.
-
Bowling for Columbine is a pure propoganda piece. The availability of guns is not the cause of the tragedy, merely the means. If they didn't have guns, it would have been molotovs and knives. The United States was by and large isolationist up until WWII, and during the Cold War, the threat of nuclear war was a very real and very frightening one.
That is true, it is a propaganda piece. However, he doesn't blame it on gun availability, but rather the culture of fear.
Oh, and something I forgot to mention, another theory is unemployment. Canada's unemployment, however, is far higher, yet it is still a far safer place.
Must be the whole releasing their anger in Ice Hockey thing :D
but why have a war any way its point less all for grass and dirt (land)
It's not like people can just go "oh, let's stop having war!".
-
Your avatar is a good reinforcement of that idea...
-
Your avatar is a good reinforcement of that idea...
I just think it looks cool :P
I'm disappointed, Lord J. When I saw you as last poster, I was excited for a long, long post about crap. Instead, I got a line about crap. :P
-
Your avatar is a good reinforcement of that idea...
I just think it looks cool :P
I'm disappointed, Lord J. When I saw you as last poster, I was excited for a long, long post about crap. Instead, I got a line about crap. :P
Far be it from me to deprive you of the pleasure of my comments on the supposed villainy of the United States. I believe this country has the distinction of being the world's major cultural influence. We are therefore held to a higher scrutiny than most other nations; but all have committed their injustices. And I don't believe humanity's progress has advanced toward evil, so what you propose as "evil," I say invites room for improvement. This is as it has been and shall continue to be.
And, speaking of "room for improvement," there are some elections coming up in the U.S. this year. Winston Churchill famously said that, if you find yourself in Hell, keep moving. This would be a good year to vote Democrat.
-
Your avatar is a good reinforcement of that idea...
I just think it looks cool :P
I'm disappointed, Lord J. When I saw you as last poster, I was excited for a long, long post about crap. Instead, I got a line about crap. :P
Far be it from me to deprive you of the pleasure of my comments on the supposed villainy of the United States. I believe this country has the distinction of being the world's major cultural influence. We are therefore held to a higher scrutiny than most other nations; but all have committed their injustices. And I don't believe humanity's progress has advanced toward evil, so what you propose as "evil," I say invites room for improvement. This is as it has been and shall continue to be.
And, speaking of "room for improvement," there are some elections coming up in the U.S. this year. Winston Churchill famously said that, if you find yourself in Hell, keep moving. This would be a good year to vote Democrat.
Good points, good points. I'm not proposing that the US is a nation of evil, I'm just asking "is it?" if so much bad happens in it. Of course, I don't have the first hand experience of living in the US, so all I know is from what I hear, and see.
However, I do know hypocrisy and double standards when I see them. For example, George W. Bush said that every country has a right to defend herself when it is attacked, in the wake of the giant middle eastern violence uprise. First off, kidnapping isn't a direct attack, though that can be disputed. Secondly, most country's that are attacked by the US defend itself, yet the US declared those countries as hubs of evil.
-
Nah, I don't think it is.
-
Not more than any other state ruled by
power seeking humans.
-
Let's just make it clear... U.S. can't do a damn thing right :?
-
Here's a history of China violence:
"The Great Leap Forward" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward#The_Great_Leap_Forward
Killed a total of 25,000,000+ people
"Communist" - https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html
Killed a total of 10,000,000+ people... Who's more evil now?
edit: The Nazi Germans started World War 1/2
Humans were probably "evil" in the past. Now, Let's all just get along and stop thinking about the past... we need peace for now and in the future.
-
Why don't we just get along regardless of religion, race, creed & culture. I don't want to see this topic gets ugly...
-
Here's a history of China violence:
"The Great Leap Forward" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward#The_Great_Leap_Forward
Killed a total of 25,000,000+ people
"Communist" - https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html
Killed a total of 10,000,000+ people... Who's more evil now?
edit: The Nazi Germans started World War 1/2
Humans were probably "evil" in the past. Now, Let's all just get along and stop thinking about the past... we need peace for now and in the future.
I don't think you can compare the two society's of America and China. Even so, I'm not talking about government implemented violence, I mean normal civilians.
And the NAZIs only started WW2.
-
Magus68, I don't think they're listening. Either that or they're trying to continue pissing you off. I, on the other hand, am not continuing this :D
-
Oh, and something I forgot to mention, another theory is unemployment. Canada's unemployment, however, is far higher, yet it is still a far safer place.
Must be the whole releasing their anger in Ice Hockey thing :D
but why have a war any way its point less all for grass and dirt (land)
It's not like people can just go "oh, let's stop having war!".
[/quote]
Why have wars any way? Your not sappose to kill. 10 COMMENDMENTS why do we kill in wars? There sould be no wars lets live in peace.
-
10 COMMENDMENTS
Some Religions don't believe in the 10 Comandments. Which is a shame.
-
That is a shame!!! But why would people want to kill for land it's crazy.
-
Look how USA was created.
-
But they have there land we have our land can't they just leave us alone and i think the USA crated and evel land look at what we have become. Why would they give guns to people who are out of the police force any way?
-
I won't even bother adding my two cents to the conversation. What juvenile responses; the world isn't black and white, it's gray. Break it down at a metaphysical level, because most of you are barely scraping the surface.
As for that list of crap the US has done wrong, how about a list of things we've done RIGHT? The good far outweighs the bad. Even then, every government, no matter who, has it's fair share of corruption; some just more than others.
CTFan
-
Why there will always be war? Easy, because there will always be humans. (I feel like I am repeating myself badly everytime I start a post)
We don't want to be equal, we want to have people under us, that's why the idea of communism(class system and everyone should have the same etc.) didn't work. Why should we live with less if we could have more? Why should be agree with someone when we know we are 100% right(->religion) or even ignore him, and not force them to their luck?
Humans are lazy, egoistic persons who mostly care about themselves, but hey, what's new?
-
I won't even bother adding my two cents to the conversation. What juvenile responses; the world isn't black and white, it's gray. Break it down at a metaphysical level, because most of you are barely scraping the surface.
As for that list of crap the US has done wrong, how about a list of things we've done RIGHT? The good far outweighs the bad. Even then, every government, no matter who, has it's fair share of corruption; some just more than others.
CTFan
i dont think we've done anything right. I think that all this is greedy. And rap. malesters. killers pot heads. blaids, pills back in gods time they did this. And listen if you go to church you still end up doing things wrong so whats the point of going??
-
I won't even bother adding my two cents to the conversation. What juvenile responses; the world isn't black and white, it's gray. Break it down at a metaphysical level, because most of you are barely scraping the surface.
As for that list of crap the US has done wrong, how about a list of things we've done RIGHT? The good far outweighs the bad. Even then, every government, no matter who, has it's fair share of corruption; some just more than others.
CTFan
i dont think we've done anything right. I think that all this is greedy. And rap. malesters. killers pot heads. blaids, pills back in gods time they did this. And listen if u go to church you still end up doing things wrong so wuts the point of going??
Oh, yeah, I'm sure EVERYONE who goes to church ends up being a child petaphile/pot head. My GOD, look at a bigger scale. DO NOT generalize society to fit your vague, corrupt philosophy.
People kill for many reasons. Belief conflicts, vengeance, justice, etc. As a person and a martial artist, I personally would kill if I felt necessary By the same token, however, I would be willing to put my life in harm's way for the same reasons. You see, the world isn't going to change. We won't have this "utopian" society some of you keep yapping about. Therefore, instead of conforming to the hate, we must resist it, but in different ways.
CTFan
-
I won't even bother adding my two cents to the conversation. What juvenile responses...
Oh, yeah, I'm sure EVERYONE who goes to church ends up being a child petaphile/pot head. My GOD, look at a bigger scale. DO NOT generalize society to fit your vague, corrupt philosophy.
People kill for many reasons. Belief conflicts, vengeance, justice, etc. As a person and a martial artist, I personally would kill if I felt necessary By the same token, however, I would be willing to put my life in harm's way for the same reasons. You see, the world isn't going to change. We won't have this "utopian" society some of you keep yapping about. Therefore, instead of conforming to the hate, we must resist it, but in different ways.
CTFan
I take it those two cents were burning a hole in your pocket...
=P
-
sorry my lord. I did not say they do drugs. But we all also do a lot of things were not sappose to.
-
sorry my lord. I did not say they do drugs. But we all also do a lot of things were not sappose to.
True, true. But that's what we're here for, right? To mess up and learn from it?
I won't even bother adding my two cents to the conversation. What juvenile responses...
Oh, yeah, I'm sure EVERYONE who goes to church ends up being a child petaphile/pot head. My GOD, look at a bigger scale. DO NOT generalize society to fit your vague, corrupt philosophy.
People kill for many reasons. Belief conflicts, vengeance, justice, etc. As a person and a martial artist, I personally would kill if I felt necessary By the same token, however, I would be willing to put my life in harm's way for the same reasons. You see, the world isn't going to change. We won't have this "utopian" society some of you keep yapping about. Therefore, instead of conforming to the hate, we must resist it, but in different ways.
CTFan
I take it those two cents were burning a hole in your pocket...
=P
Just a bit :lol:!
CTFan
-
Really hard to have a debate here with some of the member base here. Makes me miss my somewhat civil debates with Josh, even though most of them turned sour.
-
Fuck voting Democrat, I'm doing exactly what my sig says.
The U.S. ain't the pure bastion of happy happy joy joy that its propaganda machine portrays. If a democratically-elected government is hostile to us, we'll fuck with them, as opposed to making any attempt at diplomacy. But most of the incidents listed were during the Cold War, when diplomacy didn't matter much.
-
But most of the incidents listed were during the Cold War, when diplomacy didn't matter much.
Yeah, it was either you were a Capitalist Pig or Communist Scum. Ah, the good old days. :D
-
Firstly, I'm Canadian, and you have to remember, we base a lot of our national identity on the idea of NOT being American, so if there's any anti-American bias in the way I think, it's probably that. I usually would say 'I don't like the US', but that's purely on the grounds of belonging to the country I do. Reasonably, I understand why the US is what they are, and can't exactly fault them for that. In the end, I like making fun of America for its failings, but, hey, I can take the reverse stereotypes, eh?
So, on fairer ground, no, the US is no evil nation, any more than any other is. There are very few I think that history could classify as outright evil. Maybe the Assyrians, and their ever-present war-mongering and brutality in the name of Ashur, but those that go to such harsh extremes have been few. Even the Aztecs, renowned for their mass-sacrifices, had only begun that in the hundred years before their destruction - a sort of fanatasism had overtaken their religion. Anyway, back to the US. Certainly, they've acted questionably. They've only entered the greater wars when it's served their own interests. They've removed democratically elected communists, and replaced them with dictators of their choosing. They support men like Saddam Hussein, then turn on him when the climate changes. Further back, they warred in the name of Manifest Destiny. But can that truly be looked at too harshly? I'm not being cynical, but it's to be expected. That's how any empire behaves, and those at the top must before all else look after their own self interests. Moreover, as has already been said, the country itself, because of that position, stands under far greater scrutiny. In the end, however, I'd say that American is a better empire than was Britain, or even Rome.
Actually, if there is any country or empire I'd liken the US to its Athens, circa 460BC. At that point they had within the generation driven off the great, supposedly tyrant and oppressive, power of Persia and her proud kings, being along with Sparta the two main factors in bringing Greek freedom to be. Typically, Sparta was the stronger. Yet due to her navy, and her increased power in the Delian league, she became increasingly imperial and expansive in her actions. Through this time, a typical cry was that they still fought for the sake of 'freedom' and 'democracy'. Eventually, though, certain foreign policies against those who would not be on her side (a sort of 'if you're not for us you're against us' mentality) led to an appeal to Sparta by the island of... Thassos I think it was. Anyway, this precipitated all-out war, which resolved nothing, really. Eventually, however, things became worse. A second war began, at first being led by the statesman Perikles, but by other when he died in its second year to plague. Athens still claimed to fight for 'democracy' and 'freedom', even though she had long ago become an empire to rival the Persians for tyranny, and her democracy voted in such atrocities as the destruction of Milos. It is the historical point against democracy, an example of how we must be wary of the tyranny when all are given power to rule. Anyway, that's the sort of path I think I see the US taking, that of Athens. Right now, they're probably sitting at about the 460BC mark, maybe a bit later. Time-wise, this is about right, too. If things keep going this way, in the next few decades another strong empire will challenge them (China?), aiding other countries complaining of their foreign policy. Finally, they will be defeated, only to have democracy return again better than before after a time of dictatorial chaos. I wonder if that won't be the fortune of the US, and if they are not the new Athens? But I really went out on speculation with that. The thing really is, you can't really call the US evil. Every country in their position would act at least the same, if not worse. That history has proven, with very, very few exceptions (case in point in Persia, that the Greeks saw as tyrannical and evil: they were amongst the most tolerant of empires to have ever existed.)
In the end, I know we won't ever have a perfect empire controlling the world. All we can hope for is the best and, well... I know those who are faced with the power of the US will disagree with me (as opposed to me who lives in a country that is allied), but the US is pretty good. Would Russia be better? China? Britain? Eventually power will fall to another country - that I'm sure about, because even the US is not immortal. Maybe this will even happen within our own lifetime, if one such as China comes to prominence. But until then... we can make fun of and declaim the US all we want - critisism is for the best - but amonst it we must remember that we're not realistically going to get all that much better. Not from a country that has to look after 350 million of its own people first and foremost.
By the way, an interesting point, but... one of the points at the beginning was the owning of guns. I have a friend who, though being essentially Canadian is still thinks of himself as an American, and is also a bit of a gun fanatic. Anyway, he's before told me that the countries where handgun restrictions have come into effect actually have more gun crime than other places. And it makes sense. Criminals get guns regardless, but if they think a civilian might be armed, it will make them think twice about something. Furthermore, I know that here in Canada our multi-billion dollar gun registry is an absolute failure. Owning guns has not led to any sort of decay in the US, I'm certain.
-
Firstly, I'm Canadian, and you have to remember, we base a lot of our national identity on the idea of NOT being American, so if there's any anti-American bias in the way I think, it's probably that. I usually would say 'I don't like the US', but that's purely on the grounds of belonging to the country I do. Reasonably, I understand why the US is what they are, and can't exactly fault them for that. In the end, I like making fun of America for its failings, but, hey, I can take the reverse stereotypes, eh?
STFU. Your country isn't a real country.
:P
So, on fairer ground, no, the US is no evil nation, any more than any other is. There are very few I think that history could classify as outright evil. Maybe the Assyrians, and their ever-present war-mongering and brutality in the name of Ashur, but those that go to such harsh extremes have been few. Even the Aztecs, renowned for their mass-sacrifices, had only begun that in the hundred years before their destruction - a sort of fanaticism had overtaken their religion. Anyway, back to the US. Certainly, they've acted questionably. They've only entered the greater wars when it's served their own interests. They've removed democratically elected communists, and replaced them with dictators of their choosing. They support men like Saddam Hussein, then turn on him when the climate changes. Further back, they warred in the name of Manifest Destiny. But can that truly be looked at too harshly? I'm not being cynical, but it's to be expected. That's how any empire behaves, and those at the top must before all else look after their own self interests. Moreover, as has already been said, the country itself, because of that position, stands under far greater scrutiny. In the end, however, I'd say that American is a better empire than was Britain, or even Rome.
Me, I think Manifest Destiny was total crap. We didn't particularly need the land at the time.
Actually, if there is any country or empire I'd liken the US to its Athens, circa 460BC. At that point they had within the generation driven off the great, supposedly tyrant and oppressive, power of Persia and her proud kings, being along with Sparta the two main factors in bringing Greek freedom to be. Typically, Sparta was the stronger. Yet due to her navy, and her increased power in the Delian league, she became increasingly imperial and expansive in her actions. Through this time, a typical cry was that they still fought for the sake of 'freedom' and 'democracy'. Eventually, though, certain foreign policies against those who would not be on her side (a sort of 'if you're not for us you're against us' mentality) led to an appeal to Sparta by the island of... Thassos I think it was. Anyway, this precipitated all-out war, which resolved nothing, really. Eventually, however, things became worse. A second war began, at first being led by the statesman Perikles, but by other when he died in its second year to plague. Athens still claimed to fight for 'democracy' and 'freedom', even though she had long ago become an empire to rival the Persians for tyranny, and her democracy voted in such atrocities as the destruction of Milos. It is the historical point against democracy, an example of how we must be wary of the tyranny when all are given power to rule. Anyway, that's the sort of path I think I see the US taking, that of Athens. Right now, they're probably sitting at about the 460BC mark, maybe a bit later. Time-wise, this is about right, too. If things keep going this way, in the next few decades another strong empire will challenge them (China?), aiding other countries complaining of their foreign policy. Finally, they will be defeated, only to have democracy return again better than before after a time of dictatorial chaos. I wonder if that won't be the fortune of the US, and if they are not the new Athens? But I really went out on speculation with that. The thing really is, you can't really call the US evil. Every country in their position would act at least the same, if not worse. That history has proven, with very, very few exceptions (case in point in Persia, that the Greeks saw as tyrannical and evil: they were amongst the most tolerant of empires to have ever existed.)
Can I crash at your place when Emperor Bush declares a Galactic Empire? Because I'd really rather not go to Mexico.
*insert lyrics of Everyone's a Little Bit Racist as a pre-emptive defense*
And I guarantee you he'll declare a Galactic Empire, in spite of the fact that we've never been beyond our own moon. He's just that dumb.
In the end, I know we won't ever have a perfect empire controlling the world. All we can hope for is the best and, well... I know those who are faced with the power of the US will disagree with me (as opposed to me who lives in a country that is allied), but the US is pretty good. Would Russia be better? China? Britain? Eventually power will fall to another country - that I'm sure about, because even the US is not immortal. Maybe this will even happen within our own lifetime, if one such as China comes to prominence. But until then... we can make fun of and declaim the US all we want - critisism is for the best - but amonst it we must remember that we're not realistically going to get all that much better. Not from a country that has to look after 350 million of its own people first and foremost.
I was kind of wanting Japan to be the next king of the world. It has its problems, but its chicks make up for that.
-
Japan should stay neutral! Otherwise, it could become a big target! The people there are peaceful, y'see.
-
Japan should stay neutral! Otherwise, it could become a big target! The people there are peaceful, y'see.
And they created so many porno genres.
But yeah, I think Krispo was spot on. He basically said what I wanted to say, but obviously he can convey it much better :P
-
Japan should stay neutral! Otherwise, it could become a big target! The people there are peaceful, y'see.
In 2008, The Japanese government is considering rearming their military since the americans accepted their pleas. If that happens, I'll like to think that they'll conquer the world with Mobile Suits or something.
-
Or a hidden race of Saiyans... *cough*
-
I was hoping someone would rattle off a list of US foreign donations and improvement programs as a counterbalance and be done with it. But jeez was Vietnam a mistake. Lyndon B. Johnson didn't really help things. It's unnerving to go to Texas and see public institutions bearing his name.
-
You're right about that, ZeaLitY. The United States accomplished some incredible things during the 20th century. You can't trumpet the bad without giving a voice to some of that.
-
Japan should stay neutral! Otherwise, it could become a big target! The people there are peaceful, y'see.
if they dont they could just put sublinamil messages in all the games the make they'd have a army of millions.
-
Gah, ok, but my point mainly was not the government that controls the country, but rather the people who populate it.
-
Japan should stay neutral! Otherwise, it could become a big target! The people there are peaceful, y'see.
if they dont they could just put sublinamil messages in all the games the make they'd have a army of millions.
Subliminal messages are illegal now, though. But would that stop them? I think not.
-
sorry my lord. I did not say they do drugs. But we all also do a lot of things were not sappose to.
True, true. But that's what we're here for, right? To mess up and learn from it?
I won't even bother adding my two cents to the conversation. What juvenile responses...
Oh, yeah, I'm sure EVERYONE who goes to church ends up being a child petaphile/pot head. My GOD, look at a bigger scale. DO NOT generalize society to fit your vague, corrupt philosophy.
People kill for many reasons. Belief conflicts, vengeance, justice, etc. As a person and a martial artist, I personally would kill if I felt necessary By the same token, however, I would be willing to put my life in harm's way for the same reasons. You see, the world isn't going to change. We won't have this "utopian" society some of you keep yapping about. Therefore, instead of conforming to the hate, we must resist it, but in different ways.
CTFan
I take it those two cents were burning a hole in your pocket...
=P
Just a bit :lol:!
CTFan
You are right I didn't even think about it. We do wrong we learn right. And when we learn the hard way we never forget. But we will all regret it someday.
-
I'm upset because America is basically allowing Israel to bomb the poor Lebanese covering it up saying that they are trying to bomb Hezbollah. I'm upset because I'm Lebanese.
-
If Israel wanted to bomb the Lebanese people, there wouldn't be many Lebanese people left.
That's the thing that makes it so hard to be neutral about this stuff. Tactically, the Israeli Defense Forces go out of their way to minimize civilian casualties, whereas Islamic militants strive for as much death as they are able to inflict, regardless of the targets. And yet the rhetoric is the other way around: Israel is accused of being a warmonger, and the militants are called freedom fighters. Strategically I would agree with you that Israel's counterattack was way out of proportion to the original hostage-taking, but with all the Islamic bullshit Israel has to put up with, as well as the tacit scorn of most of the rest of the world, I honestly can't say I blame them. I would probably make the same decision myself. This lovely planet of ours would be a lot better off without Islamic crusaders. Without religion of any stripe, to be perfectly honest...but the militant radicals are the worst kind.
-
Gah, ok, but my point mainly was not the government that controls the country, but rather the people who populate it.
I think maybe your point got a bit derailed by your examples of violence, which were mainly decided/orchestrated/carried out by the government for the most part. Perhaps better examples of violence for the discussion you were going for would include things that the people themselves did without a government okay. Such as lynch mobs, a variety of hate crimes against black people or gay people, the Oklahoma City bombing, or even the recent event in which US soldiers over in the Middle East went and raped a woman and killed her family. (but then a counter point to the last would be that they were killed in revenge, and it's difficult to use that as an example because the people they were dealing with were apparently just as willing to be as violent as they were, and were from another country).
Also, when talking about a nation as a whole, it is easier to refer to the government and its actions and how these represent the country overall. (And politicians, regardless of their party, are power hungry to some extent, or they wouldn't be running for the positions they do - I'm sure there are a few here or there who genuinely want to do what they believe is good, and to be fair/just leaders, but for the most part, and especially those that run for position as president? power hungry. but... err... that might be digressing a bit.)
Besides, I don't think it's really just people from the United States as a whole who are violent - humans in general have always had a violent history. For example - the Rape of Nanking.
In fact, the few Americans present at Nanking at the time (mostly missionaries) set up a Saftey Zone which is believed to have saved many lives.
-
Gah, ok, but my point mainly was not the government that controls the country, but rather the people who populate it.
I think maybe your point got a bit derailed by your examples of violence, which were mainly decided/orchestrated/carried out by the government for the most part. Perhaps better examples of violence for the discussion you were going for would include things that the people themselves did without a government okay. Such as lynch mobs, a variety of hate crimes against black people or gay people, the Oklahoma City bombing, or even the recent event in which US soldiers over in the Middle East went and raped a woman and killed her family. (but then a counter point to the last would be that they were killed in revenge, and it's difficult to use that as an example because the people they were dealing with were apparently just as willing to be as violent as they were, and were from another country).
Also, when talking about a nation as a whole, it is easier to refer to the government and its actions and how these represent the country overall. (And politicians, regardless of their party, are power hungry to some extent, or they wouldn't be running for the positions they do - I'm sure there are a few here or there who genuinely want to do what they believe is good, and to be fair/just leaders, but for the most part, and especially those that run for position as president? power hungry. but... err... that might be digressing a bit.)
Besides, I don't think it's really just people from the United States as a whole who are violent - humans in general have always had a violent history. For example - the Rape of Nanking.
In fact, the few Americans present at Nanking at the time (mostly missionaries) set up a Saftey Zone which is believed to have saved many lives.
Good point.
If Israel wanted to bomb the Lebanese people, there wouldn't be many Lebanese people left.
That's the thing that makes it so hard to be neutral about this stuff. Tactically, the Israeli Defense Forces go out of their way to minimize civilian casualties, whereas Islamic militants strive for as much death as they are able to inflict, regardless of the targets. And yet the rhetoric is the other way around: Israel is accused of being a warmonger, and the militants are called freedom fighters. Strategically I would agree with you that Israel's counterattack was way out of proportion to the original hostage-taking, but with all the Islamic bullshit Israel has to put up with, as well as the tacit scorn of most of the rest of the world, I honestly can't say I blame them. I would probably make the same decision myself. This lovely planet of ours would be a lot better off without Islamic crusaders. Without religion of any stripe, to be perfectly honest...but the militant radicals are the worst kind.
Well, you should be thankful that the Lebanese government is only half Muslim, and the President is Christian, or we would have more Israeli casualties. Plus, it isn't like Lebanon captured Israeli soldiers for no reason; they want Israel to free their own militants. And eye for an eye. Plus, this conflict goes way back, so you can't automatically say that Israel is totally not at fault.
At that, I don't support Hezbollah anymore than I support the Israelis. I don't support Hezbollah because they attack innocent civilians. Israel says it is trying to attack Hezbollah bases specifically, but so far, many towns have been attacked which are no way affiliated to Hezbollah.
Plus, Hezbollah was only formed to repel invading Israeli forces back in the last Israel-Lebanon war. Oh, and because they thought Ayatollah Khomeini was hip.
-
When a nation is surrounded by hostile neighbors and can expect little relief and littler support from any of the world powers, to accuse this nation of being warlike and aggressive is a bit of a fallacy. If Israel had not defended itself in the past, it would not exist today. We dwell in the only world we have. For Israel, survival means war. Nevertheless, nearly all of Israel’s campaigns have been either defensive or counteroffensive. And its few unprovoked offensives have always been strategically defensive in nature, as opposed to offensive or punitive. Despite having so many opportunities to destroy their enemies entirely, and thereby devolve into a true warmonger state, Israel has resisted temptation and remained an honorable figure.
I find it telling that nations all over the world, whilst simultaneously denouncing Israel, nevertheless take it for granted that Israel will cooperate with them and share an impressive amount of strategic information, as we saw when Israel assisted over twenty nations in evacuating their nationals during combat operations in the ongoing Lebanese campaign. We would expect no less from an honorable nation, but it is nevertheless still an impressive sight.
I also find it telling that Israel takes incredible trouble, at enormous expense, to minimize civilian casualties while targeting an enemy whose entire philosophy of warfare is to become indistinguishable from the civilian population. That chap who said a few posts ago that he thinks Israel is using Hezbollah as an excuse to attack civilians, obviously does not comprehend the strength of Israel’s full military power. Were it used indiscriminately, Hezbollah—and a great many of the Lebanese people—would already have been destroyed. But once again we would not expect an honorable nation to target civilian populations.
Israel’s enemies don’t typically bother cooperating with foreign governments to evacuate civilians from a combat zone. Nor do these radicals warn civilians in advance of significant military strikes, as Israel has done. Indeed, the modus operandi of many militant organizations is to strike without any warning at all at the most opportune targets possible. However you slice it, it isn’t just the power that is in Israel’s favor, but the honor too.
So, Zeppy, when you accuse Israel of being not without its share of the blame, you are only correct inasmuch as Israel has refused to lie down and perish. The “blame” for all this war lies entirely with the haughty Arab state tyrants of yesteryear, and the radical Islamist militants of today. Israel’s greatest fault is that it continues to allow its good name to be besmirched by people with a religious agenda.
-
I'm not denying that Israel isn't showing it's ultimate power yet. If they had shown it's true power, Lebanon would be nuclear waste by now. But Israel isn't one to anger allies, and even the most strong allies would condemn Israel for such a massive attack, except of course the US. Yet, many places Israel has attacked have not even been connected to Hezbollah. Mosques have been destroyed which were speculated for being 'bunkers', and official Lebanese militia have even been targetted.
Lebanon:
According to various media, between 350 and 390 people are reported dead. Additionally, there have been between 480 and 600 people wounded, and over 700,000 have been made refugees, with an unknown number of missing civilians in the south.
Hezbollah acknowledges 13 killed. IDF Chief of Staff Lt. General Dan Halutz has claimed that close to 100 Hezbollah fighters have been killed at 22 July, in land fighting in South Lebanon.
Israel:
24 Israeli soldiers have been killed (including one pilot, killed in an collision between two helicopters, and two in another helicopter crash, also 4 sailors were killed after INS Hanit was hit), 2 captured, and 71 more wounded.
17 civilians have been killed, while another 418 civilians were treated in hospitals, 19 of whom were seriously injured, and another 875 treated for shock.
Foreign (noticed who caused the deaths):
- Seven Lebanese-Canadian members of a family from Montreal, including four children, were killed and six severely injured by an Israeli attack on Aitaroun in South Lebanon on 16 July. An eighth member of the family died later from injuries sustained in the blast.
- A family of four Brazilians, including two children, was killed in the Israeli bombings in Srifa, drawing condemnation from foreign relations minister Celso Amorim. Another Brazilian child was killed in an Israeli strike in Tallousa.
- Four members of a German-Lebanese family, including two minors, from Mönchengladbach, Germany were killed in an Israeli airstrike in Chehour in southern Lebanon while on vacation.
- The Kuwaiti Foreign Ministry has reported that two Kuwaiti nationals have been killed by Israeli bombing.
- One Sri Lankan was killed in an Israeli bombing.
- One Iraqi was killed by Israeli bombing.
- One Jordanian was killed when Israeli missiles hit trucks near Zahleh in the mountains above the eastern Bekaa Valley.
- A Brazilian businessman was killed in an IAF missile attack on a factory he owned in Lebanon.
- An Argentinean woman died 13 July in an Hezbollah rocket attack on Nahariya, Israel.
The entire attacks by Israel is caused basically by one thing: they're fed up. I agree that Israel has had to pay for it's previous attacks by getting attacked by all Arab nation's it has affected. Hezbollah has been one of the main hinderances to the progression of Israel. As such, Israel basically just want to demolish Hezbollah. Destroy them. Israel doesn't care about Lebanese casualties. They aren't their own people. I'm sure if it wasn't for the overwhelming support of the Lebanon by Syria and Iran, and the reaction of other countries, they'd destroy the tiny country of Lebanon, a place smaller than Sydney.
Like I said before, Hezbollah was created to repel the invading Israel. Israel had entered Lebanon in the 80's, as an offensive movement. They said that it was because of terrorist attacks happening in the north of Israel, but they had not only tried to destroy the terrorism, but actually went on to capture the capital.
Actually, the entire conflict was sparked by the state of Israel being created in Arab/Muslim lands. Israel has every right to defend it's land, but you can't deny the right of a people to try and recapture their lands.
-
Israel wants to go after all Arab goverment parties like Hamas now. Why?
-
Israel wants to go after all Arab goverment parties like Hamas now. Why?
The problem with the Middle East is that Israelis love ice cream. But the weather is hot, and their ice cream melted. Now they are angry--and want revenge!
-
Thanks to American Propoganda, we have learned that Hamas is evil! :P
-
Everybody wants to claim the holy land. That's where all the conflicts began in the first place.
-
Israel wants to go after all Arab goverment parties like Hamas now. Why?
The problem with the Middle East is that Israelis love ice cream. But the weather is hot, and their ice cream melted. Now they are angry--and want revenge!
Smartass! But yet I can't stop laughing.
-
I missed your reply somehow, Zeppy. Here are a couple of my thoughts in response to it.
Yet, many places Israel has attacked have not even been connected to Hezbollah. Mosques have been destroyed which were speculated for being 'bunkers', and official Lebanese militia have even been targetted.
Those claims are false. They originate from the same non-credible sources that accuse Israel of attacking civilian populations every time there is an IDF military operation. But it's always a lie, and we know it because the claims of casualties do not match either the body count or the offensive power of Israeli armament.
One such example: Israel hit one of Hezbollah's operational bases early on in this campaign, and the Hezbollah folks just lied out the side of their teeth and said that it was actually a half-built mosque. But they controlled the area and didn't let third-party reporters into the area to check it out. Meanwhile, Israel's military spokespeople confirmed that it was definitely a militant base. And Israel's military's public relations face, for whatever else you might say about it, is always remarkably candid and verifiably truthful.
The entire attacks by Israel is caused basically by one thing: they're fed up. I agree that Israel has had to pay for it's previous attacks by getting attacked by all Arab nation's it has affected. Hezbollah has been one of the main hinderances to the progression of Israel. As such, Israel basically just want to demolish Hezbollah. Destroy them. Israel doesn't care about Lebanese casualties. They aren't their own people. I'm sure if it wasn't for the overwhelming support of the Lebanon by Syria and Iran, and the reaction of other countries, they'd destroy the tiny country of Lebanon, a place smaller than Sydney.
Israel cares about casualties. They care about casualties so much that the fight against their most egregious, shameless enemies in an honorable and humane way. That's how decent armed forces are. And, perhaps in a more pragmatic vein, Israel avoids civilian casualties for the additional reason that world opinion, which is fundamentally anti-Israel anyway, would not tolerate large-scale civilian deaths. Any way you slice it, Israel has no intention of destroying any civilian population...and many IDF soldiers would find even the mere thought of it reprehensible.
Like I said before, Hezbollah was created to repel the invading Israel. Israel had entered Lebanon in the 80's, as an offensive movement. They said that it was because of terrorist attacks happening in the north of Israel, but they had not only tried to destroy the terrorism, but actually went on to capture the capital.
It is hard for me to defend any preemptive invasion on which I am not expertly informed and in honest support of. In all truthfulness, I think the 1982 war was one of Israel's larger military mistakes. But one thing I can say is that the Israeli desire to free itself of incessant Islamic terrorism was sincere, and justifiable. Whether that justifiability extended to the invasion of Lebanon, I can't say.
Actually, the entire conflict was sparked by the state of Israel being created in Arab/Muslim lands. Israel has every right to defend it's land, but you can't deny the right of a people to try and recapture their lands.
Ever the Islamic optimist. You're a very smart person, and well-mannered. If only you could wake up to the absurdity of your religious beliefs and the political ideology that derives from them. Perhaps those things will come to you with time, as you experience that inevitable teenage rebelliousness we all undergo, and enjoy the benefit of a fuller education.
-
I could go on, but we all know our arguments will be purely based on personal opinions, and assumptions. How do we know your sources aren't false? We don't.
Don't Hezbollah know that lying is a major sin? :P
As for my rebellious period, I think London Calling and Nevermind the Bullocks sum it up very nicely.
NEW POINT: UN Peacekeepers bombed by Israeli smart bomb. How does this prove your "Israel is trying to minimize casualties" point, Lord J?