We invaded Iraq based on lies about weapons of mass destruction and found none, and no connection to al-Qaida or 9/11. We invaded Afganistan in an effort to stop Osama bin Laden and failed until recently, in Pakistan. While our soldiers should be honored for their sacrifices, it is our leaders we should hold accountable for taking us to wars with no purposeful end, no exit strategy and a huge cost in American lives with an even bigger cost in Iraqi and Afgan lives. Right on Reverend Piazza!
His observation that any criticism of war or policy usually has the parenthetical "I support our soldiers.." is so true. I say it and believe it to at least some extent. Military people do generally support aggressive use of the military. Is it reasonable to support only those soldiers who share my views on policy? How could I articulate this?
I also have a 15 year old daughter and she understands why we went to Iraq. Perhaps her father did a better job explaining world events to her. Of course, her father doesn't hate the military either.
Saddam Hussein's intelligence agency secretly financed a trip to Iraq for three liberal Democrats: Jim McDermott of Washington, David Bonior of Michigan and Mike Thompson of California. Perhaps, like Hillary, they will also make up a story about landing under sniper fire.
Thank you "AverageVoter" It seems the idea of war is far too acceptable a means for dispute resolution. Killing other people for their resources is far to easily justified in this culture of war that we offer our children.
Is there not a better way into the future? One that is less violent? Are we doomed to being and reacting the same way which perpetuates more violence?
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.
I'd like to continue this discussion and I have a request: that your anger at and condemnation of those that disagree with you be left out.
I recommend to you that being against violence in general and war that is not in direct defense of our families and country "personal safety" constitutes an unwillingness to fight or degraded morals or patriotism.
I recommend to you that the "better man" prize goes to he who employs violence with restraint and war as an absolute last resort.
Your words gave me shivers - I agree that we need to be morally outraged! We perserve nothing but degredation when we fail to uphold our own principles about natural god given rights to life, liberty, privacy and happiness.
We invaded Iraq based on lies about weapons of mass destruction and found none, and no connection to al-Qaida or 9/11. We invaded Afganistan in an effort to stop Osama bin Laden and failed until recently, in Pakistan. While our soldiers should be honored for their sacrifices, it is our leaders we should hold accountable for taking us to wars with no purposeful end, no exit strategy and a huge cost in American lives with an even bigger cost in Iraqi and Afgan lives. Right on Reverend Piazza!
GreatPeopleWorks 7 months ago
His observation that any criticism of war or policy usually has the parenthetical "I support our soldiers.." is so true. I say it and believe it to at least some extent. Military people do generally support aggressive use of the military. Is it reasonable to support only those soldiers who share my views on policy? How could I articulate this?
NooMooBush 3 years ago
God bless him and you.
Peace be with you.
1angloboy 3 years ago
I also have a 15 year old daughter and she understands why we went to Iraq. Perhaps her father did a better job explaining world events to her. Of course, her father doesn't hate the military either.
Saddam Hussein's intelligence agency secretly financed a trip to Iraq for three liberal Democrats: Jim McDermott of Washington, David Bonior of Michigan and Mike Thompson of California. Perhaps, like Hillary, they will also make up a story about landing under sniper fire.
AverageVoter 3 years ago
Thank you "AverageVoter" It seems the idea of war is far too acceptable a means for dispute resolution. Killing other people for their resources is far to easily justified in this culture of war that we offer our children.
Is there not a better way into the future? One that is less violent? Are we doomed to being and reacting the same way which perpetuates more violence?
patrolleader152 3 years ago
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.
John Stuart Mill
English economist & philosopher (1806 - 1873)
AverageVoter 3 years ago
I'd like to continue this discussion and I have a request: that your anger at and condemnation of those that disagree with you be left out.
I recommend to you that being against violence in general and war that is not in direct defense of our families and country "personal safety" constitutes an unwillingness to fight or degraded morals or patriotism.
I recommend to you that the "better man" prize goes to he who employs violence with restraint and war as an absolute last resort.
patrolleader152 3 years ago
Your words gave me shivers - I agree that we need to be morally outraged! We perserve nothing but degredation when we fail to uphold our own principles about natural god given rights to life, liberty, privacy and happiness.
BeanGene 3 years ago