That a majority do not support a war does not in any way mean it shouldn't be fought. The majority opposed this nation's entrance into WWI and WWII. The majority opposed the "Europe First" policy of the FDR administration after Japan declared war upon us with their attack at Pearl Harbor.
The majority can be, and often are, incorrect Tilt.
Printsmith.-your comments remind me of recent movie where
reporter (M.Streep)asked the political official-what do you know
about wars-reply-cause I have read books on it. But the
generals say otherwise. reply(T.Crusie) I know better.
So freely you speak about giving up someone elses rights,
sending them to war to fight for You. Do you think by backing
the Cheney/Kissinger types they will feed you a crumb or will they stop to give you a drop of water when your car breaks
down in the desert, never happen. :bash
Whose rights do I speak so freely of giving up Tilt? The people of this nation who volunteer to serve in their country's armed forces? I am unaware of anything I have done which mandates they give up their rights as they are volunteers.
Do you speak of the rights of the nations which are belligerents in armed conflict with this nation? I would happen to think that the rights of the people in this nation supersede the rights of those in another when the physical and economic security of this nation, its people and its armed forces are threatened. I am unaware of any recent example of this nation engaging in empire building. Perhaps you have an example you would like to share?
Empire building???You said that Printsmith, not me.
You may not be reading all the posts-beginning to end, just
skimming and then making off the wall comments. Go back
to my original post-read it all.
Might you be confooosing yourself , do to lack of knowledge
on wars.
Well, let's see here Tilt. You started out saying that war was about profit for war profiteers. I countered that some people made more money in times of war than in times of peace didn't mean that wars were unnecessary. You then asked what wars besides the ones you listed were necessary along with some verbiage that seemed to suggest that we were at war for oil unnecessarily. I responded that Iraq was necessary, but not for oil, whereupon you said that the majority of people were against the Iraq war. I then pointed out two other instances where the majority of people were against a particular war, both of which were included in your earlier post amongst those that you seemed to support as necessary wars. Your next reply included a reference to my speaking freely about giving up the rights of someone else. Since I couldn't make heads or tails of what that referenced, I sought clarification - which brings us to where we are now. It's hard to make headway in a discussion when you keep moving the target of the discussion. I'm doing my best Tilt, but shifting the object of the discussion when I raise a point that you don't, or can't, address isn't really helping.
