dick_nyc Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 http://epaper.aztrib.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=EVT/2004/01/21&ID=Pc03706 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donnie Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 The Peace Candidate is Kucinich, stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dick_nyc Posted January 21, 2004 Author Share Posted January 21, 2004 Tell the cartoonist, not me. Dean is not the pro-war candidate is he? Then he must be a peace candidate. sorry to have to point this out to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylorky Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 that ANYBODY could be pro-war...........how fucking sad is that???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dick_nyc Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 Had you been a resident of Kuwait in 1991 or a resident of the Kurdish sector of Iraq in 2003, it would not be very sad at all. There are times to be pro-war and times not to be. However, if your country is at war, to be anti-war is OK but not to support your troops is what is sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JustStarting Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 >Had you been a resident of Kuwait in 1991 or a resident of >the Kurdish sector of Iraq in 2003, it would not be very sad >at all. There are times to be pro-war and times not to be. >However, if your country is at war, to be anti-war is OK but >not to support your troops is what is sad. Almost exactly right. The only part I would disagree with is "...to be anti-war is OK..." You'll recall the recent Academy Award speech where an actor said that his working on a WWII/Holocaust movie taught him to be anti-war. He learned exactly the wrong lesson: sometimes, war is the only way to stop the torture, stop the murder and stop the evil-doers. When Gandi told Jews of Europe they should adopt non-violent acceptance of Nazi actions, he revealed the incompleteness of his ideas of morality. Yes war is bad--but sometimes it prevents a greater evil. Slaves have been freed, concentration camps closed and killing fields shut down by wars--not by pacifists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylorky Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 my grandmother was a survivor of the camps (the only one in the family from that time in hell to survive)..........she was against war during her life. my uncle flew helicopters (two tours) in vietnam,the first tour was flying slicks with the 227th of the 1st.cav. his second tour was as a gunship pilot.........he is against war. i have never been to war,i have never suffered, but like the rest of my family .........i am against war. none of my family are "pacifists",not that there is anything wrong with being one,we just don't like war,or the chickenhawks that cheer them on knowing they will never have to go. so i'll ya what sgt. rock..............you can take my place in this or any other shrubfest,yea shurrrrrrrrrr you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug69 Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 >my grandmother was a survivor of the camps (the only one in >the family from that time in hell to survive)..........she was >against war during her life. The only reason that your grandmother "survived" the camps was because President Roosevelt declared war on Germany and Japan, and had to battle large numbers of cititzens like you who kept whining about "anti-war" they were. If it weren't for WAR - which you claim you're against - your grandmother would be dead. And, I know you won't answer this, because it contradicts everything you say and "think" (a word I really shouldn't use in this context), but did you favor the WAR in Afghanistan to rid that country of the Taliban and Al Qaeda, or did you favor no war and letting Al Qaeda continue to use Afghanistan as a training ground? How is possible that - other than referring to pacifists - someone thinks it makes sense to say I'm "pro-war" or "anti-war" without specifying what war they are talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug69 Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 > Dean is not the pro-war >candidate is he? Then he must be a peace candidate. sorry to >have to point this out to you. This is illogical. It's possible to be against a particular war without being the "peace candidate." Dean was against the war in Iraq but in favor of the war in Afghanistan. He was against the war in Iraq NOT because he is opposed to war, but because he thought that this was the wrong war to fight and the wrong way to expend our military resources, and that they could be better directed elsewhere. Many military leaders - hardly "peace candidates" - agreed with the assessment. The fact that someone was opposed to the war in Iraq does not make them a peace candidate. Dean is anything but a pacifist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts