It's a good thing the West didn't have that attitude during WWII, because we'd be speaking German right now. You can't stick your head in the sand and ignore the problems of the world, otherwise they'll end up at your doorstep.
Two totally different situations. In WW2 our allies (actually our homeland as we were still the dominion of Canada and part of the British empire)were under attack and in a state of war and we rightfully went to defend their country. We were repelling an invading force not being the invading force. My head is not in the sand, I watch closely and as soon as radical Islamists, or anyone else, start to try to invade Canada I will be right there to support our defense.
You're giving illegitimate governments far too much credit. You do realize that countless people are thankful that the Taliban and Saddam have lost their grip right? Put yourself in their shoes.
Illegitimate govts like the first Bush administration who started all this??? Whether you consider them illegitimate or not they were the govt, any problems with Taliban rule in Afghanistan was between the Afghanis and the Taliban. If so many were against it there would have eventually been a revolution.
Of course I do, because I'm a freedom lover who can tell the difference between right and wrong. The Taliban and Mujahideen are radical Islamic terrorists who are against freedom and harm innocent men, women and children. That makes them illegitimate governors of anything, a country, region, home, or a chicken coop.
No, you give your opinion and viewpoint of what is right and wrong. You want to bring in relativism, well right and wrong are relative. I think the death penalty is warranted for certain crimes while others believe it should apply to more than I and others think it should never be used. All the opinions are relative to our viewpoints. The sooner you understand this and stop with the good vs evil argument the sooner you will get respect for your position.
And what did the Taliban do with their responsibility of seeing over the Afghan people? They enforced the strictest interpretations of Sharia law ever seen! This amounted to terrorizing their own people!
G W Bush led his country into 2 illegitimate wars causing the death of thousands of innocents. He used fear-mongering and lies to accomplish this, that too is terrorism of his people and terrorism of the people of foreign nations. Do you think 'shock & awe' was a friendly little fireworks show.
That's completely different and not much of an argument. The Queen didn't kill anybody like the Taliban did.
The queen and her govt invaded Afghanistan and Iraq for reasons based in lies and deceit which led to many deaths. Like I said before, nobody has clean hands.
Well, not everyone shares your apathy. You remain quiet, and the rest of us will protect freedom and the country!
Many people share my views, which means that not everybody shares yours. A lot of us believe our actions in Afghanistan have made this country less safe than before. I will not sit here and claim a majority because I believe it is a fairly equal split. You can believe me though that as soon as our country needs protecting I will be there to support defending it.
Another weak argument. Were the 61% of voters who didn't vote for the conservatives UNITED on who should run the country? No, they weren't - they were DIVIDED. The other 39% of us WERE UNITED, and that made us the MAJORITY. The NDP voters made up 30% of the popular vote - MINORITY. The Liberal voters made up 19% of the popular vote - MINORITY. The Green party made up 4% of the popular vote - MINORITY. The Cons got the largest number in the popular vote with 39% - MAJORITY.
However you want to twist it 61% did not want our present leader in power. 39% is not a majority unless you use some different math system than the rest of us. Now I will say this is a result of a flawed electoral system and not the individual voter or candidate but I never fail to get a good laugh when people claim 39% is a majority and a mandate from the masses. I laughed at when the Libs said it and I laugh at it more from the Cons who used to say exactly what I am saying about the 40% Liberal majority govts. Way funny how the viewpoint is relative to the position of power.
Freedom is a God given right and democracy is one of the best ideals for ensuring it. I got that "idea" when I understood the characteristics of God. You may not believe in him, but how can you justify your rights if you can't appeal that their source is from the highest authority? If you can't claim that your right to freedom of speech is absolute, in other words it's just your mere opinion that you have the right to freedom of speech, what kind of justification is that? Opinions don't matter and you actually would justify the argument that someone would be right in denying your freedom of speech - because you admittedly don't have one - just a worthless opinion.
Oh Pleeease!! Trying to bring God into this is laughable. Our rights are innate and not granted by the glory of god, whoever that might be depending on your religious views. You are free to believe in whatever diety you like but don't you dare tell me my rights are only at his blessing. This highest authority you want to believe in is me and my heart and mind, not some ancient book or belief. If anything our rights are granted by the society we live in and the rule of law. If it helps you get through the day believing in something ancient people used to explain the unexplainable before they had the science to understand that is your business but keep it away from me, I don't need that kind of crutch to justify me existence.
That's why one of the greatest documents ever written, the declaration of Independence, lays it out so beautifully: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
I cannot disagree with your opinion of the DOI but I also include the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Together they make up a system of society that is absolutely wonderful. I find it a shame that over time they have been castrated and ignored by the ruling elite. You will please notice they did not say god given rights but allowed for individual beliefs. I find it humorous how you hold up these rights but want to go out and KILL people and force them to live under your version of freedom. So they are not given freedom at all to live differently and are certainly denied their right to life. Please do explain how you justify denying people these rights you hold so high because their version of liberty is different from yours.
It's a conundrum for YOU! You drank the kool aid of moral relativism! That's why you don't recognize the absolute God-given rights bestowed on you, that's why you don't see that it DOESN'T MATTER if the radical muslims think that the West or myself is absolutely morally wrong! Their ACTIONS, like killing innocent people in name of Allah to further their death-ideology, PROVES they are the absolutely morally wrong ones because they're VIOLATING the absolute moral law - which says that killing innocent humans is wrong. We're right, they're wrong. No conundrum here!
It would seem that you drank the kool-aid. Talk about moral relativism. Did you read this after you wrote it to see the hypocrisy? You claim it is wrong to kill innocent people for an ideology but claim you are right in killing them and some innocents for your ideology. I would say you have proved yourself morally wrong with your own statement. Not even a conundrum but a complete antithesis of morals and actions. I don't even need to go into how it 'PROVES' they are morally wrong according to your morals and how that is once again infringing on their right to believe what they want. You keep coming back to the same old arguments that fail the test of logic. 1)It would all be good as long as I agree with it. FAIL. 2) It is ok to do evil in the name of doing what I think is good. EPIC FAIL.
Nothing would please me more than to have the ability to peacefully spread the idea of freedom and the good news of Jesus Christ in the middle east. The problem is that there is a considerable presence of people who would shoot me on the spot. Its unfortunate, but the best way of supplying the average oppressed middle eastern citizen with their God given freedoms and protecting ours, is too kill the leaders who deny freedom, won't negotiate, and only wish to be martyred, and spread the ideals of freedom to the average citizen.
Do you stop to think that those in the ME don't want to hear your message from your god? Neither do I for that matter. Try spreading you good news of jesus to me and see how far you get, I wouldn't shoot you on sight but would toss you out, by force if needed, and charge you with trespassing on my property if you didn't go. Many religious leaders throughout history have tried to spread their message and version of freedom by killing and installing their own type of oppression and it has never worked. It only creates hate and resentment. I am actually quite appalled that you keep bringing this back to religious arguments. It comes across as you support freedom of religion as long as all share your beliefs. If you really believe in freedom then you have to spread that by showing people how you act in accordance with it, not preaching one thing and acting differently.
Freedom needs to be defended. The troops admirably are willing to go, that's why they're soldiers. God bless 'em.
You are right, we need to defend. What we are doing though is offense not defense, please try to learn the difference.
Criticize the war and its objectives as much as you like. Just know that some of the tactics are getting old, like the old game of trying to put us on the same level as our enemies. "America is the terrorist" and all that nonsense. The truth is that we're the honourable freedom-loving good guys and they're the scumbag freedom-denying terrorists.
Here try this. All (insert other side here) are evil! We need to end (insert other side here)! We should kill all (insert other side here)! Notice how they are all interchangeable arguments you hear from both sides. Of course my favorite un-terroristic line is 'shock & awe' which of course meant we will terrorize them into submission. In case you are unfamiliar with the definition...
Terrorism-
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
Can you say these methods are not used by the US and the west in their efforts to prevent terrorism? Does it make you laugh when you look at it objectively?
And when exactly is the threat going to be big enough for you? Their very ideology is a threat, and the more it spreads the more violence it ensues.
I already answered this. As soon as someone attacks us I will support defending ourselves.
The influence of radical Islam would spread regardless. They hate Israel and the American funding she receives. This alone fuels their Jihad blood lust.
Well at least you can recognize where most of the root cause is. If america and the west stepped back from Israel and didn't help in it's illegal formation and support it's war crimes and crimes against humanity we might not have an issue to discuss.
First, we don't TARGET innocent people, we target the militants. Second, how much injustice is done by the west in comparison to violent Islam? Probably the vast majority of what you call "injustice" by the west is only due to your belief in relativism. The forces of good are not perfect, but honourable.
Oh yeah, the collateral damage argument. There is that relativism you seem to dislike so much rearing its head again. There have been far more deaths at the hands of the west than Islam. Feel free to compare the amount of dead and wounded in both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Afghanistan, Iraq. You will find the truth is the west kills many times the amount Islam does. Forces of good??? Once again a relatavistic position. Your opinion of good which includes killing masses of people and invading sovereign nations and making everyone agree with your view on the world.
Their viewpoint is illegitimate because they kill and oppress. We have good reason to stomp in there and kill them. How can you argue with freeing oppressed people?
So does the west kill and oppress. Do you think the Iraqi's want the US there killing them? Oppression comes in many forms and what the americans are doing in Iraq is clear oppression of the people. I can argue with freeing oppressed people using 'stomp in and kill' and oppressive martial law as a method.
Did I say your neighbor was evil? No, just his religion and ironically the true followers of Islam due to the fact that Islam is violent. Your neighbor sounds like he's not a true follower.
He is a very devout follower and I am sure he will laugh at you demeaning his belief and his religion. He, like most Muslims, believe the radicals are not true followers. You are buying into radical misinterpretations just like the Jihadists and using those misinterpretations to promote your own western christian jihad against Islam. I don't blame you for being easily manipulated by your govt and religion I just want you to see that it is happening.
Patience! There's bad guys to kill!
Then you might want to start with those bad guys here in the west that put in place the foreign policy of aggression and geo-political takeover that started all this bullsh*t in the first place. They are your real enemy and have no concern for your safety, they only want to increase their power and control and achieve global dominance.
