why do people have to be aint-war....if all of america was anti-war then we would all die?

Answer 1

i agree, like I keep saying no one ever said that FREEDOM WAS FREE

Answer 2

We aren't exactly a free country right now, and as a militarian (military power-glorifying) country we are not promoting freedom or rights in other countries.

We aren't a free country because we can get forced to die, we aren't a free country because homosexuals can't marry, we aren't a free country because people can't choose what's best for their own lives, we aren't a free country because the government listens to us a little too much and still has the power to detain and arrest people without a reason if they just say they are a danger to the government.

Opposing war doesn't exactly mean no war at all. It means that you do whatever you can to avoid killing someone. How is that a bad thing?

And since you obviously don't know your history very well, militarianism is what got us into this terrorism mess in the first place (by terrorism I mean Middle East terrorism--America has it's own, atomic bomb brand of terrorism). We made Middle Eastern countries our enemy by our Cold War, anti-communist policies for one:

We supported corrupt governments and governments that abused rights just because they were anti-communist, and we didn't want to lose in a possible war with the Soviets, so we helped out people like Saddam, opposed anti-dictator rebels like Khomeini, and set up corrupt officials like Shah Pahlavi. We, through unofficial war (Iraq is an unofficial war) created hatred to the people there and brought 9/11 and hatred upon ourselves--not that what they did was right. But therein lies the point.

Opposing war does not suddenly kill everyone in a nation. Determination for peace breeds a willingness to stop fighting between warring nations, as was shown so wonderfully at the Oslo Peace Agreement between Egypt and Israel--two people who were once sworn enemies.

So you see, it's actually the refusal the make war the absolute last option that would make people want to send nukes at us all.

Answer 3

People have the right to be anti-war. I don't support that view. I think it's naive and mean-spirited a lot of the time, but that's not against the law. People can protest all they want, I think it's pretty obvious by now that the president is a "stay the course" kind of person, so all the protesting in the world isn't going to change anything. As far as all of America being anti-war, that will change pretty damn quick if we ever came under attack again like we did on 9/11.

Answer 4

People are not necessarily against war, just against wars where the purpose of the battle is completely unclear. World Wars 1 and 2 are examples of wars that the vast majority of people should willingly say they support. Wars such as the one currently waging in Iraq, where, while good things have been done, the true motive is unclear, are the ones that people have a harder time agreeing with. Now If all of America was against war, that does not mean that we would all die. America would still maintain a defensive armed force (as do the majority of countries in our world), but fewer people would be as angry at Americans as they claim to be.

Answer 5

America's basis as a nation is freedom, including freedom of speech. Naturally some people will like the idea of war and some won't. If everybody was anti-war, we would probably be taken over, but if everyone was pro-war then America would grow sick with power and be a burden on the world. Personally, i think we're headed toward the latter part, but we need both voices to keep balance.

Answer 6

OK... as a former soldier in Her Majesty's Armed Forces, and now a Private Military Contractor, I believe that I am fairly well qualified to answer this question, so here goes...

I am going to make the bold assumption here that like myself, all good soldiers are not pro-war, however, we are definitely against the alternative which is to allow anarchy and terror to reign supreme. None of us want to go to war however, we recognize that war is often a necessity in the battle against evil and that our calling requires us to stand up and defend all that we hold dear... including the freedom enjoyed by the citizens of the United States.

Being anti-war is a good thing, however being in denial of the facts, and displaying hatred and disgust against the brave men and women who defend us, often at the cost of their lives - is as bad as war itself, if not worse (in my humble opinion - to display anything but respect, admiration and gratitude for their sacrifice, is unconscionable, not to mention downright ignorant).

Peace is always the best option however, you cannot have peace without war.

So, why do soldiers, first responders, etc, do what they do?

The best analogy that I have found which can best describe why we do what we do is in an essay written by Lt. Col. (rtd) Dave Grossman which is entitled: Sheep, Sheepdogs and Wolves and can be found at this link:

http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/08-19-04/discussion.cgi.29.html

I hope this helps.

Answer 7

In the first place I fought in the Vietnam mess and oppose w's senseless war in Iraq...I do not "oppose war" I oppose this war in and of itself..I supported as did the large majority of the world the war in Afghanistan..in fact felt we took too long to attack the people that aided and financed the attack on US soil... It is every Americans right to express their own opinion..No person is constrained in their thought except of course treasonous advocating the overthrow of the US government. As my last answer "we would all die?" regret to inform we all are going to die The great thing about Americans, they have the chance to change their minds..Look at w's poll numbers lots of Americans have changed their minds as regards him and his Presidency..

Answer 8

interior the subsequent 50 to at least one hundred years, virtually something can take position. In one hundred years you've gotten the most Holy Empire of Oklahoma (led by ability of tremendous Khan Alexander von Singh from his capital in Austinius) affirming a Zensunni marketing campaign adversarial to the Despotate of Cascadia-East over the Despotate's failure to deliver a sufficiently cybernetically-more advantageous ambassador to the great Khan's line marriage. So, fairly, it truly is an unanswerable and meaningless question. Now, what you would want to do is analyze traits and confirm if, in some unspecified time sooner or later interior the destiny, there is an overpowering income to at least one united states to initiate protection rigidity action adversarial to a distinct. ought to that take position? convinced - even with the undeniable fact that the international isn't a recreation of probability the position each and everyone is in basic terms attempting to enhance their territory for status, and the in straightforward words ingredient conserving them back is the protection rigidity ability of their competitors. international international relatives (and judgements of conflict and peace) are determined by ability of nationwide spheres of pastime and established demands for one or the different (with the individuals in maximum international places needing peace).

Answer 9

I wouldn't die. Or atleast not because of that. Everyone dies sometime anyway. I might not have had a job for a while though since I was in the army.

Answer 10

Human nature being what it is you are right
If you study not just our history but the history of other countries as well as look at their present states maybe it would help create a better understanding of freedom.
sighting petting points of view aren't forms of absent freedoms

Answer 11

Lotte T , you need to get a little less liberal and think about the real facts. If we dont defend, we will be overtaken. 9/11 happened because of our customs and security. We tend to trust to much...