2006-10-12 04:10:17 · 18 answers · asked by playtoofast 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Actually, the 1st poster was slightly wrong.....it is fighting for peace is the same as f u c k i n g for virginity
Peace has always been achieved through strength. Period. All of human history is testament to that truth.
2006-10-12 04:13:51 · answer #1 · answered by lundstroms2004 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Killing is one tool
Food aid is another.
it is the old "carrot and stick" routine.
If America can achieve its security and economic goals through incentive, it will. If you have to kill, then you will do that.
Most of the western world rides on American coat tails economically, and that is why they have the luxury of judging you. America has lots of carrots, and a very big stick. Don't feel guilty, because if some other country were to be the superpower on earth, we would all be much worse off.
And have no illusion, the world needs a superpower. The human race has not advanced enough yet to be self policing.
At least the USA is the least of all evils.
2006-10-12 11:17:39 · answer #2 · answered by aka DarthDad 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You have little choice - if the terrorists want to attack you and are prepared to die trying then what else can you do... send them chocolates and flowers, perhaps?
Every country has the right to defend itself from attack. The difficulty with terror attacks is defining who the enemy is, where they come from and at what point a person makes the transition from just being someone who doesn't think much of the US to someone who is prepared to do actual harm to support his dislike.
If you can identify someone who is intending to attack the US then you have every right to deal with him in any way you can, which with Islamic Extremists, usually has to mean killing them because they're prepared to die anyway - negotiation, bargaining, bribing or merely threatening violence is NOT going to work. What many people in the West still don't seem to have grasped is that these people HATE us just for existing - as far as they're concerned even if we all died this instant it wouldn't be soon enough. There is no room for diplomacy or mere threats when dealing with people like that.
2006-10-12 11:12:00 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Attacking a nation on the pretext of defending ones own nation is wrong. But lets us know one thing as to who started the whole issue. if every nation has the same stand against terrorist there wont be any agression at all and every nation can stand hand in hand against terrorism. Conclusion still remains : No nation can act as a global police, what America did was wrong.
2006-10-12 11:18:20 · answer #4 · answered by adi 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Historically, has there ever been any peace that was not accomplished by war or threats of war?
It has long been an axiom of human nature that in order to achieve peace, one must prepare for war. And once peace is shattered, war is the only means of restoring it.
What color is the sky on your planet?
2006-10-12 11:43:09 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. According to the Criminal Justice System, the use of force has to fit the impending danger. Unless there is an overt act, such as bringing a war head over here or something of the such, then we can only respond with the amount of force that has been used thusfar.
2006-10-12 11:12:46 · answer #6 · answered by Wookie on Water 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ive always felt we have the right to defend ourselves against terrorists.... but not to cram "peace" and "democracy" down people's throats who choose to live the way they want to, differently from the US. Especially by ways of violence and killing.
2006-10-12 11:14:21 · answer #7 · answered by just lQQkin 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"We cannot defend freedom abroad by DESERTING it at home" - Robert Murrow
I think that is a great quote. Killing is not the way to have a peaceful world.... I don't understand why so many people still support Bush.
2006-10-12 11:16:09 · answer #8 · answered by betterlife_travel 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We do have the right if it relates to the peace in our country. It's when we go to war that has nothing to do with us that gets my panties in a bunch.
To other countries we invade, we're terrorist too, we just have better uniforms.
2006-10-12 11:16:17 · answer #9 · answered by bill m 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you study history, the only way to maintain peace is to beat your enemies so bad they don't want to screw with you. All the people that say we should negotiate need to look at who they want us to deal with. If the Brits and French had kicked butt early enough, Hitler would have never gotten to start WW2, but all the "lets negotiate clowns" like Chamberlian fell for all his BS.
2006-10-12 11:14:41 · answer #10 · answered by Meow the cat 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋