There IS a "type" of peace that comes from the conquering, occupying, and enslavement OF people !! But, it is a tenative and precarious peace --- for, under the surface, they HATE you !!!
There is another "type" of peace that comes from the allowance of others to live out their destinies while you live out your's -- this is a much prefered peace for it usually is a peace that is stable and genuine in nature !! But, this is only possible when you don't have people at the helm of super military might that see it as THEIR destiny to conquer, occupy, and enslave the world !!!!!
2007-07-27 17:22:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
I love peace. I wish for peace. My saviour is the Prince of Peace.
I can't help remember, that back in 1939 there was a force that was not deterred by peace.
Their bloodlust was too great and required force to stop them. If peace was the route that we had taken, we ALL would be speaking German right now.
I do agree that some countries have been extremely overbearing and invasive in their policies. However, if these countries weren't around to keep the terrorists in check, tomorrow we all might be speaking arabic.
I am American and have a live and let live policy in my personal life and I can safely say, the majority over here want the same. But, I will not berate any army that's out there fighting and dying for my freedom. You out there against the war should take a stroll through the history books and wake up.
2007-07-28 00:29:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by Whoda thunkit? 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
"You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you". - Leon Trotsky
You cannot 'quit' a war, you can only win or lose them. The onerous aspect of this is that the Losers do not get to decide the parameters of defeat. The Winners alone will decide to what extent the vanquished suffer.
Peace is not a process...it is a result of having no more enemies. It is not something you 'do', it is something you 'get'. You cannot impose peace on anyone unilaterally if they don't want it.
A refusal to fight does not guarantee peace, only defeat, the scope of which you can not begin to imagine or control. This contention is just the rationalized face of cowardice.
2007-07-28 00:47:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by righteousjohnson 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I think an intelligent foreign affairs policy would be a great start! We need to maintain a good military, but it is not for peace that we fight! Fighting is the opposite of peace, right? We need a military to protect ourselves, but we, as a country, have an awful habit of sticking our nose into other countries' business (What are we really doing in Iraq?!? Didn't our intelligence say Osama Bin Laden was in Afghanistan? Why aren't we focusing our fighting efforts there?) History is repeating itself and I am terrified for its results! After World War 1, The United States and allies forced Germany to change governments. With the instability we created in Germany, Hitler was able to rise to power. I am terrified that this will happen in Iraq and the results could be even worse! I guess you could say I am a modern day isolationist. We have too many problems to focus on in our own country! To fight in another country where we were not asked to fight is ridiculous!
2007-07-28 00:15:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Bring our troops home to help guard our borders. Most of the Iranians, Iraquians in the war torn zones immigrated into other parts of the world, and have lived there as refugees becoming citizens of other countries and have gained other passports from other countries and are now entering our country as citizens from the other countries. They are setting up "cells" throughout our country in mass numbers, making us sitting ducks here in our own country.
Glendale California being one big one...and other cities across our United States are being populated by them.
Our open borders now pose a serious danger to our own country.
Bring our troops home and start sorting through each State to find these "cells" and deport those that do not embrace our Nation and its freedoms, liberties and loyalties.
Iran and Iraq have been at war for thousands of years...we have no business having our military leave our country to fight something that has no end. We should have them home, guarding our freedoms and safety over here.
Our country is going bankrupt with our troops over there. When we are out of money...what then?
The "cells" here have dirty oil money and can buy our country out. Anyone want to be a citizen of a country that has been at war for years? Or be run by the leaders of foreign countries that haven't figured out how to be prosperous and without war and hate crimes?
The pendulum swung too heavy in the wrong direction when we opened our borders to anyone.
With the war going on...we should have closed them until it was over as we did in history past.
What were we thinking?
Years later, Iraquians enter our country as French citizens and as South Americans....and as many other less suspect countries.
When did the war start? How long does it take to take on another nationality? Geez. Who was the genius that didn't see this coming?
2007-07-28 00:27:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by cadvadvocate 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
You don't go around the world killing people just because you think you are a member of a special Tribe of people called the United States! We Americans are responsible for over a million and a half deaths by our military in the last 70 years in Vietnam and Iraq and two lost wars.
Not to bright! The City on the Hill is now going bankrupt and we have to turn the lights out at night to balance the budget and pay our medical bills.
Thank you Mr. Bush and the Republicans!
2007-07-28 00:17:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by zclifton2 6
·
0⤊
3⤋
I think you need a balance between a strong military and a strong diplomacy.
The Soviet Union was not defeated just by having a big sword, but using our diplomatic and economic power to help undermine them also. We might have accelerated their fall with the arms buildup they could not keep pace with, but so many other factors were critical in bringing down the Soviet Union.
2007-07-28 00:11:33
·
answer #7
·
answered by The Stylish One 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
I don't know whose anal orifice those numbers came forth from. But, if they are correct, then we should stop our military operations and invite Al Queda to the "Kumbaya Table". But, you'll have to excuse my absence. When the Salafist Jihadists walk in to the room and start shooting people in the head I'll be somewhere else locking and loading.
2007-07-28 00:19:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by desertviking_00 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
I think that peace isn't solved by violence, for it only causes more violence. In the Bible it says to solve these kinds of things by not doing the same thing the other person did to you, because you would be just as guilty.
2007-07-28 00:12:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by Titus M 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
If you want peace, prepare for war.
2007-07-28 10:46:36
·
answer #10
·
answered by Marine 3
·
0⤊
0⤋