HOME | DD

tanya-n In reply to disturbedMA [2009-04-26 21:09:15 +0000 UTC]

That's fine - thanks for the interest. : )

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

tanya-n In reply to slowtones [2007-10-01 14:56:10 +0000 UTC]

Thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Blazing-Blade In reply to Anenome [2008-09-11 22:15:18 +0000 UTC]

I know why, it's because it's none of the US's business what happens to other countries! America has a horrible habbit of butting in where they don't belong, and so do a lot of other countries. And THIS could be solved if there were no boundries, just land. No countries and borderlines to segregate people.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Anenome In reply to lilugirl [2006-08-11 08:30:53 +0000 UTC]

Hmmm, there are very few things in life that are 'always' wrong. Child molestation is one of the few examples of things that are always wrong under all circumstances. Are you indeed sure that war is always wrong? Have you applied that theory to all previous historically recorded battles???

And if peace protests are effective at ending war, why is there more war now than ever? They certainly have a dismal track record...

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Blazing-Blade In reply to Anenome [2008-09-11 22:09:36 +0000 UTC]

yes, war is always wrong, end of story.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lilugirl In reply to Anenome [2006-08-11 09:51:17 +0000 UTC]

has there ever been a war where no one was killed?
and how many wars have spared the lives of innocent civilians?
and yes history is full of wars and batlles and to me they were just as bad as the ones today.
how many of these wars were started because of greed and power?
and how many were started because it was for the good of the people?
protests do not stop wars, but they give people a voice, to let the greedy, corrupt powers that we do not accept it, and it is a way for people to stand up for what they believe in.
how many peace protests kill innocent people?
or how many peace protests destroy cities and the lives of the people who live in them?
food for thought

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Blazing-Blade In reply to lilugirl [2008-09-11 22:09:49 +0000 UTC]

yes, exactly

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Anenome In reply to lilugirl [2006-08-11 18:18:02 +0000 UTC]

Why don't you look at what actually does end war? Certain ideas and systems lead to far less war and conflict than do others. Communism, for instance, is notoriously warful. Capitalism & Democracy, on the other hand, are widely known to promote peace within a society. Historically, those are facts. Yet, strangely, I find that many peace activists are also opposed to both capitalism and democracy.

Similarly, you have the idea that all death is bad, that all killing is bad. This isn't true. The world would be a much better place if certain evil people were to die or be killed tomorrow. Guns always hurt or kill people when fired, yet even they are fired in the cause of good - even when the result is a death. This is because when a gun kills a bad person, the world becomes a better place. It is the same with war. When war is directed against evil, it is a good thing. Again, very few things are always wrong.

Many wars are started for the good of the people, especially when it is a democracy doing so. They are started against an enemy determined to kill innocents, ie: all terrorists. A war where no one was killed: the cold war. As for wars sparing innocent civilians, many wars are conducted to save others lives who are threatened by evil aggression. WWII was fought in part to save the Jews against atrocity. Can you really say that the US shouldn't have become involved in WWII because, as you say, all war is bad? Since war is bad, we should fight the necessary wars very quickly, using everything possible to get them over with fast with the least deaths all around. That is the most humane way we can make war, when it is necessary, and that is exactly what we do.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

Blazing-Blade In reply to Anenome [2008-09-11 22:10:50 +0000 UTC]

government is the cause of war. the us is a democracy, but it's ina war right now, so how does that make them peace promotors?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

lilugirl In reply to Anenome [2006-08-11 21:55:42 +0000 UTC]

i believe in democracy, why do you assume that because i hate war and want peace that i am into communism?
why are you so adamant about the good of war?
my dad was a naval officer in the vietnam war, and believe me war messes with all peole involved with it, have you been in a war?
have you been face to face with a gun, or the scenario where you need to kill another to survive?
taking another person's life messes with your being, so i guess i should add that not only does war destroy civilian lives but the lives of those who are over there fighting. they will return broken, no matter how quick and swift tactics are.
i assume you are in some agreeance with the war that is going on in iraq, because you seem so adamant about war being necessary.
the war in iraq was merely an excuse for bush to try and gain power iraq and oil.
the us goevrnment helped put saddanm in power in iraq, and then used the excuse 'weapons of mass destruction' to go in and wreak havoc.
yes i do know of the atrocities saddam's regime had on iraq and i can say that i think that it would have been far easier to have gone in and assinated him that to start a war, and yes it is necessary to take out evil people sometimes.
obviously we have differing opinions on this, but i don't understnd why you have to get stuck into me because i merely commented on an image that i believed in.
i am for peace and against war, that does not make me a communist, i believe in democracy, unfortunately this world is run by power that is naturally drawn to greed.
i want a world where war is no longer and innocent people are safe, at least what i believe in is a positive thing, and one day i hope it happens (unfortunately, as through out the existance of the human race, there is always going to be war)

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Anenome In reply to lilugirl [2006-08-11 23:36:08 +0000 UTC]

Good, then we desire the same thing. You seem upset in this comment, I assure you I am not going to argue with you, but if you want to discuss, that is fine. If you become upset, we cannot continue. I believe exchanges of ideas can be mutually beneficial. If you don't want to continue, then don't respond; otherwise, it takes two to tango.

First of all, I never said you were communist, I said that I've found a correlation between anti-war-in-all-situations-types like yourself and those whom are extreme leftists politically. The same with anti-capitalism, and I may be wrong, since you provide no context, but taken at face value your signature, for instance, is a blatantly anti-capitalist statement in an of itself, so there is some justification for my suspicion on that one...

One reason to assume you may a communist, though I did not, is that a belief in communism requires the same attitude of being out of touch with reality and what is realistic as does a belief that peace protests can result in peace and that war is always wrong. A peace protest makes you feel like you're actually doing something good, without in fact actually doing anything except stating that you're for what everyone is for: peace. The only problem is that some define peace as getting along with others (the West), and some define peace as the state in which all their enemies are dead (Islamo-fascism). War is necessary to deal with the latter. And if forestalled, becomes inevitable, and more terrible with time.

And yes, war messes with people's heads, war is certainly terrible. But is can also be necessary, and the effects on those involved in it is secondary to the necessity of it. Especially when those who are involved in it volunteered to be in that position. Vietnam resulted in more trauma because ppl like your dad were forced, so I don't think it's quite representative; and the modern army is not a conscripted army. Every time a police officer is forced to kill a criminal on the job it messes them up psychologically as well. That doesn't make what that person did wrong, not in the slightest. It's just intense, as war is very intense. Car accidents, also intense - any life threatening situation, can leave similar mental scars. That's neither here nor there when it comes to whether war leads to a net good in the world, or a net evil, and what is right or wrong.

You still haven't even mentioned WWII. Funny, because leftists tend to lose the 'war is always wrong' argument when that war is brought up, so I'm not surprised you glossed over it.

As for assassination, it is illegal to assassinate rulers under international law without a declaration of war. Try again. If the Iraq war was about 'oil & power', then why do we have neither over Iraq right now? Iraq does not give us oil, and they have their own government. Who feeds you such ridiculous thoughts? That's like saying we invaded Japan for 'power & sushi'.

Finally, I'm not adamant about the 'good of war' only trying to point out that there can be some resulting good, which you seem to want to deny completely. I do not deny that war can result in great evil, of course it can. But you are purposefully ignoring any good effects it CAN have, and often does when democracies are involved. Israel's war with Hezbollah right now, is a very good war. Because it is resulting in the deaths of hate-filled and evil people who would cut your throat in a heartbeat just for being a westerner. It will not be solved any other way than armed conflict. You cannot talk to and reason with evil. A thousand peace treaties and appeasements have done nothing to quell Arab anger against the Jews, because the Arab's goal is genocide, not peace. You cannot reason with genocidal hate.

So answer this then: if war is not an option, what is your alternative to deal with such conflicts?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Blazing-Blade In reply to Anenome [2008-09-11 22:12:21 +0000 UTC]

how about no conflicts? if people wanted no wars, their would be no wars. if no one wanted war, we'd all live peacefuly, end of story.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

tanya-n In reply to lilugirl [2006-04-14 09:16:19 +0000 UTC]

Thank you very much for your kind words Yes, I agree, protests for peace are indeed needed and are definitely worth having - the atmosphere is great as well.
I think there were also anti-war protests in Oz the same weekend but it may have just been in one of the main cities, and perhaps it wasn't very prominent.
Thanks again

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

tanya-n In reply to sogggze [2006-03-27 22:10:13 +0000 UTC]

Thanks

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

tanya-n In reply to RobHM [2006-03-25 19:30:33 +0000 UTC]

Thanks for your thoughts on this one - I wasn't initially sure about it - you've actually convinced me that this shot is OK after all!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

tanya-n In reply to deviant-sarge [2006-03-22 19:46:12 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0