(Poll) Are you pro-war or anti-war

[CountZero]

I'm anti-war. Something has to be done, but what? Are we going to kill all the terrorist, they don't care if they die I believe that much is obvious. Attacking Afghanistan or Iraq or whoever else might harbor terrorist won't stop them. If anything this will cause more terrorist attacks on our country. In a war thousands of our men will die, as many or more than died in WTC. Military action should be taken but a full out war is not the answer. Not to mention if we use strong military force as opposed to covert ops style stuff some countries who agreed to help will back down and possibly become our enemies.

As far as news coverage goes if anyone watched both our news and international news you'd see a huge difference. Our news was being so extremely biased about everything while only showing the slightest restraint at pinning this on Bin Laden. The news is supposed to be an unbiased statement of fact. Putting a caption saying "America at War" at the bottom of the screen and saying how pissed you are that bush is not on his way to DC is not unbiased, save it for the opinions section. Too often the news takes information processes it and tells us how to feel. OTOH I don't think that was old footage as no even remotely reliable source as said otherwise that I know of.

So I'm anti-war but pro action. I'd like to see bin laden taken alive to the US and executed oh so slowly during primetime television (on ABC or something so that even people without cable can watch). It should take well over an hour of excruciating pain to kill him. then put his head on a post in front of the white house and throw his entrails in the trees in front of the white house and blanket countries with videos of all of it just to say 'see how fScked up we are, if we even THINK you are a terrorist you'll be next
. <btw i'm kidding, i know the UN would never allow such an act to occur, though IMO Laden has given up his human rights, his animal rights, he shouldn't even be given the rights of a plant, and yes this was a paraphase of Henry Rollins's idea for world peace>

 

[Looney]

So I'm anti-war but pro action. I'd like to see bin laden taken alive to the US and executed oh so slowly during primetime television

And how do you propose we get him? Leave out cheese on the road and nab him when he comes to nibble on some? You think the US hasn't tried to get him for the past 10 years through 'peaceful' means?

 

[HowardStern]

<<

<< Get a grip, the Russians can't even beat the Chetchenins and have been beaten by countries like Estonia, Sweden, Japan, and Poland (numerous times). >>


First, Sweden hasn't been in war with Russia in 200 years, and then the swedes lost. Estonia hasn't fought Russia either, they simply used the confision in the Sovjet and claimed their independence. Poland hasn't beat russia either, atleast not during the 20th centuary. Japan has done some fighting with russia, though not since ww2. >>



Poland beat them ain 1921 or 1922. And had beaten them previously (more than 100 years ago).
Estonia almost took St Petersburg in (I think 1920 or 1921) and then the Soviets signed a peace treaty with them.
Japan beat them in 1905 See
Sweden (when it was really Norway, Finland, and Sweden was one country) I think beat them at some point in time a very long time ago. (more tham 100 years).
Get your facts straight!
Russo Japanese War

Treaty Ending Russo Japanes War
also look here More on Baltic States
Plus look into the Crimean War but at least in that case they were beaten by a major power.

 

[shaddow]

i am pro american therefore i am in favor of any measure to rid the world of terrorism

 

[NesuD]

Sheesh! I wonder which terrorist organization Weezergirls friend Whom she highly respects belongs to. That claptrap sounds like a repeat of every Arab terrorist spokesperson i have ever heard.

Pro war here

 

[CountZero]

<< And how do you propose we get him? Leave out cheese on the road and nab him when he comes to nibble on some? You think the US hasn't tried to get him for the past 10 years through 'peaceful' means? >>



Covert ops style stuff not a full frontal war. Thats my whole point. This is a different kind of enemy you must use different kind of tactics. Attacking Afghanistan as if they are the ones who attacked us and not just the ones who harbor the criminal is foolish. The day we do that do you realize how many terrorist attacks there will be? What good would a frontal assault do to stop terrorism? Personally I don't think you can stop terrorism. They are part of the new world. They come from inside and outside our own country. I don't think throwing thousands more US lives onto the pyre will solve anything except quelch some bloodlust.

 

[Pikachu]

DDCSpeed, you worded this really poorly. For example: Are you Pro-Death or Anti-Death? Are you Pro-Choice or Anti-Choice?

How about a question that reads: Are you for or against turning the other cheek? Anybody that wants to turn the other cheek can kiss my cheek! :|

And weezergirl's friend is a friggen tool! This quote really got my goat: "Overall, this whole event had been extremely convenient for the U.S. Government." WTF?! :| Yeah, this has been REALLY CONVENIENT! What an ass! weezergirl, tell your moronic friend he's due for a serious kick in the ass!

 

[Blundar]

make love not war!

 

[SpongeBob]

I'm anti-war. In my mind there is no difference between crashing a jet into a building and killing 5,000 innocent people and firing cruise missiles into a city and killing 5,000 innocent people. Why stoop to their level? I am a firm believer that violence perpetuates violence. Where does it all stop then? What if we retalliate and kill 10,000 people? Does that then give them the right to attack us again and kill more Americans, for that is how we are justifying an attack. I really think that there can be a peaceful end to this whole scenario. We have some of the brightest minds in history on our side, you're telling me that they can't come up with a solution that does not result in more loss of human life? Call me weak, call me a bleeding heart, I don't care. That is my view, and I don't see myself changing it anytime soon.

 

[MF1]

Pro-justice and anti-terrorism. Whatever these lead to.

 

[brandonl]

Pro-War

1) Billy Graham's (The most well known modern day biblical teacher) son said "God did tell us to turn the other cheek ... but he never told us to lay down and take it."

2) "Why stoop to their level?" - Because they've earned it.

3) "I don't like war, but revenge is needed." - You think everyone here loves war? I personally don't but I so much want to be a soldier heading over to the country responsible. Your making it sound like anyone not a tree-hugger are blood thirsty hicks. Its obvious most people are ignorant of those Pro-War. Just because they are Pro-War does not means they want to nuke the whole damn Continent that houses Arabian countries. Your retarded if you think that.

4) "There are other solutions." - Yeah and they haven't worked for the past 10+ years.

5) "The host country always wins." - I don't recall the United States losing World War II.


That's all i want to respond to right now.

 

[mastertech01]

No one hates war more than a war veteran. Soldiers who have witnessed the horrors of war live with this for ever. However, just as paying taxes and dieing are inevitable facts of life, defense of the worlds peace eventually always includes war against the evil forces who insist on robbing that freedom and that which our nations have shed blood in the past to preserve. Perhaps your question should read, are you pro defense of our peoples human rights or passive to the wanton desires of evil people to take away your rights and liberties..

To ask such a vague question to a huge set of so many variables is truly not representative.

 

[DDCSpeed]

Well, basically the U.S. do not have much choice left being handed into the situation by terrorism. It is very hard to say who is right and who is wrong because the terrorist were not terrorist in the first place.
It is a tragedy no doubt but is war really the answer? Maybe.

They became terrorists for a reason and I am not really sure of the history but they obviously have their reasons. I hate to say this but the term terrorism is very very abstract and it is the idea just like the term America. People will carry on the idea of terrorism just like the idea of freedom.

I hope whatever happens. It will be the best for all of us.

 

[Looney]

Covert ops style stuff not a full frontal war.

Have you even given a thought as to how this would be possible? It's like sending a special OPs team into Iraq and telling them to extract Saddam. You can't send in special OPs deep into a hostile country and expect them to extract anybody.... that's why we have no choice but to use force.

I don't think throwing thousands more US lives onto the pyre will solve anything except quelch some bloodlust

Well, sitting on your ass and doing nothing will DEFINITELY not solve anything.

 

[johndoe52]

Everyone is emtional but who would we go to war against? There are no clear enemies in terrorism and that's why it's so hard to fight. So at this point I'll remain neutral.

 

[rickn]

There will be clear enemies, there already is. It is just like if you give refuge to a criminal in this country, you are aiding and abetting them. Governments are representative of their people, even if the people do no always approve of their governments action. Unfortunately for some people they have no recourse, and end up being victims themselves, but the outcome can be a more secure and stable living environment for future generations. Look at all our operations in Kosovo, and neighboring countries. Those operations were to protect muslims. Iran is a public supporter of terrorist groups, financial support is even on their annual budget.

 

[CountZero]

<< Well, sitting on your ass and doing nothing will DEFINITELY not solve anything. >>



I didn't say to sit on our ass and do nothing did I? Don't put words in my mouth (or my text as the case may be).

Please explain to me how attacking with a strong military force will help end terrorism or give us a more secure and stable living environment? These people don't care if they die, more of them will pop up. Think about the fact that these people went to flight school in order to learn to fly so that they could kill themselves. They went and learned to take off, land and do whatever else you do while flying for the sole purpose of hijacking a plane and flying it into a building just to get their point across. Do you think if a war breaks out terrorist around the world will go "Oh my god, we could die! We better not attack America".

These attacks are orchestrated by small cells who are only loosely connected. Do you think we will weed out all of these small cells? These people lived in our country, trained with our resources and used our planes. How many other cells are in this country alone?

So, you might ask, how do we fight terrorism? I don't know. Even with a military force how will we know when we've won? Actually that brings up a good point, how can you possibly fight a war where there are no victory conditions? When there are no more terrorist attacks will that be the end? We haven't actually been attacked since tuesday.

We are full of sorrow and hatred. We all have a strong desire to strike back but I don't believe striking back with a frontal war will solve anything. Sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, mothers, and fathers have already died but until I see how more people losing their lives will help make this country more secure I can't support such an act. I'm serious, I want someone to explain to me (maturely) how this will help end terrorism and make us more secure, because I don't see it but if you are pro-war you obviously do.

 

[gopunk]

weezergirl I think your friend and even you for posting such Bullsh!t should both hop in a plane and move to the Middle East. Its pretty obvious that your friend and maybe you if you can't see the twisted view your friend has would fit right in with the Radicals.

maybe you should move over there for being so narrow-minded. while i don't agree with a lot of the points made by weezergirl's friend,

a.) disagreement is not acceptable grounds for deportation
b.) i accept that i could very well be wrong, or vice versa
c.) the bbc does offer the best coverage

 

[Peaty]

anti-war. as much as i would like to seek revenge on those who killed so many innocent lives, it just doesn't feel like we have defined our enemy to a point where we can say, "lets wage a war." I can understand covert operations behind enemy lines, but a full fledged military assault on a barren desert country? It seems to me that bin Laden was singled out as the scapegoat for the US to attack. I'm not saying that he had nothing to do with this, he probably was the mastermind. I'm just saying that it feels like we are jumping into this too quickly, fueled by the feeling of anger and revenge. We cannot start a war with someone driven by pure emotion. As much as we would like to be heroic and seek to immediately destroy those who ruined our sacred land, much more rational thought has to go into our endeavour. We must be sure of who we are trying to defeat... terrorism? bin Laden himself? all the terrorist groups of the world? Afghanistan?

If it was a defined enemy, it would make sense to wage a war. The enemy is there, defeat them. Perhaps we can defined this war more like the "War on Drugs." More of a bunch of policies and actions poised to eliminate certain specific targets. Blowing the hell out of Afghanistan isn't going to do any good at all. Its just going to lead to lost lives.

 

[weezergirl]

<<

<< Well, sitting on your ass and doing nothing will DEFINITELY not solve anything. >>



I didn't say to sit on our ass and do nothing did I? Don't put words in my mouth (or my text as the case may be).

Please explain to me how attacking with a strong military force will help end terrorism or give us a more secure and stable living environment? These people don't care if they die, more of them will pop up. Think about the fact that these people went to flight school in order to learn to fly so that they could kill themselves. They went and learned to take off, land and do whatever else you do while flying for the sole purpose of hijacking a plane and flying it into a building just to get their point across. Do you think if a war breaks out terrorist around the world will go "Oh my god, we could die! We better not attack America".

These attacks are orchestrated by small cells who are only loosely connected. Do you think we will weed out all of these small cells? These people lived in our country, trained with our resources and used our planes. How many other cells are in this country alone?

So, you might ask, how do we fight terrorism? I don't know. Even with a military force how will we know when we've won? Actually that brings up a good point, how can you possibly fight a war where there are no victory conditions? When there are no more terrorist attacks will that be the end? We haven't actually been attacked since tuesday.

We are full of sorrow and hatred. We all have a strong desire to strike back but I don't believe striking back with a frontal war will solve anything. Sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, mothers, and fathers have already died but until I see how more people losing their lives will help make this country more secure I can't support such an act. I'm serious, I want someone to explain to me (maturely) how this will help end terrorism and make us more secure, because I don't see it but if you are pro-war you obviously do. >>



i was thinking the same thing. if we do have war it will just give them more reason to spread more terrorism. they will be back with even more of a vengeance (if that's possible) but most people just want a short term answer, and war it is. *shrugs*

rush limbaugh made a funny comment the other day....he said we should point our nukes at their holy city of mecca and tell all muslims of the world that if one terrorist act is made against a us. citizen anywhere we will not hesitate to bomb mecca. which as ludicrous as it sounds seems to me like they sort of have the right point....religion is all they really care about and for us to threaten them to bomb mecca? hit them where it hurts? i dunno, maybe that'd piss them off more hehe.

wow, and i guess i should be deported?? i won't even bother to respond to your post because that's what my friend wrote and i thought it was an interesting way to look at it so i'd thought i share, no need to defend that. i guess i'm not allowed to share different viewpoints tho? i'm sure half of the stuff the government does u have no idea and if u found out about them u'd be pretty pissed off too. do u think that all politiicans are honest or are gonna tell us everything and don't do a single thing that would discredit them? it's like u are totally pissed off at me for my friend's comments to QUESTION EVERYTHING. i don't see anythign wrong with that. it's easier to believe that our government is going to be 100% wonderful and doing everything they can in our best interest but in reality the majority of america is ignorant on what the government is doing and what they are doing with foreign affairs. i bet before tuesday most people did not even know anything about it and now they all have an opinion on it huh? which is cool, but all they see is that 5,000 innocent americans died.

 

[frustrated2]

To add my 2 cents to this discussion I don't think anyone is pro war that is anyone in their right mind. I do however believe that the acts performed on Sept. 11th should not go without some sort of retaliation. War may not be the smartest thing but in order to provide/defend freedom now and in the future it may be neccesary. Without complete irradication I don't ever think that the middle eastern people will quit fighting they have been fighting since the beginning of time and will continue to do so so long as they exist. The act performed on the 11th is completely off the charts and I must commend who ever performed the act on the size of their balls. The US is the largest military power in the world and I certainly wouldn't be performing acts like this if I were them. You will notice a major change in middle eastern countries in the next couple of weeks because I promise when we park a carrier off of your coast we mean business 3 carriers mean WAR!!!!!!!

 

[QueenShanequa]

neutron bombs have hardly any fallout. Troops could occupy the territory within weeks. Also I think it is likely that the same people who are anti war are also pro abortion. It strikes me as odd that they fight for the rights of terrorists but step on the rights of innocent babies. Q

 

[CountZero]

QueenShanequa: Thanks for the info on the neutron bomb. As for the abortion comment notice the subject is "Are you pro-war or anti-war" not "How would you generalize people who are anti-war?".

As for my stance I was glad to see today that our leaders said this would be mostly small special forces style groups and not massive land attacks. Massive forces should only be used as back up defense of the special forces moving in and out.