Lieberman offers clear assessment on Iraq

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

I see no difference between Nazi Germany and the terrorists.

Nazi's wore uniforms.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Did Japan ever attack the US again?

Perhaps it did make America safer.

You missed it; it went over your head.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Did Japan ever attack the US again?

Perhaps it did make America safer.

There are so many problems with comparing Japan to Iraq that I really don't know where to start.

Why don't you start by telling me how the two situations are at all analogous.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Really? You may want to think this through a bit more.

While many are giving shelter to the terrorists, how many of them are doing so out of pure intimidation or fear? Do they deserve to die because they are trying to protect their family from retribution from terrorists? What would you do? Let me guess: you would kill them all and stare death in the face, right!

I would rather die trying to kill the enemy if he came into my house to kill American troops. That is my honest answer.

Somethings are worth dying for.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

You are correct that I would rather not see civilians die. They don't deserve to die if they really are innocent. But if they are willing to allow the terrorists to use their homes, businesses, mosques and schools to kill Americans, then they should be considered the enemy.

Depends on what you mean by "allow". Let's say I had killed your parents and your brothers' and sisters' families. I have guns, you have nothing.

Me and my buddies move into your neighborhood. What, pray tell, are you going to do? You are probably going to try and save your family.

You are assuming a position of power and agency that most Iraqis don't have. The people with power and influence and money are long gone. The people remaining are those who can't leave. They are hardly in a position to fight against those that shed blood. This is unfortunate.

What about the VT killings? What are we to think of adult men cowering under their desks while one armed man shot women in the head? Are they not complicit in some way with these killings? And because of their complicity, are we not justified in killing them in our attempt to kill the shooter?

You probably think this is unfair. Those men, individually, were unlikely to overwhelm the shooter. But had they acted in concert they might have. Is it really fair to expect them to have acted in concert?

Is it fair to justify killing Iraqi civilians because they have not risen up against the insurgents/terrorists?

In reality, the reason we are in Iraq is the opposite of genocide. We are there to preserve life, hence our police action. Bush and McCain warn of blood running in the streets if we leave. We have destabilized a country, now we hope to restabilize it. It's a tall order to ask a military, that is being attacked, to sustain and preserve life. It is noble. Whether you think it is worth the sacrifice, no doubt, influences your opinion of whether we should leave or not.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

I would rather die trying to kill the enemy if he came into my house to kill American troops. That is my honest answer.

Somethings are worth dying for.

Easy to say from a distance. What if your 3 year old daughter was sitting next to you? What if your pregnant wife was lying in bed down the hall? What if your teenage daughter was asleep and would be raped and killed for your actions? I know what the noble answer is. But I don't think anyone really knows what they would do.

At the very least, can't you even see why a person would choose to not fight? Does their decision to protect their family warrant their death as a "terrorist?"

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

There are so many problems with comparing Japan to Iraq that I really don't know where to start.

Why don't you start by telling me how the two situations are at all analogous.

Japan attacked Pearl Harbor without warning or provocation. Japan was the enemy trying to kill American troops during WWII.

Al-Quaeda attacked the US with airliners without warning or provocation. The terrorists are the enemy trying to kill American troops today.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Depends on what you mean by "allow". Let's say I had killed your parents and your brothers' and sisters' families. I have guns, you have nothing.

Me and my buddies move into your neighborhood. What, pray tell, are you going to do? You are probably going to try and save your family.

You are assuming a position of power and agency that most Iraqis don't have. The people with power and influence and money are long gone. The people remaining are those who can't leave. They are hardly in a position to fight against those that shed blood. This is unfortunate.

What about the VT killings? What are we to think of adult men cowering under their desks while one armed man shot women in the head? Are they not complicit in some way with these killings? And because of their complicity, are we not justified in killing them in our attempt to kill the shooter?

You probably think this is unfair. Those men, individually, were unlikely to overwhelm the shooter. But had they acted in concert they might have. Is it really fair to expect them to have acted in concert?

Is it fair to justify killing Iraqi civilians because they have not risen up against the insurgents/terrorists?

In reality, the reason we are in Iraq is the opposite of genocide. We are there to preserve life, hence our police action. Bush and McCain warn of blood running in the streets if we leave. We have destabilized a country, now we hope to restabilize it. It's a tall order to ask a military, that is being attacked, to sustain and preserve life. It is noble. Whether you think it is worth the sacrifice, no doubt, influences your opinion of whether we should leave or not.

Very well said.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Depends on what you mean by "allow". Let's say I had killed your parents and your brothers' and sisters' families. I have guns, you have nothing.

Me and my buddies move into your neighborhood. What, pray tell, are you going to do? You are probably going to try and save your family.

You are assuming a position of power and agency that most Iraqis don't have. The people with power and influence and money are long gone. The people remaining are those who can't leave. They are hardly in a position to fight against those that shed blood. This is unfortunate.

What about the VT killings? What are we to think of adult men cowering under their desks while one armed man shot women in the head? Are they not complicit in some way with these killings? And because of their complicity, are we not justified in killing them in our attempt to kill the shooter?

You probably think this is unfair. Those men, individually, were unlikely to overwhelm the shooter. But had they acted in concert they might have. Is it really fair to expect them to have acted in concert?

Is it fair to justify killing Iraqi civilians because they have not risen up against the insurgents/terrorists?

In reality, the reason we are in Iraq is the opposite of genocide. We are there to preserve life, hence our police action. Bush and McCain warn of blood running in the streets if we leave. We have destabilized a country, now we hope to restabilize it. It's a tall order to ask a military, that is being attacked, to sustain and preserve life. It is noble. Whether you think it is worth the sacrifice, no doubt, influences your opinion of whether we should leave or not.

Waters brilliant! On a freaking roll!

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Easy to say from a distance. What if your 3 year old daughter was sitting next to you? What if your pregnant wife was lying in bed down the hall? What if your teenage daughter was asleep and would be raped and killed for your actions? I know what the noble answer is. But I don't think anyone really knows what they would do.

Do you think the terrorists would not kill my children or wife if I did cooperate with them?

I realize I may sound like I think it's easy to say when not faced with the situation, but I honestly believe that I would not allow them to intimidate me.