I hate war becuse innocent kids who want to get an education are getting killed by war.

I wouldnt have a problem with the war if we were doing what we SAID we were doing, going after terrorists. It's been 5 years. Where the hell is Osama? The guy's on a frickin dialysis(sp?) machine. He cant be that hard to find. But instead of looking for the dick who allegedly attacked us in the first place, we have completly effed up Iraq, who was never a threat, and have Saddam in custody, who was, again, never a threat.

And another thing. The Palestine vs. Israel thing. There is one thing needed to run a war. Money. Palestine and Israel both have an unending supply coming from the US. We effed up big time here. First, we're constantly giving cash to Israel, because we are, as we now know, a christian nation, and we need to help our bretheran(sp?) the Jews. On the other hand, Palestine is funded by other Arab countries, that are funded by their oil industry, and considering that the US buys a good portion of Arab oil, I'd say we're completly to blame for that as well.

war is just isnt good at all

some war is needed WWII for example we couldnt let Hitler run around. But if nobady started wars that would be good.

yo man war is the marvel yet bad at the same time and sorry but i hate hippys no offence to any hippys out there

war has good and bad in it.Like v-gamer said WW2 was crucial to stop hitler and his democradic ways.In the other hand war causes great and numerous deaths to hundreds to thousands of people

Wars suck,because innocent people die.

yes i know,but they're wars for good causes.If they're wars for no good causes then there is a problem

If it's for a good cause,WWII isn't,Hitler started an invasion on Poland,that's wrong.
2 wrongs don't make a right,you know.

that's been proven most times in history

In every war,both sides do wrong things.

My sig says my opinion.

every war has some good in it

War is one of the most brutal manifestations of the inherent flaws in humanity.

Wars are always bad. Even if it's for a good cause, we would never have a good cause to fight a war if people weren't so stupid.

But it also has some bad in it.

id ont. the only reason that we fight wars are if there absolutly neccisary. 9?11 changed millions of people lives. thats not an exuse to go to war. its neccisary

You know, people want to waste there resources and divide countries. There's too much competition in the world.

War as we know it, isn't great.

There are only a few people who really needed to be fought and those people are dictators for the most part.

We have too high/too low level of patriotism in most places. A too high would make people fight to the death.

There is also a common desire to be at home. People naturally will fight to defend.

The US should also cut its reliance on oil.

That has to be one of the most ignorant things I have ever heard said.

War is needed sometimes. If we aren't agressive, but another country is, and they decide to take us over, they won't have much of a competition, will they? You can say "Well the restrictions would apply to them as well," but what is to stop them from doing it any way? What would a few more gun control laws be to the kids involved in the shooting at Columbine? What would a few more civil rights laws been to Saddam Hussein? Laws do not stop people without morals and values. Laws do not stop dictators. Laws do not stop rapists, larcenists, embezzlers, arsonists, or terrorists. What is one of our laws to a terrorist? Hey, Muhammed Banipetjkhan, you can't kill us because it's against the law. This would be more than motivation for him to do it. Look at what happened on 9/11. Urggghhhh! People who hate war irritate me so much, I cn barely control my temper.

I am sorry but you are wrong. war is bad. killing is bad. but where would the US be if it wasn't for the revolutionary war? we would be under control of britan. we obviously weren't going to get free by negotioting. or what about the civil war. we had a choice between death of hundreds of thousands of people and free slaves, and letting thousands of african americans and their decendants be slaves forever. we chose freedom for slaves. do you think that was the right decision? most of the world does. war is terrible. millions of people die, but before we go to war, we try every other way to solve the problem, but war is the only way for some problems.

WOOOO! Finally, someone who agrees with me. Very good point about the Civil war and the Revolution.

the same thing could be said about WWII, we couldn't stop hitler by negotiating, so we had to use force.

yeah. that ehole thing about solving problems without vilence. load of cr**. but there are some problems you can solve without violence.

yes. that is why we have the un and diplomats.

If Bush would be dead,Al-quaida and the Taliban would stop attacking people.

no, where you get that from?

There's always a way to solve problems without violence, provided that neither side is comprised of incredibly stupid people who won't hear any method other than violence.

those are the thick-headed people who only care about what happens to them,and don't care for anyone else.
Hey Mynck congratz on becoming enlightened

War and violence is required to keep the population under control. If not that, then we get disease (such as the ever impending doom of the bird flu)

oh so we need war to stop a virus like west nile desease?

Or family planning. That always works too.

Mother nature tries to balance things. It is either war, disease, or hunger, that will keep humans in line, because we don't respect the balance of nature.

It's too late to stop what has already become.

Exactly. Way to go.



Yes, very true.



Even though the UN does nothing that helps the world.



You Nazi! Bush may have made some bad decisions, but that does mean he deserves to die. This if one of the most ignorant things I have ever heard. Al-Quaida and the Taliban aren't attacking people because of Bush, they are attacking people because they are crazed loons who want to destroy America and murder anyone who does not convert to their religion.



Woo, well said.

Agreed.Even if Bush was never elected i bet Al-Quaida and Taliban would still be attcaking,but bush has made some REALLY bad decisions.

yeah, bush is a horrible president. Kerry would have done a lot better.

That is easily one of the most ignorant things I've ever heard regarding the war. They are most DEFINITLY attacking because of Bush. Why? Because Bush supports Israel, home of the Jews. Extremist Muslims dont believe the Jews have a right to have their own country. Because we support the Jews, the Muslims are automatically against us. They dont hate America, they dont hate our freedom, they hate the fact that we support their enemy.

On a side note, the whole war in the mid east works out for the Christians (who run the US right now). Why? Because, as is said in the book of Revelation, before the second coming to occur, there needs to be a war in the east.

Well, IMO, you're both partly correct. I don't think the Taliban are attacking purely because of Bush, but he is probably a big cause. Also, it is true that they want to murder anyone who doesn't convert to their religion.

Nah, they are against Britain too. And France. And the whole of Europe. And India. And parts of others.

Oh, and HerLoss, if you read some books by saints you'll find that the war is prophesized to be between Russia and China. Which will make no sense to anybody who is not Christian, so I probably shouldn't have said that... Anyways, Israel is in the MIDDLE East. Asia is the East.

It's come close before... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_b...onflict%2C_1969

Mostly because of their affiliation with the US and Israel. Also note that there are other terrorist groups with other agendas out there.

No, it makes sense, because the "east" would have been Asia back when it was prophesized, but I'm fairly sure there's something about the extermination of the Jews included there. Bush isn't a very intelligent person, it's very possible he misinterpreted "east" to mean the current mid-east.

Comeon, Bush isn't the one that starts crisses (sp?) like Israel/Lebanon one right now

I wouldn't say France has much of an affiliation with the US. And same about all but Britain... they may trade, but they are not big allies. Liking or not liking of America is not how terrorists judge whether or not a country should go down. It's more like, supporting their causes or not.

No, but if he were a competent leader he would stop supporting BOTH sides. A war can only exist if both sides have both the will and the money. They both have plenty of will, and they both have an infinite supply of money. Israel get's official funds from the US, (because christians like jews more than they like muslims), and Lebanon is funded by the major Arab countries, which are funded by selling oil to the US. All we have to do is cut off funding to one side, and no more war.

And as far as the "War on Terror" is concerned, Bush is too incompetent to attack those who are actual threats to us, AND he's too incompetent to run the war on Iraq. I mean, we're already there, we might as well finish it, but he cant even do that right.

They do? I thought Christians hated all who were not Christian.

Yeah, but christians are more closely related to jews than they are to muslims.

That's totally biased.

What is?

"All Christians hate non-Christians"

And not true. But the religion does teach that, though most dont belive it.

no they don't they would respect what they believe in all that's all

Yeah. I have plenty of Christian friends. I dosen't matter.

same here.They say they respect me,but deep inside they're just mad.

No, they'er not. They're probably your friends.