I am penguinophobic

[Sheikah]

You gotta be kidding me. No way is that the same. Saying all Asian men beat women is racist. Saying that people in the army might kill people is a job description. I don't care what uniform you're wearing when you kill someone its murder.

 

It's good murder. Gurder.

[Dyson]

It's good murder. Gurder.

 

[danny]

You gotta be kidding me. No way is that the same. Saying all Asian men beat women is racist. Saying that people in the army might kill people is a job description. I don't care what uniform you're wearing when you kill someone its murder.

 

Simpley not true. Murder is unlawful killing. War is lawful at least under British law. The fact a law mite not be internationaly lawful is not a soldiers concern. If you cant see the difference between the two you are an Idiot.

Nobody likes war. But it is quite often a nessicery evil.

[LazyBoy]

Simpley not true. Murder is unlawful killing. War is lawful at least under British law. The fact a law mite not be internationaly lawful is not a soldiers concern. If you cant see the difference between the two you are an Idiot.

Nobody likes war. But it is quite often a nessicery evil.

 

How lawful is the Iraq war though?

[Daft]

I don't care what uniform you're wearing when you kill someone its murder.

 

Is it always immoral?

 

On top of that, can it be qualified in binaries? I'd argue, no.

Edited April 29, 2009 by Daft

[Mundi]

Thats bollocks you cant go around calling people murderers just because of there profession. Well not any more than i could walk arround saying that all asian men beat women.

Firstly its a lie. And secondly its ignorent. You cant just make lies up about people and claim free speach.

 

When you kill you kill if someone else says it´s alright it does not change that murder occurred.

One of the most important part of freedom of speech is to be allowed to speak your mind and if someone thinks that what soldiers do is murder then they are allowed to say and think that.

[danny]

When you kill you kill if someone else says it´s alright it does not change that murder occurred.

One of the most important part of freedom of speech is to be allowed to speak your mind and if someone thinks that what soldiers do is murder then they are allowed to say and think that.

 

You cannt go around accusing people of crimes they have not commited. Soldiers have rights to. And the should not be badgered by people for crimes they have not commited.

[Mundi]

You cannt go around accusing people of crimes they have not commited. Soldiers have rights to. And the should not be badgered by people for crimes they have not commited.

 

But what if they think that regardless of law they are murderers?

Does the government decide then on what is alright do say?

[danny]

How lawful is the Iraq war though?

As i said that is not a concern of the soldier. If it isnt lawful then the ppl in NO 10 commited the crime not the soldier. As long as they have stayed within the rules of engagment they were given.

 

Was the Iraq war lawful. Maybe not. Was it morraly right, i beleve it was. The only regretable thing about it was that the US and UK were restrained for over 10 years and didnt just roll right through Iraq the first time. Would have saved a lot of problems.

 

Iraq is has the opertunity now to become a thriving country. Its people are now free. And the insurgents have been mostly defeated.

[Daft]

You cannt go around accusing people of crimes they have not commited. Soldiers have rights to. And the should not be badgered by people for crimes they have not commited.

 

They are given legitimacy by the law (In most cases - not in others, for example the war in Iraq). If you believe that the law is an absolute you'd be right. However, the law isn't.

 

The British legal system, at least, works on interpretation. It is not an absolute. Nothing is black or white. You cannot generalise people, either way.

 

Iraq is has the opertunity now to become a thriving country. Its people are now free. And the insurgents have been mostly defeated.

 

At what cost?

[danny]

But what if they think that regardless of law they are murderers?

Does the government decide then on what is alright do say?

 

People can think a lot of things but you cant go around acusing people of things they simpley havent done. If you think it then go about trying to change it through the proper means set up a group to have the millitary disbanded. But dont accuse innocent people of murder.

 

At what cost?

 

Around 180 british dead. thousends of americans. And god only knows how many iraqis.

Was it worth it yes.

 

How many people died defeating the nazis? You woudnt argue that Hitler should have been left to crack on and the whole of continetal europe suffer would you?

 

So why shoudnt Iraqis be free also?

[Mundi]

People can think a lot of things but you cant go around acusing people of things they simpley havent done. If you think it then go about trying to change it through the proper means set up a group to have the millitary disbanded. But dont accuse innocent people of murder.

 

I´m not saying anything against the army or anything.

 

The point I am trying to get trough is that people are allowed to say what they think regardless of the they are right or wrong in the eyes of other people.

[danny]

I´m not saying anything against the army or anything.

 

The point I am trying to get trough is that people are allowed to say what they think regardless of the they are right or wrong in the eyes of other people.

 

But do you not think people also have the right to walk down a street without beening accused of crimes they have not commited.

[Jonnas]

The definition of "murderer" may or may not apply to soldiers who kill on an order, depending on your interpretation of wether a kill can be justified by law or not.

To call them murderers may not be exactly a lie, from a certain perspective.

 

Although I do think that insulting soldiers because you disagree with a war is a very asinine thing to do.

Either way, I'm sure Iraqi immigrants (we're still talking about immigration, right?) weren't the only ones against that war, and certainly not the only jerks capable of insulting soldiers.

[Mundi]

But do you not think people also have the right to walk down a street without beening accused of crimes they have not commited.

 

The problem there is that the people on the street look down upon what they are doing.

Once again we are allowed to say what we disagree with.

[Daft]

Around 180 british dead. thousends of americans. And god only knows how many iraqis.

Was it worth it yes.

 

How many people died defeating the nazis? You woudnt argue that Hitler should have been left to crack on and the whole of continetal europe suffer would you?

 

So why shoudnt Iraqis be free also?

 

You're comparing Iraq with Nazi Germany?

 

As you said, the Nazis threatened to control Europe and probably more after. Two very similar systems in direct conflict.

 

Your definition of 'free' does not necessarily mean the same it does here as it does over there. What right does this country have to say how another should be run? It's just neo-colonialism taking advantage of another 'primitive'. Social Darwinism is revolting and the war in Iraq is the perfect example of it.

 

We lived in a perceived democracy. It isn't real. We can't escape capitalism. That is the system we are prisoners to and although you may approve of this it doesn't mean it is right or give us the right to impose it on others.

[danny]

You're comparing Iraq with Nazi Germany?

 

As you said, the Nazis threatened to control Europe and probably more after. Two very similar systems in direct conflict.

 

Your definition of 'free' does not necessarily mean the same it does here as it does over there. What right does this country have to say how another should be run? It's just neo-colonialism taking advantage of another 'primitive'. Social Darwinism is revolting and the war in Iraq is the perfect example of it.

 

We lived in a perceived democracy. It isn't real. We can't escape capitalism. That is the system we are prisoners to and although you may approve of this it doesn't mean it is right or give us the right to impose it on others.

 

Hitler persecuted certain groups of society, as did saddam hussain.

 

We dont tell people how to run there buisness. The UN does that. Just certain member states dont have the backbone to enforce what the United Nations is saying. Ie Iraq. Saddam had his fair warnings Nearly 13 years worth.

 

You want to escape capitalism. Cuba or China spring to mind one way tickets cant be that dear really.

 

The problem there is that the people on the street look down upon what they are doing.

Once again we are allowed to say what we disagree with.

 

As much higher percentage of domestic abuse is reported in asian family and the numbers are expected to be a lot higher, due to many women speaking out about it.

But this does not mean i can just start calling any asian man i see a woman beater even if i thaught it.

 

Im in the millitary. Ive been to the sand. But i have never killed anyone (Thaught i was going to have to once but didnt). As im guessing those RAF personel hadnt.

So you cant just walk up to random soldiers sailors and airmen and call the murderers.

[Daft]

Hitler persecuted certain groups of society, as did saddam hussain.

 

Right, because that was the priority in WWII. To stop the Holocaust.

 

From what I recall, since no one wanted an influx of Jewish immigrants into their country, Israel was formed. Problem solved.

 

That went smoothly.

 

We dont tell people how to run there buisness. The UN does that. Just certain member states dont have the backbone to enforce what the United Nations is saying. Ie Iraq. Saddam had his fair warnings Nearly 13 years worth.

 

The UN gave the go ahead for the Iraq war? Nope.

 

So why pick Iraq? Why not try and sort out the Sri Lankan Civil War or the War in Darfur with such gusto?

 

You want to escape capitalism. Cuba or China spring to mind one way tickets cant be that dear really.

 

See this is funny. This 'you don't like it, go somewhere else' attitude. If you can't see that capitalism in it's current form is a bad thing then you are severely misguided.

[danny]

The UN gave the go ahead for the Iraq war? Nope.

 

That was my point exactly. The UN put all the framework in place. Saddam did not conform to the UN resolutions. Remember he said that he would in his surrender. Hence why we didnt roll in to Iraq in the 90s.

Saddam woudnt prove he had no WMD's. He said he had none but was unwilling to prove it. And he wasnt the sort of person whose world you could take as gospel.

The fact that in the end there were none was beside the point. He would allow the UN inspectors to do there job. Should the world have just taken his word for it?

[Daft]

That was my point exactly. The UN put all the framework in place. Saddam did not conform to the UN resolutions. Remember he said that he would in his surrender. Hence why we didnt roll in to Iraq in the 90s.

Saddam woudnt prove he had no WMD's. He said he had none but was unwilling to prove it. And he wasnt the sort of person whose world you could take as gospel.

The fact that in the end there were none was beside the point. He would allow the UN inspectors to do there job. Should the world have just taken his word for it?

 

I don't really see how it was beside the point. Since the war started (Was it actually ever declared?) we've had admissions that the government went to war not knowing all the facts ("Saddam Hussein could deploy chemical and biological weapons within 45 minutes" and such).

 

The UN asked for more time but the US and UK took their own initiative, undermining an organisation that was set up in the wake of WWII.

 

Ultimately Hans Blix was totally ignored. Should we have just taken this UN appointed weapon inspector's word for it? YES.

[Chris the great]

all im going to say that any one who says that killing in a batte field is the same as murder needs thier head examined.

 

if sombody is trying to kill me, or some one i care about, i'd kill them, no hesitation, no regret. in warfare people are trying to kill you, is enguaging them murder? no its self defence.

 

there are alot of people who seem to strive for a utopia with no violence, no fighting, no death. its a pretty ideal but ultimatly it is impossible with humans, we allways have fought, and we always will.

 

 

this is REALLY off topic!

[Kirkatronics]

I cant believe some of you are considering soldiers murder people.

They are protecting our country...

Did Churchill send the armies out to go murder the enemy? Oh no no no no.

[Paj!]

The concept of soldiers irks me, but on a personal level. I resented having to do CCF, parading around my school yard as though the military and killing of others was something I wanted to be associated with.

 

However, I'm not AGAINST the army and what they do really, just in my head it cries "wrong" at me. Obv if I were in that position, i'd kill someone headed toward me etc.

[Goafer]

all im going to say that any one who says that killing in a batte field is the same as murder needs thier head examined.

 

if sombody is trying to kill me, or some one i care about, i'd kill them, no hesitation, no regret. in warfare people are trying to kill you, is enguaging them murder? no its self defence.

 

this is REALLY off topic!

 

I think the counter arguement (and not neccessarily one I agree with), is that soldiers have put themselves in that situation to begin with. When they signed up, they knew that there is the possibility they could be involved in a firefight. I think the self defence situation only applies when you find yourself in a fight through no fault of your own.

 

For the record: I may or may not agree with the politics behind the war (I'll be honest, I don't know enough about it to make an informed decision), but I do support the troops. Except for the ones that are truly psychopaths/sadists, but I imagine they're the minority. Unfortunately those are the ones that get featured in the media (Guantanamo bay etc) and give the rest a bad name. I think that's where a lot of the hostility comes from.

[danny]

all im going to say that any one who says that killing in a batte field is the same as murder needs thier head examined.

 

 

At last some sense.

 

I really cant be arsed commenting on this any more as i think i will get more sense from the wardrobe next to me.

But if anyone really wants to talk about it pm me and i will give u my MSN