Posted on 09/29/2001 2:05:23 PM PDT by FrdmLvr
"Well, I'm very pro-peace and I'm also very much in favor of attacking the terrorists."
Some cowardly anonymous scum.
Well stated.
I suppose people that equate peace with terrorism do.
You're just trying to be difficult, aren't you?
No. I'm trying to engage in an intelligent debate on the idea of people equating "peace" or even a "peace movement" with "terrorism". Then again, I do hope to pose difficult questions. I believe that thinking and engaging in well thought out debate is a good thing and the American way.
Some members may feel that they need to make a personal attack on me because I ask questions that go directly over their head and their ego feels threatened. That's their problem. I just feel sorry for anybody that has to deal with such a person on a day to day and face to face basis. They can be very life draining, but thank God those people are in the minority and are easily avoided. Well, at least in real life. For some reason, many on this site seemed to have completely lost control of their emotions since 9/11. It's a sad testament to how deeply the events of that day has rocked our zeitgeist to the core.
It would seem you are being difficult. You are refusing to acknowledge that on 9-11 there were thousands of people in the WTC and on 4 commercial airliners who were doing nothing more than going about their business in peaceful coexistance when they were callously, brutally, and violently attacked by a certain element who proudly proclaim that that their highest goal in life is to see to the utter and complete annhilation of America. Is that your idea of "peace"?
Where did I say that? I think you have me confused with someone else.
"Military Industrial Complex"? I haven't heard that term used regularly since Klinton was marching in Moscow. Peace,love, kumbaya etc. comrade.
Weak Republicrat response duly noted.
Sounds right to me. We don't have the luxury of having peace. We have been attacked and we are at war.
You are so right. As our great President has said, either you're for us, or you're for the terrorists. I am 100% in agreement with him. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Well, I'm very pro-peace and I'm also very much in favor of attacking the terrorists. Nothing in this world is black and white."
Not true. Many things are, in fact "black and white" while some things aren't. We could together come up with an agreeable list of the things that are indeed "black and white." But to say that nothing is "black-and white" is simply a reflexive embrace of all forms of moral relativism.
I hope you meant to say it how I did. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that, because I do believe your intentions are sincere.
"On the one hand we have fools that say we should make no attempt to seek retribution against the terrorists. I don't agree with their position."
Then you do agree with the vast majority of those here, and likely, most agruments lie in semantics.
Peace is not a course of action. It is the desirable result of many processes. One can be "pro-peace," as almost everone is, but as a doctrine, or even a statement of preference, it is meaningless when war has been declared. Because it offers no course of action to achieve it.
"On the other hand we have fools that say that if someone doesn't want to inflict harm on another person, no matter how horrible their crimes, they are pro-terrorist. I don't agree with their position either."
You need to keep in mind the last line of my post, #39. A conservative might label you "pro-terrorist" if your course of action, not necessarily the intent of that action, results in furthering the terrorists' goals. I doubt that the "peace protestors" are "pro-terrorist" in the sense that they would have themselves committed the same horrible crimes that the terrorsits did. And I doubt you'd find anyone on Free Republic who would make the case that they would.
This "you're either with us or against us" stuff is just shallow one dimensional crap being served to the idiot masses..."President Bush used that phrase specifically to address those nations who were harboring terrorsists, and correctly so. Individuals in the United States who use it against other citizens do engage in a bit of exaggeration.
More accurately, one could say, "You're either for retalliation, or you make the terrorists' task easier." That is undeniable.
"...to make sure everybody walks in step with whatever the Industrial Military Complex and its Corporate Media lap dogs decide to do. "
I wish you hadn't said this, as I found your posts truly honest, and wanting to be as reasonable of possible. When I read statements like this, peppered with trite liberal shibboleths, it reminds me of what I used to believe in myself, and how I was terribly mistaken, and used.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.