War Stories - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-29-2003, 07:41 PM   #1
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 08:47 PM
War Stories

This topic has been brought up before, but no real response has been given. In the movie and in real real life one of our smart bomps accidentily dropped on a refugee camp.

I'd like to hear the response from the supporters of this war on their view of the loss of human life. Not propoganda from either side. How can we as the nation that believes most in the individual stomach the loss of life we will be starting. NOT FINISHING, BUT STARTING.

Please no rhetoric, no parties, I want want guts and feelings. How will you feel the next day?
__________________

Scarletwine is offline  
Old 01-29-2003, 09:00 PM   #2
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,604
Local Time: 09:47 PM
Re: War Stories

Quote:
Originally posted by Scarletwine
This topic has been brought up before, but no real response has been given. In the movie and in real real life one of our smart bomps accidentily dropped on a refugee camp.

I'd like to hear the response from the supporters of this war on their view of the loss of human life. Not propoganda from either side. How can we as the nation that believes most in the individual stomach the loss of life we will be starting. NOT FINISHING, BUT STARTING.

Please no rhetoric, no parties, I want want guts and feelings. How will you feel the next day?
I do not particularly relish the thought of possibly killing an innocent Iraqi civilian.

For that matter, I do not particularly relish the thought of killing an Iraqi soldier or ruler either.

Now let me turn the question around...

Scarletwine, how can you stomach the loss of life that will be allowed to continue over the next 10, 20, maybe 100 years, in Iraq and elsewhere, if the Ba'ath party is not removed from power?

__________________

speedracer is offline  
Old 01-29-2003, 09:05 PM   #3
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 07:47 PM

I do not want civilians to be killed. I want a regime change in Iraq to occur.

~U2Alabama
U2Bama is offline  
Old 01-29-2003, 09:06 PM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 01:47 AM
What Speedracer said!
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-29-2003, 09:07 PM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,422
Local Time: 01:47 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Bama
I do not want civilians to be killed. I want a regime change in Iraq to occur.

~U2Alabama
exactly.
JOFO is offline  
Old 01-29-2003, 09:31 PM   #6
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 17,774
Local Time: 09:47 PM
In Bono's words, "I can't cope with the idea that an idea is greater than a human life."

Those people are no less our brothers and sisters than our neighbours. I can't cope with the idea of killing them. They're not collateral damage, they are human beings. I want no blood on my hands.
anitram is online now  
Old 01-29-2003, 09:36 PM   #7
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 01:47 AM
The potential number of civilians that will die in the longterm, if Iraq is not disarmed and the regime changed, is far greater than those that might die in a 3 week war that does not target civilians.
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-29-2003, 09:38 PM   #8
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,422
Local Time: 01:47 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
The potential number of civilians that will die in the longterm, if Iraq is not disarmed and the regime changed, is far greater than those that might die in a 3 week war that does not target civilians.
this is also true.
JOFO is offline  
Old 01-29-2003, 09:51 PM   #9
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,604
Local Time: 09:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
In Bono's words, "I can't cope with the idea that an idea is greater than a human life."

Nobody said anything about "ideas".
speedracer is offline  
Old 01-30-2003, 07:09 AM   #10
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 01:47 AM
Re: War Stories

Quote:
Originally posted by Scarletwine
How can we as the nation that believes most in the individual stomach the loss of life we will be starting. NOT FINISHING, BUT STARTING.

Please no rhetoric, no parties, I want want guts and feelings. How will you feel the next day?
I don't think we can. I certainly can't. I think about the thousands of people who died last time, about the children growing up without parents and the families torn apart by the loss of a loved one. I think about the newspaper reports on children as young as seven and eight who are taking anti-anxiety medication because they're so traumatised by the thought of a war. I think about the hundreds of thousands of refugees forced to leave their homes, their families, everything that is familiar to them and somehow attempt to put their lives back together in a new country. I think about the people injured and unable to get medical help, about the people who go without food because war disrupts food supplies, the people with no clean water because again because of the disruption of war.

How will it make me feel if my government attacks Iraq? I don't know. Either it will make me just so sad that we could engage in an action that's going to kill innocent people, or else I'll be just plan ANGRY with the government and want to do whatever I can to demonstrate that.
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 01-30-2003, 07:12 AM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
FizzingWhizzbees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: the choirgirl hotel
Posts: 12,614
Local Time: 01:47 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
The potential number of civilians that will die in the longterm, if Iraq is not disarmed and the regime changed, is far greater than those that might die in a 3 week war that does not target civilians.
How do you know how many people would die "in the longterm?"

How do you know it'll only be a three week war?

The aim of the war according to you would be regime change, and yet if Saddam doesn't lose power immediately, for example through a coup by opposition within Iraq, then the only way to take him out of power would be through on-the-ground fighting, which is likely to take place in Baghdad, and is surely likely to kill many innocent civilians.
FizzingWhizzbees is offline  
Old 01-30-2003, 08:28 AM   #12
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 08:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
The potential number of civilians that will die in the longterm, if Iraq is not disarmed and the regime changed, is far greater than those that might die in a 3 week war that does not target civilians.
I thought we were going to use "shock & awe" tactics. Once again - no feelings
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 01-30-2003, 09:01 AM   #13
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 03:47 AM
Id feel like a killer.
hiphop is offline  
Old 01-30-2003, 09:44 AM   #14
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 08:47 PM
The answer? I don't know.

With Afghanistan, it was apparent that anything was better than the Taliban, and it was also very clear that the Taliban and terrorism were very much tied together. The only thing that really concerns me now about Afghanistan is that I think we may have created yet another weak government in a nation that will otherwise be run by feudal warlords. Again, that doesn't quite shock me. :/

But for Iraq? Even though their quality of life has plummeted since the UN sanctions, they could still get worse, if, again, like Afghanistan, they are given a weak puppet government. Lest we forget, this was once a relatively wealthy nation before the Gulf War, and I doubt that they'll accept being an oppressed third-world nation being exploited by American venture capitalists after the U.S. comes in and topples Saddam.

So, my answer is "I don't know." A lot of it depends on if Bush's morals are just a voting ploy to attract the Christian vote or the real thing.

Melon
melon is offline  
Old 01-30-2003, 09:49 AM   #15
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 12:47 PM
I suspect the supporters of the war, from here at Interference, will feel the same as those who oppose it in regard to the loss of life.
I'd hate to think there is a 'means to an end' mentality by those people. Perhaps there exists a kind of conflict among them where they are also fearful for the potential loss and the belief that the war, not the losses, has a purpose and a valid cause?

Collateral damage is a dreadful term.
__________________
<a href=https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 01-30-2003, 03:41 PM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 01:47 AM
Fizzing,

"How do you know how many people would die "in the longterm?" "

"How do you know it'll only be a three week war?"

"The aim of the war according to you would be regime change, and yet if Saddam doesn't lose power immediately, for example through a coup by opposition within Iraq, then the only way to take him out of power would be through on-the-ground fighting, which is likely to take place in Baghdad, and is surely likely to kill many innocent civilians."

Well to answer the first question in regards to the longterm, you have to look at the number of Iraqi civilians that die on annual basis because of Saddam Husseins rule. Then you have to look at the sanctions which are eroding every day not to the point that Saddam can smuggle 4 Billion dollars worth of goods every year. Saddam will eventually be able to rearm and go to war against countries in the reason. With greater WMD capability which he would target CIVILIANS with, the cost of that future conflict must be added to the number of Iraqi's that are dying every year from Saddam's rule.

Saddam's actions and rule have resulted in the deaths of 1.7 million Iraqi's, Iranian, Kuwaiti, UN coalition, soldiers and civilians. Iraqi's continue to die and suffer under Saddam every day adding to this number. Based on this and the possibility of a future conflict several years down the road, if Saddam is not disarmed, its easy to see that more lives will be lost in the longterm than in a 3 week war that does not target civilians.

The war will only last 3 weeks, because Iraq's conventional military does not have the capability to sustain itself at that level of conflict any longer than that. The Iraqi military is no match for US forces as proven by the first gulf war. I can go into specific GROUND engagements from 1991 to make that point if you would like.

This does not mean I think the war will be a "cakewalk". Fighting in the cities will be difficult when it occurs, but no fighting force can sustain itself indefinitely without secure continous logistical support, communications and information. The Iraqi military will lose these things rapidly once a military conflict begins.
STING2 is offline  
Old 01-30-2003, 07:47 PM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,604
Local Time: 09:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Angela Harlem
I suspect the supporters of the war, from here at Interference, will feel the same as those who oppose it in regard to the loss of life.
I'd hate to think there is a 'means to an end' mentality by those people. Perhaps there exists a kind of conflict among them where they are also fearful for the potential loss and the belief that the war, not the losses, has a purpose and a valid cause?

Collateral damage is a dreadful term.
The morality of the "means" and the morality of the "ends" should both be considered.

The inevitable loss of life due to war, both Iraqi and American, is terrible. But so are the consequences if we allow Saddam to remain in power, imho.

I do not see why emoting further about one side of the equation and not the other will lead to a more intelligent conclusion.
speedracer is offline  
Old 01-30-2003, 07:51 PM   #18
New Yorker
 
Scarletwine's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Outside it's Amerika
Posts: 2,746
Local Time: 08:47 PM
Loss of life on both sides is terrible, however we will be bombing their cities full of innocent civilians, while ours will be soldiers.

Soldier's lives are as important, but they won't be sitting down to dinner and have their home blown up, very much like the workers in the WTC must have felt. They are trained and prepared for their role.
Scarletwine is offline  
Old 01-30-2003, 08:24 PM   #19
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
speedracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,604
Local Time: 09:47 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Scarletwine
Loss of life on both sides is terrible, however we will be bombing their cities full of innocent civilians, while ours will be soldiers.

Soldier's lives are as important, but they won't be sitting down to dinner and have their home blown up, very much like the workers in the WTC must have felt. They are trained and prepared for their role.
I believe we are talking about different issues here.

I don't quite see the point in comparing our casualties vs. Iraqi civilian casualties. Just about all loss of life in this war will be tragic (even the lives of Iraqi soldiers--I'll bet that there are a large number of them who really want no part of Saddam's reign of terror but remain in their posts for fear of reprisal.)

Again, I think the main issue is the following: is the result of a war better than the result of not fighting a war?

I think that the result of a war will be a loss of American and Iraqi life, general disruption to Iraq's economy and health in the short-term, but with very real prospects for a bright future. I think that once Iraq's oil sales are used for rebuilding the country, and not for weapons programs and extravagant palaces, the country will recover quite well.

On the other hand, I think that the result of not waging a war will be Saddam's continued torture and murder of Iraqi dissidents, his continued mismanagement of the country's economy and general health, and his continued pursuit of terrible weapons.

Therefore, I must conclude that the result of a war is better than the result of (not war).
speedracer is offline  
Old 02-02-2003, 04:02 PM   #20
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Castro Valley, CA
Posts: 997
Local Time: 01:47 AM

it seems that even if there were "dirty" bombs or whatever dropped on refugee camps, the people are still walking around, aren't they? it's like zombie zoo there. but here in Ca, we're having a grand auction where anyone can buy the buildings that house our long lost society. check it out, if you have the right satellite feed, there is a train in Santa Cruz up for sale, along with a Hotel in Reno. seems they're up for grabs, so to speak.

who' s got the bucks, or would you rather sit and chomp on your doritos?
__________________

DebbieSG is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×