Post Archive
Region: Libertatem
Someone who threatens are soldiers is an enemy, and that is self defense, not murder.
In heaven your still held accountable.
No your not, You are risking your life for your fellow citizens.
Are you referring to Americans who turn their back on their country who kill themselves for Al Quaeda? They murdered innocent people in a bombing and they betrayed their country. They are murderous traitors.
Yes you are.
lol, ok what ever the almighty lord Joseph Smith says.
Soldiers sacrifice their lives, that includes life with their husband or wife, friends, family, personal life, and they are willing to die for us. Saying that they are murderers and they will be held accountable in heaven, is extremely offensive, they are heroes and I'm pretty sure God wouldn't see them as murderers. How can say God could hold them as murderers, do you have him on speed dial? Even if you don't have religion, soldiers will be remembered as honorable people.
I got you TTA we should have let the nazis ride in the streets of America. War is murder, we cant defend our selfs that is wrong.
...What?
"Thou Shalt not kill."
It didn't say "Thou shalt not kill (Unless you fought for your country or for self-defense)"
1. They have the same rights as everyone else.
2. They will be judged accordingly. They will be held accountable in heaven for sure. Whether it will be accounted the same way as killing for no reason is beyond me.
TTA, you need help.
If only you knew the rest of it telegram me if you do. Not appropriate for RMB
Do you have God on speed dial? Did God tell you, "Soldiers will go to he'll for defending their country." you can't mix religion with military. Also, do realize how many people would be dead if it weren't for soldiers? Did it ever occur to you that we will still have slavery in America if the civil war never happened?
It's in the literal ten commandments.
"Thou shalt not kill."
No exceptions.
And yes it does.
Hell
The Bible was written by man most of the stuff in the bible are storys with lessons. I believe that god loves all of us and would under stand a war of defense.
It says you shouldn't kill.
You'll be held accountable. Whether you go to hell I doubt you will.
If you are a non-violent person then that's fine, but don't insult our soldiers for doing their job. My great grandfather served, my grandfather served, and my father served, and I don't appreciate you calling loyal Americans murderers.
I don't.
Both my grandparents. My uncles served and one died.
Then why are you saying that soldiers kill
Lol, statist gonna state
And can we please all get past the delusion that soldiers are fighting for our freedoms in a literal sense? There is no grounds to claim that any active combat military operations in the last 30+ years has done anything to safe guard out freedoms. While I'm sure the vast majority of those who enlist have their hearts in the right place, they are oblivious to the realities of their position.
If you enlist in the military you are agreeing to become a professional killer who will target and eliminate other humans as dictated by the governing apparatus. That's it , there isn't any honor or man hood in politically driven murder when an individual does it, why should it be any different if you're wrapped in a flag and ordained by the state?
The United States flag is a symbol of the country not the Government. The last war that was a defensive war was ww2.
The war on terror is kindof defensive because we are fighting terrorists, then again we have killed civilians.
My man
Soldiers fight for money. If you took away the money component, the army would falter, and nobody would join it without conscription. That goes to show that soldiers aren't as loyal to their country as they are to their rational self interest.
^
Because they do you Statist.
Not necessarily, they have families to take care of. Why decide to fight if your family would be starving?
Don't you even use that word
Why not find a productive job
Why?
I am talking about a defensive war when your country needs you. Also if no one joined willingly the government would just draft people.
And what about tradition or the urge to do his or share. Ill be glad if a world war begins. So you can go to the front or locked behind bars.
Do you know how horrible pay is in the military? How long it takes to get a decent pay? How horrible there "health-care" is? How they must spend years away from their families? That sounds like rational self interest doesn't it?
What?
Also if solders were in it for the money why would they join anyway? The solders get payed so little.
Don't you dare call me a statist?
If you honestly believe this, you have proven why democratic government is one of the most dangerous creations of the human mind
!
Why not?
Thats why I support constitutional monarchies
So which wars do you guys approve of then?
Defensive wars.
Makes sense.
I'm not a statist, I don't believe is statism
I don't either but does that stop the name?
I'm not a statist
Lol, this guy right here, what a jokester.
I'm so glad the onion is real, and topical;
http://www.theonion.com/articles/us-flag-recalled-after-causing-143-million-deaths,17248/
Other discussion. Jimmy Carter was a great president in the wrong decade. His policies were putting America on a path to sustainibility and renewed peace. Then Reagan was elected and destroyed all of his work. Brought the era of large deficit spending and the false economic growth.
I am not a statist
So
the American Revolution
the war of 1812
The Amarican civil war
and ww2?
I only agreed with half of that!
But I applaud you for realizing that.
Don't take the onion seriously
Always goodnight y'all
Beside the fact that it's an awful concept, it's halfway admirable to find that system, or something similar, ideal. When there is a monarch or dictator in charge there is no illusion of self ownership and the force used to subdue the populace is open, if not saluted. In these systems of "self governing" people are lead along in the allusion that they are in control and that the force being implemented is for their own benefit.
I know not to take the onion seriously
You know what's weird, England still declares they are a constitutional monarch.
Reagan economic growth was not false.
Sure. 1. Traumatizing job 2. No "man behind joystick" like a video game, a large team "pilots" the drone 3. Cannot make out faces or lisence plates (cameras are pretty much crap) 4. The movies on drones are bs. 5. There are two to six second delays on the visuals (crap cameras) 6. Yes with heat vision... it kind get kind of voyeur like. 7. Military higher ups still don't know how drones work.
WW 1 as well?
United kingdom*
Not defense.
Those and only those.
I'm really starting to wonder if you really are joking with us and this whole persona is just a practical joke
What do you mean?
Indian Wars
I am admittedly no expert on the carter administration, however I find the Reagan presidency, relatively speaking, to be tolerable if not agreeable in some aspects.
Wee you serious about claiming ww1 was justified?
*were
An insult....
There was no point in the United States to get involved in ww1.
Wilson is awful and there is no justification for our entry into ww1. That is all.
I was joking, sorry if I offended anyone
Corporate/banking interests and Wilson's political objectives
Wilson tried keeping us out of war but was pushed by Public Opinion.
What a politician tells the public and what he believe are not normally the same.
If you like your docter you can keep it.
That's an urban legend
Obviously....
Wilson was pushed by the Public then declared war. When he saw people celebrating the fact they were going to war HE stated:" I don't understand why American's are cheering for their young men to die."
No it isn't..
OH WAIT! You dislike him. Of course anything good he did is an urban legend.
Well should have stayed out of it.
Unless he secretly supported the war and wanted to pretend to be anti war so it would look like it was the people. Who knows maybe the small things that got us to declare war were from wilson. It would not be the first time the government has lied to us to get our fangs out.
I can never tell if you're serious or not
.....-_- And Here Is Conspiracy talk with: Jesse Ventura
Good.
I was joking about world war 1 with getting involved.
I see, now I know
Sorry for the confusion
And furthermore, the state ought to be abolished with the upmost haste
You're the best
http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=299155&p=20386194&sid=b703a6224705322da3409b4332c016d8#p20386194
Good for Prussia. As I said above, soldiers are heroes. We're not debating about whether the country is worth fighting for, but whether the government has reached a point where it'll throw away thousands of lives just to achieve its own political goals.
Unfortunately, this is indeed the case. The US government has unapologetically murdered hundreds of civilian men, women and children in the Middle East, and continues to do so without caring. Even if they're going after high-profile militants, they are still targeting children, by proxy, as they have not bothered to alter their policy to avoid all these unnecessary deaths, and will openly bomb civilians in order to kill one terrorist. A wedding was bombed a few weeks ago in Yemen, killing fifty people. An American-born Yemeni teenager was murdered while having lunch in a diner, without charges and without trial, because his father was a member of Al-Qaeda who had died two weeks before.
These drone strikes do indeed target kids. http://drones.pitchinteractive.com
I disagree. Carter wasn't too bad on spending, but in all other areas he was a terrible President. He created the Department of Energy to appease his union pals, which today soaks up $70 billion in tax dollars, and the Department of Energy, a corporate welfare boat that wastes $30 billion a year. Carter was a weak President that weakened America, he continued the failed experiment that was détente and sat by while the Soviets expanded their empire. Reagan was direly needed in 1980. He tried to cut spending numerous times, even bringing a balanced budget constitutional amendment to Congress in 1982 (it passed the Senate but fell ten votes short of a supermajority in the House). It was economic growth that sparked a two-decade expansion, creating 50 million jobs and adding the equivalent of the Chinese economy x 2 to the US one.
Quite the opposite. He wanted to get involved in the war from the start, but the public was firmly against it. So he slowly bumped PO in favour of the war.
He created the Federal Reserve AND the income tax. He passed the Sedition Act (which is still in effect), segregated the federal government and publicly legitimised the KKK. He was nearly as bad as FDR.
For the first time, I'm in the ranking's top ten.
You named the Department of Energy twice, there.
RIP The Magic Conch.
Noooooooo
Nooo
Yessss
No he didn't. He was pushed into it by the Fed Reserve who wanted to profit off of the war through war bonds. The Fed Reserve is the only reason he got elected, in exchange for campaign support, Wilson would bring forth the Federal Reserve Act so that the rich could get richer and reenact their hold on america's money. Why we can't just get rid of this arbitrary banking system today with the Fed Res and go back to the far superior gold standard is beyond me.
I meant Education the first time.
Perhaps the key role of the central bank is to finance wars. That's literally true.
A true liberal would advocate the abolition of the Federal Reserve. It's inflationary policies are regressive by definition. Inflating the value of stocks and bonds while increasing the cost of living helps the rich and harms the poor.
For all those familiar with Britain and its economy and politics, which would you rather abolish, VAT or the income tax?
Same here
Hey guys, today was the day that D-Day happened.
Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.