American Public Turns Anti-War …

[poncho]

Warmongers Desperately Reply, “But War Is GOOD for Us!”

War Is Peace, Freedom Is Slavery, and Ignorance Is Strength

The American people are now overwhelmingly opposed to more war in Ukraine, Syria, Iran and elsewhere.

Those who get rich from war (the military-industrial complexers and big banks) and their lackeys are desperate to reverse this trend.

As such, they are resorting to more and more outlandish justifications for war.

For example, Ian Morris has written an entire book arguing that war is the best thing ever, the only thing which has lifted us out of poverty and barbarianism. And – yes – he even says that war brings peace.

David Swanson provides a must-read dismantling of Morris’ book.

Morris writes this week in the Washington Post:

War has not only made us safer, but richer, too.

In reality, security experts – conservative hawks and liberal doves alike – agree that waging war in the Middle East weakens national security and increases terrorism. See this, this, this, this, this, this and this. So it doesn’t make us safer.

And there is now overwhelming evidence that war is horrible for the economy, and makes us poorer.

Morris continues:

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/03/americans-overwhelmingly-oppose-us-intervention-ukraine-syria-iran-anywhere-else.html

 

[RLBosley]

Anyone who truly thinks war is a good thing needs to be educated or committed.

 

[poncho]

Posted the wrong link in my first post. Here's the one I meant to post.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/04/american-public-turns-anti-war-powers-go-full-retard-trying-sell-war.html

 

[Salty]

Anyone who truly thinks war is a good thing needs to be educated or committed.

A true GI hates war

 

[carpro]

Anyone who truly thinks war is a good thing needs to be educated or committed.

I agree. But unfortunately, sometimes it is necessary.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I agree. But unfortunately, sometimes it is necessary.

... and that's what the liberal nanny-staters don't understand.

 

[RLBosley]

I agree. But unfortunately, sometimes it is necessary.

Well, from a political standpoint I understand and can even agree with this. However, I am convinced that the NT teaches non-violence, so I believe that the church (Christians) should not participate.

... and that's what the liberal nanny-staters don't understand.

You do know there are conservatives against war right? Me for instance.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Well, from a political standpoint I understand and can even agree with this. However, I am convinced that the NT teaches non-violence, so I believe that the church (Christians) should not participate.







You do know there are conservatives against war right? Me for instance.

Of course there are. Many of us would be anti-war unless the US is threatened. Of course holding that view will get you labelled a liberal, a leftist, a peacenik, or worse.

 

[RLBosley]

Of course there are. Many of us would be anti-war unless the US is threatened. Of course holding that view will get you labelled a liberal, a leftist, a peacenik, or worse.

Oh yes. I've been labeled liberal and leftist (not on here though. Not yet anyway). Funny since I'm really conservative theologically and a conservative leaning libertarian politically. Peacenik? I think I might embrace that one, I'm in good company after all.

Mat 5:9 NASB - "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Oh yes. I've been labeled liberal and leftist (not on here though. Not yet anyway). Funny since I'm really conservative theologically and a conservative leaning libertarian politically. Peacenik? I think I might embrace that one, I'm in good company after all.

Mat 5:9 NASB - "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

Sounds like we are on the same page. I've been called a socialist even for not agreeing with a group of posters.

 

[RLBosley]

Probably means you were on the right side of the issue. The "Socialist" epithet is the new "Nazi."

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Oh yes. I've been labeled liberal and leftist (not on here though. Not yet anyway). Funny since I'm really conservative theologically and a conservative leaning libertarian politically. Peacenik? I think I might embrace that one, I'm in good company after all.

Mat 5:9 NASB - "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

Sure...lets just dismantle our military and tell everybody to go home. Open the door to the likes of Putin, Stalin, Hitler...... again who was that Brit....was it Chamberlain who held up th document claiming 'PEACE IN OUR TIMES ' when he sold out Czechoslovakia? .... Right!!!!

 

[RLBosley]

Sure...lets just dismantle our military and tell everybody to go home. Open the door to the likes of Putin, Stalin, Hitler...... again who was that Brit....was it Chamberlain who held up th document claiming 'PEACE IN OUR TIMES ' when he sold out Czechoslovakia? .... Right!!!!

:applause:

Wow. Congrats on bringing up Hitler and Stalin... I never heard that argument before! :BangHead:

But seriously, first calm down before you rupture something.

Second, did I say anything about dismantling the military?

 

[just-want-peace]

Is it positive or negative when you get sliced in the belly???
Well, it depends on whether it's a surgeon going after a ruptured appendix, OR, a hoodlum trying to steal your money!!

If Japan had been a little more aggressive in '41, it's very possible that we would all be speaking Japanese today, BUT, they weren't, so we had time to re-tool for war and "properly" engage them and prevail.

Except for a very few, I really don't think the people WANTED war - it's just that under the circumstances there was really no choice. The choice had been determined by the invaders.

As a side note, I remember reading a comment by one of the strategists of this invasion that the reason they decided NOT to invade the continent was that they would " be met by a gun behind every tree!", and this is precisely why the liberals want to get rid of armed citizens - much easier to conquer & control!!!!!!!

 

[carpro]

The american public did not suddenly "turn" anti war. They have always been anti-war.

Until given a valid reason to go to war.

When that changes, the end of this nation is near.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Is it positive or negative when you get sliced in the belly???
Well, it depends on whether it's a surgeon going after a ruptured appendix, OR, a hoodlum trying to steal your money!!

If Japan had been a little more aggressive in '41, it's very possible that we would all be speaking Japanese today, BUT, they weren't, so we had time to re-tool for war and "properly" engage them and prevail.

Except for a very few, I really don't think the people WANTED war - it's just that under the circumstances there was really no choice. The choice had been determined by the invaders.

As a side note, I remember reading a comment by one of the strategists of this invasion that the reason they decided NOT to invade the continent was that they would " be met by a gun behind every tree!", and this :thumbs: precisely why the liberals want to get rid of armed citizens - much easier to conquer & control!!!!!!!

And in retrospect....had we given them California!!!!!

 

[poncho]

:applause:

Wow. Congrats on bringing up Hitler and Stalin... I never heard that argument before! :BangHead:

But seriously, first calm down before you rupture something.

Second, did I say anything about dismantling the military?

I should probably warn you the resident war mongers and isolationists (the people who want to stop trading and slap sanctions on everyone and everything that doesn't move to Washington's beat) here can only speak in terms they've picked up from the likes of the Johns McCain and Kerry and the corporate media.

 

[poncho]

You’d never allow a favorite sport destroyed by psychopathic ‘officials;’ why allow the US destroyed?

If a favorite sport was rigged so “officials,” game announcer, and reporting media allowed massive destruction of the rules that effectively devolved the game into a tragic-comic joke, you would be livid, speak-up, and take some kind of action.

You can’t imagine this would ever occur because so many Americans are well-educated in “sports law,” are highly passionate in their love of their games, and quick to self-express when the sport suffers from an obviously bad/missed call by officials.

For examples, Americans would speak, act, and end the following egregious sports violations of law if they occurred:

Read More At: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/05/youd-never-allow-favorite-sport-destroyed-psychopathic-officials-allow-us-destroyed.html

What is the US legal argument that current wars are lawful? We’ve never found one, have you?

“No treaty, however much it may be to the advantage of all, however tightly it may be worded, can provide absolute security against the risks of deception and evasion.” – President Kennedy, June 10, 1963

As you know from history, after two world wars, the US led international treaty-creation that made military attacks on other nations unlawful unless that nation’s government attacked first, or there was provable imminent threat. Importantly, this is no restriction of military use for self-defense to stop an active attack.

You also know that no nation’s government attacked the US on 9/11, yet the US regularly uses military attacks against other nations. You may know that since World War 2 such US military actions have killed ~30 million since WW2, arguably more than Hitler’s Nazis.

You may also know that all “reasons” given to the US public to support current wars are easily verified as lies known to be false as they are told. You may have felt intentionally deceived at the time; now official US government disclosures and presentation of public evidence prove it.

You may wonder, given the treaties making war unlawful empower US military to reject war orders and arrest those who issue them since no war order is lawful in an unlawful war, what is the official US legal justification for these wars?

Read More At: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/05/us-legal-argument-current-wars-lawful-weve-never-found-one.html

 

[righteousdude2]

I agree. But unfortunately, sometimes it is necessary.

:tear::tear::tear:

 

[pinoybaptist]

the thing I hate about America going to war in today's times (that means except for the past 'world war' and Korea), is that we just send off our men and women and then, when politically expedient the pencil pushers and microphone-eaters in Washington, the Pentagon, and everywhere else they may be, just tell our guys to (1) forget about your buddies who died, (2) lick your wounds and put on your prosthetics, (3) try to control your nightmares and suicidal urges and go visit the 'doc' for your sociological and psychological transition into society, and (4) join the ranks of the unemployed.
In short, we don't finish the job, and the blood of our troops become cheap, and we are bullies who huff and puff but are found to be 'just for appearances'.
now, some of the more educated here can demolish what I stated, and that's fine, but if I have to, in another thread or forum, I will say it again.