If war is wrong we'd still be British, and the Jews would have been exterminated. I served and I believe that killing is wrong. But I'll be damned if I would sit back and watch men like Milosavich and Hussein murder their own countrymen by the thousands. Has war always been wrong, or did you just reach an age where you're finally paying attention? Clinton led tens of thousands of young men and women to Europe and the Middle East to stop Genocide. He commanded us to launch hundreds of missiles from ship to shore. Innocents died then. Where were all of the peaceniks at that point? Probably still in elementary school. Ask yourself, do you hate war or do you hate Bush? Do you even know the difference anymore? Can you answer any of these questions honestly? In my experience it seems that those willing to sacrifice the least protest the most. By the way, Korea was supposed to be a war that was lost. Hmmm. You should look into how our veterans are received in that country. The South Koreans honor them. Honor. There's a scary word for this generation.

Its cool to hear that you served, and believe that killing is wrong. I should hope so, lol. -I dont really get how you're saying "if war is wrong... ... the jews would have been exterminated." Um how does that make sense?? Exterminating the Jews WAS war, and it WAS WRONG! I know it was necessary that the world go to war to stop the N azis, but that doesn't mean that war is right. Whats right is for things like that to not be allowed to happen in the first place. -Hussein DID murder people, but theres many other nations that do the same, and Saddam hadnt been murdering people lately. Since the war started the death rate is 100,000 people higher than it was under saddam for the same time period. -Peaceniks have been around since at least the 60's. Maybe Clintons war was legal under international law? I dont know much because I was fairly young, so I wont go on. -Well I think I'd have to say I hate war AND Bush. War is much worse, but Bush himself said that he's a war president, so do we know the difference? Doesn't sound like theres really that much of a difference!

i think that war is sometimes necessary, but of course not many people actually enjoy or relish in war itself. I think that after the attack in new york president bush was obliged to take action, if he had not everyone would hate him for being a dumbass AND a p ussy. I think he went about it completely the wrong way though, he should have found the true enemy, found the true harboring country of the terrorist group or groups involved, found some realy hard evidence and gotten the support of the UN, which i know is EXTREMELY hard to get to take action but i think that is very necessary for war in our times. Bush has just not done a good job of rectifying the need to attack Iraq.

To clarify, history demonstrates to me that war is neccessary. In my own life I have had to defend myself with force. It's natural for some people to try and exploit the weakness of others. I certainly had no intention of killing the other men, but I was willing to do what was neccessary for my own survival. Up to and including crossing that line. (How far would you go to protect your family?) I believe then that if the nature of men's hearts is to hurt other men, war is a natural part of our world. Disgusting, tragic, yet natural. By the way, would you let a murderer go unpunished simply because he hasn't murdered lately? Can you really believe that Saddam stopped killing? Understand, there is no sarcasm in these questions. I simply ask because I am curious. I am also not trying to persuade anyone of anything. Only trying to gain an understanding of what my peers think. By the way, it's cool to see a response to political conversation that is just that-part of the conversation. It's a breath of fresh air.

first off let me say I have mad respect for those who have are and are going to serve in the armed forces. I am not bashing these people at all, they are defending their country and usually don't pick where they have to go. that being said I stand by that war is never the right answer, sometimes it is the only plausible answer and is such justifiable. the war in Afghanistan was a justifiable war that needed to be done, the war in Iraq is not justifiable. I haven't heard of a single american saying that the war in afghanistan shouldn't have gone down. as I've said many times saddam needed to be takin down, but I don't feel this was the way to do it. if we really would've wante the iraqi country to succeed we would've supported a democratic upheavel not started one. I know it seems splitting hairs, but forcing people to like something, or supporting them liking something is a big difference to me. I also don't believe offensive violence is a tendency of all men, it is the tendency of a deranged few. I would fight to the death without a doubt if I ever felt that my family or my country was in a real threat of being lost. but since the war in afghanistan (I was 16 so I couldn't legally join I even talked to recruiters, and since we invaded Iraq wrongfully I'm glad I couldn't) that hasn't been a threat at all. and just because I was 13 doesn't mean I don't remember the wars in bosnia and such. but the word terrorist wasn't thrown around nearly as much or in the same manner. now anyone that dissaproves of the bush presidency is considered a terrorist by the gov't and many of its yokel followers (I know from first hand experience; my co workers called me a terrorist because I was talking about how Dubya won't apologize for his mistakes) by the way just cause you don't support a war doesn't mean you don't support the troops (that goes out to all the dumbass rednecks out there)

I don't believe that not supporting the war means a person doesn't support our servicemen and women. And to be honest, maybe because you were in school you were more aware of current events at 13. I know when I was in school we studied current events. Sorry about the implication. Remember though, airliners being hijacked, olympic athletes murdered, people that blow themselves up to hurt others-all of these things have been current events for all generations. Also, be careful about general implications about rednecks- more than I was with my implications about your age.

Yeah, I am against terrorism probably like everyone else on this site. About four of my teachers, including my volleyball and basketball coach were in Saudi Arabia the other day during the bombing of those hotels, i forget which ones but they were there, luckily they werent hurt. But i think something really needs to be done about it. I do not think attacking i Iraq was the right thing to do. All these speculations of this campaign "blood for oil" (thats what the protest signs in my city call it), I think, is encouraging more people to become terrorists. Terrorists are not going to kill themselves out either. My one teacher, who is pretty insane, was on the Gaza Strip and when to meet the palestinean terrorists about to go blow up some jewish people. He got some pictures of them, and he said thier younger siblings at the age of 6 and 8 could not wait to go kill Jews. I think knowledge is a better weapon to fight terrorism with, seeing as knowledge cannot hurt anyone. And as long as these ideas spread are simply of peace and how to work out problems and not how women should have rights, then it would work. I think Bush underestimates how important knowledge is.

you have to have something to understand its importance. and I understand that terrorism will always be there, I don't think dubya does. thats the wonders of diplomacy. if you come to a middle ground on everything the majority is generally happy. its impossible to make everyone happy, so theres always going to be extremists.

I beleive that war is never good unless it is used to protect ones self (Stated by the UN as the global law). but if that was the case no war would ever happen cuz u wouldnt be able to war unless there is an agressor. I agree the afgan war was totally necisarry, because there was a large amount of terrorists there and all that such thing. but i think alot of people are buying into the propaganda that iraq was full of terrorist, even the world trade centers were "most likely" and commonly beleive to be done by Osama Bin Ladden, who may reside, and certainly operates in afganistan (for the most part at least). Saddam should have been aprehended, so should alot of other leaders around the world. i beleive that in the long run that the war in iraq will lead to the country being better off, but that doesnt excuse the massive death toll thats occuring, the innocent people that have been killed out way both sides military casualtys, and that disgusts me. i think best case senario the world finds a way to deal with tyrant dictators peacefully. i for one am all for mass dictator assassination, and implimenting suitable leaders threw crooked elections (if a country is not educated enough to make the decision) but then u end up with all these countries being controlled by other bigger more powerful countrys and all though u help the people slightly, u also add more complications, such as risking all nations becomming one with deep world corruption. hahaha possibly the most outlandish theory ever stated on this site so far, thats exciting. (i was no serious about the whole assassination + corrupt elections... althought it might work, not entirely flawlessly, but better then how things are now)