Comments on: The Essence of War http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/08/29/the-essence-of-war/ Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:00:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Bob Dylan http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/08/29/the-essence-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-54699 Bob Dylan Sat, 08 Sep 2007 01:39:50 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/08/29/the-essence-of-war/#comment-54699 What may I ask does it mean to "win"? If you really wanted to "win" so bad, why are you sitting there typing on your keypad and not out there "winning" it with the rest of our troops on the battle front? It's easy to sit there and tout heroic ideals, it's another one to be in it, constantly in mortal danger. Think of how many of our troops are going to come up messed up in the head from this war? Not to mention the ones who come back without heads. This is the reality of war. Wake up and face it before you talk about it like it's some kind of baseball game. Did we "win" Vietnam? No. Maybe we could at least learn from it? What may I ask does it mean to “win”?

If you really wanted to “win” so bad, why are you sitting there typing on your keypad and not out there “winning” it with the rest of our troops on the battle front?

It’s easy to sit there and tout heroic ideals, it’s another one to be in it, constantly in mortal danger.

Think of how many of our troops are going to come up messed up in the head from this war? Not to mention the ones who come back without heads. This is the reality of war. Wake up and face it before you talk about it like it’s some kind of baseball game.

Did we “win” Vietnam? No. Maybe we could at least learn from it?

]]> By: Bob Dylan http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/08/29/the-essence-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-54698 Bob Dylan Sat, 08 Sep 2007 01:36:32 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/08/29/the-essence-of-war/#comment-54698 The essence of this war is that is was founded on a mistake or a lie, what else shall we call it? Do we really expect our kids over there fighting day after day to stay alive to fight a war without merit? This is insanity. We need out of this war, NOW! Our serving men and women have donated to Ron Paul's campaign more than any other candidate, what does that tell you? Support our troops, bring them home alive! Some good links about Ron: www.RonPaul2008.com http://www.ronpaulnation.com/tv.html The essence of this war is that is was founded on a mistake or a lie, what else shall we call it?

Do we really expect our kids over there fighting day after day to stay alive to fight a war without merit?

This is insanity. We need out of this war, NOW!

Our serving men and women have donated to Ron Paul’s campaign more than any other candidate, what does that tell you? Support our troops, bring them home alive!

Some good links about Ron:

http://www.RonPaul2008.com

http://www.ronpaulnation.com/tv.html

]]> By: sedonaman http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/08/29/the-essence-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-54323 sedonaman Thu, 30 Aug 2007 14:02:57 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/08/29/the-essence-of-war/#comment-54323 Honker: The term “innocent” has been bandied about quite a bit, usually by the media to mean those who are not part of the conflict, as in “innocent civilians”. I am not an attorney, but in my reading of the Geneva Convention, I have not come across it as a category. The term used by Geneva is "non-combatant", which includes civilians, wounded combatants who are incapacitated, media reporters, clergy, medical corps, etc. In the case of the “innocent Southern settlers at Pottawatomie”, the author probably also means those who were not part of the conflict. By the way, John Brown would be considered a war criminal under Geneva because he was not in any responsible military chain of command, and he waged private war on non-combatants (at least some of them obviously were). To illustrate a point, I like to pose the following hypothetical scenario to any attorneys out there: Coalition forces are flying missions to enforce the no-fly zone over Iraq pursuant to UN Resolution 1441 and the cease-fire agreement Saddam signed. He issues an order for his gun battery crews to shoot down any coalition planes coming within range and for the population to kill any pilots they capture. Subsequently, a coalition plane is shot down by a gun crew, the pilot is captured, and he is killed by some farmers. What, if any war crimes have been committed? Honker:

The term “innocent” has been bandied about quite a bit, usually by the media to mean those who are not part of the conflict, as in “innocent civilians”. I am not an attorney, but in my reading of the Geneva Convention, I have not come across it as a category. The term used by Geneva is “non-combatant”, which includes civilians, wounded combatants who are incapacitated, media reporters, clergy, medical corps, etc. In the case of the “innocent Southern settlers at Pottawatomie”, the author probably also means those who were not part of the conflict. By the way, John Brown would be considered a war criminal under Geneva because he was not in any responsible military chain of command, and he waged private war on non-combatants (at least some of them obviously were).

To illustrate a point, I like to pose the following hypothetical scenario to any attorneys out there:

Coalition forces are flying missions to enforce the no-fly zone over Iraq pursuant to UN Resolution 1441 and the cease-fire agreement Saddam signed. He issues an order for his gun battery crews to shoot down any coalition planes coming within range and for the population to kill any pilots they capture. Subsequently, a coalition plane is shot down by a gun crew, the pilot is captured, and he is killed by some farmers. What, if any war crimes have been committed?

]]> By: Honker http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/08/29/the-essence-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-54316 Honker Thu, 30 Aug 2007 13:25:43 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/08/29/the-essence-of-war/#comment-54316 The concept of "innocent" is problematic when it comes to war. I for one lay much of the blame on the quiet and the weak among the multitudes in Iraq. Their silence in regards to Al-Quaida is reprehensible. A public display of support from the Iraqi people is necessary to support this war. Without it, what are we fighting for? The author seems to advocate giving the Iraqi people an option- leave or suffer the consequences of war in society. Fine- great theory in Civil War times where safe havens were available- where are these people going to go? I take a different approach; fight, leave, or die. If the people of Iraq are not willing to fight for freedom; does anyone truly believe they could sustain it? Our own freedom has been challenged many times in our 200 year history and if it was not for the public demand of leaving a society blessed with the same freedoms which that same society has enjoyed our Republic would have dissolved centuries ago. The citizens of Iraq must fight for freedom first. We will be there for support; but the weakness of these people can only be overcome from within. Those souls who do not stand up to tyranny and support freedom do not deserve freedom. ...............you can lead a horse to water..............???? The concept of “innocent” is problematic when it comes to war. I for one lay much of the blame on the quiet and the weak among the multitudes in Iraq. Their silence in regards to Al-Quaida is reprehensible. A public display of support from the Iraqi people is necessary to support this war. Without it, what are we fighting for? The author seems to advocate giving the Iraqi people an option- leave or suffer the consequences of war in society. Fine- great theory in Civil War times where safe havens were available- where are these people going to go? I take a different approach; fight, leave, or die. If the people of Iraq are not willing to fight for freedom; does anyone truly believe they could sustain it? Our own freedom has been challenged many times in our 200 year history and if it was not for the public demand of leaving a society blessed with the same freedoms which that same society has enjoyed our Republic would have dissolved centuries ago. The citizens of Iraq must fight for freedom first. We will be there for support; but the weakness of these people can only be overcome from within. Those souls who do not stand up to tyranny and support freedom do not deserve freedom. ……………you can lead a horse to water…………..????

]]> By: sedonaman http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/08/29/the-essence-of-war/comment-page-1/#comment-54298 sedonaman Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:26:47 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/08/29/the-essence-of-war/#comment-54298 Most Americans want to win in Iraq. However, there is a determined, vocal minority among us who do not want the US to win, whatever the conflict. They are the same who wanted us to lose in Vietnam. They are the same who battled the Nazis for control of the streets in the late 1920s, for control of the streets is key. They firmly believe the streets are belong exclusively to them; any counter-demonstration is met with violence. Given this situation and the Americans’ proclivity to use compromise as a solution every dispute, how do you compromise between winning and losing? You don’t because you can’t; some issues don’t lend themselves to compromise (slavery and abortion come to mind). As I see it, this is what we find ourselves in – fighting a war in such a way as to satisfy the pro-winning side and the pro-losing side at the same time. Most Americans want to win in Iraq. However, there is a determined, vocal minority among us who do not want the US to win, whatever the conflict. They are the same who wanted us to lose in Vietnam. They are the same who battled the Nazis for control of the streets in the late 1920s, for control of the streets is key. They firmly believe the streets are belong exclusively to them; any counter-demonstration is met with violence.

Given this situation and the Americans’ proclivity to use compromise as a solution every dispute, how do you compromise between winning and losing? You don’t because you can’t; some issues don’t lend themselves to compromise (slavery and abortion come to mind). As I see it, this is what we find ourselves in – fighting a war in such a way as to satisfy the pro-winning side and the pro-losing side at the same time.

]]>