<p>There is nothing wrong with using force to counter aggressiveness and to defend the nation. There is however a lot wrong with either not understanding who or where the enemy is, or turning potential friends into enemies because of ignorance born out of arrogance. I am merely stating that we have discovered we know very little about the complexities of the people who inhabit the lands we are militarily involved in. We had better be as educated about these people as we are strong. Thats not “political correctness”, thats being smart.</p>
<p>“Yet, we don’t have politically motivated groups out there trying to kill people because they are jewish or christian or Asian.”</p>
<p>Thankfully, not any more, but our own history is littered with such examples, some not so long ago. Differences because of color, creed, or politics. As for teaching and preaching “nationalism”, well, that has its own dark lessons in history.</p>
<p>I think the only thing broad about the brush “Might” be to include all muslims, as in the entire religion, into the group. That isn’t fair to those in this and other countries that aren’t so agressive towards other religions.</p>
<p>Which brings us back to the original topic; World Peace. Personally, I don’t believe that we are at war with ANY NATION ON THE PLANET at this time. The “World Peace” people are allowing their hearts to bleed for is not the type of peace you are asking for. </p>
<p>If you want that type of peace in this type of world, then you need to talk to the “War Lords”, “Terrorists”, “Hate Groups”, etc… There are no countries at war with Iraq, Iran, Nations of Africa, etc… There is fighting again individual and particular groups. Those are the ones you should be talking to. The United States has no problem with these countries. We do have problems with some of the bastards taking matters into their own hands, fighting and causing terrorism on behalf of a country even though the average people of that nation doesn’t directly support such actions. Just like the ACLU and NAACP proclaiming their strength and how well they represent. Yet there are a lot of people in this country of all colors who don’t agree or support them. They don’t speak for everyone. Neither do the war lords and terrorists. They don’t speak for all the people of Iraq, Iran, Saudi, nations of Africa, etc… </p>
<p>These are the ones we currently don’t have peace with. Not the countries themselves. Now, if these particular groups are truly interested in peace, then they can take the first step. I would support that. If they don’t take the first step, then I am all for bombing their A$$ back to the stone age. With no regrets. Again, we aren’t at war with Iraq or any other nation.</p>
<p>Yes, you’re right. Of the 15 or so Middle East Muslim countries, maybe 1 actually recognizes Israel’s “right to exist”, but I can’t think of who it is.</p>
<p>The rest of them declared war on Israel in 1946, and have never rescinded that declaration.</p>
<p>Call me a pessimist (I prefer “realist”) but a wolf in sheep’s clothing is still a wolf. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But they’re NOT “taking matters into their own hands, fighting and causing terrorism on behalf of a country”, they’re fighting and causing terrorism on behalf of a religion.</p>
<p>And the sooner we realize what we’re fighting, the sooner this “war” between “the true believers” and the “infidels” will end.</p>
<p>I agree with you. If those in the country who don’t support the terrorists would take matters into their own hands, it would be called a civil war. Unfortunately the average people aren’t organized or trained into handling such matters. Therefore we are involved.</p>
<p>It would be easy if we knew that an entire country was united. Then we could either go to war with them as a nation, and turn their country into glass, or we could find a way to let them live as they are. Such as we do for many countries that we don’t agree with.</p>
<p>But, as soon as a group of people in that country decides to attack our country, people, interests, etc… and the local government and people can’t regain control of such groups, then that’s when we need to get involved. The hard part is to minimize collateral damage and death and injury to innocent bistanders. That’s our biggest problem. We are compassionate and try to follow rules of engagement. Many of these other groups don’t follow any set of rules. Later… Mike…</p>
<p>No, you actually have to read and understand what the writer is writing.</p>
<p>Doesn’t really matter either way I guess. We all have our own opinions on the motives behind it anyway.</p>
<p>I bet that if this “peace day” were scheduled to fall on Ramadan that we would be hearing jihads and other things being declared against the founders.</p>
<p>However, I have one item that actually was presented yesterday at the UN:</p>
<p>UN Human Rights Council Opens Permanent Indictment of Israel</p>
<p>Egyptian ambassador interrupts UN Watch speech on biased agenda</p>
<p>Geneva, Sept. 20, 2007 – Today the UN Human Rights Council launched a special agenda item singling out Israel for permanent indictment. The special debate criticizing Israel allowed the Palestinian representative to take the floor and accuse Israel of “atrocities”, Syria to charge Israel with “Judaising” the Golan, and the Islamic group to protested Israel’s entry of Syrian airspace. Cuba on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement complained Israel was excavating around the Al-Aqsa mosque. Iran, Kuwait, Algeria, and Venezuela and others also joined in condemning the Jewish state.</p>
<p>ALL of mankind has a lot of growing up to do. That includes Israel, it’s neighbors, etc. The U.N. has put itself into a position of weakness because it’s member states (including the US) has found it easier to manipulate it when possible, ignore it when necessary. It is, however the inevitable forbarer of what will eventually, someday, be the the de-evolution of nations into one global government, because a world of nations with all of their guns pointed at each other is neither desirable nor sustainable. It won’t happen in our lifetime, but it will happen, OR some nation with “overwhelming firepower” will use it and it will all be a mute point…</p>
<p>If world peace day is nothing more than just a nice dream we might as well pack it in. No nation goes on forever, never has, never will. Our nation can be a catalyst for peace or not. I truly believe that is the mandate and the responsibility of the American people—not to subjugate, not to assimilate, but to facilitate peace between peoples.</p>
<p>“it is the mandate and the responsibility of the American people—not to subjugate, not to assimilate, but to facilitate peace between peoples”.</p>
<p>NOT unless the different “Peoples” want peace. Unfortunately, not everyone of these “Peoples” want peace. That is too clear. If these people don’t want peace, and their actions affect our nation, it’s people, our interests, and/or our rights, then we have every business subjugating these “People”.</p>
<p>Until these “peoples” WANT peace, World peace is nothing more than a “NICE DREAM”. Just as we can’t force and free and democratic style of government down these “Peoples” throat, neither can we force “peace” on them. They have to want it. Unfortunately, many believe that all people in the world automatically WANT peace. That is NOT true. There are plenty of people out there that believe in total assimilation. And if you DON’T assimilate to a prescribed belief and ideology, then you are to be eliminated. When these people stop such beliefs, THEN we can discuss world peace. NOT until then. Later… Mike…</p>
<p>Sorry, but I can’t trust you on that one. I have lived in too many countries. I have seen first hand what some of these “Groups” promote. I do NOT believe you or anyone else who say that the entire people of the world want peace. They don’t. And sometimes it’s not just the leaders of the countries. I believe that Iraq is a prime example of that. I believe that the “Country and elected leaders” including the majority of the people in Iraq do indeed want peace. But there are some that are against the present government and any other nation assisting that government from becoming established. They are against many individual groups and races/religions, and that truly don’t want peace. Later… Mike…</p>
<p>If the majority of the world wants peace then I rest my case. The world order is constantly evolving…changing…BUT, there are only two possible final outcomes in the end:</p>
<ol>
<li>World Peace.</li>
<li> World Destruction.</li>
</ol>
<p>Everything else is just a mile marker on the way. The status quo never remains, history has taught us that.
The other thing history has taught us is that a people subjugated by military power, religion, or any combination of the two, doesn’t stay that way forever. They have a tendancy to eventually rise up either violently or subtly from the inside because of the the inability of the government to satisy their needs for either basic freedoms or quality of life (or both).</p>
<p>Well then, I guess we have a VERY long road. It has been thousands of years, and we still haven’t reached peace or destruction. I think there will be a constant shift between more or less violence, never reaching either extreme…(unless someone pushes that big, red button).</p>