Hatred for the Enemy (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

KG Erwin -> Hatred for the Enemy (12/23/2004 3:27:28 AM)

This one is touchy, but it does deal with wargamers' motivations in playing these games. As I get older, I find it provides a motivation for continuing in this hobby. These days, I gotta fight an enemy I truly want to destroy. Forget the chess-like aspects and the management techniques fostered by playing wargames. Objective number one is, and always has been, killing the enemy. My personal motivation for doing so goes deeper.

For this reason, I just can't identify with "the bad guys" anymore. For WWII games, the distinction is very clear, and specifically for my fascination with the Pacific War. The Americans and their Allies were attacked by the Empire of Japan, so the motivation for vengeance is built in.

Guys, my mindset has undergone a sea-change in the last few years, and it has much to do with the images of 9/11 still seared in my mind's eye. I can now truly understand how the typical American in Dec 1941 felt after the attack on Pearl Harbor. It affected me deeply, to the point that I cannot enjoy playing at war unless the cause is justifiable, and the enemy deserves to be punished with extreme prejudice.

I also realize the unhealthy aspects of developing a hatred for your enemy, as this too often allows no room for negotiation. However, for the combat troops in the field, the objective is clear cut.

All of this contributes to my desire to protect my men while inflicting maximum damage on the enemy, even in the virtual and impersonal environment of the wargame.

Am I alone in feeling this way, or am I letting my personal prejudices interfere with the intent of the wargame experience?



RBWhite -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/23/2004 5:00:44 AM)

It took me almost an hour to make up my mind to respond to this thread.

I'm one those guy who can't sit through the landing scene in Saving Private Ryan. And you don't want to know why. If you turned out the light during that scene you would see a red glow coming from my eyes.

So please take this advice from someone with life experience in what you have written.

Let It pass.

Don't dwell on it.

It will eventually destroy you.

It's that little demon in all of us, don't let it loose.

Rick White



KG Erwin -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/23/2004 6:20:53 AM)

Thanks, Rick. Being one who has never experienced war at the sharp edge, it's easy for civilians to get wrapped up in historical events they read about and study. This has been the bane of many who delve into research and writing. They tend to too closely identify with the subjects they write about.

However, I cannot deny that I hold the few combat veterans I know in high esteem. I'm obsessed with certain aspects of history, but I'm not crazy enough to actually desire that I'd been there. Nevertheless, I admire them, in particular the US Marines of WWII.

Yes, I DO think about the paradox of turning this most intense of human experiences into a game. Even after 30-plus years of wargaming and historical study, I still ask myself why I continue to do it.



KG Erwin -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/23/2004 6:50:37 AM)

As for the hatred of the enemy, here's a direct quote from "With The Old Breed at Peleliu and Okinawa", by the late Eugene B. Sledge:

" ...the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor caused Marines to hate the Japanese intensely and to be reluctant to take prisoners...the Japanese held mutual feelings for us...This collective attitude, Marine and Japanese, resulted in savage, ferocious fighting with no holds barred. This was not the dispassionate killing seen on other fronts or in other wars. This was a brutish, primitive hatred..."



Riun T -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/23/2004 7:22:16 AM)

I think theres a serious psych message in your thoughts gunny, but not in a negitive way. in ninjitsu we are shown the mental outlook of how to as I've heard here many times by all sorts of speakers,combat vets and otherwise.about containing the demon, or caging our tigers,,,.. the truth of the matter is that any combat force worth its salt,individual or armada, will draw a very definitive line of conduct and tactics to equal or surpass there adversary's. the example for this in the pasific was the fact that the japanese conquests in china and mongolia where well broadcast over the radio at the time and they heard that the jap's favored their swords and bayonets,[long as f***ing swords] in the atrocities of the conflict so far, my point being it didn't take too much convincing to hate someone who might like to garishly find u on their bayonet and was more likely to give a Banzai charge than to negotiate or collect prisioners from. the more aweful urban legend or hyped publicity the adversary gets the more we under supposedly rational ethics and standards will bend universal law and rule and even commit some attrocities ourselves to defeat these enemies.



KG Erwin -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/23/2004 8:01:39 AM)

Riun, you raised some good points. If anyone would see the propaganda in the US from say 1937 to 1941, the Japanese were portrayed in the worst racially bigoted way. If anything, the press reports only reinforced the stereotype. In other words, for the US public, and the mass of draftees, they were easy to hate. We tend to forget that the American public regarded Japan, after Pearl Harbor, as Enemy Number One. In reading Sledge's account, there is no doubt in my mind that he had a preconceived idea of his adversary before he was deployed to Peleliu. His experiences in combat did nothing to dispel that notion. The Japanese were tough opponents, and fought to the death. This fanatical resistance only served to increase the Americans' determination to offer no quarter. This resulted in higher headquarters requesting that prisoners be taken to gather intelligence info.



pzgndr -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/23/2004 3:59:41 PM)

quote:

Forget the chess-like aspects and the management techniques fostered by playing wargames.


For me, that IS why I play these games. Being able to manage a variety of units with their unique strengths and weaknesses, orchestrate a battle or campaign over time and space, manage resources, and trying to optimize results and win IS the whole point. Wargaming is an intellectually stimulating exercise.

Having cycled through being a hobbyist to professional soldier back to hobbyist, I made the decision long ago to dissociate myself from the personal reality of what these games represent. Not to be delusional, but to be able to continue enjoying what I grew up playing. Even when I had M113s on the Czech border against Soviet T-72s, I played GDW's Assault series to learn and become better. No point cringing each and every time "my" unit got wasted. On the other hand, I do find it difficult to play games that are TOO real, such as any FPS which shows men getting killed in graphic detail. I did play Wolfenstein for a while but that's about it.

If players take their games too personally, it limits what you can get out of them. I can play games as either the Americans or Germans or whoever and learn to appreciate the differences. Maintain a proper perspective, seek play balance to ensure a decent game, and enjoy playing. If you're not having some fun playing wargames, then you're in the wrong hobby.



RBWhite -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/23/2004 4:16:44 PM)

pzgndr has made many excellent points.

I for one found that War gaming, flight, chopper, sub sims etc has kept my demon in check. Satisfied it, you might say, sad, but true.

It doen't matter to me who side I control, there games.

If former Warriors from all sides 55 and 60 years after the end of WWII can meet shake hands and talk to each other, well that tells you something about human nature. It Passed.

Rick White



Veldor -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/23/2004 8:55:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

quote:

Forget the chess-like aspects and the management techniques fostered by playing wargames.


For me, that IS why I play these games. Being able to manage a variety of units with their unique strengths and weaknesses, orchestrate a battle or campaign over time and space, manage resources, and trying to optimize results and win IS the whole point. Wargaming is an intellectually stimulating exercise.



Well said. I'd say if your capable of playing both sides in any battle or game then you've probably nothing to worry about. But if you are married to playing one side or the other than you might want to think on your motivations further. As a kid I had a friend that always insisted on playing the so-called "evil Germans" in all the WWII games. He was a bit obsessed with the Germans of WWII and being an American Kid I never really thought it was a healthy thing even back then.

I mean if you play a WWII FPS and finding yourself upset by events happening to the Americans and vengefully screaming at the Germans as you riddle them with bullets then you probably shouldn't be playing any games at all. There is nothing wrong about "getting into" the game but there is a point where a person needs to be able to clearly understand what is and isn't reality.

That said in many games your personality will still normally and probably quite rightly come across. In Civilization if your against war perhaps you try to take the more diplomatic approach always (Note not because you think its a better strategy but because you think its the right thing to do). In a MMPORG, especially the early days before griefing existed, perhaps you just couldn't play the thief (such as in Ultima Online where a thief could quite rightly steal from other players) or an evil person in the days where they were free to attack others. I always had trouble doing those things because they did cause the other player "grief".

Of course so does obliterating them in a wargame but there it is the established undeniable point and objective of the game to do so.

In another example take the person who gets pissed off at work comes home and wants to play a shooter to get out his hostility and aggression? Is that a bad thing? Without it he might have to direct that aggression elsewhere... his family... at work? But playing the game with those motives repeatedly fuels and builds an even more hostile personality.

So I'd say if your motivations are nearly always the same then you may have some deep seaded troubles that you probably should talk through with a professional. If you watch Saving Private Ryan and then decide that night you need some vengeance. No Big Deal. But if its a daily event then I don't know. It just doesn't sound like any of the wargamers or gamers I've ever known. And I guess by definition it would make such behavior abnormal?

I don't see how hatred for the enemy would be much of a good thing for an officer. It would just muddy sound logic and reason. Good tactics vs. Vengeaful ones. Hatred due to 911 is pretty silly too IMHO. Who do you hate? Muslims? Iraqis? Afghans? Terrorists with no faces and no countries? Hard to hate what you don't know, can't see, or even rationally define. Hatred that way just gets displaced elsewhere, perhaps in video games, but just as often with disrespect and improper treatment of other demographics and/or in extreme cases the murdering of innocents in this country or abroad.

Too many people think they have to hate because not doing so is akin to love and/or approval. Too many have to always be for or against things. I guess its just how we are built Right/Wrong, Black/White. But There is also "indifference".

Finding the happy middle in anything (again only in my equally worthless opinion) is where true knowledge, power, success, happiness, or virtually anything else can be found...



EricGuitarJames -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/24/2004 1:52:33 AM)

I have to say that I find FPS games that offer the opportunity to fight in real-life situations (badly done or otherwise) make me very uncomfortable. MoH, Call of Duty, Ghost Recon and the like just get too close, therefore I prefer games where the 'enemy' is alien or somehow supernatural. Once it gets to the scale of the Combat Missions/Stee Panthers of this World then it's just abstract enough to make the little pixels just that, little pixels.



a19999577 -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/24/2004 3:25:43 AM)

I'm really mostly into playing the underdog or the country that lost the actual war. That results in me usually playing the Axis in WWII, although my preferred countries are Japan or Italy [!!]. I'd be quite happy to play an operational game of the 1939 fall offensive as the Poles though... When it comes to the ACW, I usually go for the CSA.

I don't know... it sometimes just feels uncomfortable pummeling the poor guys who ended up losing the war.



freeboy -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/24/2004 5:45:20 AM)

Sometimes the sides are really different, so one side is the aggreessor and unless a game ingine is like Decisive battles with multiple sides, Russian and German, early and late war, Normandy etc... sometime I have said, this side is more fun.. I really like the Combat Missions game, and other than ati not supporting fog, it can be a great time, playing any one of several nations...

As to hatred, are we talking strong dislike, revulsion of something we abhore or a personal hatefullness toward a people. The later is one that is unhealthy, but not unusual. HAtred affects the possesor far more than the object, and like many attitudanal issues often is rooted in anger, which is neither good nor bad in itself, it is an emotion.. it is what we do with our anger!... thanks for listening... Merry Christmass All



MARKUSS -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/24/2004 12:24:54 PM)

I think this is one of the most sensible postings I've seen in a long time. I drafted my own less sympathetic response to the original post yesterday, but then thought better of sending it.

At the risk of being controversial, look at the reasons for the 11th September outrage and try to put yourself in the shoes of those islamic people brought up to believe (like the Japanese pre-WW2) that the west in corrupt and evil, and who have a strong and genuine sense of grievance. Look too at the one-sided US foreign policy towards Israel, which my country and so many others tacitly went along with for far too long. look at the number of countries you have invaded, bombed or generally messed with, and the resultant civilian death toll since the end of world war two. It must now run into millions. Remember too that the west armed Saddam and the Tallyband and has generally supported any pro-western regime regardless of its brutality or anti-democratic credentials. Now that the cold war is over, many of these poisoned chickens are coming home to roost.

I do not condone what has been done in the name of Allah, I deplore it, but I can understand it. Hatred gets you nowhere. It eats away at you - I grew up with ethnic German parents in a country that was at war with my ancestors and parents until 7 years before I was born. I encountered a great deal of anti-German feeling at school and elsewhere. I met many people with closed minds who were absolutely convinced that all Germans are evil, born wearing jackboots and even in the womb are obsessed with invading Poland. My late mother was a dear soul, very religious and prepared to give a stranger in need her last penny. People consumed by hatred never gave themselves a chance to see her good side, and were a lot poorer for it. To an extent I can understand the hatred, and to a point forgive those who wronged me (I also pity them for their blindness brought on by hatred), but equally I am not slow to point out that the allies did not emerge from the war smelling of roses. In a sense this hatred is perpetuated when British TV regularly trots out bad war films (some made as wartime propaganda) rather than show more programmes about Germany or our other European partners - frankly there is also too much US-made material on our TV; even though much of it is excellent, I think we are being culturally swamped, and I suspect that many islamic people feel the same way. iJust as most Germans or Japanese were not 'evil', neither are most worshippers of islam (a religion that preaches peace and tolerance). Just as we had Christian fanatics of various demoninations willing to burn 'heretics' or 'heathens' so we have fundamentalists who see self-immolation with a a car bomb as a ticket to Paradise. I sincerely hope that those who perpetrated the Twin Towers atrocity will burn in hell.

The USA also has its share of religious nuts, and the sooner they lose their grip on government and foreign policy, the better.

Have a peaceful Christmas.

Regards


Charles Markuss



dbt1949_slith -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/24/2004 4:44:29 PM)

I can usually be pretty dispationate as to which side to take in most wargames.The only exception would be the ones about VietNam which are a little.......personel to me. It took a long time for me to even play this theater's games.



Grouchy -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/24/2004 5:46:52 PM)

No problems in playing both sides, but I can understand some people don't playing both sides. Especially if their country or they where part of the conflict.

I know generally more about the bad guys then the average joe gamer and how evil they really where but I "ignore" the political systems and reasons why the conflict was started in the first place.

Why?
I get satisfaction by defeating the other sides army in the field in a battle and/or campaign, not by thinking if I win this one then I'm achieve the particular side political agenda.
It are just games, nothing more then that. I play them trying to do better then historically was the case or try different strategic and tactical options.

And If you don't play both sides you only have played 50% of the game.



KG Erwin -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/24/2004 7:00:02 PM)

First of all, I want to wish everyone a peaceful and happy Christmas.

Secondly, I do not want to come across as someone who has a gripe against a particular people or nationality--that was not my point. I DO have strong feelings about certain political agendas, in the present day as well as in the last century.

Thirdly, in certain games I play, it IS from the POV of the "other side of the hill". SHII is a prime example, as you are playing as a German U-Boat commander.

Fourthly, I was speaking specifically about the role I usually assume in playing SPWaW--my personal involvement in the development of the particular OOB I usually take plays a part in this, as well as the fact that I do know a couple of Marines personally. For better or worse, there are certain parallels between the fanaticism of their WWII opponent and the opponents they face in today's war. The sides are now (and were then), diametrically opposed, and dispassionate discussion is difficult.

It's a bit complicated for me, as while I admire the troops in both wars, I hold differing opinions on the causes they fought for in WWII ( it was the right thing to do) and today (I opposed our involvement).

As for the politics, well, let's leave that alone, as carrying on with it will just get this thread locked down.



freeboy -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/24/2004 9:14:28 PM)

Can war be just? At what point does a civilian casualty be cause for denouncing a conflict? Post WW2 the US was hindered with a mindset of anti-communism, that while rooted in a true desire to protect against an expansionist Soviet block, also had a religous anti commie fear element. Communism cannot work imo, not because of its tenents but because of the nature of man. If we were all angelic . perfect being we would probably not even have governments! As for the US supporting despots, it is both true sad and at times inevatable. See the Suidis.. what would youu do? and trust me this is as an intollerant society as they come, if you are a born Suidi and want freedom of anything you go west...
Please see the above post regarding why the origanal poster went this way.. it is about motivation, and for me it is an escape and fun... although in Rome Total War I cringe when sacking a city is the only option due to the game mechanics! The current government is elected because like myself, a non huministic, Theistic thinker with conservative values, many americans 98% of all counties in fact*.. voted for Bush. He is not neccessarily "perfect" but I wonder if the Uber liberal European press would be so hyper if the forces found a cach of bio /chem/ or atomic weapons. The seppression and removal of Saddam has merits on its own, but I do understand the post about hatred and the anger about the percieved one way support of Isreal by the US. Funny how the palistinian problem, refugees etc could be solved aby any arab country, but try getting any to allow refugees.. very resistant to the idea.What does a nation do to avert being hated.. well the US gives more aid each year than all other countries combined, we rebuilt Europe after WW2 as well as JApan.

*98 % of all counties voted having a majority of voters favoring Bush.

This is in response to the anti "religious" anti Bush comments above. Strong leaders lead, weak leaders vasilate. Strength alone does not make a leader or their decision good or bad, they each must be weighed in the context they are made.... and in regard to Iraq, can we really be certain their are no wmd hiding , or transported out to terrorist supporting states like Syria or IRaq? ok.. enough about that hot topic

what about declaring war, is it ever justified? Would the United states have been better to fragment rather than suffer the huge losses in the Civil War?
Should Germany have been attacked prior to ww2 after violating her treaty commitments?
Should the US have tried to stop the Japanese with an embargo, remember JApan had overrun Korea and a large part of China?
war is an evil, and many of these games are not bloody, body part on the screan games...
just ask anyone who is, or has fought. Why do wars exists.. perhaps we do not hate the right things...

thanks for listening... not a pro war person I am just a realist..
Merry Christmass!



a19999577 -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/25/2004 12:13:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

...I do understand the post about hatred and the anger about the percieved one way support of Isreal by the US. Funny how the palistinian problem, refugees etc could be solved aby any arab country, but try getting any to allow refugees.. very resistant to the idea...


Are you suggesting that the Palestinian problem would be solved by simply letting the Palestinian refugees live in other Arab states?

I don't think that if Mexico invaded and annexed Texas the 'solution' to the 'problem' would be to let the Texan anglo-saxon refugees live in New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana... or would it?



Oleg Mastruko -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/25/2004 1:48:14 AM)

Good thread. I belong to those who can play any side in any game. Of course there are sides and games I came to prefer, but it's based on their weapons and tactics or the challenge of playing any given side, not politics.

For instance I became "Japanese fanboy" in WITP, simply because it's more challenging and more rewarding to play Japanese in that game, but realistically speaking there's no army, no political system, no state in XX century that's more distant from me as person and my personal beliefs than Japanese militarists were during 30s. They may be fascinating in their own way, when you start to read about them, but they (Japanese leaders and soldiers) are utterly strange and totally not likable as human beings, historically speaking. Not the kind of guys I'd be drinking beer with (or sake). In fact just the total opposite. Bunch of crazy weirdo bushido sadists. Japanese Navy may be somewhat more sympathetic, but still...

I am able to detach myself from history and my own personal opinion, enough to play some "role playing" games with my PBEM opponents, if they are willing to take a joke, like screaming Banzai in e-mails, threatening with Kamikazes, Gulags, NKVD, SS, whatever is appropriate for any given side.

Perhaps, once you start to "role play", and when it's clear to both you and opponent that "its only a game", then it's kinda more fun to play the bad guys.

Of course, how it came that we can turn global mass slaughter into enjoyable activity (games) and fun associated with it (e-mail "threats" and role playing SS commanders) is unexplainable paradox some posters already mentioned. But there you go, we're wargamers and that's it.

But I can surely understand guys who get emotional about it, especially considering something so recent as 9/11. In Croatia our conflict with Serbs is still very recent, and I remember very well the hatred I felt when Serb rebels shelled my hometown in 91-92. In that moment I certainly could not have played any game dealing with Croat-Serbian conflict (luckily there are almost no games and scenarios deling with this conflict anyway). But, years passed, war came to an end, we won what we wanted, so... past is past. I could drink beer with Serbs now with no problems (in fact I did that, and will be doing it again), I communicate with them every once in a while, talking about everyday things or doing business, and would be able to emotionally detach myself enough to even play as Serb side in any wargame scenario deling with the conflict. But somehow I think I would not be playing with my heart in that game [8|]

Its perhaps good that there are no games delaing with this conflict so I don't even have to think about it.

O.



freeboy -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/25/2004 7:18:09 AM)

quote:

Are you suggesting that the Palestinian problem would be solved by simply letting the Palestinian refugees live in other Arab states?

I don't think that if Mexico invaded and annexed Texas the 'solution' to the 'problem' would be to let the Texan anglo-saxon refugees live in New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana... or would it?

Not "go away", simply that it seems ludicrous that the oil rich nations of the mideast, super duper wealthy hardly lift a finger to help, all the while hating the Isreali's. this is a great area to examine in light of the "anger" topic.. how much grief and strife is produced by those who cannot forgive and work towrds a wholeness of self and community? I simply find the anti Isreal lobby too much to take, not that everythng they do as a country is right imo... it is simply irrational to suggest Isreal must submit to the wishes of terrorist or states who publicly have called for its irradication.

As to Mexico, remember the wars? If mexico defeated texas, the US would probably not have gone to war to correct the problem150 years ago... and regarding racial motivation, how about the Blacks being slaughtered in Africa.. where is the outrage? If the wherre "white" the UN would be ,and the EU specifically.. causing an uproar about it!..



.50Kerry -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/25/2004 7:41:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin



As for the politics, well, let's leave that alone, as carrying on with it will just get this thread locked down.


Imagine that the "enlightened" wanting to do a Hit and Run political rant and then asking the issues be tabled when the rebuttals start in....[8|]

Typical Erwin post, complete with stealthy political screed. Erwin you really should just come out and say that people who serve in the force should be spoonfed your superior morals. You know for such a USMC fanboi you seem to have missed the message of this pic....?



Some people need hated and are very worthy of it. The Japanese were not blessed little angels of multiCultihood and ALL nations drank of the bitter Kool Aid in WW2.....

as to MARKUSS' intonations that America is currently ruled by a Theocratic minded hyper religious US Taliban maybe I'll go to the trouble of posting Jacques Heinz's views on Iraq circa 1998 or Beijing Billy's use of the Middle East as "Operation Hide the Dress" if political rants are now back in vogue in these parts???



pasternakski -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/25/2004 7:52:36 AM)

Why can't we all just have a nice happy meal and get along?

[image]local://upfiles/6977/Jh161637860.jpg[/image]



.50Kerry -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/25/2004 8:04:04 AM)

quote:



It's a bit complicated for me, as while I admire the troops in both wars, I hold differing opinions on the causes they fought for in WWII ( it was the right thing to do) and today (I opposed our involvement).




by the way on a lighter note you are a heck of a "ayotollah of rock and rollah" for being a minimum of what 78?

You feel on a personal level that World War 2 was 'the right thing to do", but opposed the current conflict?

No, you support our world war 2 efforts totally as a spectator with NO personal direct risk or involvement. I'll bet if FDR had an "R" by his name you would be all over his "aggressive foreign policy baiting of the Axis" through embargoes and threats. This is akin to the magic that Kerry and others pull whereby Vietnam was "all Nixon's fault". Neat trick as when Johnny was playing "Christmas in Cambodia"(allegedly) LBJ was Prez not Tricky Dick.


War is never a "fun thing" but it is often sadly the "right thing".

Afghanistan is a testament to what we are trying to accomplish in iraq and one day the whole region......

I could make an acidic sarcastic comment on how funny it is for you to have your views based on your rhetoric "gunny" but in the spirit of the Yuletide I'll refrain.

Suffice to say rank political opportunism masquerading as pacifistic morals is as aromatic as the French saying a series of 'oops' killed 60 people in the IC.



a19999577 -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/25/2004 9:21:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

Not "go away", simply that it seems ludicrous that the oil rich nations of the mideast, super duper wealthy hardly lift a finger to help, all the while hating the Isreali's. this is a great area to examine in light of the "anger" topic.. how much grief and strife is produced by those who cannot forgive and work towrds a wholeness of self and community? I simply find the anti Isreal lobby too much to take, not that everythng they do as a country is right imo... it is simply irrational to suggest Isreal must submit to the wishes of terrorist or states who publicly have called for its irradication.


Once again, your argument is basically 'other Arab states have enough money to take care of the entire Palestinian population, so they should do so and leave Israel alone'. The middle east problem is much wider than that.

Additionally, it would be incorrect to state that they haven't 'lifted a finger' to solve the problem. They have, several times, spent enormous amounts of money and effort in trying to solve the problem militarily. Things haven't worked out their way, but accusing them of not trying is unfair.

quote:


As to Mexico, remember the wars? If mexico defeated texas, the US would probably not have gone to war to correct the problem150 years ago...


What do you mean by 'correct the problem'? Is that a manifestation of 'Manifest Destiny' or something?



a19999577 -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/25/2004 9:31:44 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: .50Kerry
Afghanistan is a testament to what we are trying to accomplish in iraq and one day the whole region......


This here also reeks of 21st century 'Manifest Destiny'....



.50Kerry -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/25/2004 10:13:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: a19999577

quote:

ORIGINAL: .50Kerry
Afghanistan is a testament to what we are trying to accomplish in iraq and one day the whole region......


This here also reeks of 21st century 'Manifest Destiny'....




yeah except for the whole "we are not annexing sh** and integrating it to the United States" & "the last time I checked a map Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Persian gulf were not in North America" paradigms it is EXACTLY the same.....

[8|]

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=manifest%20destiny

This is NOT the "whiteman's burden" where we dress up the subjugation of entire continents as "for their own good". The most likely result for the US will be setting up regimes at the end fo the day that are at best antipathetic. Kind of like modern Germany, France, and South Korea.

"Just another day at the office".

if something "reeks" it needs a bath or the smeller likely does.



KG Erwin -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/25/2004 10:21:21 AM)

Well, ol' Sven is definitely in the Christmas spirit, so he's guaranteeing that Vic will lock it up. I said my piece, and I'm glad some of you others did, too. Sven and I go back a few years on our differences of opinion (and if you remember, we have a few shared opinions, too) . To get it all in the open, his real name is Frank, and mine is Glenn. He's a Republican, I'm a Democrat. It's Christmas Day, and I think a cease fire is in order.
'Nuff said.

Merry Christmas, Frank, to you and your family. We'll continue this discussion another day.



VicKevlar -> RE: Hatred for the Enemy (12/25/2004 5:21:20 PM)

Alrighty kids.......you may continue this thread over at Vinny and Doggie's. That's the place for it.

Locking up.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.312988