The Best Reason Now To Be An Expat In Argentina...

[Jaredberryman]

War cannot end until all individuals refuse to participate in it. I for one refuse to participate in any war for any reason (including World War II if I lived at the time), and would actively try to talk any of my friends or family from participating. Even if it means punishment for myself, I won't kill anyone for any reason. I am willing to stand up to injustice by non-violent resistance, but not through violence. Of course this is largely motivated by my religious beliefs, but I think everyone can come to this conclusion.

 

[John.St]

may I ask you something? since people (I dont care if its the enemy or whoever, people) get killed in wars, if you watch such a degrading show, with the lower instincts a human being can see, if you destroy families forever, and even civilizations, if you make those very important changes in human lives, why do you want to participate in such degrading work? why do you want to be a part of it? you re not obligated, arent you? dont you ever feel guilty? they are just human beings, the category of 'enemy' is defined politically, you re just fighting for the rich people to become richer, to the politicians to rule the world. Killing some vietnamese, or pakistani, or whatever is an abuse of power IMO and the US have been doing this the entire century.

Im really just curious, if you really think that defending the US you are doing well. Im talking to you and John St.

Regards

Hm, very difficult to translate into words, but I'll try.

As we all know, the world is not ideal.

As long as somebody is ready to use violence to gain power, you have to make a choice: Fight against or become a slave.

Matias, let's perform the concentric circle test.

Are you prepared to defend yourself if you are attacked?
Are you prepared to defend your children and spouse if they are attacked?
Are you prepared to defend your parents and siblings if they are attacked?
... your friends if they are attacked?
... your neighbours if they are attacked?
... an unknown child under attack?
... an unknown woman under attack?
... an unknown man under attack?
Are you prepared to defend a countryman under attack?
etc.

Unless you are ready to fight for what you believe is right, then at some point you are prepared to let innocent persons suffer or die.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

I think that everybody is prepared for self-defending. There is no debate about that.

The moral question he did is about attacking. Because the US is always invading one or other country, or both.

 

[John.St]

I think that everybody is prepared for self-defending. There is no debate about that.

The moral question he did is about attacking. Because the US is always invading one or other country, or both.

The United Kingdom, France, USA, Soviet Union invaded Germany - should they have stopped at the border?

The US was criticized for not taking part in WWII before December 1941.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

[Jaredberryman]

Hm, very difficult to translate into words, but I'll try.

As we all know, the world is not ideal.

As long as somebody is ready to use violence to gain power, you have to make a choice: Fight against or become a slave.

Matias, let's perform the concentric circle test.

Are you prepared to defend yourself if you are attacked?
Are you prepared to defend your children and spouse if they are attacked?
Are you prepared to defend your parents and siblings if they are attacked?
... your friends if they are attacked?
... your neighbours if they are attacked?
... an unknown child under attack?
... an unknown woman under attack?
... an unknown man under attack?
Are you prepared to defend a countryman under attack?
etc.

Unless you are ready to fight for what you believe is right, then at some point you are prepared to let innocent persons suffer or die.

What if you defend people without using violence?

 

[Bajo_cero2]

Interesting you give this example Jhon st.
The foreign policy of germany under Hitler was to invade those territories they need for its resourses.
The US seems to be doing the same. There weren's massive destruction weapons at Irak, but it was full of oil...
They were spying the Pope, and I wonder, they were afraid that he was going to send theTemplars?

 

[Bajo_cero2]

What if you defend people without using violence?

You are missing the point, you cannot attack people and steal the natural resources without violence.

 

[GS_Dirtboy]

I participated in combat. I also participate in peace marches. I taught young men how to kill with extreme prejudice. I also taught young men how to save lives (including wounded enemy soldiers) on the battlefield. No one is black and white.

The point of war is not to kill the enemy. The point of war is to achieve a particular objective.

I think the point Bajo_cero2 is pointing to is a good one - about attacking. I personally believe that my country has gone way too far in the way of "pre-emptive" attack. I would rather spend that money and training in creating a strong defense. If we get attacked then retaliate with a vengeance.

Spend the balance of that money saved on education and taking care of the people inside our borders that need help.

... segueway ... wait for it ...

Like providing jobs for people so they can afford decent health care. How about that Affordable Care Act? Anyone have any opinions on that?

 

[ghost]

I think that everybody is prepared for self-defending. There is no debate about that.

The moral question he did is about attacking. Because the US is always invading one or other country, or both.

Bullshit. Pure f...ing bullshit. "[ALWAYS"] come on Cero what does always truely mean?.In English.

 

[internationalguy]

People keep assuming the US attacks Middle East countries for their oil. That isn't entirely true, it's not about the oil itself. North America (from Alaska to Mexico) and Venezuela have enough oil to make Middle East incursions unnecessary for oil purposes (we even have Saudi Arabia willing to sell as much as we need). That being said it is of the uttermost in the government's eyes importance to enforce the petrodollar (please do some research). Without all the efforts to force the petrodollar on most oil trading countries then the 17 trillion would REALLY have to be paid. If you think inflation is bad in Argentina right now I can't imagine what would happen if suddenly the USD would no longer be the world's reserve currency and 300 million unsuspecting Americans would have to deal with huge inflation they're not used to or prepared for. Then the fat lady would sing and the S would HTF. That's what the middle east invasions are all about. Not the oil itself.