Attitude about war?

[Raenelle]

Poll question: Attitude about war?

[Racenut20]

1. Those are incredibly bad choices

[Raenelle]

2. I thought so too, but I'm a pacifist, and the alternatives are all

stereotypes to me. Do you have other suggestions.

[lcordero]

3. How about e.

e.Smedley Butler on Interventionism
-- Excerpt from a speech delivered in 1933, by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC.

War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.

I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.

Lying about "reasons" to go to war has been a common practice since before "civilization" was born.

[Warren Stuart]

4. I hate to nit-pick

But when you're in a foxhole and bullets are flying at you it's hard to question the meaning of self-defense. Would I sign up to fight in an unjust war? Hell no!

But if I was in the military and got orders to a combat zone, desertion in this case carries the death penalty (well, maybe in declared wars).

There is a case currently, where a muslim in the British military refused to go to Iraq because he felt that this would consign him to hell.

somehow I don't think that he is going to get off lightly.

[rock]

5. I just voted

for "War is sometimes necessary, but I would not fight in an unjust war" and thought: do we need a poll asking the question "Is DU to homogenous?"

[4_Legs_Good]

6. I answered pacifist, but...

I think I'm a near "peace at any price pacifist", but I do know that there are some wars I would fight for (though very few). I just think that EVERY possible alternative should be completely and utterly explored before we resort to violence.

I think that we should spend as much time and effort (actually more) developing new methods for peaceful resolutions than we do for developing new weapons systems.

Gaining victory by any kind of peaceful means should be considered far more glorious than any kind of war fought by arms.

I remember when Jimmy Carter stopped 3 wars before Clinton yanked him. Someone called up a radio station in Arcata (may have been SF, I don't remember) and said, "That Jimmy Carter - a REAL American hero." He's a man, in my books, who should have medals up the wazoo, rather, perhaps, than the Generals who, albeit brave, did something far less noble.

david

Kucinich 2004

Arianna YES
Recall No

[JohnKleeb]

7. I voted for the second choice but will explain my attiude

I am pretty much a dove although there are some wars I would support and fight in. I feel that war is a sad thing and there really are no true winners of war and it is a thing that we must avoid. That said if today was December 8, 1941 I would be lying my age to enlist. I believe war must be avoided and that we should pay our soldiers good and give them good benefits. I find it terrible that war becomes common place this day and age and the fact that so called war to end all wars meant nothing really and the weapons used although revolutionary at that time now look like children's toys. That wasnt even a century ago.