Debates

[Mystes]

Sticking to Ron Paul. His POVs are much close than other candidates'.

[ainsoph9]

Well, some good news is that Bachman dropped out of the race, and Perry might also pretty soon. Sadly it does feel like the US is stuck in a Catch-22 with the democrats and Republicans...-_-

Part of the purpose of the Tea Party Movement was to break that, but it only has had limited success thus far.

Sticking to Ron Paul. His POVs are much close than other candidates'.

kira, why are you so fixated on Ron Paul and a couple of the other candidates? Also, his opinions will be relatively close to the other candidates because they are all part of the same party.

[Mystes]

kira, why are you so fixated on Ron Paul and a couple of the other candidates? Also, his opinions will be relatively close to the other candidates because they are all part of the same party.

However, his policy in the world looks much better t han Santorum's "Let's bombard every islamic country."

Today itd bt Syria. Tommorow Iran. Then, it'll move all across the Middle-East.

[ainsoph9]

However, his policy in the world looks much better t han Santorum's "Let's bombard every islamic country."

Today itd bt Syria. Tommorow Iran. Then, it'll move all across the Middle-East.

Define "better." I do not think that Santorum has a problem with Middle Eastern countries in and of themselves. I get the feeling that it is more of a problem with Islam itself, which keeps showing itself to not be a religion of love and peace like it tries to portray itself as. I am not talking about the people but the theology. If anything, people can become victims of their our theology, ideals, and philosophies. Hence, it is important to differentiate, especially since people can be quite loving despite their theology. At the same time, a theology that creates suicide bombers in the name of its deity is obviously problematic. To ignore that is tantamount to asking them to kill you and your family and friends. This is probably what Santorum is trying to guard against because he sees the potential alone for all Muslims to become human weapons bent on the destruction of the West. Sadly, the way that the majority of the populations in Middle Eastern countries are repressed and treated inhumanely makes Santorum's viewpoint have more credibility than more would like. Basically, when you have nothing left and no future, becoming a suicide bomber or someone who kills in the name of their deity becomes a very attractive incentive, many times to the point that parents will raise their children to become suicide bombers in order to become "martyrs." Doing so earns them honor and gifts and things of the sort. Should this kind of behavior be encouraged when it degrades human beings?

[Mystes]

Mind you, ainoph. It's not written in the Coran "Thou shalt bombard America in order to become a great guy." or something like that. Also, suicide bombings were the idea of Japanese, who were shintoist. Should we sanction Shintoism, saying "Ah, it's a religion where you make Zero-fighters crash"?

Plus, in the mid 70s, China had a nuclear weapon. Did the US invade China? No. And China was, IMO, a greater threat because they were "communists". Same thing with NK. Why aren't the US attacking NK and Russia, since they are/were "bad communists"? Why aren't the US attacking India and Pakistan? And even ISRAEL has a nuclear weapon. One day, Vietnam will have one too, if they work hard on it, and Vietnamese are enough intelligent to create one. Will the US attack Vietam then? I doubt so. Iran is making a nuclear weapon to assure its power and to defend itself from a possible invasion. Because, trust me, if NK didn't have a nuclear weapon, the sanctions would have been waaaay stronger (not that it really affects it though), and SK would be seeking to gain territory. Basically, to assure that you wouldn't be invaded, you need a nuclear weapon, and that'S what Iran wants.

Plus Al-Quaida wasn't EVEN in Iran. That's Afghanistan. There's no one yet that's destroying Iran's roads, bombing the buildings and such. Personally, Iraq was in a regime of terror, but it was still wealthy. After the US invasions, how many Iraqi lost their homes? How many soldiers lost their lives? If you try to meddle in each time a country seeks to gain power, no wonder Iraqi don't like the US, right?

And on Santorum: You said it ealier, he's a pure catholic. I wouldn't be surprised if he decides to resume the crusades and start making war in the Arab countries in the name of God. He's probably the most "republican" outta there.

[ainsoph9]

Spoiler! :

Mind you, ainoph. It's not written in the Coran "Thou shalt bombard America in order to become a great guy." or something like that. Also, suicide bombings were the idea of Japanese, who were shintoist. Should we sanction Shintoism, saying "Ah, it's a religion where you make Zero-fighters crash"?

You are right. The Quran itself does not say that, but the commentary to the Quran does say these kinds of things, which is the problem. You compared this to fascist Japan. You are right. That mindset needs to be banned. However, you are wrong that at the time all Japanese were Shintoist. You are forgetting a lot of other historical facts that play into this. In fact, Shintoism has very little to nothing to do with the situation. The Japanese have worshiped their emperor as a god for a long time. When your god commands you to do something, you do it. That is what Hirohito did. That was the problem, not Shintoism.

Plus, in the mid 70s, China had a nuclear weapon. Did the US invade China? No. And China was, IMO, a greater threat because they were "communists". Same thing with NK. Why aren't the US attacking NK and Russia, since they are/were "bad communists"? Why aren't the US attacking India and Pakistan? And even ISRAEL has a nuclear weapon. One day, Vietnam will have one too, if they work hard on it, and Vietnamese are enough intelligent to create one. Will the US attack Vietam then? I doubt so. Iran is making a nuclear weapon to assure its power and to defend itself from a possible invasion. Because, trust me, if NK didn't have a nuclear weapon, the sanctions would have been waaaay stronger (not that it really affects it though), and SK would be seeking to gain territory. Basically, to assure that you wouldn't be invaded, you need a nuclear weapon, and that'S what Iran wants.

Comparing Communism and Islam is not a good comparison historically. Communism is dangerous - agreed. However, communism does NOT seek to kill the population of the world like Islam does actively. Communism oppresses its population and does encourage people to act in evil ways as side effect. Islam does it as a matter of default by the theology. There is a difference and a huge one at that.

Your questions about North Korea, Russia, India, Pakistan, Israel, Vietnam are entirely different issues. I will admit that North Korea and Pakistan are obvious problems. Russia is a problem because they are an arms dealer to terrorist nations just as the previous two. India has their act more together for the most part and have other problems right now, so they are not a big concern. Israel knows how to act responsibly and has NEVER launched a single one of their nuclear missiles despite the THOUSANDS of missiles rained on them within months. Iran, on the other hand, has repeatedly used inflammatory rhetoric, threatened the destruction of the West and Israel, and sees itself on some holy war against other Middle Eastern countries. There is a HUGE difference that we are talking about here, kira. If you believe Iran's lies, fine. I cannot convince you otherwise, but I will say that you are in for a very rude awakening.

As for your comments on North and South Korea, I find them offensive, being Korean myself. Please watch what you say concerning those nations. I see North Korea as a problem, yes. South Korea is not a problem and to accuse them of being one or a potential one is slanderous.

Plus Al-Quaida wasn't EVEN in Iran. That's Afghanistan. There's no one yet that's destroying Iran's roads, bombing the buildings and such. Personally, Iraq was in a regime of terror, but it was still wealthy. After the US invasions, how many Iraqi lost their homes? How many soldiers lost their lives? If you try to meddle in each time a country seeks to gain power, no wonder Iraqi don't like the US, right?

Al-Qaeda is NOT the only terrorist cell in existence, kira. Iran has ties to other terrorist cells like the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc. Your commentary "destroying Iran's roads, bombing the buildings and such" makes no sense. Iran's problems are internal and external. Iranian women are beaten and treated as less than human. The men are made to cower in fear of the regime, which is Islamic at its core. So, if you are talking about the people's spirit, the roads and buildings were destroyed long ago.

Your points about Iraq make no sense again. Iraqis did lose their homes, and soldiers did lose their lives. This is a part of war. Currently, the United States, Canada, and most of the West live in a time when they do not have to fight wars on their home turf. This is a luxury. It has also made people forget what war is like and what it means, which means that they flake out every time they hear of conflict. War to such people is another afternoon at the movies. Pardon the expression, but war is hell. No soldier that fought from the United States army was conscripted or drafted. They all volunteered fully aware of the possibility that they could die in combat. To suggest that their sacrifice, the ultimate sacrifice, was in vain or part of a plot on the part of any nation sullies their memory and honor.

As for the Iraqis not liking the United States, that is a myth propagated by the media. It is not true.

And on Santorum: You said it ealier, he's a pure catholic. I wouldn't be surprised if he decides to resume the crusades and start making war in the Arab countries in the name of God. He's probably the most "republican" outta there.

kira, please do not bash the Catholics like that. To do so is ignorant at best and hateful and unhelpful at worst. Since your comment on the Catholics basically just showed me that you do not know your Church history, I will say apologizing to the Catholics would be in good order. Actually, the Catholics have been the leading denomination in research and relations to repent of the Crusades and the Holocaust. This is especially true within the past 20-30 years. Likewise, the Catholics have strong relations with many Muslim clerics and the leadership in general. All Catholics are required to take catechism growing up, which involves the history of the Church and explains the Catholic tradition and origins.

Concerning Santorum, whether he is the most "Republican" out there is really...

[Mystes]

Ah, since I'm on my iPod Touch, I'll debate respond to this later (a lot of typing). Though sorry I I offended you. What I meant is that the Korean war is technically "paused", and the war hasn't ended. Though because of the threat of NK, countries can't invade the country like for Iraq or Afghanistan, since there's always the threat of a nuclear bomb falling, and gives NK an advantage and time.

[HexOmega]

Just a quick clear up for you guys. The only comment on Islam that invokes suicide attacks were those brought up by Osama. He convinced the Jihad that they would receive the whole 72 virgins (no where in the Islamic faith is this true, seeing as Islam is the most peaceful "globalizing" religion in existence; They are supposed to accept Christians and Jews, but Jihad extremist has been so diluted they don't know what their fighting for)
Second: Communism is not the big bad evil you make it out to be. The entire idea was equal rights for everyone. The only issue is that Leaders become corrupt, and no one knows how to follow proper Marxist Communism. The best example would have to have been Russia, due to the fact Stalin did honestly prompt "protection" for all (no matter how rash), while China and North Korea abuse it to be "worship your god emperor"
Next:What you are talking about Kira is the concept of Sharia Law, which is brought about from extremist Muslims, not all of them.
Moving on: The countries that you mentioned, Kira, that would be dangerous (SK, Israel, India) are US allies, and would go belly up if they were to propagate any attack against us. The only large fear in the Middle east as of now would be Iran, simply due to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Many of the Iranian people actually do like the United States, but the crazy proposals by Ahmadinejad are what cause it to look as if the whole country hates us; He says he speaks for his country, but he only speaks for himself. NK would also never attack even with a nuclear arm, due to the fact that would remove any aid they recieve. AS of 2011, China stated that they would no longer support NK if they were to start something, and Russia said that while they may distribute weapons, they would not back up NK in their use. NK will always use verbal threats and small skirmishes (if you want to call them that), because that's how they get resources. They scream like a lion when they can only strike like a Mosquito.
Final point: No matter how Religious the president is, he will never act in a way to harm the United states as a whole. The purpose of being president is to protect your people, and Congress would never sanction war on the middle east (we're not even in "War" with them now) just because of the President's faith. If that was true, Bush would have launched the bombs on the Middle East the second he became president.

[Mystes]

Quick comment, I didn't say that communists are bad, and that is why I put the term in quotes.

[HexOmega]

My apologies, I've seen people use quotes for enforcement before....silly I know, but thats how Debate forums work sometimes....

[ainsoph9]

Spoiler! :

Ah, since I'm on my iPod Touch, I'll debate respond to this later (a lot of typing). Though sorry I I offended you. What I meant is that the Korean war is technically "paused", and the war hasn't ended. Though because of the threat of NK, countries can't invade the country like for Iraq or Afghanistan, since there's always the threat of a nuclear bomb falling, and gives NK an advantage and time.

I forgive you. Just please be more careful in the future. Also, thank you for clarifying what you are trying to say.

Just a quick clear up for you guys. The only comment on Islam that invokes suicide attacks were those brought up by Osama. He convinced the Jihad that they would receive the whole 72 virgins (no where in the Islamic faith is this true, seeing as Islam is the most peaceful "globalizing" religion in existence; They are supposed to accept Christians and Jews, but Jihad extremist has been so diluted they don't know what their fighting for)

Actually, if we look into Osama's sources, we will find that he did not invent this out of the blue. He is actually going back to the Quran itself. Unfortunately for him, many modern scholars say that it is possible that the "72 virgins" is a misreading/scribal error. Rather, it is talking about vats of olive oil.

As for Islam being "loving" and "accepting" of Christians and Jews, it historically has not. Thousands of Christians and Jews were and are made third-class "citizens" in Islamic countries at best. At worst, they were and are persecuted, beaten, imprisoned, and murdered. Unfortunately, classroom history books often overlook this fact, and the modern news media is no better.

Second: Communism is not the big bad evil you make it out to be. The entire idea was equal rights for everyone. The only issue is that Leaders become corrupt, and no one knows how to follow proper Marxist Communism. The best example would have to have been Russia, due to the fact Stalin did honestly prompt "protection" for all (no matter how rash), while China and North Korea abuse it to be "worship your god emperor"

I recently made some comments elsewhere on the forum about this. Again, I differentiate between the ideology and the people.

Next:What you are talking about Kira is the concept of Sharia Law, which is brought about from extremist Muslims, not all of them.

This is true that not all Muslims are into Sharia Law, but the number of Muslims who want to adopt is growing like a malignant cancer.

Moving on: The countries that you mentioned, Kira, that would be dangerous (SK, Israel, India) are US allies, and would go belly up if they were to propagate any attack against us. The only large fear in the Middle east as of now would be Iran, simply due to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Many of the Iranian people actually do like the United States, but the crazy proposals by Ahmadinejad are what cause it to look as if the whole country hates us; He says he speaks for his country, but he only speaks for himself. NK would also never attack even with a nuclear arm, due to the fact that would remove any aid they recieve. AS of 2011, China stated that they would no longer support NK if they were to start something, and Russia said that while they may distribute weapons, they would not back up NK in their use. NK will always use verbal threats and small skirmishes (if you want to call them that), because that's how they get resources. They scream like a lion when they can only strike like a Mosquito.

Ahmadinejad is really only the tip of the iceberg. The Ayatollah is the real problem, who is pulling Ahmadinejad's strings behind the shadows.

China and Russia may say what they like; it does not mean that I trust them any more.

Final point: No matter how Religious the president is, he will never act in a way to harm the United states as a whole. The purpose of being president is to protect your people, and Congress would never sanction war on the middle east (we're not even in "War" with them now) just because of the President's faith. If that was true, Bush would have launched the bombs on the Middle East the second he became president.

We can only hope that this is true. If a president can sign this bill into law, he/she can certainly act with impunity against their nation. (To me, that law is an extremely dangerous law that can be used against the very citizens it proposes to protect. Obama signing it makes me very wary that he is truly concerned about the welfare of the United States.)

[HexOmega]

The thing with Obama's new bill is, like the patriot act, it requires Court approval before action is taken. Also, when the bills applies to a person, they are then considered "an enemy of the state" and do not gain the same benefits as an American Citizen, much like those in Guantanamo. Will talk later, but have to go to school...-_-

[Mystes]

Are the US Rome?

[ainsoph9]

Some actually have that understanding that the United States is like the new Rome in a sense.

[Mystes]

There are parallels that could be drawn.