southsider2k5 Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 http://www.thisislondon.com/news/articles/...ning%20Standard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
israel4ever Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 Obviously, Sadaam had to go! He's history...now, let's get the hell out of Iraq! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pale Hose Jon Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 Doesn't make much sense to shoot a baby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 Doesn't make much sense to shot a baby They were all criminals! :headshake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 (edited) That is really sad and a terrible tragedy. May I ask, how many children must die before we send in the Troops? 5, 500, 5,000? Is there a number? Is there a balance? Is it proper for the US to suffer 1,000 deaths to save 1,000 babies? At some point our leaders have to make that decision. I do not envy them that. Edited October 13, 2004 by Texsox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pale Hose Jon Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 That is really sad and a terrible tragedy. May I ask, how many children must die before we send in the Troops? 5, 500, 5,000? Is there a number? Is there a balance? Is it proper for the US to suffer 1,000 deaths to save 1,000 babies? At some point our leaders have to make that decision. I do not envy them that. The problem is that sooooooo many babies are killed around the world all the time. We don't have enough troops to go to war with 30 or 40 countries. So i don't know how to answer your question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 The problem is that sooooooo many babies are killed around the world all the time. We don't have enough troops to go to war with 30 or 40 countries. So i don't know how to answer your question. There probably isn't an answer, and if there is it changes from person to person. Some will say that a 100 Americans could die to save 50 and it was somehow "worth it". Others will say that it is never worth American blood to save a foreigner. I do know we prefer to help far away, rather than close at home. Hungry Mexicans fleeing poverty, wanting nothing more than to pick your vegatables for $5.15 per hour, are a threat to our national security and should be stopped at all costs, yet spending billions of dollars and losing thousands of lives, is a small price to pay for Iraqi babies. I find it hard to cry for one and not the other. I wonder if Iraq was on our southern border, what we would do. Whomever wins this and every election for President faces decisions that I cannot fathom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 14, 2004 Author Share Posted October 14, 2004 The problem is that sooooooo many babies are killed around the world all the time. We don't have enough troops to go to war with 30 or 40 countries. So i don't know how to answer your question. Estimates are about 300,000 Iraqis, 50,000 Kurds, and about a million or so Iranis to start with. How many lives are 1.35 million people worth? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 (edited) Estimates are about 300,000 Iraqis, 50,000 Kurds, and about a million or so Iranis to start with. How many lives are 1.35 million people worth? Currently millions and millions of children are living below the poverty level in the United States. Should we take care of them first? http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/povfaq.html Should we spend a few bucks to fight crime against the elderly in our inner cities? Should we spend a few dollars to provide decent health care, education, and security at home for our at risk kids. Is it worth a million US lives to save those 1.35 million? Is it worth 2 million US lives to save those 1.35 million? These are the questions our law makers wrestle with. Vote wisely at all levels. Edited October 14, 2004 by Texsox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 14, 2004 Author Share Posted October 14, 2004 Currently millions and millions of children are living below the poverty level in the United States. Should we take care of them first? http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/povfaq.html Should we spend a few bucks to fight crime against the elderly in our inner cities? Should we spend a few dollars to provide decent health care, education, and security at home for our at risk kids. Is it worth a million US lives to save those 1.35 million? Is it worth 2 million US lives to save those 1.35 million? These are the questions our law makers wrestle with. Vote wisely at all levels. Are those people being gassed? Are those people being bombed? Are those people being tortured? Are we not spending any money on the poor now? What do we spend on education? What do we spend on welfare? What do we spend on umemployment? What do we spend on jobs programs? Do you think Kerry's $5 trillion health plan will do the trick for health care? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Are those people being gassed? Are those people being bombed? Are those people being tortured? Are we not spending any money on the poor now? What do we spend on education? What do we spend on welfare? What do we spend on umemployment? What do we spend on jobs programs? Do you think Kerry's $5 trillion health plan will do the trick for health care? I am pointing out that while it sounds very nobel to travel the globe saving people, we do not have unlimited resources of money, people, or time to do so. There is also an ethical balance that must be realized. Would you risk 1,000 US casualties to save 10 people? 100 people? 1,000 people? At what point should America jump in? Should we borrow a couple trillion dollars and solve problems everywhere? The decisions we face collectively as the US is not much different (other than scale) than we face in our personal lives. How much are we doing as individuals to help others? Would you advocate individuals borrowing $2,000 each and sending it to a starving family in China? I doubt it. Perhaps even collectively we do not have the resources to solve every tragedy in the world. No they are not being gassed. In the US they are being shot, stabbed, strangled, and starved. They are being locked in their homes, afraid to go out at night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.