Man, it takes skill to contradict yourself as much as you do.
You say that dictators are threats, but then you go on and on about how good conquest and imperialism is. Imperialism is good for a very small sector of a nation, and to say that it is an overall good thing is to basically show contempt for human life. This comment is particularly interesting:
"I'm sick of this whole war causes suffering thing. It's the most obvious thing"
When the 'most obvious thing' about a certain institution (in this case, war) is that it causes immense suffering, to be able to justify it, especially for the 19th century reasons you've given justifying it, is sickening. I think, that in this argument, and, perhaps in all facets of your life, your logic is fundamentally flawed. You have total apathy for human life.
"People die, get over it"
Yeah, people do die. But not prematurly and in droves and in the most inhumane and painful ways imaginable. You basically present the argument that a police state is 'good' (I'm not sure what you mean by good, obviously not good for the general population) and then go on about how dictators are threats. You must really pratice that contradiction, you've got it down pat.
Really there is no point arguing an unjustifiable war in any type of rational way with someone who is so out of touch with reality, and rationality himself.
|