|
| quote: | Originally posted by venomX
They're both proven liers. You're preference of believing your side of the story is a clear bias of living in the US. Now the interesting question is, if you have that bias, wouldn't others also have it? And if you can understand this concept, wouldn't you also espouse the belief that this type of intimidation and warmongering doesn't amount to anything else than escalation which will surely be followed by more war, more instability, more hunger and more suffering. Notice that in that list you'll never find anything positive, as with all wars. No war has ever brought any good, only of course the spoils for the victor. And if that is the point, the spoils, why cover it up and pretend you're doing good? |
I already said I'm prone not to believe anything from either side. However, for the most part, the West has been pretty quiet on the matter. Yes, we have gotten condemnations and such, and the British were vocal at first. However, Iran has released a new confession, video or press release concerning the sailors or further acts against Iran literally every day. If you say nothing, it's hard to lie, but if you're constantly pushing out more crap to the media, in order to one-up your last release I am "biased" into believing that they *might* be lying.
I'd also argue that wars can bring about good. You can debate "end justifying the means," all you want, but when it means removing a proven, ruthless dictator (ala WWII and Hitler) who without military intervention would have had no problem dominating the entire planet via his agenda, I'd say war does bring about relative good. It should always be a last resort, however when dealing with irrational people, war is sometimes the only means of preventing far worse atrocities than war brings.
|