Jump to content

Nationality & Belonging to a country


dsavi

Recommended Posts

You want to belong to a country? That's even more sick than believing in a god.

Where is the world going to?

jupjup.png[~Visit my Slayer Blog~]jup.png

 

rvedit2.png

Being happy doesn't mean that everything is perfect. It means that you've decided to look beyond the imperfections.~unknown~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm in a weird situation to. My family is largely Egyptian, but I was born in the US when my family was staying with my uncle there for a while and now I live in Belgium. I've got the American and Belgian nationality and could get the Egyptian one if I wanted, but I never really know what to root for. I also find it awkward when people start getting patriotic, since I feel that in a way I'm betraying one if I go for the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a debate about whether or not the bombs were necessary, you know. And whether or not you agree, the fact that they were dropped directly on civilians with the intent on killing as many people as possible would normally have been considered a war crime. We were on the winning side, so it took a different perspective.

 

I'm of the camp of subscribing to the Doctrine of Double Effect: purposefully attacking civilians is wrong under any circumstance. This is a tough issue, one that not everyone will come close to agreeing on.

Look at it this way though - I think it's reasonable to say that without the constant bombing of japan and the Dresden firebombing, there's no way the allies could have won the war.

 

I see it as necessary to topple an evil regime, and save far more lives than they took.

polvCwJ.gif
"It's not a rest for me, it's a rest for the weights." - Dom Mazzetti

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a debate about whether or not the bombs were necessary, you know. And whether or not you agree, the fact that they were dropped directly on civilians with the intent on killing as many people as possible would normally have been considered a war crime. We were on the winning side, so it took a different perspective.

 

I'm of the camp of subscribing to the Doctrine of Double Effect: purposefully attacking civilians is wrong under any circumstance. This is a tough issue, one that not everyone will come close to agreeing on.

Look at it this way though - I think it's reasonable to say that without the constant bombing of japan and the Dresden firebombing, there's no way the allies could have won the war.

 

I see it as necessary to topple an evil regime, and save far more lives than they took.

 

In the modern world, civilians are the same as combatants: the guy that built that predator drone missile is just as guilty as the brainwashed teenager that's using it to kill children. The guy with an AK-47 can use it however he feels: we're all people, and sorting each other into groups just makes it easier to kill.

 

War is abhorrent in all of it's forms.

"Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."

Support transparency... and by extension, freedom and democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.