November 14th, 2005, 20:25 | #46 |
Perhaps this conversation IS over.
You are fixated on the "Nazi" of WW2 and seem to forget about the other thousands of years of history. Go ahead, commemorate WW1 and WW2, as I do, and many others do but you have absolutely no grasp of the concept of context yourself and your lack of open mindedness is what makes conflicts around the world persist. I fully comprehend the difference between "remembrance" and "commemoration". But with your biased North American opinions you'll never get past the fact that the "soldier", regardless of nationality, should be "commemorated". Would you fight for your country? Your religion? Your fellow man? To stop tyranny? You can't judge a person's or country's decisions until you have walked in their shoes. I think you've been watching too many Bush broadcasts my friend! Cheers.
__________________
-- Whisper Kill |
|
November 14th, 2005, 20:58 | #47 |
lol, you keep stressing that the soldier should be commemorated simply for being a soldier, yet you continue to dance around that question that you know will sink you:
Would you commemorate an Al-Queda soldier for his cause? Would you congratulate him on his success? Would you commemorate the promotion of terroristic regime? You see if you answer no, then you contradict yourself, but if you say yes... well, I dare you to You see your logic is as follows: IF soldier X, then soldier X's cause, actions, and success should be commemorated. whereas my logic is as follows: IF soldier X AND soldier X cause = good, then soldier X's cause, actions and succes should be commemorated. Do you see the problem with your logic? I can substitute any terrorist for X, and by your logic, that terrorist's regime, actions, and success should be commemorated too.... scary.
__________________
"And the Lord said unto John, 'Come forth and receive eternal life.' But John came fifth and won a toaster." |
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|