I fear that the world has become so obsessed with the problems of hatred and aggression, that it will allow peace and love to be regarded as soft and weak. Yet our survival depends on their domiance.

Whether we choose to destroy our civilisation or save it is a
collective decision, and it is one that hopefully may well be made within our lifetime. My hope is that ways can be found to reverse the process of destruction and that our energy and resources are diverted to the real problems facing us, including poverty, disease, overpopulation, injustice, oppression, and the devastation of our natural environment.

When bombs are referred to as "little boys," missiles are
"peacemakers" and human beings are "soft targets" in our media, new ways of thinking and talking about these issues are desperately needed.

I feel that we are possibly living in the most destructive age in history. If we blow it up, we cannnot 'create' something out of nothing: even the greatest artist did not invent colour, nor the greatest musician sound, not the greatest writer - speech. If we
continue down our path of war (especially in an area that has no history of democracy - just as Vietnam did not), all we will be able to do is discover, imitate, rearrange-or-destroy. Our worst illusion is that we might return to the state of primitive man (i.e. after the inevitable - nuclear war that awaits us). But primitive man did not have polluted soil, poisoned streams, irradiated game and vegetable foods.

TRTL said: (Saddam, vile dictator as he was, qas quite secular. He was no supporter of Islamist terror, and this war has been a distraction).

Saddam was paying some of the families of those who were suicide bombers. When Palestinians killed Jews in Israel in this manner, the families were paid $25k.

That's supporting terrorism.

Fair point Ditch - I suppose he has supported it elsewhere when it suited his agenda of opposing the Israelis and the US, though not inside his own borders. That would have threatened his own power base.
The point still remains - he was an enemy of Al Qaeda, because their agenda conflicted with his desire to maintain power.

Jack The Lad - so you found one leftie group which debated poorly. So what? There's thousands of groups out there on both sides of the spectrum, many of which debate poorly. It's still a shoddy argument.
By your logic, if I can find any right wing groups that argue badly, I can call any bad argument a typical rightie response.
Like I said, it's poor form.

Hello Bugsy. If you are really interested, it was the Scottish National Party, back in the days before it was hijacked by the Left faction. Still, nice to see that you can post without using your stupid acronyms.

Gismy XX, go for it you misinformed cretin, you follow your delusions of who I am. You’re not worth a vendetta. As for ridiculing other views, you’re the expert at that. Spineless? I would say that you are the invertebrate here. Unless you want to explain how you arrived at that conclusion. What did I write about hurling insults when you can't come up with a sensible argument?

TRTL, I never wrote that it was ‘one leftie group’, but most were guilty as charged. I’ll agree that there are many groups of all types that debate badly. By my logic, you can call a typical ‘rightie’ response if most rightist groups debate badly, not one.

TRTL – 1. Propping up the Saudi’s? They have enough oil to keep themselves afloat they don’t need western financial aid. Yeah the Saudi’s do promote a form of extreme Islam which could be a potential threat but we are “talking” to them about it and I am sure we have 100% support of the people on this form to just keep talking to them about it for the next 1000 years! What do you want to do TRTL? Bomb them? How savage of you! You are no better then a dirty blood thirsty American!

2. Agree with you on Afghanistan the Europeans should be doing more there! Especially the French and Germans but I would not call it a half arse invasion.

3. I shake my head when I read this. TRTL you are such a hypocrite and let me explain why. You consider the invasion of Iraq an “illegal war” because it was not supported by the UN. You then say that we should be in Sudan and that only the Chinese and the Russians would be against this. So then they would veto it in the UN and thus your only option left would be to start an “illegal war” in Sudan. Yes I think that makes you a hypocrite! One rule for you and one rule for the rest of us!
O and while I think of it what is the trigger to go into Sudan then? Or will we just take the bloody thirsty war monger option and not worry any more about “chatting” with them?

Since you consider posting pictures of so called chums here is one I like! http://www.pursuingholiness.com/2006/05/07/the-more-things-change Its the lefts hero Chamberlin and his good mate Adolf!

How many people here think Chamberlin should have had a bit more chit chat with Adolf to stop ww2? Adolf invades Poland “lets just talk about it” Adolf invades France “more talking is required” Adolf invades England “more empty gibberish is needed’

Please expand on the grab for oil that you keep talking about! I think its more of a case of serendipity then anything else. And even if it was for oil it will be a win win situation the Iraqi get democracy and peace the west gets oil… which they already had… which Saddam was already selling them…

Foxy – We are not in Burma, North Korea and those other places because of people like you. All you want to do is talk! You can talk for a thousand years but if somebody does not want to budge no amount of talk will ever move them.

Foxy you see the world through rose colored glasses. It’s a nice thought you have but it’s a long way from reality

Bugsy – How did you come to this logic? Destabilizing the middle east to keep oil price low?
The Americans have good relations with Kuwait and Israel! Why do they need a permanent base in Iraq? I think they have a number of small bases through out the middle east.

BUGSY HOW MANY TIMES DO I NEED TO REPEAT MYSELF! WE HAVE NOT MOVED AGAINT OTHER ROUGE STATES BECAUSE WE NEED A TRIGGER! WE NEED THE TRIGGER BECAUSE IF WE DONT HAVE ONE PEOPLE LIKE YOU WILL WET YOUR PANTS AND BE BURNING AUSTRLIAN FLAGS IN A MATTER OF NO TIME TO SHOW HOW OUT RAGED YOU ARE ABOUT THE ACTION TAKEN AGAINST THESE COUNTRIES! YOU WILL BE DEMANDING THAT WE TALK MORE TO THEM! Honestly its like talking to a brick wall!