Tea Party?
- Thread starter fillyacup
- Start date
I don't want to speak for him, but I think fillyacup is trying to say: Is War solely defined by congress' declaration or is there something intrinsic to these conflicts that make them wars regardless of the formalities?
People on all sides directly involved in Vietnam would probably argue that it was a War. So who decides?
People on all sides directly involved in Vietnam would probably argue that it was a War. So who decides?
I think people have the freedom to call it whatever they want, and since war is a broad and subjective term, they may be right to some degree of definition.
However, relative to the definition accepted by the US Government, they will be wrong.
In reality same events and results happened whether it is was called a war, conflict, meeting, or party.
If fillyacups point is that whether or not we call it a "war", the outcome was still the same and equally deplorable, then what is the point of arguing that is was in fact a "war" on the other side of the debate and not just that it was horrible whether we call it a war, conflict, meeting or party?
He is arguing for subjectivity, only when the definition fits his subjective definition - which defeats the purpose of arguing subjectivity.
In other words, you can't argue that the definition of war is subjective, and then tell Timm his is wrong lol.
*ps why don't you let fillyacup make his own point rather then make it for him?
^ the fact is, whether its subjective or not shouldnt matter as all things are subjective.
the play on words we know can last eternally.
the object of debate we know can last eternally.
why it does matter tho is because this is death and destruction of man, woman, child, and the intrinsic value of life thats inside them.
the play on words we know can last eternally.
the object of debate we know can last eternally.
why it does matter tho is because this is death and destruction of man, woman, child, and the intrinsic value of life thats inside them.
coldblooded pretty much put it in an intellectual point to what i was trying to get across, forgive the lack of means to put my thoughts in a well worded sentence brehs.
regardless if it was "officially" declared or not, a war is a fucking war. in the same sense that, forgive the childish metaphor, you can have and impala and a malibue but its still a fucking chevy. or better yet, its still a car, no matter how you try and classify it
regardless if it was "officially" declared or not, a war is a fucking war. in the same sense that, forgive the childish metaphor, you can have and impala and a malibue but its still a fucking chevy. or better yet, its still a car, no matter how you try and classify it
I'm reading this book called "Son of Hamas", by Mosab Hassan Youseff. HAMAS would torture their own people into admitting to having sex with donkeys and shit just to make the torture stop. This occured in prisons. around this time is when Mosab became an Israeli informant because of all the crazy shit Hamas was doing to eachother and innocent civilians
