a leader should lead his troops into a battle he started (wrongfull battle or not) if the leader cant draw his sword in times of battle it really says something Ps bush blair and the UN are all world dominating fools and if you vote for them what have you got to say for yourself you western scum ? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! pps i just want some heat
Hmmm... Well, if you want to live in the Middle Ages or a couple of centuries ago at least, then go ahead. You won't get any heat (from me) for being just plain silly.
Even if you do feel that way, you should really come to terms with the present, eh? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Your "essence"? What do you mean by this? And yes, times have changed. Leaders of nations are not generals any longer.
Yeah. All we need is leaders who are suicidal enough to be in the front lines of battle. I can just imagine that would turn out well.
my essence is the energy that has always existed and cannot be destroyed only transormed into another form of energy and has existed since time began
oh i see....so why then, if they are SO passionate bout war as these bunch of dangerous fools are, why dont they send their OWN children to te front line intead o other peoples children?????
war is wrong in all aspects but if you do start a war atleast fight aswell not just send in other people to fight for you
A great leader is the one who can negotiate a just peace instead of making war. Any fool can start a war; the wise reach a resonable accord.
because most likely their children have a good education and are going to go on to high paying jobs.i dont really think they are passionate about war,a means to an end and all that.
world domination is what i have against the UN they think it is promoting a peacefull world but if you have to kill people to achieve peace is that peacefull?
Division of labor: It's one of the fundamental building blocks of civilization. With some notable exceptions, people who have the skill to lead an army into victory in battle are not the same ones who have the skill to lead a nation into harmony and prosperity in peacetime. To the extent that entry into any particular war is unavoidable, a brilliant politician is not the guy you want on the battlefield. Now the current war, on the other hand. I would have loved to see Bush go one-on-one with Saddam. Good riddance to both of them. Same with his Daddy in the first Crusade. Same with Kennedy in Vietnam. Hirohito was a devout Buddhist and could barely stomach his military advisors' ranting about the necessity of war. If he had been required to carry so much as a sword, there would have been no Pearl Harbor. We would have sat out WWII entirely, there's no way FDR could have led the troops into Europe in his wheelchair.
Ha, I beg to differ! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! - N (Yes, I know it's a horrible job, lol)
