Irish Translation Forum

LOL not yet, but click on the word souvenir in my last post

you want ducky yellow or lilac?

obroin_the_raven wrote:Not to wax philosophy here, but why do people cling to the idea that true peace can only be achieved without war? The United States got its freedom and its own peace through war. We've been comfortable for a while because we vehemently defend ourselves when someone threatens that peace. Everyone wants peace. If another country forces the United States to act militarily, it is not our fault.

First, I promise not to pursue this further...please don't lock the thread!

Oh, I agree with you, Tom. War is, as I said, sometimes a necessary evil. But it remains an evil, and should only be resorted to when absolutely necessary. It's one thing when you're living under a dictatorship, or a feudal monarchy, or a revolutionary emperor--the individual citizen really doesn't get much of a say in how things are run.

In a democracy or republic, where the people is sovereign and retains the ultimate power, it becomes a much more important question. In a democracy or a republic, each and every one of us is responsible for the actions of our government. That's why I feel we have to make sure that we only use military force when it is absolutely necessary and when there is no other means of resolving the problem.

I supported the war in Afghanistan, because the Taliban regime was shielding an terrorist organization that had attacked us. We were defending ourselves against an international criminal (Bin Laden and those who support him).

In Iraq, we were not facing a threat. Iraq posed no threat to the US or its interests. The question of sanctions and weapons inspections could have been settled by the UN--the UN was doing it's job, just not fast enough and not in the way some people wanted. Also, if Saddam Hussein was the problem, he could have been kidnapped or assassinated, sparing the Iraqi people a war.

As an individual, I do not have the right to kill anyone. I do however have the right to defend myself. Killing is an evil act, but if I cannot defend myself in any other way, then I have that option. The same goes for nations. War is an objective evil. No nation has the right to wage war on another. However, each nation has the right and duty to defend itself and its people. If it cannot do so without going to war, then it has that option.

"Ní bheidh mo leithéid arís ann" --right??? hehehehe-- size 6 please. I noticed the sizes all start in the double digits--- guess there would be a lot more to pog!

OOHHH, I know what you'll be pickin up for me---Oscar and Órla Octopus!





C
http://www.fiosfeasa.com/script/bearla/ ... _steps.asp

in case ya wanna know that in blazes i'm talking about

I dunno how Irish sizes work

dang where is Caireann!?!

oisin718 wrote:

obroin_the_raven wrote:that sounds cool

can you translate this one as well?

Without war, there can be no peace.

I could, but I'm philosophically and theologically opposed to the concept.

Peace can be achieved without war, but not without justice. War, like all killing, is essentially an objective moral evil. It can, at times, be a necessary evil, but it remains an evil nonetheless. Life is the highest good, and therefore the destruction of life is the gravest evil.

Your sentence:

Gan an cogadh, ní féidir an tsíocháin a bheith ann

My sentence:

Without justice, there can be no peace

Gan an ceart, ní féidir an tsíocháin a bheith ann

You forgot the preposition "le"

Gan an cogadh, ní féidir leis an tsíocháin a bheith ann
Without war, there can be no peace

Gan an ceart, ní féidir leis an tsíocháin a bheith ann
Without justice, there can be no peace