|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Sep 9th, 2006 12:09 PM | ||
| The Good Reverend Roger |
Quote:
|
|
| Sep 8th, 2006 01:14 PM | ||
| Preechr | LMAO | |
| Sep 8th, 2006 01:08 PM | ||
| mburbank |
"The terrorists who want to harm America can now buy disposable cellphones and open anonymous e-mail messages." -GWB Thank your lucky stars that this nincompoop is just the hood ornament and not the driver. |
|
| Sep 8th, 2006 12:57 PM | ||
| mburbank |
"The WOT is designed to close the gap." HAH! The WOT is not 'designed' to do anything! Maybe it could be, maybe you'd like it to be, maybe it should be, but what it IS is a happ hazzard collection of nutsiness that is rapidly eexhausting our manpower and our wallets. We took our eye off the ball in Afghanistan, Iraq is a big fat mess, and who all knows what's next. I don't disagree that closing the gap would be laudable, but just look at the home front. This administration doesn't LIKE closed gaps, they have been widening the gap right here at home. "Despots and Dictators are what cause disconnectedness." agree... mostly. "These are the things we are fighting" Disagree STRONGLY! We are buddy buddy with all sorts of dictators and despots, and when we DID topple a despot, we let all hell loose! If Despots and dictators were what we were fighting and closing the global gap was the reason, I might have many an objection, but at least something coherent would be going on, it might amount to a strategy. You are describing a WOT you want and the current administration doesn't feature people like you. It features people as ridiculously, insanely sure of themselves as Abcgdgcdh and is 'led' by a man who makes Kultyklub look like a man of near normal intelligence. It's like saying "Cars are good, not bad" and failing to think about the fact that the car your in is being driven by a rabid, blind Orangutan that hasn't been fed in a week. |
|
| Sep 8th, 2006 12:29 PM | ||
| Preechr |
Quote:
Disconnectedness is what causes terrorism. Despots and Dictators are what cause disconnectedness. These are the things we are fighting. THese are ties that bind together Al Quaeda, Saddam, Iran, Kim Jong Il... everything.... I have been through all this before, and recommended you a book on the subject. I would LOVE to see you feeling better about all this, but you just don't want to, obviously. If you change your mind, I'll be happy to type my fingers down to nubs for you. |
|
| Sep 8th, 2006 12:16 PM | ||
| Preechr |
It's not an empire. France, Germany, and Italy aren't American States. We gave them back to their owners. That's what we do. We are not building an empire. We never have. There is just no indication that's what we are doing now. It's fun to say it, but we are no more building an empire than we are a condominium or a theme park. Saying things you know are not true is bad, Max. If you'd like to offer proof that we are actually evil fuckers secretly building an empire, or even a historical example for an empire built in secrecy, then feel free to do so and we'll discuss that. If not, then we'll move on to a more productive portion of the conversation. |
|
| Sep 8th, 2006 11:35 AM | ||
| mburbank |
I'll assume your last sentecne was meant as stylistic parody. I think our differences of opinion come down to trust issues. My opinion is that as long as we have the option to "lock them up forever and torture them if we wish. " we'll do it. At first just a little the way we are now, and only a few innocents will end up getting tortured (as we do have a habbit of being wrong about things we think we are totally sure of) and only a few people will get tortured too much and die from it, and only a few officers will find they really like torturing other people. But as shown by Ahbu Gharib, shit like that spreads down pretty fast. I'm confident (and I imagine our enemies, who have a worse opinion of us than we do) that the administration had a high value prisoner and they believed they were in that stupid ass ticking time bomb scenario they always talk about, they'd go right ahead and torture that prisoner in violation of the law. Every administration I've lived under has felt free to violate the law when they felt the need, and some of them paid the consequences and some of them didn't, but they all did to one degree or another. I'm sure no Arab prisoner thinks they won't be tortured because of the niceties of our laws. Make torture permissible, and nobody has to think "Do I really need to do this?" Historically speaking, torture has enjoyed great popularity acriss the political spectrum. I don't think it's because of tirtures wonderful track record of success, I think it's because people in power like other peope to be afraid of them, and it's easy enough to find torturers who... enjoy their work. As for Quagmires, while I agree with you that halfhearted efforst make them, whole hearted efforts made without due cause, or based on lies, or just for fun, are what make evil empires. Case in point. Afganistan was arguably a case for a serious war effort. Take out the Taliban, round them up, occupy the country with massive force, perhaps requiring a draft, certainly requiring taxes, pour money into infrastructure and jobs and kick the shit out of anyone who doesn't like it. Crude, nasty, costly, but for a reason and maybe worth it all in the end. Certainly provoked. Like the war in Iraq or not, think it's just or not, I think we went there because our president is a dope with daddy Issues and the people he trusts most have dreams of empire and have had since they were ugly like Nixon/Ford thugs. Go half heartedly into shit like tat and you have a quagmire. Go Wholeheartedly into it, and you are embracing evil. Plus, you can't separate goals you might find laubable from the administration. Whatever you may want on paper, it ain't your paper. It's GWB's, and while I cop to hating him, I don't hate him randomly, I hate him for who he daily shows himself to be, an unprincipled, hubristic, shallow zealot. THAT's who's paper it is, and whatever you think of the uses of power and our ability as a nation to withstand it's corrosive influence, I wouldn't give these people one fifth of what they freely take and trust them for an instant. |
|
| Sep 8th, 2006 10:55 AM | ||
| Preechr |
I actually did mean it that way. Well, that, and I wanted to make people look up a word. You weren't supposed to TELL THEM the definition, dammit! I don't consider humanity a birthright. I can think like that and still believe we all possess "God-given" rights and freedoms because I believe it possible, common even, for people to give those rights and freedoms away or otherwise choose to have them stripped away through criminal and immoral actions. I don't consider our terrorist enemies to be human until they do something to regain that status in society. They lost their human status not just because we call them enemies, of course, but rather due to their choices and actions. They traded their humanity for an inhuman ideology... and I'm not talking about Islam. I honestly do believe that this war will have an end. It's not going that bad so far. You're just jaded and cynical. This is the "end game" of Liberalism, and I'm just thankful I'm around when it's happening. As for innocents, I agree that we should not torture them. I'm not advocating the mass torture of all Arabs or all Muslims or whatever, either. We won't have to. Just as were we to institute a policy that no prisoner will ever be tortured for any reason we would no longer be able to obtain ANY useful information, the policy that we have where our detainees don't know what we might do to them is pretty darn helpful, I'd imagine, when it comes to interrogation time. They know we can lock them up forever and torture them if we wish. That's exactly as it should be. We have to have these options available to fight this war. Innocent folks might be shot in the head accidentally, but would you advocate taking away our soldiers guns, Max? War is not a fun and happy thing, but fighting a war with half-measures is exactly what causes "quagmires" like Vietnam. You like to refer to Iraq as a "quagmire like Vietnam," yet you champion the ideas that cause "quagmires like Vietnam." What's up with that? I wonder if your hatred for Dubya hasn't taken on a life of it's own, invading your subconscious and becoming a self-reinforcing, narcissistic pathology... |
|
| Sep 8th, 2006 09:37 AM | ||
| mburbank |
There's WAY too much here for me to respond to, not because I don't think it's worth it, I'm just too busy right now. So. Main points and objections. " War Crimes Trials are held AFTER the war." Then there will be no trials (which perhaps you are okay with, but then argue that) because the way this 'war' was framed was so that it is not going to be over ever. "I'm falling on the side of whenever even a single innocent life is at stake and offers of cigarettes and candy fail." Even under the kindest of interpretations, this practically guarantees at least some innocent people get tortured. I hope it isn't anyone nice. Under less kind interpreation, it would mean the routine torture of almost everyone we take in, because who knows what information they might have? The argument isn't wether a line should be drawn between them and us, it's where that line should be drawn. I prefer to draw it so that we're the side that doesn't torture captives, as opposed to the side that tortures them less and with better intentions. "The greatest mistake a person of virtue can make is the assumption that all others already are equal in virtue." That would be a mistake. But I also think it is a mistake to think that Virtue has anything whatever to do with the actions of others. Vurtue is about deffinition and should exist in a vaccuum. Virtue is about what we decide to be as people and as a nation. "To anthropomorphize those of such a terribly different culture is to commit such an error. " I'm pretty sure you didn't mean exactly that, since athropomorphizing is attributing human characteristics to non human things, say animals or rocks. History is full of examples of humans of all stripes doing things terrible enough to make this current crop look like pikers. If what you mean is don't assume the same, similar or even understandable values of people from parts of the world we know next to nothing about. By the same token, we shouldn't assume our values are deffinitively human. Don't get me wrong. I like my values better. I just think that the opposite of anthropomorphization is dehumanization, and that it's our enemies ability to do this (among other things) that makes them our enemy. Again, if we don't draw some sort of line between us and the enemy, we are just baboon tribes killing each other with sticks. Not to anthropomorphize baboons. Or sticks. |
|
| Sep 8th, 2006 01:23 AM | ||
| The Good Reverend Roger |
Quote:
|
|
| Sep 7th, 2006 10:41 PM | ||
| Preechr |
I thought you were waiting. How bout STFU until you are done waiting. |
|
| Sep 7th, 2006 10:38 PM | ||
| The Good Reverend Roger |
Quote:
Most of the sissies are. |
|
| Sep 7th, 2006 10:36 PM | ||
| Preechr |
Waiting is good. Keep doing that. |
|
| Sep 7th, 2006 10:33 PM | ||
| The Good Reverend Roger |
Quote:
|
|
| Sep 7th, 2006 10:29 PM | ||
| Ant10708 | He never started. | |
| Sep 7th, 2006 10:01 PM | ||
| Preechr | Does that mean you think I write funny or that you quit? | |
| Sep 7th, 2006 10:00 PM | ||
| Preechr | I try | |
| Sep 7th, 2006 09:47 PM | ||
| The Good Reverend Roger |
Quote:
You exhibit some very odd behavior, Preechr. |
|
| Sep 7th, 2006 09:33 PM | ||
| Preechr | Funny, btw, isn't it, that my link was actually much older than yours? Doesn't that cast a bad light on your ability to source crap properly? | |
| Sep 7th, 2006 09:32 PM | ||
| Preechr |
Yes. You really ARE supporting troops. Makes sense. Especially if I ignore the guys stuck in Camp Pendleton upon acusations leveled upon them only by potential enemy groups. If I don't contrast that with your contrite allegiance to the past events involving one soldier better understood here: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...ee-cover_x.htm ... a bit more updated version of the story... I can also ignore that you are full of shit, at least on this: your first attempt to engage this conversation "seriously." I wish you better luck in the future, and again I hope you prove to be much less disappointing. |
|
| Sep 7th, 2006 09:16 PM | ||
| The Good Reverend Roger |
Quote:
Nice. Glad to see you supporting the troops. |
|
| Sep 7th, 2006 09:15 PM | ||
| Preechr |
No it's not. I truly hope you aren't really THAT big of a dumbass. Please, prove me right. |
|
| Sep 7th, 2006 09:09 PM | ||
| The Good Reverend Roger |
Quote:
Nuff said. |
|
| Sep 7th, 2006 08:54 PM | ||
| Preechr |
The camp administration says: It is unfortunate that despite the promises of those released, some of them - at least 20 if not more - have returned to fighting. One of those, Abdullah Maqsud, claimed that he was a clerk and a driver for Taliban, and had denied any links to Al Qaeda. Maqsud said that he was forced to join the battalions of the Taliban, and that he did not receive any military training, or training to use weapons. After he was released, it became apparent that he was behind the orders given to an armed group to kidnap Chinese engineers. Another detainee, after being released, assassinated an Afghan judge. Many of the released detainees have been killed after returning to fighting. http://aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=3&id=6170 How's it feel to be spun, guys? They say "secret prisons" and gasp, looking at you with big, disappointed eyes, and you drop your pants and start a protest without even an effort at a second thought. If there ever even has been one, I am not aware of a war fought by any country without POW camps. Those are by defintion "secret prisons," and for damn good and excruciatingly obvious reasons. Let's focus for a moment and ponder the possible opportunities provided to our enemies were we to publish the location for these "secret prisoners," shall we? I'm using my vivid imagination to picture immmediate attacks on those "secret prisons" based in hope that either their buddies could rejoin the fighting or (and this is easily just as advantageous for these folks) everybody just dies. Wouldn't it be wonderful to see what the western media would do with a "secret camp" full of 1,000 or so dead bodies? Somebody's headline is eventually gonna contain the word "genocide." Geggy's far from a unique individual, unfortunately, so I'm thinking a lot of people are going to believe it when Al Jazeera reports those detainees were exterminated by the Great Satan. Here's the kicker, guys: Why the fuck do YOU need to know where these prisons are located? Personally, I am just tickled to know they have locations! Alternate Option #1: a glass Iraq... not my favorite... Option #2: Immediate trials for suspected terrorists. Let's look into that second one, Ok? Where the hell are we gonna get our evidence for these trials, Mr. Matlock? War Crimes Trials are held AFTER the war. Until the dust settles, we simply do not have all the information we need to know what these jokers have done or were prepared to do. A FAIR trial is fair on both ends. Until we have defeated the organizations we are currently fighting and have access to all their plans and history, we could not hope to know for what to prosecute them. Personally speaking, I am not at all comfortable with the notion of letting even one mass murderer loose to assist in the next 9/11... are either of you? As for torture, Max, your definition was more of a condition. In that vein, I'd offer you some reality: Our enemy has proven itself to be not such a big fan of interrogation... much closer to (if not surpassing) the sickos you seem to think our soldiers are, preferring mutilation and beheading pretty much immediately after capture in most cases. Theirs is a war of propaganda and manipulation where ours is a war of information. As for acceptable conditions for torture, I'm falling on the side of whenever even a single innocent life is at stake and offers of cigarettes and candy fail. We've previously shaken out our personal differences regarding human nature, so I'm not gonna attack your sad and bleak near total lack of belief in the innate integrity of most people. I'm not sure I believe in it, either, but I question your own position's credibility based on it's inherent and unavoidable foundation in the value of human life. What I do know is, however, without the belief of torture being an available option... without the pretense that we can fight just as dirty as they do... all our detainees have to do is wait out their detentions. In that case, and in light of the actual enemy we are currently fighting, innocent people WILL die... unnecessarily, in my opinion. That being said, even the most horrible means of information extraction MUST be a tool at our disposal as a necessary condition of our eventual victory. I hope you know by now that my feelings on this are not based in any sort of bloodlust. If I am a "hawk," I follow that path unwillingly. I would have much preferred a Colin Powell victory, or no war at all. My support for this effort comes only from my belief that the WOT is a war to end war and that the closing of Globalization's gap will benefit mankind as a whole beyond my abilities to explain it. The greatest mistake a person of virtue can make is the assumption that all others already are equal in virtue. To anthropomorphize those of such a terribly different culture is to commit such an error. Our enemy simply does not share our modern and distinctly Western respect for human life and we can't make them fight on our level anymore than they'll submit to living on our level. They are betting they will win by overcoming our incredible power with sheer inhumanity. To avoid fighting this fight from 50,000 feet... again, not my favorite option... we must meet their fight to as much a degree as is possible on the lowest level necessary to prove to them they are wrong. It might make you feel a bit better, though I still doubt the reasoning behind your outrage and so doubt you'll ever feel better about anything Bush-related, to consider that our side won't be fessing up to much in regards to actual torture being practiced institutionally until well after the war is won. The only conclusion to be drawn from that is that we are actively promoting the rumor that we are, in fact, doing much more than we are being caught at. The obvious conclusion coming from that is we are, in fact, NOT institutionally torturing to a very high degree, but only keeping a rumor alive for psy-ops purposes. Does that make you feel better, Max? |
|
| Sep 7th, 2006 08:49 PM | ||
| The Good Reverend Roger |
Quote:
It's wrong. Period. Even if you call it "frat pranks". |
|
| This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | ||
