Blowback: 9/11 Justification?

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Quote:
You seem uncomfortable getting into specifics. How far does holding the USA accountable go? Wheres the line?

Not at all. I'm tired of your inability to digest what a person states.

And yet you keep asking me to argue things that I don't believe. You ask me why I defend actions, and yet I am not defending them. My digestion is tip top. I'd say you need some intellectual ginger to digest what is being presented to you.

JTT wrote:

I've stated, way more than once, that the US and its criminal officials should be held accountable within the USA for their criminal actions and by the ICJ for their crimes against humanity.

You certainly have "way more than once" stated a lot of things. What isn't clear is what beyond stating things you've dared to do even once.

A
R
Talker

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Manored is correct--the only way to deal with JTT is to ignore it.

You're quite right, but I'm not trying to deal with JTT. I'm indulging him by addressing him here directly. Otherwise, I'm testing my own theory on the broken watch.

A
R
That, however, is for my indulgence.

0 Replies

@failures art,

Quote:

How's that working for you?

Pretty fair, I'd say. It's got you going.

I've another question. Why, if you're so current on all the US war crimes do you give absolute nonsense a pass. Why do you let Cycloptichorn, and others, suggest that the US isn't a terrorist nation?

Why do you let MM, Ican, Okie, ... deny what are undeniable facts? You're normally really quick to jump on any of them for things you think they err on.

Why did you stop at two instances, and why did you pick the relatively "mild" ones"? It seems that you're uncomfortable talking about these numerous instances of US war crimes and mass murder, the instances of numerous government officials expressing ho-hum attitudes to hundreds of thousands of slaughtered innocents.

Given the myriad examples of the above and more, I've actually heard very little from you on these things. Why would that be?

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Quote:
How's that working for you?

Pretty fair, I'd say. It's got you going.

Yeah. Getting me going is doing wonders to hold war criminals accountable. Pat yourself on the back JTT.

JTT wrote:

I've another question. Why, if you're so current on all the US war crimes do you give absolute nonsense a pass. Why do you let Cycloptichorn, and others, suggest that the US isn't a terrorist nation?

The reason is simple. I'm not going to participate in labeling "terrorist nations." The USA has people who have committed terrorism. That is not making the USA a terrorist state. Drop the rhetoric. you sound exactly like those who you criticized. I don't call other states terrorist nations either. The concept is stupid. You're stupid for promoting it.

JTT wrote:

Why do you let MM, Ican, Okie, ... deny what are undeniable facts? You're normally really quick to jump on any of them for things you think they err on.

I ignore Ican and Okie because they C&P spam. As for MM, I was not aware you kept logs on my discussions with him. Apparently you're more familiar with my conversations, than I am. I don't often agree with MM, so most of our exchanges are in debate.

I don't let anyone do anything. I don't hold dominion over anyone other than myself. Neither do you.

JTT wrote:

Why did you stop at two instances, and why did you pick the relatively "mild" ones"?

I stopped at two because I don't need to create any sort of list to impress you with my knowledge of US actions. You asked for at least two and I provided. As for "mild," I'm sorry these aren't up to your standards of horrible. I'm fairly positive that the people who it effected are very apologetic that they could not be a part of a better example for you.

**** your "mild" bullshit. I listed real and horrible things, and you've been lecturing about dismissal. You're such a hypocrite. Shame on you.

JTT wrote:

It seems that you're uncomfortable talking about these numerous instances of US war crimes and mass murder, the instances of numerous government officials expressing ho-hum attitudes to hundreds of thousands of slaughtered innocents.

Tell me how to get comfortable talking. You're the pro.

JTT wrote:

Given the myriad examples of the above and more, I've actually heard very little from you on these things. Why would that be?

Because I don't have **** to prove to you. I'm not claiming to be "the messenger" or that I'm bestowed with some other phony enlightenment. I'm not concerned with impressing you. You don't hold the secret to catching American murderers let alone the worlds.

If you meant what you said in the last post about this working because you "got me worked up" then you're terrible at being "the messenger."

Would you like a gym membership?
I already have a gym membership.
Why don't you want a gym membership?
Because I already have one.
You don't like exercise, do you?
I do like exercise.
Then get a gym membership!
Fine. Now **** off.
Hey! I'm just doing my job!

A
R
T

1 Reply

@failures art,

Quote:

I'm not going to participate in labeling "terrorist nations."

Gee, I wonder why that would be?

Quote:

The USA has people who have committed terrorism. That is not making the USA a terrorist state.

That is so ******* lame; you get a major failure for that one, Art. No, the US doesn't have "people" who have committed terrorism. The US has presidents who regularly order terrorist actions against innocent civilians. The US has presidents, including the present one, who orders illegal actions that are war crimes.

The US has a long long long history of terrorism, again, planned by the highest levels of government, including members of every branch of government, save the court system, they only protect the terrorists.

Quote:

I don't let anyone do anything. I don't hold dominion over anyone other than myself. Neither do you.

You're being disingenuous, Art. You argue vociferously with many. You've been dead silent, that's absolutely silent on this when others have spread falsehoods.

Quote:

Because I don't have **** to prove to you. I'm not claiming ...

You seem to be growing even more uncomfortable talking about US war crimes and terrorist actions so you divert to this.

Have you seen Ms Olga's new thread?

1 Reply

You've asked a number of times why I focus on the US, Art. I've addressed that with some comments, which you've likely missed, as they weren't things that would engendered a sense of comfort in you.

This is the main reason why i focus on the US:

Quote:

In the leading establishment journal Foreign A~airs, Samuel Huntington warns that Washington is treading a dangerous course. In the eyes of much of the world-probably most of the world, he suggests- the US is "becoming the rogue superpower," considered "the single greatest external threat to their societies."

Realist "international relations theory," he argues, predicts that coalitions may arise to counterbalance the rogue superpower. On pragmatic grounds, then, the stance should be reconsidered. Americans who prefer a different image of their society might have other grounds for concern over these tendencies, but they are probably of little concern to planners, with their narrower focus and immersion in ideology

And that is what the USA is. Consider how vastly it outspends the world on armaments. Consider who is responsible for most of the problems in the world. Consider who is the most reluctant to abide by UN resolutions. Consider who is the largest provider of arms in the world, if I'm not mistaken, by a margin that beggars belief.

Consider all this and I think you'll agree that the US should be the focus of concerted action to rein it in.

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Quote:
I'm not going to participate in labeling "terrorist nations."

Gee, I wonder why that would be?

Since I must repeat myself, it's stupid. You're using the same rhetoric that the very people you despise use to justify invasions. Wasn't part of the war narrative that Afghanistan was "protecting" OBL, and that Iraq funded AQ activities? Isn't the war narrative that they were "terrorist nations?"

JTT wrote:

Quote:
The USA has people who have committed terrorism. That is not making the USA a terrorist state.

That is so ******* lame; you get a major failure for that one, Art. No, the US doesn't have "people" who have committed terrorism. The US has presidents who regularly order terrorist actions against innocent civilians. The US has presidents, including the present one, who orders illegal actions that are war crimes.

You didn't refute what I said.

JTT wrote:

The US has a long long long history of terrorism, again, planned by the highest levels of government, including members of every branch of government, save the court system, they only protect the terrorists.

You aren't refuting anything I've said. You're getting left behind. We've already been here. Over and over and over. I'm don't argue otherwise. Don't waste my time.

JTT wrote:

Quote:
I don't let anyone do anything. I don't hold dominion over anyone other than myself. Neither do you.

You're being disingenuous, Art. You argue vociferously with many. You've been dead silent, that's absolutely silent on this when others have spread falsehoods.

Unless people express themselves as you wish, they are silent. Dead silent. Understood.

JTT wrote:

Quote:
Because I don't have **** to prove to you. I'm not claiming ...

You seem to be growing even more uncomfortable talking about US war crimes and terrorist actions so you divert to this.

Whatever fits your narrative JTT. I asked you directly about blowback and justification, and you don't have the answers. We could talk about these until we're blue in the face, you'd still not be able to reconcile your contradictions on blowback and vindication.

You reinforce and perpetuate the cycle of violence by granting validity to he idea of justified blowback. As long as you tote the line that the USA simply got what it deserved, you feed that bloody cycle.

A man may repeatedly rape and murder your daughter. The justice system may fail to put them in jail. The public may not offer you the sympathy and support you deserve. Is there a point where you are entitled to violent vigilante justice? Perhaps you could rape and murder the daughter of the man who raped your daughter. Eye for an eye right?

Wrong.

A
R
T

3 Replies

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Consider all this and I think you'll agree that the US should be the focus of concerted action to rein it in.

I don't disagree that action should be taken on war criminals. I don't care what country they are from. I've got no shame from dirty laundry. Care to show yours?

I think your obsession with the USA is built from your own guilt. Focusing on the USA helps distance yourself from the exact kind of implication you make about the American public.

A
R
T

0 Replies

@failures art,

Quote:

Since I must repeat myself, it's stupid. You're using the same rhetoric that the very people you despise use to justify invasions. Wasn't part of the war narrative that Afghanistan was "protecting" OBL, and that Iraq funded AQ activities? Isn't the war narrative that they were "terrorist nations?"

No, I'm merely pointing out the incredible hypocrisy that is the USA, even guys like Cycloptichorn. If he's bought into the propaganda what hope is there.

You want to minimize that clear fact instead of letting other Americans know that they have been duped once again, that their country is much worse when it comes to terrorism and has been for much much longer than probably the sum total of all the current terrorists.

Let me remind you, the USA, including Obama and I'd say 99% of government officials still mouth the propaganda line, "We're fighting a war against terrorism".

I haven't heard you describe what they're doing as "stupid". I haven't heard you seek to correct the numerous instances here where people mouth the same propaganda.

I haven't heard this argument until this thread. Is it brand spanking new?

Quote:

You didn't refute what I said.

That's even more lame. Major failure number 2.

I illustrated that, no, you've illustrated that you're not much better than Foofie or MM or Okie or Ican. You continually minimize what are horrendous war crimes, war crimes that have shown no signs of easing up.

Have you been to "Lest there be any doubt"? Were you able to get through the series of articles? Why no comments?

1 Reply

@failures art,

Quote:

Whatever fits your narrative JTT. I asked you directly about blowback and justification, and you don't have the answers. We could talk about these until we're blue in the face, you'd still not be able to reconcile your contradictions on blowback and vindication.

There's no contradiction, simply your steadfast blindness and ignorant pigheadedness to something you believe you see, something that you cling to desperately.

Quote:

You reinforce and perpetuate the cycle of violence by granting validity to he idea of justified blowback. As long as you tote the line that the USA simply got what it deserved, you feed that bloody cycle.

So now my message, which you continue to badly distort, is strong enough to "reinforce and perpetuate the cycle of violence". A good example of your logic, Art. Another is coming.

Might not the continued terrorist activities of the USA, the continued war crimes of the USA, the continued instances of mass murder perpetrated by the USA, the continued duplicity of the USA, the huge arms sales of the USA "reinforce and perpetuate the cycle of violence"?

Quote:

A man may repeatedly rape and murder your daughter.

Typical of your logic, Art.

1 Reply

@manored,

manored wrote:

JTT wrote:

That's no reason not to hold those guilty of clear breaches of international law accountable, Manored.

Well we need a fair tribunal for that to happen, and I think that the fact of that its not already happening is the proof of that we do not have one. And I dont think we will be having anytime soon.

funny Nuremberg seemed to work pretty well for the Nazi's, the Hague seems to be acceptable for tin pot dictators, but not good enough for the US, is that because nobody is fit to judge them Rolling Eyes

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Let me remind you, the USA, including Obama and I'd say 99% of government officials still mouth the propaganda line, "We're fighting a war against terrorism".

I don't use such a phrase. Here's another direct question for you to ignore: Who is AQ and the Taliban fighting?

"A war on terrorism" certainly is propaganda. Now tell me what AQ and the Taliban are fighting.

JTT wrote:

You continually minimize what are horrendous war crimes, war crimes that have shown no signs of easing up.

The only one of us who has minimized any war crimes was you with your "mild" comment.

JTT wrote:

Have you been to "Lest there be any doubt"? Were you able to get through the series of articles? Why no comments?

I assume by the reference to comments that this is another thread in A2K. No I haven't read this thread. There are thousands of threads I haven't read, or are even aware of, on A2K. It seems you assume I have read it. Not only that but that I've also avoided making comment. You're a mystic when it comes to reading actions and deciphering cryptic motives JTT.

My imagination paints a pretty good picture though. Let me guess, in the thread you (or whoever the OP is) outlines evidence that the US has committed war crimes lest there be any doubt in the reader's mind.

What does such a thread have for me who has no doubt of such things?

A
R
T

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

Might not the continued terrorist activities of the USA, the continued war crimes of the USA, the continued instances of mass murder perpetrated by the USA, the continued duplicity of the USA, the huge arms sales of the USA "reinforce and perpetuate the cycle of violence"?

Of course they could, but so could those activities by North Korea, Iraq, UK, Iran, Israel, Russia, China, India, Pakistan.....
The list is rather long with very few countries that couldn't be included on the list but you only want to talk about one of them while ignoring all the rest. If you ignore the actions of one country is it no different than ignoring the actions of another?
Explain that to us JTT. Why is it blind to ignore the actions of one country? Why is it not blind to ignore the actions of another country?

2 Replies

@parados,

Post: # 4,390,162

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

Of course they could, but so could those activities by North Korea, Iraq, UK, Iran, Israel, Russia, China, India, Pakistan.....

NORTH KOREA! IRAQ! INDIA!

I never thought, in all my born days, that I'd see such a vacuous argument come from you, Foofie.

1 Reply

@JTT,

So, you are going to argue that those countries never sold weapons? Never committed atrocities or war crimes? Really? Are you really going to argue that?

2 Replies

@parados,

It's not that. It's just that those war crimes are "mild" and lesser worth mention. We're allowed to talk about any country's dirty laundry as long as it's the USA.

This new rhetorical tactic of JTT's to attempt to manipulate people by likening them to Ican, Okie, or in your case Foofie, is supposed to make you back down. JTT is just like H20man and OmSigDavid. Laughing

A
R
T

0 Replies

Is it rong to sell weapons ?

Maybe a lease ?

0 Replies

@parados,

Now we have Foofie, his brother Foofie and his other brother, Foofie.

You have to add the arms sales from the five countries that follow number 1, guess who that might be, before you get an equal figure.

http://www.globalissues.org/article/74/the-arms-trade-is-big-business#tab-content-arms-sales-suppliers-1

Now why would y'all be trying to downplay this? Why would you be focusing on this one narrow issue?

The sheer volume of US war crimes is the issue here. The present day sheer volume is the issue here.

Start listing the war crimes of others if that's what you want to do. Knock yourselves out. I won't be there making feeble attempts to minimize them.

Focus, gentlemen. There are people still people dying in Iraq and Afghanistan because of the war crimes of your country.

This is such a fatuous argument. It's amazing that you have the temerity to even raise it.

The US didn't raise the issue of its war crimes as it sat in judgment of the Germans and Japanese who had committed war crimes in WWII. There was no nonsensical suggestions that some comparative study was in order.

In fact, when the issue of US war crimes was raised as a defense, the US quickly dropped the charges against those individuals. The US also failed to prosecute some of the worst war criminals for some of the most heinous of acts simply to gather information on how to perform those heinous acts.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

You have to add the arms sales from the five countries that follow number 1, guess who that might be, before you get an equal figure.

And you would have to add the population of 5 countries to equal 1 and you would have to add the GDP of 10 countries to equal 1.

All you are doing is arguing that some war crimes are worse than other based solely on who did it.

Quote:

The sheer volume of US war crimes is the issue here. The present day sheer volume is the issue here.

No, the issue is your inability to look at anything from an honest standpoint. Based solely on a per capita basis, I could argue that Al Qaeda has committed more crimes than the US. You have a bias and you won't look outside your bias.

Quote:

In fact, when the issue of US war crimes was raised as a defense, the US quickly dropped the charges against those individuals. The US also failed to prosecute some of the worst war criminals for some of the most heinous of acts simply to gather information on how to perform those heinous acts.

I see.. Could you name those individuals and tell us what their war crimes are and then tell us why you don't spend as much time attacking them since you have evidence. I assume you have evidence to support your statement but then it isn't always safe to assume.

1 Reply

Blowback: 9/11 Justification?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know