Quote:There's a difference between "understanding the mind and goals of the enemy," and being an apologist for the terrorists who are beheading innocent people for political gain.
It's a difference of interpretation in this case.
Though I'm not surprised that many conservatives see it this way; such a black-and-white outlook on things invariably leads to criticism of those who would dare suggest that we have something to learn from studying the enemy....
Cycloptichorn
Ticomaya wrote:There's a difference between "understanding the mind and goals of the enemy," and being an apologist for the terrorists who are beheading innocent people for political gain.
Yous should be less concerned with what the "terrorists" are doing for political gain and more concerned with the atrocities YOUR government are carrying out in YOUR name for political gain.
gav wrote:Ticomaya wrote:There's a difference between "understanding the mind and goals of the enemy," and being an apologist for the terrorists who are beheading innocent people for political gain.
Yous should be less concerned with what the "terrorists" are doing for political gain and more concerned with the atrocities YOUR government are carrying out in YOUR name for political gain.
No ... I'll be more concerned with what the terrorists are doing (sans quotation marks). But thank you for your suggestion.
Quote:No ... I'll be more concerned with what the terrorists are doing (sans quotation marks). But thank you for your suggestion.
This is exactly the problem we have here in America. A stubborn unwillingness to perform self-examination built upon pride, nationalism, and fear.
Thanks for summing it up so nicely, Tico. Remember what the good book says, though - the pride comes before the fall....
Cycloptichorn
<< Thinks of forwarding Cyclo's remarks to the White House. After all, she knows the exact problem here in America, so maybe she can offer the exact solution
Damnit!
I am a he!
Cycloptichorn
OCCOM BILL wrote:
1. Are those FIVE MILLION LITTLE GIRLS worth fighting for?
2. Do they deserve a better lot in life than the essential enslavement that the Islamic Extremists have in mind for them?
3. Does it matter if their parents have been brainwashed into accepting the injustice?
I think these are valid questions and deserve honest answers. Their validity as questions does not depend on whether one can or cannot prove true the assumptions upon which they are based.
1. Whenever and wherever one, ten, tens, hundreds, thousands, millions or more little girls are threatened with enslavement, they are worth fighting for.
2. Whenever and wherever one, ten, tens, hundreds, thousands, millions or more little girls are threatened with enslavement, they deserve a better lot in life.
3. Whenever and wherever one, ten, tens, hundreds, thousands, millions or more little girls are threatened with enslavement, regardless of whether or not their parents have been brainwashed into accepting that injustice, they deserve a better lot in life.
The al Qaeda, Iraqi insurgents, Iranian invaders, and Syrian invaders are knowingly and willingly murdering Iraqi civilians in order to prevent those civilians from having the government they want.
We are killing al Qaeda, Iraqi insurgents, Iranian invaders, and Syrian invaders in order to stop them from murdering Iraqi civilians.
We are unintentionally killing Iraqi civilians in our effort to stop al Qaeda, Iraqi insurgents, Iranian invaders, and Syrian invaders from murdering Iraqi citizens, because we don't know how to stop al Qaeda, Iraqi insurgents, Iranian invaders, and Syrian invaders from murdering Iraqi citizens without unintentionally killing Iraqi civilians.
If we were to stop trying to stop al Qaeda, Iraqi insurgents, Iranian invaders, and Syrian invaders from murdering Iraqi citizens, would more or fewer Iraqi citizens be killed over the next 20 years?
If we were to continue trying to stop al Qaeda, Iraqi insurgents, Iranian invaders, and Syrian invaders from murdering Iraqi citizens, would we succeed in stopping them within the next 20 years?
If we were to continue trying to stop al Qaeda, Iraqi insurgents, Iranian invaders, and Syrian invaders from murdering Iraqi citizens, would we succeed in enabling Iraqis to have the government they want within the next 20 years?
What is a better way to try and stop al Qaeda, Iraqi insurgents, Iranian invaders, and Syrian invaders from murdering Iraqi citizens, and enable Iraqis to have the government they want?
If so, what is that better way?
Why do you think so?
Cycloptichorn wrote: ... the problem we have here in America. A stubborn unwillingness to perform self-examination built upon pride, nationalism, and fear.
I think the problem some have here in America is the arrogance to presume that
self-examination ought to lead and will lead to a conclusion favored by those advocating
self-examination.
My
self-examination over the years--performed the hard way while a former bully victim--has lead me to conclude that bullies are not placated by bully victims submitting to being bullied; nor are they placated by bully victims empathizing with the bullies because of past hurts suffered by bullies. Rather bullies are placated by forcing them to suffer the hurt they inflict on others. If bullies murder they should always be killed to stop them from continuing to murder. That has in the past tended to reduce the number of those bullies who would otherwise murder. More importantly, that has reduced the rate at which people are murdered.
That is true for phsycopaths ican, which make up the bulk of the bully population. Life in prison is a better alternative than capital punishment because it allows for vindication.
Einherjar wrote:That is true for phsycopaths ican, which make up the bulk of the bully population. Life in prison is a better alternative than capital punishment because it allows for vindication.
Vindication? Or did you mean
rectification?
Ah, I think I've got it. You meant it allows time for a convicted innocent to prove her/his innocence.
But what about the case where the bully is not proven to be a pyschopath, but has clearly articulated his intention to kill all people like you? Do you wait until such bully has killed you, or do you pre-empt and kill the bully first?
ican711nm wrote:OCCOM BILL wrote:
1. Are those FIVE MILLION LITTLE GIRLS worth fighting for?
2. Do they deserve a better lot in life than the essential enslavement that the Islamic Extremists have in mind for them?
3. Does it matter if their parents have been brainwashed into accepting the injustice?
I think these are valid questions and deserve honest answers. Their validity as questions does not depend on whether one can or cannot prove true the assumptions upon which they are based.
1. Whenever and wherever one, ten, tens, hundreds, thousands, millions or more little girls are threatened with enslavement, they are worth fighting for.
2. Whenever and wherever one, ten, tens, hundreds, thousands, millions or more little girls are threatened with enslavement, they deserve a better lot in life.
3. Whenever and wherever one, ten, tens, hundreds, thousands, millions or more little girls are threatened with enslavement, regardless of whether or not their parents have been brainwashed into accepting that injustice, they deserve a better lot in life.
Someone made the point before, I think it was blatham, that in Iraq, which was a largely secular state under Saddam, in which many religions co-existed, "little girls" and other females were far better off in that society than in the surrounding states. But a lot of them are dead now.
More of them are not dead and we need to protect them and keep them from the clutches of sharia law.
and wherein lists the cost/benifit line that determines how many are dead vs how many are free?
McGentrix wrote:More of them are not dead and we need to protect them and keep them from the clutches of sharia law.
I could have sworn that line came from Ican. I had to look twice to check.
It sure is a helluva way to evangelise, McG-
"I have laid waste your country and killed 250000 of your countrymen. Now do you see I am right?"
In a perfect world there would have been no deaths and Saddam would have been the next saladin who loved his people so much he gave them the money gained from the sale of oil and their would have been much joy and happiness spread throughout the middle east.
In a perfect world there would be no islamic terrorism.
In a perfect world we would all get a long peacefully and be respectful of each other and loving of all life.
Alas, this is not a perfect world so we must deal with the realities of life. Those realities include the ugliness of death and destruction. Some contemplate only the death, while others dwell on those that keep living despite the death.
Some prefer to linger behind a mask of concern for the past while ignoring the future. One cannot be changed. One can. To dwell on the one that cannot be changed is to forever doom the one that can.
Glad to see you're back here Ican. I get too irritated with foolishness. I admire your patience.
McTag wrote:ican711nm wrote:OCCOM BILL wrote:
1. Are those FIVE MILLION LITTLE GIRLS worth fighting for?
2. Do they deserve a better lot in life than the essential enslavement that the Islamic Extremists have in mind for them?
3. Does it matter if their parents have been brainwashed into accepting the injustice?
I think these are valid questions and deserve honest answers. Their validity as questions does not depend on whether one can or cannot prove true the assumptions upon which they are based.
1. Whenever and wherever one, ten, tens, hundreds, thousands, millions or more little girls are threatened with enslavement, they are worth fighting for.
2. Whenever and wherever one, ten, tens, hundreds, thousands, millions or more little girls are threatened with enslavement, they deserve a better lot in life.
3. Whenever and wherever one, ten, tens, hundreds, thousands, millions or more little girls are threatened with enslavement, regardless of whether or not their parents have been brainwashed into accepting that injustice, they deserve a better lot in life.
Someone made the point before, I think it was blatham, that in Iraq, which was a largely secular state under Saddam, in which many religions co-existed, "little girls" and other females were far better off in that society than in the surrounding states. But a lot of them are dead now.
Nope, doesn't work there, McTag.
Earlier, OCCOM BILL had wrote: Insofar as there are people all over the world that need rescuing; we agree. That provides no reason or excuse not to rescue these people. The reason for removing Saddam is of little importance at this point. We did. We are now responsible for making sure his replacement is better, not worse. We broke it, we bought it. That means we cannot allow Islamic extremists to enslave the Iraqi women
and make no mistake
that is their intention. Would you have us let them?
You are not enlightening anyone with that addition, since this is the 3rd time I'm quoting myself to close that loophole. At this point, with us already there, would you have us abandon those 5,000,000 little girls, 14 and under, who
are fully 1/5th of the population of Iraq?
ican711nm wrote:Einherjar wrote:That is true for phsycopaths ican, which make up the bulk of the bully population. Life in prison is a better alternative than capital punishment because it allows for vindication.
Vindication? Or did you mean
rectification?
Sounds about right (English is a second language to me.)
Quote:Ah, I think I've got it. You meant it allows time for a convicted innocent to prove her/his innocence.
Correct.
Quote:But what about the case where the bully is not proven to be a pyschopath, but has clearly articulated his intention to kill all people like you? Do you wait until such bully has killed you, or do you pre-empt and kill the bully first?
Are we still debating capital punishment? I have this sneaking suspicion that we might suddenly be talking about Iraq.
In terms of capital punishment I advocate life in prison over capital punishment in any and all cases. I would also support putting the prison population to work, making the prison system self supporting. Humane conditions would be required off course. Oh, and I should add with no parole to the life in prison bit.
In literal interpretation, no, I would not counter a death threat with an assassination atempt. (especially in the context of all people like me, which is almost certainly an empty threat) I belive the law forbids me to do so as well. (Actually if I took such threats serious, and responded by atempting to assasinate the person who made such threats, I would have ended up in 'special care' before I started school.)
As pertaining to Iraq, If you are to deal with homocidal maniacs you might as well begin with those closest to aquiring potent weaponery.
OCCOM BILL,
Can you help me understand how the action going on in Fallujah works toward helping those 5 million little girls?
Ambush aggravates 16-hour battle
Quote:The battle for Fallujah does not fall into any neat category, and even the messy label of urban warfare does not capture the intensity and unpredictability of this battlefield. In some places, the insurgents appear to fire and fall back, perhaps trying to tease the Marines into ambushes or dissolve into the grimy fabric of the city to fight another day.
But elsewhere, they hold their ground until the buildings around them are obliterated, or open fire abruptly from exposed positions and are literally cut to pieces. Nothing here makes sense, but superior American training and firepower eventually seem to prevail.
This fight started about 8 p.m. Monday, with the Marines pinned down only 50 feet from where they had poured across Fallujah's northern boundary. Under heavy fire, they called in artillery and airstrikes but were still there at 4 a.m., battling insurgents in a water tower 600 yards away. Finally the Americans annihilated the tower with rockets, machine-gun fire from AC-130 gunships and other weapons, and started to move again
I would think that a water tower is an important piece of the infrastructure, but then what good is running water if the buildings are demolished.
