WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
That doesn't mean what you think it does.
Press for truth!
- Thread starter Childlike Empress
- Start date
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
I'm still waiting on either an example, or your retraction CLE.
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
That's what "these guys" do "for the most part?" Please.
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
This perception precisely the kind of biased, emotional response that I'm talking about. Devoid of reasoning, looking at only the parts of the picture that support preconcieved notions.
However, I doubt anything I say would make a difference, as facts, reason, and logic certainly haven't played a part.
But it's not worth losing sleep and getting my blood pressure up.
I'd appreciate those who have this view to let me know your names and addresses. If, for whatever reason, I happen to be a member of U.S. forces deployed into your nations for peacekeeping, or for a humanitarian mission, or to train local groups in sanitation techniques, or to rebuild neighborhoods, I want to make sure I know who doesn't want my help. I want to know who regards us as terrorists, so we know which direction to watch for an attack that will, most likely harm not just the U.S troops but the native civillians in the area as well (as the majority of attacks in Iraq/Afghanistan have).
Soundbites do not a story make. Most of 6 months in Iraq was spent building schools, playgrounds, and sanitation sites for local towns...as well as insulin deliveries so the local clinics could actually treat diabetes. Of course, that slowed down a bit when various groups began trying to shoot and/or bomb the construction vehicles, or the medical supply trucks...or when they began sending groups of Iraqi children in to stand around our vehicles, so we'd be distracted when they launched their RPG. Or firing at our convoys from school buildings or hospitals or similar sites.
But of course, we're terrorists just like they are, so I suppose it's okay, just depends on your point of view, right? It's all relative, right? We're just as wrong as they are, aren't we? Because we have a few rogue elements that act agaisnt their trainign and against their commands, that makes us just as bad as the organization that promotes these tactics as official doctrine, doesn't it?
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
Oliver to be honest I'm not longer sure what our conversation is about. I am utterly confused.
Can you state again your stance for clarift?
What would you like me to respond to, again?
-Andrew
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
Are you denying that World War Two could have been prevented by the allies dealing with Hitler sooner?
Your point?
-Andrew
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 8, 2006
- Messages
- 11,494
Still waiting for that list of fascist regimes 'Empress has lived under.
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
They didn't have a choice. Tora Bora happened before the US had a significant presence on the ground.
-Andrew
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
I'm sorry. Are you saying I am a neocon?
By the way, WTF are you talking about? Saddam Hussein? Why bring him into this?
Don't put words in my mouth.
-Andrew
Oliver
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 17,396
Hello everybody, hello Andrew.
Andrew, we talked about the reasons why something
like the holocaust or the nazi-regime could happen.
The reason why i and childlike seem to argue the same
way, could be a result of all the thoughts we made about
our history. Even if i don´t know her/him. Everybody
who did not dig that deep in this point in history, seem
to have trouble to understand it in here - this is my
conclusion to the response from others in here.
May i ask you to follow our discussion from the point
when i think i started to shift to this issue again?
It started at this point: #158 (foreign policy) up to #215
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63545&page=4
Regards,
Oliver
Added:
To everyone else who´s interested in this part
of discussion: #158 to #215
Last edited:
Axiom_Blade
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2006
- Messages
- 2,979
Why is it that when we talk about the slaughter of 9-11, it's OK to be emotional, and say "Never forget", etc. but when we talk about Iraq, we must be coldly rational?
The Iraqi deaths weren't tragic, I guess, because they served the greater good of capturing Hussein, and bringing "democracy" to Iraq, correct? And even mentioning their deaths is considered inappropriate, almost traitorous, since it might call into question our glorious mission over there.
Do a cost/benefit analysis of lives lost (US, allied forces, Iraqi), money lost, and what has been gained as a result. Does this look equal to you? Do the ends justify the means?Could it have been done without such a tragic loss of life? OR (perish the thought!) not done at all?
Rush Limbaugh once said that an army's job was to "kill people and break things". I don't often agree with him, but here I do. Armies aren't a charity. I'm not denying that they sometimes do humanitarian work, but their PRIMARY business involves killing and destroying, not healing or building.
Not that killing and destroying isn't sometimes necessary (moral relativism, remember?).
Nice straw man.
I don't think I ever said US ARMY = AL QAEDA. And if I did, I was wrong, okay? DUH.
That's a real easy way to avoid the issue that the army does engage in terrorist activities: sometimes as a result of rogue elements, sometimes as official policy. Does that makes them "terrorists"? No.
As for "just as wrong"...
How many civilians died in the WTC?
How many civilians died in Afghanistan/Iraq?
Oh, wait, I forgot, those deaths don't matter, because our cause is just.
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 8,368
OK, Childlike, time to take the gloves off.
"Being a German" -- what the hell is that supposed to mean? That only Germans can understand Hitler and his rise to power? Do you think we in America are unaware of history? Just where do you get off presuming to lecture to us? If I wanted to get nasty, I'd point out that it was Germans -- your predecessors -- who elected Hitler, supported him, did all his dirty work. Somehow that sordid history gives you some kind of insight over the rest of us? Bull. You may loathe the history of your country (and I can certainly see why you would), but don't try to compensate for it by transferring its sins to other countries that don't deserve it.
Since you presume some sort of superiority, let me tell you a little something about Hitler that you've neglected to mention. Hitler came to prominence in large part through anti-Semitism. He demonized Jews, and got average Germans to believe their downdrodden plight was due to a vast Jewish conspiracy to rule the world and keep the German race from achieving its rightful prominence. Well, guess what? Many of your CT buddies believe an updated version of the same thing: The Jews did 9/11, they're out to control us all, etc. etc. See any parallels there? Or are you too busy trying to enlighten us poor, ignorant Americans with your superior German intellect?
So shove off, Childlike. You were kind of amusing for a while, with your obviously limited (one might say childlike, or more accurately childish) capacity to express yourself and reason clearly. But now you're just being insulting, in a way that I find reprehensible. Don't ever again presume an air of intellectual superiority. Trust me, you aren't even remotely qualified for it.
Last edited:
Oliver
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 17,396
I don´t know Childlike, but this is my point of view to:
Quote>>> "Being a German" -- what the hell is that supposed to mean?
That only Germans can understand Hitler and his rise to power? <<<Quote
I wouldt like to have Gumboot online, but i guess he`s sleeping.
Hello everybody, hello Andrew.
Andrew, we talked about the reasons why something
like the holocaust or the nazi-regime could happen.
The reason why i and childlike seem to argue the same
way, could be a result of all the thoughts we made about
our history. Even if i don´t know her/him. Everybody
who did not dig that deep in this point in history, seem
to have trouble to understand it in here - this is my
conclusion to the response from others in here.
May i ask you to follow our discussion from the point
when i think i started to shift to this issue again?
It started at this point: #158 (foreign policy) up to #215
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63545&page=4
Regards,
Oliver
Added:
To everyone else who´s interested in this part
of discussion: #158 to #215
Quote>>> "Being a German" -- what the hell is that supposed to mean?
That only Germans can understand Hitler and his rise to power? <<<Quote
I wouldt like to have Gumboot online, but i guess he`s sleeping.
Hello everybody, hello Andrew.
Andrew, we talked about the reasons why something
like the holocaust or the nazi-regime could happen.
The reason why i and childlike seem to argue the same
way, could be a result of all the thoughts we made about
our history. Even if i don´t know her/him. Everybody
who did not dig that deep in this point in history, seem
to have trouble to understand it in here - this is my
conclusion to the response from others in here.
May i ask you to follow our discussion from the point
when i think i started to shift to this issue again?
It started at this point: #158 (foreign policy) up to #215
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63545&page=4
Regards,
Oliver
Added:
To everyone else who´s interested in this part
of discussion: #158 to #215
Axiom_Blade
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2006
- Messages
- 2,979
Pffft.
We Americans are perfectly aware of history.
For example
Hussein = Hitler
also
Osama bin Laden also = Hitler
and
maybe that guy in Iran = Hitler, too.
We'll let you know when we've rounded up and destroyed all the Hitlers.
Never Forget.
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 8,368
Oliver, I'm not Gumboot, if that's what you're implying. As to your defense of Childlike (at least I think it's a defense; in all sincerity I'm having a bit of trouble following what you're saying), you state:
I'm sorry, but this is presumptuous nonsense. I'm not sure what you think of the educational systems in other countries, but I can assure you, I have indeed "dug deep" into the history of Hitler and Nazism, including college-level study and copious additional readings on the subject. I humbly submit that I am just as aware of those events as you are, and I have also thought very long and very hard about how they apply to the modern world.
Your implication is that if I just knew as much about the topic as you and Childlike, I'd agree with you. That's flat-out insulting. I do know enough about it to form my own, very valid opinion that you and Childlike are wrong. Can't you see the insult behind your words?
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
You a thatcher?
You must be a thatcher, you seem to have huge amounts of straw.
If you want to critisize the war in Iraq, or argue it's usefulness, or why it was needed, fine. I might even agree with a lot of that. But critisizing U.S. actions and equating those actions with the actions of terrorist organizations and terrorist operatives are two entirely different things.
Nice straw man.
Also, you're missing my point on moral relativism. I do believe actions need to be balanced against circumstances...but I've only seen the term moral relativism in terms of "Well, we can't blame him for murder because he grew up in a bad home" or "Well, they aren't really terrorists because that's the culture they were brought up in, it's not thier fault/it's oklay for them". Or, more pertinent to the discussion at hand, "well, you've both caused civillian deaths, so you're both the same, both terrorists, regardless of whether those deaths were intentional or incidental, or if you intentionally tried to cause and maximize those deaths or if you tried to minimize and avoid them."
The army (as an orginization) does not engage in terrorist activities, anymore than, say, people from New York engage in murder. Some may, but it's not an organizational goal nor condoned by the organization. And no, I'm not avoiding the issue that some military elements engage in terroristic activities. I'm also not avoiding (as you seem to be) the fact that these are not organizational policies or goals, that these are punished when discovered, and by far the exception to the rule, rather than standard operating procedure.
Why keep hinting that the U.S. and terrorists are equivalent? You implied, rather clearly, that the U.S. actions and terrorist actions were equivalent. I wasn't attacking a straw man, no matter how much you'd like to back-peddle now. That's the entire point that pi$$es me off..it's a completley irrational response with the entire goal of creating bias and propaganda...not to mention it's an unsupportable position, to equate the U.S military with a terrorist organization.
Now, for your edification, this is a straw man. I never said they don't matter, I never said we shouldn't be emotional, I never even said our cause is just.
You believe I've ever stated the Iraqi deaths don't matter? I spent hours with my hands elbow-deep in Iraqi blood to save the lives of some of those Iraqi civillians ( I was there as a medic). So keep your straw, and your rhetoric, and your propaganda, and shove your bias where it belongs.
What I'm saying is that there is a difference between the U.S. military actions and those of a terrorist group. A difference just like the difference between, say, manslaughter and first degree murder. Rarely does the U.S military intentionally try to harm civillians, and most of the time policy and tactics go out of their way to try and prevent civillian casualties.
Terrorists, prety well by definition, intentionally target civillians.
Of course, while we're on the subject of numbers of deaths, have you just been looking at total numbers? DO you know how many of those civillian deaths are not the direct result of U.S. action, but the result of the actions of terrorist groups? Those who set off bombs in the middle of their own countrymen? Or attempt to start firefights in the middle of crowded marketplaces?
But you're right, we're the bad guys, we're just as bad. Shoot, we're so evil, we should just carpet-bomb the entire country. Who cares about civillians, right? We'd loose a lot less American lives then, it'd actually be cheaper in the long run, and we could move in and only rebuild the oil wells and airstrips...save a lot of money on rebuilding homes, schools, hospitals, and all that other crap.
In your anal-ysis, you ignore motivation, you ignore tactical policy, you ignore intent, you ignore that the vast majority of U.S. action is aimed towards accomplishing our goals with minimal civillian casualties, and towards rebuilding and assisting the civillian populace...while the goals of a terrorist organization are aimed towards maximizing casualties of all types, civillian or not, enemy or not, in order to stimulate public perception and sway minds. Something that is done to create propoganda. Something that seems to be having its effect on many.
Edited to Add:
I find it funny that you talk about the "End justifying the Means". Isn't that exactly what you're doing here? "Look at the numbers of civillian deaths on 9/11 vs. Iraq...don't worry about how and why they happened, don't worry about the means..."
It's precisely because I don't always agree that the end justifies the means that I'm arguing this. My only objection is equating the U.S. (as a whole) with terrorists. My firm belief is that those who view the U.S. as terrorists are biased and not looking at the full picture, operating either from ignorance or prejudice. I've yet to see any evidence to the contrary. In order to support this type of assertion, one has to cherry-pick the minority of U.S. actions that could be classified as terrorist (and the vast majority of which are carried out by rogue elements against the law, commands, and plociy fo the U.S. itself) and cherry-pick the actions of the terrorist organizations (ignoring that the entire goal was civillian casualties, ignoring that attacks on a legitimate military target are rare, etc).
Last edited:
Childlike Empress
Banned
That's exactly what i said. Now you have two possibilities:
- The germans (and the italians, spanish, japanese (ETA: totalitarian regimes without the rabid antisemitism) etc.) are somehow inferior to the americans.
- It can happen everywhere.
That is a very small minority but guess what? Most of your CT buddies believe in a vast and sinister conspiracy to take over the world. Those EEEEVIL islamists.
Think what you want.
Last edited:
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
I'm still waiting on either an example of a JREF supporter of the mainstream accepted explanation of events on 9/11, or your retraction CLE of the claim that we were/are mocking the victims.
Stellafane
Village Idiot.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2006
- Messages
- 8,368
Of course I think it can happen anywhere, but you know damn well that's not what you said. You said it is happening now in America. There's a very big difference, which I would think even you can see. I believe we'd both agree that anyone out here on the internet might be a pedophile. Does that allow me to say that you are a pedophile?
That is a flat-out lie and again, you know it. A small group of Islamic fundamentalist terrorists conducted the 9/11 attacks, on that any reasonable person must agree. But I defy you to find a single member of this forum who have ever said all Islamists are out to take over the world. So prove it to me -- it's your claim, so prove to me that a majority of us believe there's a "vast and sinister" conspiracy involving Islamists to take over the world. If you can't, your options are to retract that claim, or let yourself stand exposed as a liar.
I will -- and thank God, with no help from you.
Last edited:
Oliver
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 17,396
It has nothing to do with "educational systems in other countries",
it even has nothing to do with education or believes at all.
I guess you are an us-citizen - what means: You´re making a simple
failure in your thoughts, because your thoughts are based on what you
believe. But believing is not knowing - or in other words:
A terrorists mind thinks: "I know what´s the truth, what i do
is true, my god is the truth, and everything else is not true,
because only my truth and my way about thinking is the
only truth."
BUT THIS IS WRONG!
You remember my simplyfied "childs example"?
Now read again and tell me what i´m saying:
QUOTE:
It depends on wich side you stand to
claim - the ones on the other side are
the terrorists.
But you have to view it from a neutral
place to see: they´re both - or none
of them.
Like little kids - everyone claims: "He started."
"No, it was him". "Thats not true, he did it."
What do parents say in this case - from their
neutral position? .... "i don´t care who started..."
That´s exactly my point of view: I don´t care
what you say - because i don´t care who
started. It does not matter at all.
Think about it. I know you´re still in your old
position. Think neutral.
Added: Beside usa, 911, presidents, rights, terrorists,
al quaida and so on. Try to leave this side out of your
mind for a moment.
You may miss the other side right now, am i wrong?
Last edited: