[quote]JeffR wrote:
lixy,
What is your home country?
[/quote]
Don’t see why it would matter, but my mum is French.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
david dunne wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Oh I wish I had seen this thread earlier…
You all know I despise George II and his war, but compaing it to WWII is fucking laughable.
Japan was murdering and raping China, then turned on us and tried to wipe our fleet out…God, nothing fucking pisses me off more than people who bitch about the use of excessive force against an Imperial Japan that was part of one of the most horrific scenes in history.
I’m glad we nuked them. I’d have nuked four of their cities, just because…well, fuck’em. You want to play the game, here are the consequences.
I don’t feel bad for one motherfucker that died on the Japanese side…and it did save lives in the end.
Just when I was in danger of losing interest in the euro douche whining…this gets posted and I feel all better again.
Since this thread began with arguments about how to “morally” end a war (?)- this comment kind of brings it full circle. For me at least.
Small picture:If you start a fight with someone - there is no scripted ending. It’s a possibility that person might just keep beating your head against the pavement until they kill you. Moral of the story-dont start fights.
It’s funny, becasue I was going to use that exact analogy.
Bigger picture: If you attack a country (say Pearl Harbor or Sept 11) then there is the distinct possibility that country might just decide to fuck you up on a grand scale. It might just decide to topple your piss ant government (Iraq, Afghanistan).It might just decide to end the fight AND to send a message to the world at the same time.
Right Hiroshima? Right Nagasaki?
Did everyone see that big orange boom that used to be 140,000 of the motherfuckers that attacked us? Does everyone understand it’s better NOT to fucking attack us? Good.
It sure worked as a nice deterrent for a long time.
I don’t recall another country attacking the US like that again until Sepember 11 - maybe it’s time to remind these clowns we will pull the BIG fucking trigger on them too?
And of course it wasn’t a country that did 9/11 or said country would be a smoldering memory and all the map makers could go ahead and just blank out whatever it was before.
As for all the anti-Americanism from the euro-douches…yawn. Yeah uh, we CAUSE all the attacks on us and we CAUSE the world to hate us etc etc.
Whatever you say oh enlightened ones. Better learn arabic because it wont be the USA that ends up converting to Sharia law - it will be you pussies who get manhandled-again.
I agreed with the invasion of Afghanistan, and if the fighting had become serious enough to the point where many Americans were dying in vast numbers, using the big guns.
Because I disagree with the premise of the Iraq war, I would not say the same about that.
[/quote]
Just because the 9/11 hijackers didn’t have passports of Iraqi origin, doesn’t take away from the fact that we are the target of Islamist terrorists. Middle eastern countries (every fucking one of them), could be doing more to stop these radicals. They choose not to so screw them, we have to do it.
Again, Rumsfeld screwed it up, but the fight is against radical Islam and Iraq was as good a place to start as any. Afghanistan doesn’t count as a country. I think Iraq caught everyone’s attention.
[quote]lixy wrote:
If you think that the so-called “fight against Communism”, was worth all the blood that went into it then I give up.[/quote]
Are you referring to the blood of 58,000 American soldiers or the blood of 30,000,000 Russians and Eastern Europeans that were killed at the hands of the Red Army and Stalin or the 40,000,000 peoples’ worth of blood that Mao Zedong felt the need to spill? Because if we were going to talk about wishing what hadn’t happened in the “fight against communism” (funny how you capitalized communism), I’d start with the victory of the Red Army in 1920s.
[quote]lucasa wrote:
You don’t need to say any more lixy, I was pretty sure from the beginning that your life was worthless. Since you’ve said you’ll die for anything and kill for nothing, I’m sure that you know it’s worthless too.
[/quote]
I have ideals. Aside from my religious background, I’m also a humanist. As a Muslim, I firmly believe in all men being equals and as a libertarian-socialist that people will naturally oppose any form of oppression. I also know from experience that money corrupts beyond belief.
You make it sound as if I’m a slob. I believe in action, but affirmatively, so did Hitler. Just because I refuse to kill people to defend a cause doesn’t mean I don’t act.
Forgive my pickiness, but your Orwell quote is a famous case of misattribution. There has never been a shred of evidence in him actually saying it. I see your point nonetheless.
Here’s some related quotes that I’m sure you’d appreciate.
?Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.? – Samuel Johnson
?Patriotism is a pernicious, psychopathic form of idiocy?
– Georges Bernard Shaw
?Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.? – Oscar Wilde
[quote]olderguy wrote:
Just because the 9/11 hijackers didn’t have passports of Iraqi origin, doesn’t take away from the fact that we are the target of Islamist terrorists. Middle eastern countries (every fucking one of them), could be doing more to stop these radicals. They choose not to so screw them, we have to do it.
Again, Rumsfeld screwed it up, but the fight is against radical Islam and Iraq was as good a place to start as any. Afghanistan doesn’t count as a country. I think Iraq caught everyone’s attention.
[/quote]
I disagree. Iraq was not the good place to start, being as it was probably the least dominated by psychotic Islamic elements. I have long said that America was better off having Hussein in power instead of the power vacuum that has been created now- the same reason we didn’t go in to Iraq in 1991 was as valid as ever in 2003. I don’t want to get into the Iraq War’s legitamacy again, though, because I’ve been over it over and over again on this board. Just know that I was never for it and think that it was the result of a supremely corrupt administration. Do with that what you will.
If you want to fight radical Islam, and you want to use nuclear weapons and all sorts of conventional means, then you’re going to have to go to war with an entire section of the planet.
I’m still not sure whether that would be worth the cost or not, when it could be fought just as effectively by having intelligence that is not assbackwards.
I still wonder if there will be a great clash of civilizations in the future. It may be unavoidable, but I would not want to rush towards it if there is a better diplomatic solution. The USSR was far more dangerous and far more intimidating, and we took them down with killing millions.
This is not WWII, though I often wish it was so things would be clearer.
[quote]lixy wrote:
lucasa wrote:
You don’t need to say any more lixy, I was pretty sure from the beginning that your life was worthless. Since you’ve said you’ll die for anything and kill for nothing, I’m sure that you know it’s worthless too.
I have ideals. Aside from my religious background, I’m also a humanist. As a Muslim, I firmly believe in all men being equals and as a libertarian-socialist that people will naturally oppose any form of oppression. I also know from experience that money corrupts beyond belief.
You make it sound as if I’m a slob. I believe in action, but affirmatively, so did Hitler. Just because I refuse to kill people to defend a cause doesn’t mean I don’t act.
[/quote]
What? What the fuck does that mean?
If someone invaded your home and tried to rape your wife, you wouldn’t kill them?
If an army invaded you country and tried to burn your home, you wouldn’t kill them?
Listen man, I’m as liberal as they come, but you’re full of shit.
[quote]lucasa wrote:
Are you referring to the blood of 58,000 American soldiers or the blood of 30,000,000 Russians and Eastern Europeans that were killed at the hands of the Red Army and Stalin or the 40,000,000 peoples’ worth of blood that Mao Zedong felt the need to spill?[/quote]
I had more in mind the 5,700,000 southeast Asians who died as a direct consequence of the Vietnam war. But you’re missing my point.
Whoever thinks that those figures even entered into consideration for US strategic planners is utterly dillusional. However, you supported and armed the Shah of Iran, Suharto, Pinochet, Saddam and many other mass-murderers.
If you bothered to look, I only capitalized it because it was that was in the post I was replying to.
All I was trying to say is that; Stop relaying the myth that you are bringing democracy to the world. It’s an outrageous lie that Bush likes a lot.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
olderguy wrote:
Just because the 9/11 hijackers didn’t have passports of Iraqi origin, doesn’t take away from the fact that we are the target of Islamist terrorists. Middle eastern countries (every fucking one of them), could be doing more to stop these radicals. They choose not to so screw them, we have to do it.
Again, Rumsfeld screwed it up, but the fight is against radical Islam and Iraq was as good a place to start as any. Afghanistan doesn’t count as a country. I think Iraq caught everyone’s attention.
I disagree. Iraq was not the good place to start, being as it was probably the least dominated by psychotic Islamic elements. I have long said that America was better off having Hussein in power instead of the power vacuum that has been created now- the same reason we didn’t go in to Iraq in 1991 was as valid as ever in 2003. I don’t want to get into the Iraq War’s legitamacy again, though, because I’ve been over it over and over again on this board. Just know that I was never for it and think that it was the result of a supremely corrupt administration. Do with that what you will.
If you want to fight radical Islam, and you want to use nuclear weapons and all sorts of conventional means, then you’re going to have to go to war with an entire section of the planet.
I’m still not sure whether that would be worth the cost or not, when it could be fought just as effectively by having intelligence that is not assbackwards.
I still wonder if there will be a great clash of civilizations in the future. It may be unavoidable, but I would not want to rush towards it if there is a better diplomatic solution. The USSR was far more dangerous and far more intimidating, and we took them down with killing millions.
This is not WWII, though I often wish it was so things would be clearer.[/quote]
Fair enough. I have been back and forth with this myself and I think the clash of cultures can start now. 9/11 set the stage.
But my biggest bone of contention is Rumsfeld. He outright failed. All the other crap, (true or not), about Bush and his father, Cheney and Haliburton, yada, yada, is taking a back seat to these determined and crazy fucks. And we aren’t talking about the Badder Meinhoff Gang here. There are a lot of these guys, millions, and if we don’t intimidate other arab nations to police their countries, we are fucked.
Sorry about the info you didn’t want to hear.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Forgive my pickiness, but your Orwell quote is a famous case of misattribution. There has never been a shred of evidence in him actually saying it. I see your point nonetheless.[/quote]
Thus “George Orwell” rather than just George Orwell. And it’s paraphrased from letters exchanged between himself and Rudyard Kipling who wrote Tommy
Yes, making mock o’ uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an’ they’re starvation cheap;
[quote]Here’s some related quotes that I’m sure you’d appreciate.
?Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.? – Samuel Johnson
?Patriotism is a pernicious, psychopathic form of idiocy?
– Georges Bernard Shaw
?Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.? – Oscar Wilde[/quote]
Incorrect, related quotes would come from someone who has been forced to fight for his freedom, not from a carefree handful of writers, the best of whom lost a duel with wallpaper.
[quote]lixy wrote:
lucasa wrote:
You don’t need to say any more lixy, I was pretty sure from the beginning that your life was worthless. Since you’ve said you’ll die for anything and kill for nothing, I’m sure that you know it’s worthless too.
I have ideals. Aside from my religious background, I’m also a humanist. As a Muslim, I firmly believe in all men being equals and as a libertarian-socialist that people will naturally oppose any form of oppression. I also know from experience that money corrupts beyond belief.
You make it sound as if I’m a slob. I believe in action, but affirmatively, so did Hitler. Just because I refuse to kill people to defend a cause doesn’t mean I don’t act.
Forgive my pickiness, but your Orwell quote is a famous case of misattribution. There has never been a shred of evidence in him actually saying it. I see your point nonetheless.
Here’s some related quotes that I’m sure you’d appreciate.
?Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.? – Samuel Johnson
?Patriotism is a pernicious, psychopathic form of idiocy?
– Georges Bernard Shaw
?Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.? – Oscar Wilde[/quote]
libertarian socialist?
[quote]lixy wrote:
lucasa wrote:
You don’t need to say any more lixy, I was pretty sure from the beginning that your life was worthless. Since you’ve said you’ll die for anything and kill for nothing, I’m sure that you know it’s worthless too.
I have ideals. Aside from my religious background, I’m also a humanist. As a Muslim, I firmly believe in all men being equals and as a libertarian-socialist that people will naturally oppose any form of oppression. I also know from experience that money corrupts beyond belief.
You make it sound as if I’m a slob. I believe in action, but affirmatively, so did Hitler. Just because I refuse to kill people to defend a cause doesn’t mean I don’t act.
Forgive my pickiness, but your Orwell quote is a famous case of misattribution. There has never been a shred of evidence in him actually saying it. I see your point nonetheless.
Here’s some related quotes that I’m sure you’d appreciate.
?Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.? – Samuel Johnson
?Patriotism is a pernicious, psychopathic form of idiocy?
– Georges Bernard Shaw
?Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.? – Oscar Wilde[/quote]
I have not one single bigoted thought in my head about gays, but two ot the three you quote were. George and Oscar. I hope this wasn’t a trap, but I don’t think gay writers are really known for their knock down, drag out, attitudes. I go with a Patton or Kennedy myself. And having served, had no problem serving with gays, as I’m sure I did.
And when you say “all men created equal”, does that include women? Just curious.
[quote]lixy wrote:
I had more in mind the 5,700,000 southeast Asians who died as a direct consequence of the Vietnam war. But you’re missing my point.[/quote]
1.) The is a wildly exaggerated upper estimate and counts combatants on both sides as well as civilians indiscriminately.
2.) Speaking of South Asians, I forgot the 1.5M (or I guess in the vein of the argument 3.3M) that were killed by the Khmer Rouge regime. I keep forgetting that these communist regimes were so much better at killing their own people than we were at killing the regimes.
3.) By looking past 5.7M dead South Asians to 70M dead Asians and Europeans, I’m the one missing the point?
[quote]Whoever thinks that those figures even entered into consideration for US strategic planners is utterly dillusional.[/quote] Yes, I’m sure we were fighting the Soviets over oil or because we thought it would be a lark or whatever. I’m sure the “We will bury you!” outbursts or the stockpiling of nuclear weapons was completely irrelevant.
Weird how we supported the mass murders that a.) if you added them all together didn’t kill as many people as even Hitler, let alone Stalin or Mao and b.) distinctly opposed communism. I’m pretty sure history just fell together like that and we sewed it up nicely with some our own revisionist history. Except… most of this was known throughout the world well before the height of the Cold War.
Then what, pray tell, are we doing in Iraq? It’s not getting us any oil, it’s not making us any money, it’s not getting rid of WMDs, it’s not getting Bush re-elected, it’s not glorifying the Republican Party. It has gotten rid of an evil dictator, it has granted freedom to the native populace, it has created and empowered a new democratically-based gov’t… You may argue that we’re fostering more hatred and ideology and/or destabilizing things overall, but you’re retarded if you think that it’s intentional.
[quote]olderguy wrote:
I have not one single bigoted thought in my head about gays, but two ot the three you quote were. George and Oscar. I hope this wasn’t a trap, but I don’t think gay writers are really known for their knock down, drag out, attitudes. I go with a Patton or Kennedy myself. And having served, had no problem serving with gays, as I’m sure I did.[/quote]
Right. I noticed that but thought that it their sexual orientation wouldn’t come into question. And no, It wasn’t a trap. It was just the first ones I stumbled upon.
The way the image of Islam is distorded the Sauds and Talibans I can understand why you’d make such a remark. Islam preaches nothing but respect for women. I’d be happy to discuss that but it just doesn’t seem to be thread for that.
[quote]lucasa wrote:
Then what, pray tell, are we doing in Iraq? It’s not getting us any oil, it’s not making us any money.[/quote]
You’re suggesting that America is in Iraq to spread democracy and has no interests whatsoever in the region. I don’t think anyone of the apologetics crew (Zap, JeffR…) is gonna back you up on this one. They’re more in touch with reality, and know that getting a strong foothold in the region is one reason and that the military-industrial complex is another. It’s been extensively covered elsewhere, so go get yourself a copy of “Why we fight”, watch it and get back to me.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
If an army invaded you country and tried to burn your home, you wouldn’t kill them?
Listen man, I’m as liberal as they come, but you’re full of shit.[/quote]
Keep your shirt on.
I talked about killing for a cause. Self-defense isn’t a cause, it’s an innate mechanism. It’s evident that I could kill if given no other alternative. But that should be the last resort, and would (ab)use diplomacy first.
[quote]david dunne wrote:
Openly paying for suicide bombers to attack the West counts enough for me. Doesnt matter which gang affiliation they claim.
I know this much - neither he nor his government has paid out for any brainwashed asshole suicide bombers the last three years or so.[/quote]
Sure, Iraq and Israel were openly at war. What else is new?
Aside from that, the Mossad and CIA was involved in numerous terrorist attacks. Just because they have a fancy name and use more elaborate methods than suicide bombing doesn’t mean they can be exempt from the terrorist label.
[quote]lixy wrote:
david dunne wrote:
Openly paying for suicide bombers to attack the West counts enough for me. Doesnt matter which gang affiliation they claim.
I know this much - neither he nor his government has paid out for any brainwashed asshole suicide bombers the last three years or so.
Sure, Iraq and Israel were openly at war. What else is new?
Aside from that, the Mossad and CIA was involved in numerous terrorist attacks. Just because they have a fancy name and use more elaborate methods than suicide bombing doesn’t mean they can be exempt from the terrorist label.[/quote]
Wrong dick.
Blowing up mommies at the mall or teenagers standing in line at a disco isn’t “openly at war”. It’s just killing.
If you can ever grasp that one then get back to me. If you cant-dont bother.
The CIA and Mossad huh? Yeah ok.What a surprise you come up with vague conspiracy theory nonsense.
Tell you what - don’t bother “enlightening” me any further about how the CIA and Mossad are really behind x, y & z terrorist attacks ok? I mean, after all.
EVERYBODY knows the CIA was behind the 9/11 attacks and the Mossad warned thousands of Jews in NYC that morning to avoid the towers right? I mean THAT is undisputed. It’s common knowledge. I even saw proof on numerous bumper stickers all over Africa and Europe.
Sigh.
Bye bye dude. Have a blessed life.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
It appeared that Communism was about to gobble up the globe.
McCarthy called and he wants his line back.
If you think that the so-called “fight against Communism”, was worth all the blood that went into it then I give up.[/quote]
Are you originally from France?
[quote]lucasa wrote:
lixy wrote:
The difference between you and me is that, though I might be willing to die for my cause, I could never even contemplate killing for it.
You will always be indebted to and imprisoned by those who can and do.
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.
–John Stewart Mill–
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
–George Orwell–
The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in times of great moral crisis maintain their neutrality.
–John F. Kennedy–
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
–Edmund Burke–
No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.
–Gen. George S. Patton–
You don’t need to say any more lixy, I was pretty sure from the beginning that your life was worthless. Since you’ve said you’ll die for anything and kill for nothing, I’m sure that you know it’s worthless too.
BTW- I’m not quite sure how many newspapers Patton read on any given day.[/quote]
I hereby nominate this post for the ‘Post of the Year’. Brilliant quotes, very well put together.
My hat is definitely off!
[quote]david dunne wrote:
lixy wrote:
david dunne wrote:
Openly paying for suicide bombers to attack the West counts enough for me. Doesnt matter which gang affiliation they claim.
I know this much - neither he nor his government has paid out for any brainwashed asshole suicide bombers the last three years or so.
Sure, Iraq and Israel were openly at war. What else is new?
Aside from that, the Mossad and CIA was involved in numerous terrorist attacks. Just because they have a fancy name and use more elaborate methods than suicide bombing doesn’t mean they can be exempt from the terrorist label.
Wrong dick.
Blowing up mommies at the mall or teenagers standing in line at a disco isn’t “openly at war”. It’s just killing.
If you can ever grasp that one then get back to me. If you cant-dont bother.
The CIA and Mossad huh? Yeah ok.What a surprise you come up with vague conspiracy theory nonsense.
Tell you what - don’t bother “enlightening” me any further about how the CIA and Mossad are really behind x, y & z terrorist attacks ok? I mean, after all.
EVERYBODY knows the CIA was behind the 9/11 attacks and the Mossad warned thousands of Jews in NYC that morning to avoid the towers right? I mean THAT is undisputed. It’s common knowledge. I even saw proof on numerous bumper stickers all over Africa and Europe.
Sigh.
Bye bye dude. Have a blessed life. [/quote]
Because the Mommy and Baby killing bombs that fall out of an American plane are oh so different than the ones that suicide bombers use.
And the pilots are heroes and not terrorists.
And “shock and awe” is not a tactic that is designed to inspire feelings of instense anxiety, gut wrenching fear, well, um terror…
And anyhow it is different because Americans soldiers are God fearing men that fight for their country and what they believe in, whereas those terrorists only fight for mindless propaganda and an ivisible man in the sky that does not exist anyway.
The differences are obvious Sir and the fact that the 90-95% of the worlds population that do not live in the US do not instinctively grasp it, clearly shows how backward and in need of American leadership they really are.