[quote]PonyWhisperer wrote:
Because despite the psychosis running through middle aged white guys
[/quote]
You forgot to mention that they’re also Christian, no worries, your bigotry came through just fine.
Just crazy ass white people mad at obama…
again, nothing to see here, move along and never question our benevolent government.
[/quote]
Aggv,
As a middle aged (47) white guy, Christian I am not being bigoted, just pointing out what everybody else sees. Questioning the government is fine by the way, it’s our job, but this shit is just plain silly.
[/quote]
lmao… “Questioning the government is fine, as long as I approve of said questions.”
Dat Dere fuckign logic is impeccable. You should run for office, you’ll fit right in.[/quote]
Yes that’s exactly what I said, because questioning something real (taxes, gun control legislation, drug policies etc) is the same as questioning black helicopters and chupacabras. I didn’t say you can’t ask stupid or insane questions, just that you would be viewed as a wacko if you did. [/quote]
“Everyone who has a different opinion than I do is either insane or stupid”.
You sure you want to run with that logic?[/quote]
Beans,
Are you sure that’s what you want to say you read? Because it’s mot what I wrote. Of course it doesn’t shock me, your typical response to anything you disagree with is a smart-ass comment followed by a twisting of words (the Bernie Sanders incident comes to mind, where you stated that douchebaggery is not uncommon for you). I merely pointed out that there are good arguments to be made and bad arguments, if you were to call 9/11 an “inside job” you would be a nut, if you doubt the moon landing you are a nut etc. I am not saying people can’t have their own opinions, but when they are about a real life issue based solely on a “gut feeling” that the government is evil, you come off looking like a clown. You might want to invest in make-up and a wig.[/quote]
A whole post ridiculing people who don’t think like you want them too.
You’re fast becoming a one trick pony, and your ignorance of world history is obvious, and I believe Push just addressed it.
…when they are about a real life issue based solely on a “gut feeling” that the government is evil…
[/quote]
But the government IS evil. Often.
Why?
Simple: it’s staffed with evil people.
But evil people are everywhere, right?
Yes, but a power grant is what government is…and…power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
The more power it accumulates the more corrupt it will become. It’s inevitable. This is empirically proven and goes well beyond a mere “gut feeling.”
The sane, sensible man takes the default position that government is intrinsically evil and works from there, hoping for the best (and certainly getting it at times, no doubt).
[/quote]
All the while ignoring the imperatives of anarchy and Hobbes’ state of nature. I’ll take the lesser of two evils.
[/quote]
I believe Push has said, time and again, that government is a necessary evil.
I know I have. Don’t try and set up a false dichotomy.
…when they are about a real life issue based solely on a “gut feeling” that the government is evil…
[/quote]
But the government IS evil. Often.
Why?
Simple: it’s staffed with evil people.
But evil people are everywhere, right?
Yes, but a power grant is what government is…and…power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
The more power it accumulates the more corrupt it will become. It’s inevitable. This is empirically proven and goes well beyond a mere “gut feeling.”
The sane, sensible man takes the default position that government is intrinsically evil and works from there, hoping for the best (and certainly getting it at times, no doubt).
[/quote]
All the while ignoring the imperatives of anarchy and Hobbes’ state of nature. I’ll take the lesser of two evils.
[/quote]
I ignore no such thing. I actually agree with you.
[/quote]
Upon rereading your post, I realize I was mistaken. I conflated your position with that of another poster. I apologize.
[quote]PonyWhisperer wrote:
Are you sure that’s what you want to say you read? Because it’s mot what I wrote. [/quote]
Yes it is what you wrote. Just like the bigot doesn’t understand they are, in fact, a bigot, you don’t seem to understand how what your statements come across.
You’ve been here for about 15mins. Chill the fuck out with your assessment of my posting please. You know not of what you speak. Most of us have a long history of going back and forth.
ohhh, boo hoo, did I hurt your feelings?
Jesus Christ Nancy…
No, Nancy, you’re saying if people have an opinion you dont’ agree with, you get to ridicule them, put them down, and call them all sorts of names to try and stifle their speech. When if you truly thought those people were in fact “nuts” you wouldn’t even bother with them, because those that speak the truth don’t have to silence those that don’t with ridicule.
And inb4 “you’re ridiculing me by calling me Nancy”… No, I’m pointing out you’re being a wee bit sensitive because I called you out for trying to play middle of the road when you blatantly aren’t. Which is normal, but around here we tend to just be open about our biases because it makes for better discussion. Either way, I’m not saying your opinion makes you a Nancy, I’m saying you not being able to take a little childish ribbing in stride in a politics forum makes you sensitive and a short timer here.
Seeing as the whole of human history, and the founders of this very same government tend to agree with me, that yes, government is inherently evil, because it has power and power attracts evil men, it shouldn’t come as a surprise to you that those very same founders wore wigs then…
Safe to assume we all know which posters would have viewed the Night of Broken glass as random and no big deal… Then went along giving out yellow arm bands because it’s no big deal, and anyone questioning the government is a “nut”…
[quote]Aggv wrote:
Safe to assume we all know which posters would have viewed the Night of Broken glass as random and no big deal… Then went along giving out yellow arm bands because it’s no big deal, and anyone questioning the government is a “nut”… [/quote]
Jade Helm 15 is in no way comparable to Kristallnacht.
[quote]Aggv wrote:
Safe to assume we all know which posters would have viewed the Night of Broken glass as random and no big deal… Then went along giving out yellow arm bands because it’s no big deal, and anyone questioning the government is a “nut”… [/quote]
Aggv,
So now we are comparing my disagreement to supporting Nazi’s? That didn’t take too long. Nice job comparing a commonplace military training exercise to Kristallnacht, you just made the largest leap of logic I have ever seen, go pick up your gold medal for bad analogies at the front desk.
[quote]PonyWhisperer wrote:
Because despite the psychosis running through middle aged white guys
[/quote]
You forgot to mention that they’re also Christian, no worries, your bigotry came through just fine.
Just crazy ass white people mad at obama…
again, nothing to see here, move along and never question our benevolent government.
[/quote]
Aggv,
As a middle aged (47) white guy, Christian I am not being bigoted, just pointing out what everybody else sees. Questioning the government is fine by the way, it’s our job, but this shit is just plain silly.
[/quote]
lmao… “Questioning the government is fine, as long as I approve of said questions.”
Dat Dere fuckign logic is impeccable. You should run for office, you’ll fit right in.[/quote]
Yes that’s exactly what I said, because questioning something real (taxes, gun control legislation, drug policies etc) is the same as questioning black helicopters and chupacabras. I didn’t say you can’t ask stupid or insane questions, just that you would be viewed as a wacko if you did. [/quote]
“Everyone who has a different opinion than I do is either insane or stupid”.
You sure you want to run with that logic?[/quote]
Beans,
Are you sure that’s what you want to say you read? Because it’s mot what I wrote. Of course it doesn’t shock me, your typical response to anything you disagree with is a smart-ass comment followed by a twisting of words (the Bernie Sanders incident comes to mind, where you stated that douchebaggery is not uncommon for you). I merely pointed out that there are good arguments to be made and bad arguments, if you were to call 9/11 an “inside job” you would be a nut, if you doubt the moon landing you are a nut etc. I am not saying people can’t have their own opinions, but when they are about a real life issue based solely on a “gut feeling” that the government is evil, you come off looking like a clown. You might want to invest in make-up and a wig.[/quote]
A whole post ridiculing people who don’t think like you want them too.
You’re fast becoming a one trick pony, and your ignorance of world history is obvious, and I believe Push just addressed it. [/quote]
Beans,
I am not criticizing people that disagree with me, I am pointing out that crazy conspiracy theories are just that…crazy. If you are having a hard time understanding what I am writing you may not be as smart as you think. You are essentially defending the belief that the government of the United States is running some scenarios to see how quickly or efficiently they can suppress a series of well armed Red states with 1200 SF soldiers.
Think of it like this, if I spent the whole morning posting that the GOP is merely a front for the Koch brothers and is blindly following their agenda would you respond with “You have a good point, let’s see what we can dig up.” Somehow I doubt it.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Yes Horiuchi graduated from West Point and he was in the Army for 8 years; however, he was in the FBI for nearly double that time, 15 years, and from what I can gather was trained by the FBI as a sniper. Further, Horiuchi’s actions are the exact opposite of what is taught in the military.
[/quote]
Right man, yes. This is my point, right here, your last line seals it.
He did the very opposite of what he was supposed to do in almost every single way imaginable. There are bad people in this world, and some wear uniforms. There are in fact soldiers that would give and follow the order to do the unthinkable.
That’s all I’m saying. [/quote]
I understand. Now try and see it from my perspective. If I’m understanding you correctly you are essentially saying because there are bad apples in every organization, we can’t trust the institution as a whole to do what that institution is designed to do. That is, support and defend the constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic, in this case. Fair enough?[/quote]
I’m saying we can’t trust that government, any government is going to be benevolent for any period of time, and the unfortunate fact is, the military takes orders from that government.
Luckily, our military takes an oath and is volunteer, which lends itself to be self policing against the unthinkable. Which, without this post turning into a novel, just requires the evil men in government to frame the issue differently.
No I don’t think JH is some massive conspiracy to take over Texas, but neither do I have an issue with people being concerned given the nature of the leaked info, and the general lack of transparent response from the government about it at first. Since 9/11 the government has pulled some seriously heinous shit, so people being on edge isn’t a surprise.
Do I think Generals will turn around tomorrow and order the slaughter of American Citizens in rural areas of the continental United States? No, not by a long shot. And I’d venture to guess the man that did such a thing would be shot more likely than followed.
However, do I think those same soldiers would eliminate a terrorist threat, foreign or domestic in rural areas of the continental United States? Yup. And I’m thankful for that. However, one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.
My main issue is it comes down to the notion of “is the US truly exceptional to the point of, we will buck the historical precedence and NOT devolve into a collectivist totalitarian shit hole nation?”. And people worried the answer to that question may be “no, we aren’t that exceptional” are called all sorts of names, and apparently insulting to Vets because we ARE worried that evil men DO have control within our government.
Because let’s face it. The great experiment was the most self limited and controlled government the world has ever known… And what are we today? The largest, most powerful and influential government the world has even known, and the argument could be made that we are the largest, most advanced empire the world has ever knows.
I’m not intending to insult the military. I’m intending to ask an uncomfortable question, which the lack of answer from those calling me (or others names) is rather disturbing. Shit, people that fancy themselves well versed on the topic completely “dismiss” the question, which in turn means the questions need to be asked with even further expediency. [/quote]
I don’t disagree with what you’ve written for the most part. The only caveat being that service members are just regular Joe’s like you and I. Would some open fire on Americans? Yes. Just like some CPAs will commit fraud. My main point is that that is the nature of humankind and is not specific to a profession.
[quote]
Honest question, if faced with the choice of execute this American Citizen or be shot yourself, what percentage of the people you served with you take that bullet? [/quote]
Idk, but I think you’d be surprised.
[quote]
Then answer it like this: If faced with the order of “drone strike this citizen” or be court marshaled. How many would drop the bomb? [/quote]
Idk, but I think the percentage is even higher than the above scenario.
[quote]
Then answer it like this: violate the (pick a number) amendment rights of these citizens or be fired, how many would be unemployed? [/quote]
A lot.
In general I think the line for the vast majority of service members will be where your average guy believes the act will infringe on the constitution or not. Drone strike = infringement. Executions = infringement.
It’s not ridiculous at all. Why do you think GAAP is now rule based and not principle based like IFRS? Why do you think there is government oversight like PCOB? We watch and regulate across all industries. [/quote]
Oversight is not what I was driving at or the point. Placing the blame even partially on the AICPA for the actions of one CPA 15 years removed from public accounting is ludicrous.
Should I not trust the Army because of Nidal Malik Hasan’s actions?
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
The only caveat being that service members are just regular Joe’s like you and I. Would some open fire on Americans? Yes. Just like some CPAs will commit fraud. My main point is that that is the nature of humankind and is not specific to a profession. [/quote]
1000% what I’ve been getting at too.
[quote]
[quote]
Honest question, if faced with the choice of execute this American Citizen or be shot yourself, what percentage of the people you served with you take that bullet? [/quote]
Idk, but I think you’d be surprised.
[quote]
Then answer it like this: If faced with the order of “drone strike this citizen” or be court marshaled. How many would drop the bomb? [/quote]
Idk, but I think the percentage is even higher than the above scenario.
[quote]
Then answer it like this: violate the (pick a number) amendment rights of these citizens or be fired, how many would be unemployed? [/quote]
A lot.
In general I think the line for the vast majority of service members will be where your average guy believes the act will infringe on the constitution or not. Drone strike = infringement. Executions = infringement. [/quote]
I mean, I’m just going to link to drone strikes killing American citizens and NSA spying then. (Understood that one’s father was a participant in a terror organization and the other mostly perpetuated by what I assume are civilians.)
So then comes the question of how have we gotten this far off the path in the first place? Death from a thousand tiny cuts is how. How do you eat the elephant of constitutionally protected freedom? One bite at a time.
[quote]
Oversight is not what I was driving at or the point. Placing the blame even partially on the AICPA for the actions of one CPA 15 years removed from public accounting is ludicrous.
Should I not trust the Army because of Nidal Malik Hasan’s actions? [/quote]
I’m not sure you are really following what I’m saying if you still think I’m blaming the fucking army for the actions of an individual at WACO.
And you shouldn’t trust the Army for their reaction to Hasan and the disarmament of the troops in his rampage, imo. “WOrkplace violence”…
What about Bradley Manning? Should what he exposed, and his subsequent treatment effect the way we see the Army?
[quote]PonyWhisperer wrote:
I am not criticizing people that disagree with me, I am pointing out that crazy conspiracy theories are just that…crazy. If you are having a hard time understanding what I am writing you may not be as smart as you think. [/quote]
And… You contradict yourself in two sentences.
No, I’m clearly defending the belief that no one is above reproach and it is the duty of the Citizen to question the leaders and those that carry out the leaders wishes, from time to time. And based on the series of events surrounding this particular exercise, those questions aren’t too ostentatious.
No I’d ask you to prove your assertions. You wouldn’t be able to, and I point that out, and be done with the nonsense… I would not however try and shame you into silence by calling you “crazy” a “nut” or proudly displaying a lack of even elementary understanding of not only world history but American history as well.
Because simply put, the founders of this government, they very people who put it in place, would be arguing along side me in this thread, and to not understand that is to not even the beginning of an understanding of their intent.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I mean, I’m just going to link to drone strikes killing American citizens and NSA spying then. (Understood that one’s father was a participant in a terror organization and the other mostly perpetuated by what I assume are civilians.) [/quote]
Then I’m just going to re-link to the 75%+ of sorties where munitions are not deployed for fear of collateral damage (mainly)
[quote]
So then comes the question of how have we gotten this far off the path in the first place? Death from a thousand tiny cuts is how. How do you eat the elephant of constitutionally protected freedom? One bite at a time. [/quote]
Okay.
[quote]
I’m not sure you are really following what I’m saying if you still think I’m blaming the fucking army for the actions of an individual at WACO. [/quote]
That’s what it reads like. Why else bring up West Point or the Army at all? He had been working for the FBI for 15 years when WACO occurred.
[quote]
And you shouldn’t trust the Army for their reaction to Hasan and the disarmament of the troops in his rampage, imo. “WOrkplace violence”… [/quote]
I tend to agree it was workplace violence; however, the rest of your statement isn’t such a black and white issue.
[quote]
What about Bradley Manning? Should what he exposed, and his subsequent treatment effect the way we see the Army?[/quote]
That depends on what you’re referring to specifically. Bradley Manning is a nut job and a traitor.
No I’d ask you to prove your assertions. You wouldn’t be able to, and I point that out, and be done with the nonsense… I would not however try and shame you into silence …
Beans,
Really? I didn’t have to look to far into your online life to see exactly the opposite, in fact it was your response to my very first post in this thread. Calling a grown man “a kid” and attempting to diminish them because they said something you disagree with is exactly your M.O so stop trying to spin your nonsense. I’m sure you’re a shocked as I am.
PonyWhisperer wrote:
If you remove Bernie Sanders from this mess you just have one gigantic ball of lies and bullshit (and Canadians). By the way before you jump on the Bernie Sanders thing, all I’m saying is that he at least says what he believes regardless of polls.
lmao…
This kid thinks Sanders is any different than any of the other candidates when it comes to “balls of lies”…
I bet you are a hit in sociology department in college right?
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
That’s what it reads like. Why else bring up West Point or the Army at all? He had been working for the FBI for 15 years when WACO occurred. [/quote]
Because the assertion was made that “it just won’t happen” because “we take an oath” and to believe otherwise means “you’re ignorant of the ways of the military”.
I then use the actions of a graduate of one of the most prestigious military schools in the world, and an Army vet to show you WHY I think the notion of “it just won’t happen because Oath, etc” doesn’t hold as much water WITH ME, as it does with those that call me names for thinking the way I do.
I’m not blaming anyone but the individual, however the point is, there are currently men and women in uniform, even after the oath that would do equally evil shit.
It’s only natural you’re going to reject what I’m saying, and you don’t want to believe it. I wouldn’t want to either, and don’t want to now. Unfortunately reality is different than I want to believe.
[quote]
I tend to agree it was workplace violence; however, the rest of your statement isn’t such a black and white issue. [/quote]
You don’t think it was a blatant act of terror and those dead soldiers shouldn’t be honored as such?
Well, let’s look at it. (I honestly don’t have an opinion either way about him.)
Does he or does he not have a legal and moral obligation to report war crimes?
Was what he exposed not evidence of this?
If he did flow it upstairs, and upstairs did nothing, does his moral obligation end with that? Or is he obligated to try seek justice?
[quote]PonyWhisperer wrote:
No I’d ask you to prove your assertions. You wouldn’t be able to, and I point that out, and be done with the nonsense… I would not however try and shame you into silence …
Beans,
Really? I didn’t have to look to far into your online life to see exactly the opposite, in fact it was your response to my very first post in this thread. Calling a grown man “a kid” and attempting to diminish them because they said something you disagree with is exactly your M.O so stop trying to spin your nonsense. I’m sure you’re a shocked as I am.
PonyWhisperer wrote:
If you remove Bernie Sanders from this mess you just have one gigantic ball of lies and bullshit (and Canadians). By the way before you jump on the Bernie Sanders thing, all I’m saying is that he at least says what he believes regardless of polls.
lmao…
This kid thinks Sanders is any different than any of the other candidates when it comes to “balls of lies”…
I bet you are a hit in sociology department in college right?[/quote]
Why are you so obsessed with talking about me and Bernie Sanders?
I pointed out you sound like a college kid that hasn’t actually worked a day in his life to provide anything, and you haven’t done much to change my initial judgment.
That isn’t derogatory as much as it is a stage of political development and understanding. One I was firmly within at one point myself, hence my ability to spot that shit from a mile away.
But to sit here and cry like a child that “kid” is comparable to “nut or crazy” and “you should buy clown makeup” is laughable.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
That’s what it reads like. Why else bring up West Point or the Army at all? He had been working for the FBI for 15 years when WACO occurred. [/quote]
Because the assertion was made that “it just won’t happen” because “we take an oath” and to believe otherwise means “you’re ignorant of the ways of the military”.
I then use the actions of a graduate of one of the most prestigious military schools in the world, and an Army vet to show you WHY I think the notion of “it just won’t happen because Oath, etc” doesn’t hold as much water WITH ME, as it does with those that call me names for thinking the way I do.
[/quote]
He graduated from West point 26 years before Waco… He hadn’t taken the Oath in 15 years…
The point I have been trying to make, regardless of the fact the Horiuchi is a terrible example, is that you don’t cut an apple tree down because the apple pie you bought tastes like shit.
[quote]
I’m not blaming anyone but the individual, however the point is, there are currently men and women in uniform, even after the oath that would do equally evil shit. [/quote]
And I’m saying it is few and far between, imo.
[quote]
It’s only natural you’re going to reject what I’m saying, and you don’t want to believe it. I wouldn’t want to either, and don’t want to now. Unfortunately reality is different than I want to believe. [/quote]
What you’re saying is based off of a very small set of examples. I can come up with a tiny set of examples in any industry, profession, etc… and do the same thing.
[quote]
[quote]
I tend to agree it was workplace violence; however, the rest of your statement isn’t such a black and white issue. [/quote]
You don’t think it was a blatant act of terror and those dead soldiers shouldn’t be honored as such? [/quote]
Maybe, I haven’t studied the case. All I really cared to know prior to today is that a lot of good men and women died because of some asshole’s actions. That’a all I really needed to know. TBH I don’t really care what we call it.
[quote]
Well, let’s look at it. (I honestly don’t have an opinion either way about him.)
Does he or does he not have a legal and moral obligation to report war crimes? [/quote]
He does, but not to Wikileaks.
[quote]
Was what he exposed not evidence of this? [/quote]
Some of it might have been. I’d have to dig deeper into it.
[quote]
If he did flow it upstairs, and upstairs did nothing, does his moral obligation end with that? Or is he obligated to try seek justice?[/quote]
There’s almost always more upstairs and the UCMJ covers this. There are also watchdog groups.
Is that what Manning did, seek justice? Idk about that.
[quote]PonyWhisperer wrote:
No I’d ask you to prove your assertions. You wouldn’t be able to, and I point that out, and be done with the nonsense… I would not however try and shame you into silence …
Beans,
Really? I didn’t have to look to far into your online life to see exactly the opposite, in fact it was your response to my very first post in this thread. Calling a grown man “a kid” and attempting to diminish them because they said something you disagree with is exactly your M.O so stop trying to spin your nonsense. I’m sure you’re a shocked as I am.
PonyWhisperer wrote:
If you remove Bernie Sanders from this mess you just have one gigantic ball of lies and bullshit (and Canadians). By the way before you jump on the Bernie Sanders thing, all I’m saying is that he at least says what he believes regardless of polls.
lmao…
This kid thinks Sanders is any different than any of the other candidates when it comes to “balls of lies”…
I bet you are a hit in sociology department in college right?[/quote]
Why are you so obsessed with talking about me and Bernie Sanders?
I pointed out you sound like a college kid that hasn’t actually worked a day in his life to provide anything, and you haven’t done much to change my initial judgment.
That isn’t derogatory as much as it is a stage of political development and understanding. One I was firmly within at one point myself, hence my ability to spot that shit from a mile away.
But to sit here and cry like a child that “kid” is comparable to “nut or crazy” and “you should buy clown makeup” is laughable. [/quote]
Beans,
Do you actually think anyone is stupid enough to fall for what you are trying to do? If we use your own reasoning “crazy” or “nuts” is meant to detract from the validity of the statements a person makes, wouldn’t “this kid thinks” be the same thing? If I were to go change “crazy” to “childish” would that change your opinion of my posts? Would that change the point I am making? Your issue here is that you called me out for something you did just a couple days ago, you may not agree with what I am saying, but Jesus Beans, go look up hypocrite, you might be amazed at what it means. By the way you’re right about me, I haven’t provided anything, I am a retiree but for the previous 25 years I was in the Army and working with disabled Veterans at the VA, surely you have done much more valuable work counting those beans.