[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
(Why do I think I’m going to get a pithy, slightly ridiculing answer back? 
[/quote]
Because he hits a lot of foul balls?[/quote]
Push, you’re my friend. I wouldn’t hit you in the balls, no matter how foul they are.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
If that’s the case who’s the bigger knucklehead?
;-)[/quote]
You are, by at least fifty pounds.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Because that would just be badass.[/quote]
Interesting comments Varq, the last time the Russians marched against the Muslims with the goal of taking back Constantinople & reuniting the Orthodox, the West stopped them. That’s pretty much why Russia had places like Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan & Uzbekistan under it’s rule at one time. To do what you are saying, they would have to re-take all of these areas and are doing it with negotiations and treaties instead of force like they are using in Ukraine. Not saying it’s not possible though. Interesting thoughts.
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Ideals are a dangerous thing. They give false hope to the realization of a standard that will never be achieved. They inspire people to do things they otherwise wouldn’t.[/quote]
Such as inspire millions to rebel against the most powerful empire on the planet in what everyone thought would be pointless rebellion?
[/quote]That was in SELF INTEREST, not “idealism” - they were getting taxed and felt it was oppressive.[quote]
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Ideals are the SAME tool that ISIS is using to motivate it’s followers to brutality - same concept, just a different set of words. I suppose the “romantically inclined” among us can use ideals for inspiration, but they ARE NOT reality. Not on planet Earth, anyway. This is a place of survival of the fittest, not some half baked IDEAL world of peace, love and equality. INEQUALITY is the basis of the friction that has driven human conflict since the time we picked up the first stone and threw it in anger.[/quote]
Look, I agree with you. Ideals are dangerous things. Look at what the British colonists did with it. Literally changed the history of the world in all perpetuity in a manner that virtually no one else could have; I’m sure Sexmachine would agree with me on this.
Ideals lead people to do things that seem utterly insane and outrageous. If you follow that ideal, then those people seem heroic. If you’re against them, then they seem like monsters. I’m sure the British the Boston Tea Party to be an utter outrage; something that only monsters can do. Conversely, the colonials considered it a rightful act against tyranny.
Or what about when the Bostonians rioted and destroyed the homes of a many people they considered pro-British? I’m sure the Bostonians thought they were fighting to protect their rights and values against a government that ignored them and held steadfastly British against their wishes.
It’s just that… the quote above is so incredibly bizarre when taken with quotes like
this-
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Our President is a fucking LIAR and he is twisting the truth so that he can undermine American values.[/quote]
[/quote]American values are NOT CUTTING OFF PEOPLE’S HEADS. Do you not see a difference in LAW AND ORDER (fear of consequence) vs. IDEALISM (people acting altruistically motivated by XYZ)?[quote]
One moment you’re saying values are important, and the next you’re saying they’re not? What am I supposed to do with that, huh? [/quote]No, you are changing definitions of words around in an attempt to make me sound like a hypocrite. Typical liberal tactics.[quote]
I mean, most people would agree that the war against the Islamists fundamentalists is essentially a conflict of ideals. Many of them hate our ideology, and so they kill us. Many of us hate their ideology, and so the liberals either try to change it through talking, while you talk about just killing them all until they change their ideology to something more acceptable.
One way or another, they’re fighting because they disagree with one another. Ideology is at the core of the fight.
And you’re saying that ideology doesn’t matter. Except you’re saying it does matter.
Make up your mind.
[/quote]This fight is about an EMPIRE exercising it’s influence (oil, strategic control of resources, deterring the enemies of our allies, etc…) - ideology takes a back seat to power. The people over there don’t like us because while we’re over there, we’re fucking with their culture and value system. Not to mention preventing them from exterminating the Joooooos, which is their ambition. I would have to say that they have a pretty good reason to hate us and want to attack us. It’s no secret that we’ve toppled governments, and meddled at the whims of an every changing foreign policy agenda that I’m sure appears schizophrenic to them. They have very good reasons not to trust us and even to hate us. If I were them, I probably would.
So naturally, they attack us. MY personal problem with THEM is that MY FAMILY is part of what they are attacking. You see, that’s all I give a fuck about. The well being of ME and MINE. Those things are in MY sphere of influence. So when some fucking muslim terrorists decide to crash a plane five miles from MY FUCKING HOUSE, I kinda take that shit a little personally. The mosque where that fucking piece of shit al awlaki was from is like a mile from my old house. I feel like I live in a god damned community of fucking terrorists. I DON’T FEEL SAFE IN MY OWN NEIGHBORHOOD! FUCK THEM. I would see every last one of them strung up by their fucking intestines before I’d let them harm my family.
There was a kabob place in Laurel, MD that got raided by the US government and shut down because they were supporting terrorism. These fucking muslims are INVADING my area of operation like fucking cockroaches. They bring terrorism to MY territory. It’s just a matter of time before something happens. It’s not “American ideals” that’s driving me, it’s the safety of my family.[quote]
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Well, you summed up that history lesson with, “you’re wrong, you’re speaking out of your ass”. Which I take exception to. I may very well be wrong - none of us has a crystal ball - but to use an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT set of circumstances to defeat part of an argument is logically unsound. There’s no parallel with the AFTERMATH of WWII to anything I wrote or suggested.[/quote]
As I alluded to, I was dealing specifically with this claim-
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
IT WORKED! Took the will to fight right out of those imperialist bastards to the point where they GAVE UP THEIR ARMY.[/quote]
and this-
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Japanese DIDN’T completely and utterly STOP all aggressive activities when we wiped out two of their cities.[/quote]
They DIDN’T stop merely because of the a-bomb. They DIDN’T stop because we destroyed two of their cities. They stopped because we allowed them to keep their Emperor. We didn’t follow through on the unconditional victory demand.
[/quote]Spare me another history lesson - it’s a different set of circumstances. I can cherry pick anything anyone writes and use it to make a point. What’s lacking is CONTEXT… [quote]
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
We keep prisoners to GET INFORMATION, silly! And to provide leverage, among a host of other STRATEGIC reasons - not because we care about their “basic human rights”. LOL C’mon, dude!!! WAKE UP TO REALITY![/quote]
Why don’t we kill them after we pump them for information and decided they have nothing much else to give?
What leverage? Prisoner exchanges? What other strategic reasons?
[/quote]Personally, I’d drown them in pigs blood after I had them raped on camera and publish it on www.watchterroristsgetfucked.com . But I suppose the main reason we keep them alive is because we have the resources to do so. If we didn’t, I assure you they’d be deader than dirt. Also, the liberal media would try to sway public opinion against who ever executed them PUBLICLY because they are a bunch of terrorist apologists (Hamas anyone?). So we keep them alive to placate the liberal agenda (which for the record, I feel is a mistake). [quote]
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Gotta disagree there - I think the Catholic Church has that trophy on the top of THEIR mantle EDIT: I wrote this BEFORE I continued on reading anything in the thread.[/quote]
Why?
In any case, fair enough. It may be unfair to claim they committed the worst war-crimes, even though I don’t think anyone else have ever killed more than them except Stalin and Mao Zedong.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
If we kill enough of the religious (or IDEALISTIC) ones, then the rest of them might get a little motivation in the form of self interest and finish the job.[/quote]
As long as you’re willing to let others apply the same concept to the U.S., I guess I can’t say much more on this.
[/quote]Listen to yourself - you all but say they’re “justified” in doing what they are doing! It’s not up to me to “let” anyone apply any concept - all I know is they are attacking us, close to home in my case. Do they have reason? I suppose they do. But I don’t GIVE A FUCK. Those animals are making MY WORLD a more dangerous place for ME and MINE… So, in my mind, they gotta go. It’s quite simple: you fuck with ME or MINE, I’ll break a dick off in your ass. I’ve been that way my whole life and I feel pretty strongly about it - it’s not likely to change.[quote]
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
But that fact that YOUR uncles and grand parents failed to secure themselves any “justice” (as imagined by you) is no one’s “fault” but THEIR OWN.
[/quote]
Well, it turns out that I was wrong. The Americans did secure some justice for the grieved, so hurray!
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
First of all, they allowed themselves to be victims in the first place.[/quote]
So if I hunt you down and murder your family, you allowed your family allowed themselves to be victims? The fact that I’m utterly insane and committed a horrible act is irrelevant?
[/quote]If I allowed my family to become victims of murder, I share some responsibility for that. I failed to prepare and defend them. I would also let you know what your left nut tasted like.[quote]
Just trying to figure this line of thought out. Is both your family and I/solely your family/solely me to blame if I did commit that action?
[/quote]Ultimately, I feel it is MY responsibility. I, more than anyone, am FULLY AWARE of the range of crazy psychotic murderers out there - I had the pleasure of living among them for four years. I can either take that knowledge and do nothing (putting those I hold dear at risk) OR I can prepare my family, my home and my businesses for the worst and HAVE A PLAN for how to deal with the crazy fuckers in this world. I take responsibility for my outcomes. At the end of the day, my family is MY responsibility.[quote]
In all seriousness, I agree with your beliefs concerning ideals and the broader concept of power and its influences. The powerless cannot realistically demand anything because they lack the power to enforce it on their own. I’m probably the first person on any other site to state that might makes right, and all the ideals in the world doesn’t change this.
Where you and I apparently differ on the matter is that you apparently think we shouldn’t have ideals because ideals are dangerous (though even then your support of “American” values seem to contradict this). [/quote]I’m not out of touch with reality enough to think that we “shouldn’t” have ideals. “Should” is kinda like “wish” or “want” - it’s an immature grasping at a value judgement and an attempt to control that which is outside of your sphere of influence. No, I don’t CARE about the “ideals” of others. UNTIL THEY AFFECT ME and MINE… See the difference? You can believe whatever the fuck you WANT. But the second you start coming at my KIDS with that shit, we are going to have a major fucking problem - be it religion, liberalism, manipulation, or government. I will not tolerate my children being infected with that bullshit. And if your “ideals” begin to affect the health and safety of my children, then god help you.[quote] I think we should have ideals precisely because they are dangerous; as I hinted towards at the start of the post. My definition of freedom is the ability to attempt to achieve whatever we want to achieve. Idealism is a the core of this definition. [/quote]No, that would be self preservation (GREED)[quote]
I believe that we become nothing but animals if we lack an ideal that drives us forward.[/quote]
Um… NEWSFLASH: WE ARE ANIMALS. Homo Sapiens to be exact. Top of the food chain here on planet Earth. It was not always so, but here we are right now in this age. To expect it to ALWAYS be so is an exercise in mental masturbation. We have had our time, but recently, we’ve harnessed the power of the atom… LMAO At a time when people still believe in fairy tales and “ideals” based on religion (AKA: writings of MAN designed to control primitive populations). How much longer do you think we will survive before we destroy ourselves? (and what evidence you base it on?) Serious question. (and an open question to the forum)
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Because that would just be badass.[/quote]
Interesting comments Varq, the last time the Russians marched against the Muslims with the goal of taking back Constantinople & reuniting the Orthodox, the West stopped them. That’s pretty much why Russia had places like Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan & Uzbekistan under it’s rule at one time. To do what you are saying, they would have to re-take all of these areas and are doing it with negotiations and treaties instead of force like they are using in Ukraine. Not saying it’s not possible though. Interesting thoughts. [/quote]
Last time, Russia didn’t have aircraft carriers, submarines, airborne infantry and intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Might be harder for the West to stop them, particularly if (and this would be the only circumstance under which this would happen) the West was facing an existential threat of its own from a common foe.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]magick wrote:
I believe that we become nothing but animals if we lack an ideal that drives us forward.[/quote]
But that’s all we are if no Creator and Lord exists.[/quote]
My Friend, serious question: What’s “WRONG” with that?
If that’s what it IS, that’s what it IS…
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]magick wrote:
I believe that we become nothing but animals if we lack an ideal that drives us forward.[/quote]
But that’s all we are if no Creator and Lord exists.[/quote]
My Friend, serious question: What’s “WRONG” with that?
If that’s what it IS, that’s what it IS…
[/quote]
It all depends on what your definition of “is” is.
And people who deny that humans are animals probably are not entirely clear on what an “animal” is.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
“Should” is kinda like “wish” or “want” - it’s an immature grasping at a value judgement and an attempt to control that which is outside of your sphere of influence. No, I don’t CARE about the “ideals” of others. UNTIL THEY AFFECT ME and MINE… See the difference? You can believe whatever the fuck you WANT. But the second you start coming at my KIDS with that shit, we are going to have a major fucking problem - be it religion, liberalism, manipulation, or government. I will not tolerate my children being infected with that bullshit. And if your “ideals” begin to affect the health and safety of my children, then god help you.[/quote]
Couldn’t have said it better.
I once read an amusing line to the effect that the entire history of humanity could be summed up with the image of a monkey standing atop a heap of explosives with a lighted match. Seems legit.
The answer to your question, in my mind, is a paraphrase of Einstein: we will survive as long as we can, but no longer. And in any case longer than we should.
Angry Chicken, the more of your posts I read, the more I think you would be a damn fine person to know in real life.
No chance of your taking a trip to the Far East anytime in the foreseeable?
Can you imagine if they had taken Turkey or the Ottoman Empire which was their goal at the time. This would have given them a vast empire and several warm water ports. Come the Communist Revolution and they would have ruled the world. There would have been no stopping them. What do you think Varq?
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
That was in SELF INTEREST, not “idealism” - they were getting taxed and felt it was oppressive.[/quote]
No, the founders and those who rebelled clearly felt otherwise.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
American values are NOT CUTTING OFF PEOPLE’S HEADS. Do you not see a difference in LAW AND ORDER (fear of consequence) vs. IDEALISM (people acting altruistically motivated by XYZ)?[/quote]
Please stop thinking I’m comparing people to ISIS or anything here. I’m trying to take things into a broader context.
Of course there is a difference between law and idealism.
Values are built upon a foundation of ideals that make them better than whatever other foundation of ideals you disagree with. From the above, I take it you really don’t care about the foundations that form the values inherent within the American law system. Ok, fine. But that doesn’t mean you’re right, or that’s a good way to go about it.
Ask yourself. Do you accept laws ONLY because they provide order, and the lack of them creates the potential for chaos? If yes, then how can you justify your dislike of all the regulations and such that are meant to protect people?
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
No, you are changing definitions of words around in an attempt to make me sound like a hypocrite. Typical liberal tactics.[/quote]
What words am I changing here?
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
The people over there don’t like us because while we’re over there, we’re fucking with their culture and value system.[/quote]
How is this any different from what I wrote? Many of them hate us because they think we’re trying to mess with their culture.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I would have to say that they have a pretty good reason to hate us and want to attack us. It’s no secret that we’ve toppled governments, and meddled at the whims of an every changing foreign policy agenda that I’m sure appears schizophrenic to them. They have very good reasons not to trust us and even to hate us. If I were them, I probably would.[/quote]
Be consistent, will you? Because this directly contradicts what you wrote later in your post-
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Listen to yourself - you all but say they’re “justified” in doing what they are doing! It’s not up to me to “let” anyone apply any concept - all I know is they are attacking us, close to home in my case. Do they have reason? I suppose they do. But I don’t GIVE A FUCK.[/quote]
And, no, I’m not saying they’re justified in anything. I am merely applying my sense of freedom - Anyone should be allowed to ATTEMPT to do what they want.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Well, you summed up that history lesson with, “you’re wrong, you’re speaking out of your ass”. Which I take exception to. I may very well be wrong - none of us has a crystal ball - but to use an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT set of circumstances to defeat part of an argument is logically unsound. There’s no parallel with the AFTERMATH of WWII to anything I wrote or suggested.[/quote]
As I alluded to, I was dealing specifically with this claim-
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Spare me another history lesson - it’s a different set of circumstances. I can cherry pick anything anyone writes and use it to make a point. What’s lacking is CONTEXT… [/quote]
Dude. I’m not trying to apply whatever I wrote there to the war with ISIS. I am just saying that the claims you made regarding the war with Japan was wrong.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
But I suppose the main reason we keep them alive is because we have the resources to do so. If we didn’t, I assure you they’d be deader than dirt.[/quote]
But that’s a waste of resources. Why feed the enemy? Why use housing for them? Why spend valuable manpower guarding them?
If they have no strategic value to you (I mean, what can a normal foot-soldier know besides enemy troop placement, something that will likely change in a couple of weeks anyhow), why continue to keep them alive? Obviously sending them back to the enemy is out of the question, because they’ll just shoot you again.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Also, the liberal media would try to sway public opinion against who ever executed them PUBLICLY because they are a bunch of terrorist apologists (Hamas anyone?). So we keep them alive to placate the liberal agenda (which for the record, I feel is a mistake). [/quote]
So you think we should be killing any convicted terrorists we capture, or all enemy combatants in general?
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Ultimately, I feel it is MY responsibility. I, more than anyone, am FULLY AWARE of the range of crazy psychotic murderers out there - I had the pleasure of living among them for four years. I can either take that knowledge and do nothing (putting those I hold dear at risk) OR I can prepare my family, my home and my businesses for the worst and HAVE A PLAN for how to deal with the crazy fuckers in this world. I take responsibility for my outcomes. At the end of the day, my family is MY responsibility.[/quote]
Ok, let’s explore this line of though briefly.
Are you responsible for something occurring to your family that you couldn’t anticipate?
Are you responsible for something occurring to your family that you could anticipate, but properly preparing for it was challenging for certain reasons?
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I’m not out of touch with reality enough to think that we “shouldn’t” have ideals. “Should” is kinda like “wish” or “want” - it’s an immature grasping at a value judgement and an attempt to control that which is outside of your sphere of influence. No, I don’t CARE about the “ideals” of others. UNTIL THEY AFFECT ME and MINE… See the difference? You can believe whatever the fuck you WANT. But the second you start coming at my KIDS with that shit, we are going to have a major fucking problem - be it religion, liberalism, manipulation, or government. I will not tolerate my children being infected with that bullshit. And if your “ideals” begin to affect the health and safety of my children, then god help you.[/quote]
Sounds like you’ll be choosing who your child marries.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Um… NEWSFLASH: WE ARE ANIMALS. Homo Sapiens to be exact. Top of the food chain here on planet Earth. It was not always so, but here we are right now in this age. To expect it to ALWAYS be so is an exercise in mental masturbation. We have had our time, but recently, we’ve harnessed the power of the atom… LMAO At a time when people still believe in fairy tales and “ideals” based on religion (AKA: writings of MAN designed to control primitive populations). How much longer do you think we will survive before we destroy ourselves? (and what evidence you base it on?) Serious question. (and an open question to the forum)[/quote]
Yes, we are animals. We are also animals that can think fairly deeply. Arguably the next most intelligent animals (chimps and dolphins) can’t seem to get beyond the basics of warfare (chimps) or killing for fun (dolphins). Until the chimps start arguing why they SHOULDN’T be killing those chimps elsewhere, or the dolphins start arguing why they SHOULDN’T be murdering porpoises for fun, I would like to think that humans are the most intelligent animals alive, and we should be doing something with our brains that go beyond “they will die if they harm us, and that’s all I care about”.
As for your question- most people are rational enough to realize that they’ll be killing themselves if they do something that others deem crazy.
Those who are not rational we can’t do much of except either kill or imprison.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Historian: ‘I Don’t Think the President [and many others] Knows Very Much about the Crusades’
“University of London Historian Thomas Asbridge also told ABC News that the suggestion of any causal link between the Islamic State terrorists and the medieval Crusades is ‘grounded in the manipulation and misrepresentation of historical evidence.’”
To be fair, people aren’t saying that there is a link between the two so much that they’re “trying” to say that all religions have the potential to be violent.
That being said, bringing the crusade up over and over again is a bit dumb. Plus, having the President say it on public t.v. is REALLY dumb.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
“Should” is kinda like “wish” or “want” - it’s an immature grasping at a value judgement and an attempt to control that which is outside of your sphere of influence. No, I don’t CARE about the “ideals” of others. UNTIL THEY AFFECT ME and MINE… See the difference? You can believe whatever the fuck you WANT. But the second you start coming at my KIDS with that shit, we are going to have a major fucking problem - be it religion, liberalism, manipulation, or government. I will not tolerate my children being infected with that bullshit. And if your “ideals” begin to affect the health and safety of my children, then god help you.[/quote]
Couldn’t have said it better.
I once read an amusing line to the effect that the entire history of humanity could be summed up with the image of a monkey standing atop a heap of explosives with a lighted match. Seems legit.
The answer to your question, in my mind, is a paraphrase of Einstein: we will survive as long as we can, but no longer. And in any case longer than we should.
[/quote]LOL[quote]
Angry Chicken, the more of your posts I read, the more I think you would be a damn fine person to know in real life.
No chance of your taking a trip to the Far East anytime in the foreseeable? [/quote]
You honor me with the invitation. And as recently as seven years ago I probably would have jumped at the chance (Chushin and I share a few particular interests and avocations). I had dreams of Japan at one time. But then life happened. The next few years at least will be spent riding the bull here at home - investing and shoring up resources. I have, by either dumb luck or skill, landed one of the sweetest and most profitable jobs available to someone with my particular skill set, which I intend to ride until it dies. However, if you find yourself coming to the DC/northern VA area anytime, my door will always be open. If you ever want to have a chat off line, Push knows how to find me, as does Chushin. And the feeling is mutual, by the way.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]magick wrote:
I believe that we become nothing but animals if we lack an ideal that drives us forward.[/quote]
But that’s all we are if no Creator and Lord exists.[/quote]
My Friend, serious question: What’s “WRONG” with that?
If that’s what it IS, that’s what it IS…
[/quote]
It’s all about the “If” part.[/quote]
LOL I just KNEW I “should” have left that last sentence out. LOL
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]magick wrote:
I believe that we become nothing but animals if we lack an ideal that drives us forward.[/quote]
But that’s all we are if no Creator and Lord exists.[/quote]
My Friend, serious question: What’s “WRONG” with that?
If that’s what it IS, that’s what it IS…
[/quote]
It’s all about the “If” part.[/quote]
LOL I just KNEW I “should” have left that last sentence out. LOL
[/quote]
Hahaha. That extra sentence will get ya every time 