[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Hell, Europeans have trouble even having children. The Muslims are moving into vacant land, similar to what the barbarian hordes did after Rome emasculated itself.
[/quote]
headhunter makes a valid point here. We became decatend. That is an uncomfortable truth we have to admit.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…so why dÃd the US government think it was best to attack Iraq instead of capturing Bin Laden?
[/quote]
Do try and keep up.
Terrorists aren’t the problem of one country. In fact, they infest many.
Did your european press report that saddam hussein refused extradition for al zarqawi?
I’m guessing, nope. Do us all a favor and google it.
Good luck.
JeffR.
P.S. You kill the enemy where you find him or he moves. I’m pretty sure there weren’t any Japanese soldiers in Guadacanal on December 7th, 1941. By your logic, we shouldn’t have invaded Guadacanal in 1942.
[quote]electric_eales wrote:
Chushin wrote:
electric_eales wrote:
so you justify doing some bad shit by saying that some other people did some even badder shit before you?
No.
But we DO expect the assholes who did the “badder shit” to show a little humility and to NOT take a self-righteous, pompous, arrogant attitude toward us.
Now that you mention humility in this thread it has made me realise that this is something rather important to the original question.
If some Americans showed a little more humility they may endear themselves to people outsidethe US more, but with some Americans making comments like;
We are the best
We have the best army
We have the biggest economy
We can go kick anyones ass
We saved your ass in WWII
I think if the Americans who chant out those types of statements showed a little more humility there would be less negative feeling towards Americans in Europe.
[/quote]
Looks like we are at an impasse. Since you won’t extend the same courtesy (aka…adopting a morally superior tone).
JeffR
P.S. We are the best, have the best army, the best economy, can kick anyone’s ass, and we saved your ass in WWII.
[quote]Mishima wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Hell, Europeans have trouble even having children. The Muslims are moving into vacant land, similar to what the barbarian hordes did after Rome emasculated itself.
headhunter makes a valid point here. We became decatend. That is an uncomfortable truth we have to admit.[/quote]
…decadend? Personally i think that, through alot of trial and error, many europeans have started to value life as being more than acquiring material and economic profit. In a world that still has a long way to go towards appreciating the value of inner richness, this is seen as weakness, and in a way it Ãs weakness but not decadence…
…either we destroy ourselves trying to take what someone else has, or we forgo the silly idea that matter has any real value. I must admit that, as time goes by, the former seems most likely…
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Mishima wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Hell, Europeans have trouble even having children. The Muslims are moving into vacant land, similar to what the barbarian hordes did after Rome emasculated itself.
headhunter makes a valid point here. We became decatend. That is an uncomfortable truth we have to admit.
…decadend? Personally i think that, through alot of trial and error, many europeans have started to value life as being more than acquiring material and economic profit. In a world that still has a long way to go towards appreciating the value of inner richness, this is seen as weakness, and in a way it Ãs weakness but not decadence…
…either we destroy ourselves trying to take what someone else has, or we forgo the silly idea that matter has any real value. I must admit that, as time goes by, the former seems most likely…
[/quote]
Hey, the 60s are so over! ;D
Anyway, see the material hand that is snatching away the material food from your very material baby? Ah, matter has no real value anyway.
Good God, man, what have you let those Left wing Satanists do to you? You let them teach you to roll over (or bend over) while they get away with whatever they want? WTF kind of philosophy is THAT? Please, Google some Nietzsche or better some Ayn Rand (she’s less obscure) today! Lock yourself in the room!! Damn!!!
Why are US embassies the only ones targeted all around the world?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071202/ap_on_re_as/philippines_anti_us_protest
…if i didn’t think you’re mentally disturbed, i’d go into a discussion with you about the inane, selfserving philosophies of Rand, but as you would misinterpret all i write to fit your warped views, that’ll be a exercise in futility. Us awaits a Pyrrhus victory, but at least you can beat yourself on your chest and say: ‘we won!’…
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Headhunter wrote: Please, Google some Nietzsche or better some Ayn Rand (she’s less obscure) today!
…if i didn’t think you’re mentally disturbed, i’d go into a discussion with you about the inane, selfserving philosophies of Rand, but as you would misinterpret all i write to fit your warped views, that’ll be a exercise in futility. Us awaits a Pyrrhus victory, but at least you can beat yourself on your chest and say: ‘we won!’…
[/quote]
Got your T injection, looks like. Good man.
Look, if you can refute a single line that Ms. Rand writes, I would hear it gladly. Her philosophy is certainly more rational than you’re ethereal ‘bend me over’ philosophy.
Keep injecting the T! You’re starting to sound like a man, not like that pussified version I offered help to yesterday.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Why are US embassies the only ones targeted all around the world?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071202/ap_on_re_as/philippines_anti_us_protest
[/quote]
If you’re never the lead dog, then the view never changes.
Figure it out.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Headhunter wrote: Please, Google some Nietzsche or better some Ayn Rand (she’s less obscure) today!
…if i didn’t think you’re mentally disturbed, i’d go into a discussion with you about the inane, selfserving philosophies of Rand, but as you would misinterpret all i write to fit your warped views, that’ll be a exercise in futility. Us awaits a Pyrrhus victory, but at least you can beat yourself on your chest and say: ‘we won!’…
[/quote]
Show me a non-self serving philosophy.
People who have the desperate desire to sacrifice their lifes for others could very well suffer from some sort of ascetic narcissism, the overwhelming desire to live up to simple and strict ideals they should have outgrown long ago.
Having to live in the real world cures most of them. Therefore the saying, if you are not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you are still one at thirty you have no brain.
Just because those people may be able to rationalize their neurotic mental structure does not make them any less inmature whereas true egoism requires a high degree of maturity and cooperation.
[quote]orion wrote:
ephrem wrote:
Headhunter wrote: Please, Google some Nietzsche or better some Ayn Rand (she’s less obscure) today!
…if i didn’t think you’re mentally disturbed, i’d go into a discussion with you about the inane, selfserving philosophies of Rand, but as you would misinterpret all i write to fit your warped views, that’ll be a exercise in futility. Us awaits a Pyrrhus victory, but at least you can beat yourself on your chest and say: ‘we won!’…
Show me a non-self serving philosophy.
People who have the desperate desire to sacrifice their lifes for others could very well suffer from some sort of ascetic narcissism, the overwhelming desire to live up to simple and strict ideals they should have outgrown long ago.
Having to live in the real world cures most of them. Therefore the saying, if you are not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you are still one at thirty you have no brain.
Just because those people may be able to rationalize their neurotic mental structure does not make them any less inmature whereas true egoism requires a high degree of maturity and cooperation.
[/quote]
…your point being?
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
ephrem wrote:
Headhunter wrote: Please, Google some Nietzsche or better some Ayn Rand (she’s less obscure) today!
…if i didn’t think you’re mentally disturbed, i’d go into a discussion with you about the inane, selfserving philosophies of Rand, but as you would misinterpret all i write to fit your warped views, that’ll be a exercise in futility. Us awaits a Pyrrhus victory, but at least you can beat yourself on your chest and say: ‘we won!’…
Got your T injection, looks like. Good man.
Look, if you can refute a single line that Ms. Rand writes, I would hear it gladly. Her philosophy is certainly more rational than you’re ethereal ‘bend me over’ philosophy.
Keep injecting the T! You’re starting to sound like a man, not like that pussified version I offered help to yesterday.
[/quote]
…please don’t fool yourself into thinking your opinion is of any value to me. You remind me of Otto, Kevin Kline’s character from ‘A Fish Called Wanda’…
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
ephrem wrote:
Headhunter wrote: Please, Google some Nietzsche or better some Ayn Rand (she’s less obscure) today!
…if i didn’t think you’re mentally disturbed, i’d go into a discussion with you about the inane, selfserving philosophies of Rand, but as you would misinterpret all i write to fit your warped views, that’ll be a exercise in futility. Us awaits a Pyrrhus victory, but at least you can beat yourself on your chest and say: ‘we won!’…
Got your T injection, looks like. Good man.
Look, if you can refute a single line that Ms. Rand writes, I would hear it gladly. Her philosophy is certainly more rational than you’re ethereal ‘bend me over’ philosophy.
Keep injecting the T! You’re starting to sound like a man, not like that pussified version I offered help to yesterday.
…please don’t fool yourself into thinking your opinion is of any value to me. You remind me of Otto, Kevin Kline’s character from ‘A Fish Called Wanda’…
[/quote]
More T!! Man, are you a Lebensborn baby?
“Some 8,000 children were eventually born in Norway, and thousands more were registered in Denmark. Lebensborn also operated in the occupied Netherlands.”
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-11-03-nazi-children_x.htm
Never saw that movie btw. Sounds like a pussified chick-flick.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Why are US embassies the only ones targeted all around the world?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071202/ap_on_re_as/philippines_anti_us_protest
[/quote]
lixy, as usual, you suck.
Here’s Pakistan’s embassy being hit.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WDQ/is_2000_July_24/ai_63674190
Here’s the Indian Embassy.
Here’s the Phillipine embassy
Australia
Russia
Turkey
http://www.turks.us/article.php?story=20060623101114438
Indonesia
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/10/08/france.indonesia/index.html
I’ve said it many times, if you weren’t so transparent and clumsy, you could be dangerous.
JeffR
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Chushin wrote:
PLEASE put yourself in the position of the average American and tell us all in FULL detail what YOU would do so that things you disagree with weren’t done “in your name, with your money, on your watch.”
Better yet, tell us what you’d have done if you were alive in old Grandad’s day, and the stench of rotting bodies on your clothes was being put there “in your name, with your money, on your watch.”
We’re all waiting for your advice.
Better yet, Orion, how would you feel if middle eastern muslim extremists hijacked 4 planes full of innocent passengers and flew them into Austria’s most proud landmarks. What would you expect your country to do and how would you and your country react?
…i’m sure that would suck, and on 9/11 i was shocked just like alot of people were. Would i see that as a justification for starting a war on a country [Iraq] that had nothing to do with it? No, absolutely not. Would i want to mastermind behind the scheme to be found and brought to shame? Yes, very much so. Why did the US government think it was best to attack Iraq instead of capturing Bin Laden?
[/quote]
ephrem,
Please try to keep up. In war, the enemy often doesn’t confine himself to one area. It ebbs and flows.
You go to where the enemy masses or has influence.
I’ll bet your biased news agencies failed to report that saddam hussein failed to allow extradition of al zarqawi in 2002?
zarqawi found a patron. We knew he was there. We weren’t cool with al qaeda leaders snuggling up to saddam.
Any more questions?
If any of this is unclear, open go to www.google.com. Type in extradition + jordan + al zarqawi + saddam.
Or, you can google Bush/Powell’s speeches about al zarqawi circa 2002-2003.
JeffR
[quote]ephrem wrote:
orion wrote:
ephrem wrote:
Headhunter wrote: Please, Google some Nietzsche or better some Ayn Rand (she’s less obscure) today!
…if i didn’t think you’re mentally disturbed, i’d go into a discussion with you about the inane, selfserving philosophies of Rand, but as you would misinterpret all i write to fit your warped views, that’ll be a exercise in futility. Us awaits a Pyrrhus victory, but at least you can beat yourself on your chest and say: ‘we won!’…
Show me a non-self serving philosophy.
People who have the desperate desire to sacrifice their lifes for others could very well suffer from some sort of ascetic narcissism, the overwhelming desire to live up to simple and strict ideals they should have outgrown long ago.
Having to live in the real world cures most of them. Therefore the saying, if you are not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you are still one at thirty you have no brain.
Just because those people may be able to rationalize their neurotic mental structure does not make them any less inmature whereas true egoism requires a high degree of maturity and cooperation.
…your point being?
[/quote]
Since most philosophies demanding more or less mandatory altruism are logically flawed and very likely also self serving, the point that Ayn Rands philosophies may be self-serving is moot.
So what if they are?
[quote]orion wrote:
ephrem wrote:
orion wrote:
ephrem wrote:
Headhunter wrote: Please, Google some Nietzsche or better some Ayn Rand (she’s less obscure) today!
…if i didn’t think you’re mentally disturbed, i’d go into a discussion with you about the inane, selfserving philosophies of Rand, but as you would misinterpret all i write to fit your warped views, that’ll be a exercise in futility. Us awaits a Pyrrhus victory, but at least you can beat yourself on your chest and say: ‘we won!’…
Show me a non-self serving philosophy.
People who have the desperate desire to sacrifice their lifes for others could very well suffer from some sort of ascetic narcissism, the overwhelming desire to live up to simple and strict ideals they should have outgrown long ago.
Having to live in the real world cures most of them. Therefore the saying, if you are not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you are still one at thirty you have no brain.
Just because those people may be able to rationalize their neurotic mental structure does not make them any less inmature whereas true egoism requires a high degree of maturity and cooperation.
…your point being?
Since most philosophies demanding more or less mandatory altruism are logically flawed and very likely also self serving, the point that Ayn Rands philosophies may be self-serving is moot.
So what if they are?[/quote]
She believed that individuals must choose their values and actions solely by reason, and that “Man �?? every man �?? is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others.” According to Rand, the individual “must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.”[2]
…the philosophies i’m familiar with, buddhism/non-duality/Advaita Vedanta, may seem logically flawed but are far from selfserving. So, no moot point was made…
…how old do you think i am? My mother was born in '40, you idiot ((-:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Headhunter wrote: More T!! Man, are you a Lebensborn baby?
…how old do you think i am? My mother was born in '40, you idiot ((-:
[/quote]
Well, out of respect for her, I won’t ask the obvious question wrt her, as the Lebensborn program was in full swing by then.
What fascinated me was the effeminate sound of the ‘bend over’ post and then the somewhat more masculine tone of these last few.
Do you really think that physical objects, like the jar of baby food sitting in front of your child, are of no meaning? Its okay to spout nonsensical philosophies on here but what do you do wrt the hungry baby? Chant ‘Ohms’ while it screams?
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
ephrem wrote:
Headhunter wrote: More T!! Man, are you a Lebensborn baby?
…how old do you think i am? My mother was born in '40, you idiot ((-:
Well, out of respect for her, I won’t ask the obvious question wrt her, as the Lebensborn program was in full swing by then.
What fascinated me was the effeminate sound of the ‘bend over’ post and then the somewhat more masculine tone of these last few.
Do you really think that physical objects, like the jar of baby food sitting in front of your child, are of no meaning? Its okay to spout nonsensical philosophies on here but what do you do wrt the hungry baby? Chant ‘Ohms’ while it screams?
[/quote]
…trust me when i say that my mother would not have been �?bermensch material, despite the fact she gave birth to very intelligent children. Wrt your misrepresentation or simply misunderstanding of what i qualified as ‘material’ in that other post; i’m not going to bother explaining what i meant as it should’ve been clear to anyone reading with just a modicum of objective reasoning skills…