Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    08 Apr '11 13:28 / 3 edits
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    Let me save you some time. From Thread 138771 - pg 8

    "I have no idea why you think what is morally justified has to equate with what you consider wise. It's up to those who are oppressed to decide whether violence would be "entirely futile"; you're hardly in a position to make such a call." - no1marauder

    (I added the word "what" above as he seems to have left it out).

    That's no1 telling me why even the ancestors of Native Americans are justified in resorting to violence today for their continued "oppression." You can be sure terrorist bombs in NI will be just peachy for him.
  2. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    08 Apr '11 14:01 / 2 edits
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    Yes.

    I dispute the term "terrorist" as used in this case. Kerr was not a civilian but an armed member of a paramilitary force doing the oppressors' bidding. Therefore, he was certainly a legitimate target.
  3. Standard member Seitse
    Doug Stanhope
    08 Apr '11 14:12
    what a twat
  4. 08 Apr '11 14:41
    Apparently this is a quote of No1 on the 'Spruce doctrine'.

    "Of the two choices, I would say that non-democracies being commonplace is preferable to war being commonplace. The idea of having a "club" of countries who get to decide when and where to unleash war on the rest of the world based on their own non-specific criteria gives me the willies."

    I do wonder why the idea of random people deciding that they are being oppressed and thus justified to murder does not give him the willies.

    Of course there are situations where resistance is justified, but a place with a democratic government representing all residents of the area and a working peace process .... Anyone still taking up arms in Northern Ireland is murderous scum.
  5. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    08 Apr '11 14:46
    Originally posted by Barts
    I do wonder why the idea of random people deciding that they are being oppressed and thus justified to murder does not give him the willies.
    Obviously, if No1 agrees with them, they're justified in their violence. Otherwise, they give him the willies.

    Duh.
  6. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    08 Apr '11 15:00 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sh76
    Obviously, if No1 agrees with them, they're justified in their violence. Otherwise, they give him the willies.

    Duh.
    I do hope FMF visits this thread. Yesterday he masterfully derided Wajoma for his moral justification of tax evasion (provided one feels they are in "credit" ).

    I wonder how he views no1's moral justification of murder.
  7. 08 Apr '11 15:26
    Elzas-Lotharingen, Eupen-Malmedy, Dutch-Limburg, Wales, Scotland, Skania, Südtirol, Schleswig, Danzig area, Eastern Poland, .......

    I might have to prepare myself for a few wars. And this is just off the top of my head.
  8. 08 Apr '11 15:34
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    I do hope FMF visits this thread. Yesterday he masterfully derided Wajoma for his moral justification of tax evasion (provided one feels they are in "credit" ).

    I wonder how he views no1's moral justification of murder.
    If he were a right winger FMF would be all over it.
  9. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    08 Apr '11 15:38
    Originally posted by whodey
    If he were a right winger FMF would be all over it.
    Oh, I don't know. I give FMF more credit than that.
  10. Standard member Bosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    08 Apr '11 16:03
    Originally posted by whodey
    If he were a right winger FMF would be all over it.
    You betray your desires.
  11. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    08 Apr '11 16:34
    Originally posted by sh76
    Obviously, if No1 agrees with them, they're justified in their violence. Otherwise, they give him the willies.

    Duh.
    There is a huge difference between a militarily dominant group of nations deciding to attack other nations and an individual who has decided to strike back against enemies who are much stronger than he is.
  12. Standard member DrKF
    incipit parodia
    08 Apr '11 17:18 / 1 edit
    *rolls up sleeves and prepares for the long haul*
  13. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    08 Apr '11 18:02
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    There is a huge difference between a militarily dominant group of nations deciding to attack other nations and an individual who has decided to strike back against enemies who are much stronger than he is.
    Yes, the latter guy is a moron.
  14. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    08 Apr '11 18:29
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    I do hope FMF visits this thread. Yesterday he masterfully derided Wajoma for his moral justification of tax evasion (provided one feels they are in "credit" ).

    I wonder how he views no1's moral justification of murder.
    Did George Washington "murder" the Hessians at Trenton?
  15. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    08 Apr '11 18:31
    Originally posted by Barts
    Apparently this is a quote of No1 on the 'Spruce doctrine'.

    "Of the two choices, I would say that non-democracies being commonplace is preferable to war being commonplace. The idea of having a "club" of countries who get to decide when and where to unleash war on the rest of the world based on their own non-specific criteria gives me the willies."

    I do ...[text shortened]... king peace process .... Anyone still taking up arms in Northern Ireland is murderous scum.
    The British army and the RUC are still "taking up arms" in Northern Ireland.

    Are they "murderous scum"?