Originally posted by richhoeyThat is a silly statement, ie, "most peoples definition of a totalitarian government'. It has nothing to do with detaining prisoners of war. A totalitarian government is ruled by a dictator and kills it's own and other countries citizens AT WILL... JUST FOR THE FUN OF IT. If you are going to make totally stupid assertions, at least define what you think totalitarianism is.
The tendency to detain people indefinitely without trial would crop up pretty high in most people's definition of a 'totalitarian' government. So are you against totalitarianism or not?
This issue is far more complex than either being for Afganistan or for the US and should not be reduced to the terms of a playground scrap.
Rich.
Yes. I am against totalitarian governments. Afghanistan was one. Pakistan is one. Iran is one. Saudi Arabia is one. China is one. Viet Nam is one. Cuba is one. Syria is one. Iraq was one.
The issue is dirt simple. Just answer the following question, and you too can obtain a position on the issue:
1 - You can be for absolute dictatorships that kill for fun.
2 - You can be against them and want to destroy them.
3 - You can be indifferent to the whole issue.
4 - You can make a simple decision (whether you can accept wholesale slaughter and murder by dictators) into a grand construction of silliness.
5 - You can equate a democratic nation, the US, to totalitarianism.
You have already EQUATED THE US TO TOTALITARIANISM. Good for you. You have the right to think that, and I'm not going to try and change your mind. That would be far beyond my abilities or desires. I want a little better quality person to be on my side in this. I am quite happy to have you as an enemy. Conversely... you will never argue me into your point of view.
Originally posted by ivanhoe
Hello StarValleyWy I've missed ya .......
Albert Einstein:
Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.
In E. T. Bell Mathematics, Queen and Servant of the Sciences. 1952.
😀
Alberts quote... I wonder if it applies to "all" people or just some that he knew? You wouldn't think Albert would make such an obvious logical mistake. Maybe it was his aquired prejudice against others lack of intelligence when he was seventeen that caused him to make such an obvious error of logic.😀
Originally posted by StarValleyWywho cares.
Alberts quote... I wonder if it applies to "all" people or just some that he knew? You wouldn't think Albert would make such an obvious logical mistake. Maybe it was his aquired prejudice against others lack of intelligence when he was seventeen that caused him to make such an obvious error of logic.😀
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI really didn't expect to change your mind - you've made your position perfectly clear in numerous posts. But I do object to the cheap rhetorical trick of presenting a complex question as a simple choice between your own position and one that no reasonable person would ever take. I also oppose 'totalitarian' states, but I believe you can do that without resorting to the methods they employ. One such method, I would continue to assert, is detainment without charge.
That is a silly statement, ie, "most peoples definition of a totalitarian government'. It has nothing to do with detaining prisoners of war. A totalitarian government is ruled by a dictator and kills it's own and other countries citizens AT WILL... JUST FOR THE FUN OF IT. If you are going to make totally stupid assertions, at least define what you th ...[text shortened]... te happy to have you as an enemy. Conversely... you will never argue me into your point of view.
On another point, it worries me how ready you are to accept people as your enemies - indeed to assume that anyone who opposes your point of view is a hostile force. World politics is not dirt simple; it is complex stuff. It is bound to cause disagreements, but it does not need to cause fights.
Rich.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyYou quote rogue terrosrist groups like Bin Ladens freaks as if they are everywhere, which funnily enough seems to be the current American administration's attitude as well.
That is a silly statement, ie, "most peoples definition of a totalitarian government'. It has nothing to do with detaining prisoners of war. A totalitarian government is ruled by a dictator and kills it's own and other countries citizens AT WILL... JUST FOR THE FUN OF IT. If you are going to make totally stupid assertions, at least define what you th ...[text shortened]... te happy to have you as an enemy. Conversely... you will never argue me into your point of view.
You are right about totalitarian governments; except you dont realise that America is behaving excatly like one. The US decides guilt of other nations and individuals and goes DIRECTLY against the UN in doing so, then it has the gall to demand they now help in Iraq.
As a soldier in Afghanistan or Iraq, if l resist against illegal US invasion l am convieniently labelled a terrorist or soldier serving under a terrorist regime.
Please dont try to to tell me l am pro these regimes; as that is completely false. l am however against any group that uses actions such as the current Amercian regime that are at best misleading, rash and inhumane to justify behaviour that is not far removed from those they purport to be against.
It is interesting that you equate me as your enemy for having a different view to yourself. That just shows how immature and juvenile you are . l am not trying to convert you to anything.
The reason in my opinion that the US is so unpopular is precisely the ignorance and unwilligness that you are showing , in at least attempting to understand someone elses view point.
Please bombard me with reason because l would love to have an intelligent conversation with you in this forum, if you can keep your political rhetoric in check.
Originally posted by royalchickenAnd you ARE the voice of reality?; give me a break. I don't purport to know everything about foreign policy as you seem to, but I do put the safety of my country above the rights of some "alleged" terrorists. I'm not as far right as you are far left, and comparing me to "Dubya", while not neccessarily a compliment, beats being compared to Bill Clinton. When you get out into the real world, away from the Dawson's Creek setting you are in now, you'll thank me for enlightening you. Who know's, you may even join the Military where they will break that Freethinking mentality that has brainwashed you and make a man and a Al-Qaeda killer out of you yet...😵..😏
Surely you're joking. Chancremechanic, while seemingly a nice guy, is hardly the voice of reality. He tosses around peurile rubbish like Dubya at a press conference.
Originally posted by nook7If a rapist is free in your neighborhood, do you wait until he rapes your wife or daughter, or do you load your gun and hunt him down??
[b]You quote rogue terrosrist groups like Bin Ladens freaks as if they are everywhere, which funnily enough seems to be the current American administration's attitude as well.
You are right about totalitarian governments; except you dont realise that America is behaving excatly like one. The US decides guilt of other nations and individuals and goes DIRECTLY against the UN in doing so, then it has the gall to demand they now help in Iraq.
The Bush Admin had no choice (UN backed or not) to hunt down two mad men before they struck terror on our country or against any other country again.
Their mistake was sending US and British troops into Iraq. One death is one too many if you have other means.
What they should have done is make a parking lot out of Iraq, and while the planes were still in the air, why not make an island out of Korea’s (since N.Korea is next on the world bad boy list). And on the way home, if there are any bombs left, drop a few on France just because they deserve it! 😵
(Note: It’s early and I haven’t had my morning coffee, so that last paragraph may be a bit harsh)
Originally posted by richhoeyIn my opinion... and it is only that. You are as wrong as can be. World politics is "DIRT SIMPLE". It is even more simple than that. You either support evil through inaction or you oppose it by action. That is the only lesson that the world has taught human civilization over and over again through all the twentieth century. Before WW1, you are right. Wars were fought for land, money, wealth and just about every reason imaginable EXCEPT THE DESIRE TO TOTALLY CONTROL POPULATIONS belief systems, and establish CULTS OF DEATH. Totalitarianism.
I really didn't expect to change your mind - you've made your position perfectly clear in numerous posts. But I do object to the cheap rhetorical trick of presenting a complex question as a simple choice between your own position and one that no reasonable person would ever take. I also oppose 'totalitarian' states, but I believe you can do that without ...[text shortened]... omplex stuff. It is bound to cause disagreements, but it does not need to cause fights.
Rich.
But we are still dealing with the fact that Islam has started a war. They will not rest until they control the world, and establish governments dedicated to their God. Afghanistan was one such. There are many others.
I was highly amused at your term "rhetorical trick". Is that anything like "Geez! Not fair! You have facts and logic. You can't state the obvious and expect to get away with it."... ?
It is a new world. Until the problem of totalitarian muslim governments is solved, then the people who support them... those who directly support them by direct action, such as "blowing themselves up to kill for God" or those who indirectly support them by equating the US effort to kill the bastards with totalitarianism "are my enemies." That's war. I have no time to pander to people without enough moral sense to think about which side they ultimately support. I'm too old and grumpy to pay much heed to those too lazy to develop a sense of right and wrong. They are some of the most worthless, vile creatures on the planet, in my opinion.
I restate... I don't expect you to change your views. I have learned over the years that people either know right from wrong at age six or they never get it. Those who never get it are why Hitler and Stalin and many, many other despots gained power and murdered millions. So who cares if you don't get it? Not me.
I just have to counter silliness, such as the premise of this thread, when I encounter it, with a little straight talk. That is what I can to in this war. Education. Propaganda. Whatever. This is not COMPLEX STUFF. You support murdering governments/religions or you don't. How complex is that? Except for all you poor "Ethically Challenged" out there. If you are one of those... then to hell with you. You are just making the world a more sorry place than it is already.
Your closing sentence is simple minded logic, ie, "doesn't need to cause fights." Really? How touchy and feely is that. War is not exactly a hand in hand stroll with a friend to work out and prevent another "episode" over "leaving your dirty clothes on the floor". Except for people way out of touch.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyYou my friend are one ignorant individual if you believe this and I seriously doubt that you have ever met a real muslim.this statement is completely inacurate, apocolyptic rubbish and sounds alot that hate speech.
But we are still dealing with the fact that Islam has started a war. They will not rest until they control the world, and establish governments dedicated to their God. Afghanistan was one such. There are many others.
if they are prisioners of war as you inform us, then Article 118 states
'Prisoners of war shall be released and repatriated without delay after the cessation of active hostilities.'
This was a war in Afghanistan and that war was over when the Taliban was removed from power. The world is not your battlefield, that arguement cannot hold water.
Hey but whatta i know, i haven't had any rest for a while.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyRight, it's a bit boring to go over this again, but you clearly haven't got it, so I'm going to give it another go. Rhetoric was invented by the Ancient Greeks as a way of playing with words to bolster an argument or help structure a speech - it is quite different from logic. One of the oldest tricks in the rhetorical book is to claim (falsely, indeed illogically) that there are only two choices: your opinion and another option which is obviously wrong. This is how you are arguing, even if you are too naive to realise it.
In my opinion... and it is only that. You are as wrong as can be. World politics is "DIRT SIMPLE". It is even more simple than that. You either support evil through inaction or you oppose it by action. That is the only lesson that the world has taught human civilization over and over again through all the twentieth century. Before WW1, you are right. ...[text shortened]... e" over "leaving your dirty clothes on the floor". Except for people way out of touch.
And make no mistake about it, you are extrordinarily naive. There will be very few people reading your post who will accept your analysis of world politics as DIRT SIMPLE. My God, if only it was.
Now I couldn't care less what you think of me, so I'm not going to give you the pleasure of taking offence to your post, but some of what you said was at the very least ridiculous. Implying that anyone who disagrees with you is a tacit supporter of the likes of Hitler is no way to argue in my book. But then, your posts are frequently offensive when you come up against people who disagree with you.
That was my final point actually - that it should be possible to have an argument about politics without resorting to personal abuse. I'm sorry if you find this too touchy feely for your liking.
Rich.
Originally posted by richhoeyYou are supporting murdering governments and you think i'm naive! That is really Rich. Pun intended. If you can't figure out who started killing in the name of god because you are somehow crippled by the ancient greeks, don't blame me. Set down and ask yourself why you are in support of killer governments over the US government. Dirt simple, Rich. This is not something a child of 5 couldn't figure out if told "Who do you like best for a friend? A government who kills mommy and daddy if they watch tv or teach you anything except the Koran? Or a government who is fighting to keep mommy and daddy alive, and let them send you to school to learn science and things?" If a five year old can do it Rich... you just have to try harder. And try not to let those ancient greeks mess with your mind so much. Learn to think for yourself. They have been dead a long time. Come on into the present world.
Right, it's a bit boring to go over this again, but you clearly haven't got it, so I'm going to give it another go. Rhetoric was invented by the Ancient Greeks as a way of playing with words to bolster an argument or help structure a speech - it is quite different from logic. One of the oldest tricks in the rhetorical book is to claim (falsely, indeed il ...[text shortened]... orting to personal abuse. I'm sorry if you find this too touchy feely for your liking.
Rich.
Please point out where my logic is wrong. That should be interesting. Will anxiously await your returm from your astrologer.
Don't think of it as personal abuse. Think of it as a spanking.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyRight, please scan back over my previous posts and point out where I have written 'I support murderous governments'. I think you'll struggle. And since you asked, here is the hole in your logic - your entire post is arguing against a position I would never dream of holding.
You are supporting murdering governments and you think i'm naive! That is really Rich. Pun intended. If you can't figure out who started killing in the name of god because you are somehow crippled by the ancient greeks, don't blame me. Set down and ask yourself why you are in support of killer governments over the US government. Dirt simple, Rich. Th ...[text shortened]... turm from your astrologer.
Don't think of it as personal abuse. Think of it as a spanking.
We have been talking of simplicity - well my argument is very simple. If governments such as the US are to take the moral high ground in their struggle against terrorism or dictatorship, they have to be absolutely scrupulous and open about the way they prosecute justice. Throwing a load of 'unlawful combatants' into a rather dubious prison, presenting no evidence of their guilt, charging them of no crime and effectively throwing away the key is no way to do that.
Let's boil it down to its most dirt simple component for you: to the rest of the world, it just looks really, really bad.