For Der Trihs

The BBQ Pit
101

Just a sense I get from the venom in his posts. It’s often the case when someone holds so many other people in contempt, it’s because he has feelings of inadequacy or self-hatred.

And for those who condone or sympathize with the killing of US troops, I’d like to remind you that we are currently in IRaq under a UNSC mandate that was unanimously approved, and at the invitation of the duly elected government of Iraq. We are essentially the police force for that country, so no matter what you thought about the invasion, that’s no reason to celebrate the killing of our military.

102

I certainly won’t argue that, and have said so in the past, even while stating that his argument is defensible. Again, if my choice is to commit sanctioned murder (which is how he sees it, defensibly) or have life as I know it come to an end, I’m not sure what action I’d take. If I chose the former, then I’d be a murderer in his eyes, and again, defensibly. I don’t have to agree with him, I just have to understand his argument. I do. It’s very similar to those who believe abortion is murder, and that doctors who perform such deserve death. While I don’t agree with them either, I do understand their argument.

Neither of us can know that, and I’m not even sure if he can know that about himself. We can all guess, and one of us might end up being right, but I don’t think any of us have convincing evidence that points to any outcome. There ARE people who chose the path he claims he’d take, so it’s certainly a possibility that he’d do the same.

He posts a lot, and very few of those posts are about his life. While I can’t avoid creating images in my head of many posters on this board, I’m also aware that my pictures are often likely completely wrong (and thanks to having met some dopers, I know this to be true).

That’s just silly. There are people who whine who have every reason to whine, and there are people who whine who have little to whine about. I’m not sure how you think you can make the call by reading posts on a messageboard.

Did I call him courageous at any point? He’s just a poster on a messageboard, but one who happens to oftentimes make defensible arguments (albeit in a crappy manner) that get people’s panties in a wad.

The easiest way to avoid fooling one’s self is to not make pronunciations about a person’s personal life based on their postings.

103

How can you possibly drag the abortion card into this? What in the hell does an INTENTIONAL act like abortion have to do with the UNINTENTIONAL consequences of warfare?
I know!
nothing.
I know, I know, we aren’t as precise as we’d like to be in our killing of our real or perceived enemies. But we’re getting better at it! We do indeed have a “kinder, gentler machine gun hand”, which may mean squat to the occupied Iraqis, but in fact it is true!
i would almost argue that we expend unnecessary resources as a “conqueror” nation trying to deflect innocent civilans!
If we’re as evil as we are portrayed, why not just level the entire country? Why not kill ANYONE who stands in our way?
What’s that? Because that would be the pinnacle of evil?
Correct!
We like to soften our evil with democratic platitudes, 'round these parts. Get used to it.
It isn’t new, either.
/half sarcasm

104

And this is why Der Trihs kicks the crap out of people in some debates. Did you read the fucking post, or even the post I responded to? A soldier is doing their job. An abortion doctor is doing their job. Neither of them have “pretty” jobs, and both do something that some consider murder. I agree with neither of those groups who consider it thusly, but I understand them both. Please do keep up.

Indeed, it probably means squat to the hundreds of thousands (or more) who have been directly affected by our “kinder, gentler machine gun hand.”

Then you’d be a far sicker person than the guy we’re pitting. I bet you call it “collateral damage” as well.

What was the other half?

105

For 99% of the posters on this board, that holds true. Der Trihs is in the one percent. The insanity is just too much in your face to ignore. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, yadda-yadda, you get the picture.

106

What if, despite all internal logic, I think that offering the death of all soldiers (of whatever nationality) is morally reprehensible and that it reflects very poorly on the proposer? I can’t help but think that a person who wishes he has the power to call down lightning on an entire army is probably not a very nice person, however unlikely the possibility of that happening is.

Internal logic isn’t the only way of evaluating an argument. Sometimes an emotional response is the only appropriate one, such as when the desire for the deaths of an entire army are expressed. That’s just distasteful.

In other words, all the logic in the world won’t stop someone from being a dick.

107

I wanted to add that this…

…is a bit harsh for someone who stated…

So which is it?

108

Surprisingly insightful words from the OP, which some of you should listen to.

I don’t think American troops are evil, by the way. Not personally.

What’s going in Iraq is not nice and won’t be for a very long time to come. The forces fighting there are using the method of killing of their opponents as a means to their longer term goals. A method in which they are having significant success on both sides and at this stage there is no end in sight.

I don’t know that the death of every member of the US military presently in Iraq would result in the lowest death and misery and destruction count, all things considered. It might do but I don’t have a crystal ball. What I do know is that the position is not unarguable, and wishing the death of all US military in Iraq is not necessarily a wish that will amount, in the long run, to anything less bloodthirsty than the way that the current situation will actually play out. Do you know to the contrary?

I would have been happy with a quote that had all the the elements of the position attributed to Der Trihs. I even found the quote which came closest to proving that **Der Trihs ** did in fact have the position attributed to him re Iraq myself, and posted it at #30. So I think your accusation that I was prepared to rely on trivial outs is unfair.

109

Just to follow up, I’d say that calling DT’s posts “nuanced” is laughably wrong. Whether his points are defensible or not is another matter. I’d say that the apologetics you’ve done for him put his thoughts in a better light than he ever could. The reason that most people—right and left—write him off as both a dick and and asshole is that he lacks nuance. He loves making proclamations about large swaths of people, ignoring any possible nuance, if not outright denying it.

I think your bias is showing itself more than a little. I think you conflate defense of a position that DT might espouse with his particular method of putting it forth and defending it. He’s as far from nuanced as I can imagine. He should pay you to put forth his positions. You make them more palatable and defensible, while not allowing people to rightly write you off as a cyst oozing puss.

Well, not right off the bat, anyway. :wink:

110

The thing is, I rarely see the man make ARGUMENTS.

I mean, I know his song by heart by now. The “debates” go like this:

DT: All religions are con jobs. All religious people are idiots or con artists, or possibly idiot con artists. Also, everything bad that has ever happened can be traced straight back to religion! It’s a proven fact.

A Few Other People: Woohoo! Tell it like it is!

Some Poor Bastards: But that’s not true. Lots of good things have come from religion, including much of Western civilization, and there are plenty of good religious people. Most of the people in the world are religious in some way, do you hate Buddhists this much too?

DT: Everything bad happens because of religion! You’re an idiot and religious people are stupid. Look – Inquisition? Religion. Holocaust? Religion. Those are bad things, religion caused them, religion is bad.

AFOP: You said it!

Some Atheists and Agnostics: Well… he’s being a bit of a dick about this, but he’s not wrong entirely.

Jaded Folks: What, this argument again? You asked for it. Der Trihs is everything evil and awful in this world, literary tastes notwithstanding.

SPB: But those are just people using religion for evil purposes! They’d use whatever tool they had if they didn’t have religion to use. Look at Communist Russia and China.

DT: Those don’t count. Religion is evil. We’ve been over this. “By your fruits you shall know them,” isn’t that in your Bible? Religion’s fruits are evil, therefore religion is evil.

SPB: But religious people give to the poor, feed the hungry, clothe the naked –

DT: Secular groups can and do the same things without murdering thousands and trying to convert them. Religion is evil and stupid and illogical and unprovable.

SPB: Where are the vast seas of atheist Red Cross equivalents, then? Besides, the point of religion is not to be provable. goes talking about faith for a while

AFOP, SAaA: Don’t make us sick.

JF: We TOLD you, didn’t we?

Then everyone starts fighting again. At some point people get bored and get headaches and leave the thread and it dies. Then someone somewhere makes a comment about religion and nice things religious people might do and the Trihs signal goes off and it all starts again. And it never sodding changes, except for the occasional frothing invective from the other side (listed as yet another example of why religious people are not to be trusted).

For me? It’s springtime, the bugs are chirping, the grass is growing, and the sun is still in the sky when I drive home from work. Things are generally okay so when I come home and see another Der Trainwreck, it gives me something to be good and cross about before I go to the bathroom for a good poop.

I actually kind of like the guy, which is frankly amazing because his opinions on religion and the military grate on my apparently-quite-conservative soul. They sound to me like the overenthusiastic pessimism of a twenty-year-old philosophy major – I knew a lot of them at UT and the tone is familiar. (Actually they sound a LOT like a thirty-something mild stoner I know – absolute invective when it comes to almost random things but a fine artist and insanely funny and creative, but he would make more cogent arguments.) He does remind me of two things: that God loves him too and, as he is one of God’s creations and worthy of love, I should treat him well, even if he gives me headaches. Also, he reminds me that my grandfather and my great-uncles and my father and my cousins and my mother, even, fought for his right to squawk on the internet. And it’s GOOD he has the right and the privilege to scream hateful things.

But just remember: every time you touch yourself, Der Trihs flames religion again. :frowning:

111

The extent of his engagement in hyperbole detracts from his message. Plus the hyperbole is easier to attack than the substance. Whatever level of nuance you think he has, he has more of it than a single line shock quote can convey, which is the point.

112

By this assessment, he’s an Ann Coulter for the left. But about 100 times more hyperbolic. His positions aside, he’s a complete asshole when it comes to discussing religion or our murderous military monsters. :rolleyes:

113

No, and yes, respectively. In the case of religion, the “groupthink” I was referring to is the idea that atheists have to play nice with the religious, that religious thought is worthy of respect in a way other delusions aren’t. Even the majority of atheists here subscribe to that. DT doesn’t.

And yes, the 'dope is a hotbed of American militarism. The number of currently serving and veteran soldiers/sailors who come out of the woodwork if you even suggest that America deserves to lose in Iraq is a good indicator. The level of vitriol directed at those suggesting it confirms it, IMO.

What standard is that? He doesn’t believe the military should be in Iraq and he backs it up by (wait for it) NOT VOLUNTEERING for the military! That hypocrite!

He has the courage to post in GD, where you are free to rebut and really make him look like a fool. Why should he lie down for a gangbang here, instead? Pittings are easy, GD is hard. But I don’t see your pussy ass arguing with him in there, now do I? Much easier to hang out here and make “40 year old virgin, Har-har” jokes. Pathetic.

You’re one of those atheists who lives in fear of being noticed, and plays nice with the theists like a good Tom. ISTM you’re jealous Der has the balls to post what he does. And you’re ex-militar IIRC, so DT must really push your buttons, that much is obvious.

114

Wait, fuckstain, are you having the gall to suggest the Iraq war is an ACCIDENT?
There’s nothing “UNINTENTIONAL” about anything that gets done in Iraq by your occupation. Nothing!

115

Slight nitpick - while founder Dunant himself may have been motivated by his Calvinist beliefs, I would not call the Red Cross a religious organisation in any way, shape or form. It’s strictly secular (motto notwithstanding)

116

Fair enough, although I think in that case you should not have put quite so much stress on ‘exact’. Just my opinion.

117

You’ve read some lists of Coulter quotes, I’m sure. You think he’s more hyperbolic. Well I don’t. Perhaps we split along political lines. There’s not much point in debating degrees of hyperbole since they are a matter of opinion for the most part.

You’re probably right, although my experience of debating on these boards is that not everyone is as rational as you, and that if I didn’t emphasis “exact” I’d get a heap of quotes that weren’t appropriate but were seen by those with heavy preconceptions as being so.

118

Ah, so it’s “groupthink” when most people, even atheists, consider that “Prove that God exists, or admit that all religion is a delusion!” is lacking something as a nuanced position. Got it. But in any case, Der doesn’t even draw the line at not playing nice with the religious - he finds it necessary to spit hate-filled invective at religion every time he opens his mouth on the subject. It’s not a question of merely finding their philosophical position indefensible - Der’s picture of the Christian, for instance, owes everything to the Inquisition and nothing to, say, the gentle Vicar from the Canterbury Tales.

You see? It’s not about disagreeing vehemently with other people’s beliefs. It’s about hysterically insisting that the other side are all baby-eating barbarians.

As an aside, I’ll make a mental note never to discuss anything of moment with you. The frenzied babblings of a deluded person can hardly be worth a moment of your time. :dubious:

119

No skin off my nose if you do, or don’t. But you do understand I was referencing Der’s stance, not my own slightly more nuanced one, right?

120

Well, from this:

no, I rather understood you to be referring to your own point of view. If you’ll tell me how I should have parsed the above phrase, I’ll be sure to give it due consideration.