Here come the pseudo hippies....

The BBQ Pit
61

Since you’re a pacifist and your sig references Gandhi, I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and point you toward a little historical fact: The ONLY reason Gandhi was able to enter into effective dialogues with anyone is because other leaders were very very busy killing British soldiers in the mountains, and Gandhi seemed a little bit more reasonable (I know that’s a simplification, but it’s not an incorrect one).

You might also be surprised at this quote from Gandhi, who is often considered the ultimate pacifist: “Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.” – Mohandas K. Gandhi: “Gandhi, An Autobiography”, page 446

Even he saw the need for armed response in certain situations, and I don’t think there has ever been a situation in the history of humanity that justified armed response more than the current one. Several have warranted it just as much, but none more.

Finally, regarding your last paragraph, let me offer this quote:

“In Italy for thirty years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love, they had five hundred years of democracy and peace, and what did they produce? The cuckoo clock.”

– Harry Lime to Holly Martins in “The Third Man” (1949)

You’re an ignorant fool. Don’t be proud of it.

62

You are a Nitwit.

63

Fuck you, fallen Angel. You dont see me slinging insults, do you?

Well, I’ve forgiven you already. And you also made some good points. I think the tradition of violence in this world can be turned into a tradition of peace. It will take a lot of time and hard work, but is it worth it? I think so.

peace,
JB

64

Jabe,
I’m gonna let Grim_Beaker correct your ignorance on this one, 'cause I owe him one for the undeserved flame (sorry again GB).
But I just can’t resist asking, do you consider 90 years “a few”?

65

in the grand scheme of things, yes
peace,
JB

66

And another thing:

“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares about more than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no hope of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.”

– An anonymous partial paraphrase of the above, possibly by George Will, found over a display in the Naval Air Museum at Alameda Naval Air Station, Alameda, California.

67

In our present millitary/industrial society, I dont really think there is any socially acceptable way to deal with terrorists than to kill them. I dont agree with killing people. If this makes me an ignoratn fool, a nitwit, dangerous etc. then so be it.

I’m just waiting for someone to call me a pinko commie.
peacenotwar,
JB

68

I’m getting my ass kicked all over the place here. And I dont have an answer for a lot of the points brought up. I think some of you people are a lot smarter than me, and you also have popular opinion on your side, so that makes you more powerful.

I restate my opinion: I want to see this resolved as peacefully as possible with no civilian casualties.

I’m leaving this thread after one more insult, so goodbye, because the insults will come soon I think.
peace,
JB

69

pinko commie!

70

So you have no problem with being ruled by a fascist government that exterminated 6 million Jews? OK…

That speaks volumes itself. Get a history book…do a little reading 'mkay?

The word is “secede” genius… look it up.

I didn’t say the war was fought over slavery (notice that I called it the “War Between The States”) …nice try on the straw man though.

So when you said, earlier, "I dont think the government of any country has the right to kill ANYONE, civilian or murderor, terrorist or tyrant. " you weren’t exactly telling the truth eh? If the “cause” suits your needs…then you have no problem with the colonies having the right to “KILL the British”?

Christ…it’s like shooting fish in a barrel here.

71

I so sorry, I was way off on that pinko commie thing, it’s just that you asked for it and then said you would leave after one more insult once I had already posted it.

I also don’t believe you could be a “pinko commie” 'cause most communists have no problem killing anyone who does not agree with their philosophy when the revolution comes. So since you are non-voilent, you could not be a pinko commie.

Go in peace, and watch your back.

72

Waaa fuckin’ waaa. You’re in the pit…making stupid statements …you get called on the carpet for the statements, lack the intellectual cajones to even attempt to back them up in a serious fashion…and whine about being insulted. Imagine that. :rolleyes:

73

Tapswiller,

Don’t worry about it, twas no big deal :slight_smile:

stern look Now… for you jabe…

sigh

I had this very harshly worded post all typed out, complete with all manner of amusing invective. It included the words “motherfucker”, “syphilitic monkey fellater”, and other such hooliganery. Then you had to go and change your position to:

I think I can agree with this. No one in their right mind really wants to see civilians getting hurt from the fall out. If I were you I would reserve judgement until the government decides to act. THEN we can more accurately determine if the course of action decided on is appropriate. M’kay?

Grim

74

jabe, this has nothing to do with "social acceptability’. It has to do with the simple fact that predators cannot be made tame. The terrorists are not, as so many have claimed, psychotic. They are not madmen.

They are smart, cunning ideologues who have arrived at their position through a combination of their own reason and external indoctrination. They will not change their positions. They will not come to repent through dialogue. If they were captured and imprisoned, they could still find ways to communicate with those left outside and do exactly what they’re doing now. Come on, if you can score heroin in even the most prison, you can certainly slip out a message. There is also the very real chance they could ultimately escape and do exactly the same thing all over again.

There is no way to deal with them but to kill them. Kill them as quickly and in as great a quantity as possible. Do not bomb civilian targets. To not rain misery on innocent people and thereby make them even more desperate than they already are - sowing the seeds for the next generation. But do, by all means, mercilessly slaughter the predators who would do this.

Let’s take this out of the human-to-human context for a moment. If you are in Africa, and a leopard comes into your village at night and eats a couple of children and kills other people indiscriminately (as leopards will do like few other animals), there are three choices: Move away, capture and relocate the leopard or kill it.

Moving is a pretty poor option. You have crops. Your family has lived there for generations (assuming the village is not comprised of nomads), etc. There’s also a fair chance the leopard will move with you.

If you capture and relocate the leopard somewhere else, it WILL people again. When leopards put humans on their menu, they find out we’re really pretty easy prey.

The only option that will stop the leopard from killing any more humans is to kill it. That’s not “mindless blood sport”, as some term big game hunting. That’s not killing for its own sake. That’s destroying a predator that cannot be overcome by reason, that cannot be stopped by fences and that will not stop any other way.

The situation here is no different. Social acceptability is not a factor. Cultural and INDIVIDUAL survival is. Any other “solution” is an exercise in dangerous naivete, no matter how much we would like it to be otherwise.

That said, I do apologize for my earlier “ignorant fool” commment. You have been civil in defending your position. Even though this is the Pit, I should have exercised the same civility.

75

Are you accusing me of this? Because I don’t seem to recall using the word “blood” in any of my posts. I don’t seem to recall clamoring for the deaths of innocents. My bowel control seems to be intact. I haven’t uttered any moans or shouts. And I think my patience with your complete lack of understanding the world has been about all that I can manage. In fact everyone has been fairly restrained considering that this is the pit. But make no mistake, I am a denizen of the pit and if you misrepresent my position again, I’ll show you what being insulted is all about.

If you can’t handle insults, go start a great debate. Your ideas will still be insulted, but you as a person will be off limits.

76

You guys are fucking assholes when someone comes in here and tries to defend their opinion. I dont have a fucking PHD. I have a hard time expressing myself in print. I misspell words. I dont write in complete sentenses. I am sorry for my ignorance.

I want to see this resolved as peacefully as possible with no civilian casualties.
peace,
JB

77

[sub]To continue with the leopard analogy…[/sub]

So the villagers discover that this leopard is actually hed by another group of people from another village. They release the leopard onto your village and are breeding more leopards to do the same. The village leaders go and confronts this group. They ask the group to hand over the offending leopard and any other cubs so their women and children don’t get eaten in the future. They tell them to get bent. The villagers tell them that they will take the leopards by force if need be, but they’d rather just have them turn them over peacefully. The group gives them the finger and says that if they try, they will tell other leopard keepers to release their animals on your village as well. The villagers, showing remarkable restraint, demand the leopards be turned over once again, and other memebers of your village may get hurt in the process. The leopard holders do not care about the other people of the village, so they tell the village to shove it.

Now, if force has to be used, who’s fault is it? The leopard keepers or the villagers?

The Afgani government has a peaceful out. They refuse to take it.

78

They ask for proof. If the US government is so sure it was Bin Laden, why dont they just give them the proof and get over with it…I know, because we have to show how tuff we are “WE SHALL NOT NEGOTIATE!!!”

peace,
JB

79

For those of you keeping score…that would be TWO times in one thread that jabe defies an earlier post…

Whatever happened to

“I’m leaving this thread after one more insult, so goodbye, because the insults will come soon I think.”

…talk about your bad pennies.

If you admit to not having a grasp on historical precedence…why are you still here in this thread?

80

Where to begin…

Doing this will cause more casualties. The terrorists won’t listen at first. They will continue their acts of terror and kill ‘innocent civilians’. By not doing anything about it other than ‘dialogue’, we are letting them continue to attack and thus letting down our citizens. How is that better than going after them and killing them?

Jabe, your attitude is the exact one i targeted in my OP. It’s fine to have opinions but back them up. You listed one reason and it’s been pointed out repeatedly why it’s not a good one. It’s not wrong because it’s a peaceful solution, it’s wrong because it’s not an effective solution. The goal is to wipe out terrorists. They are the bad guys. Repeat-They are the bad guys! Not arabs. Not Muslims. Terrorists. People who blow innocent people up just to make a point. They deserve no benefit of the doubt. The countries that house them deserve no benefit of the doubt.

I’m upset with these ‘pseudo hippies’ because they don’t have a point. All they say is ‘we don’t want war’. Well how do they suggest we make our country and civilians safer. Maybe if they take the rings out of their eyebrows, stop taking ecstasy, and wake up before 3 p.m. they might be able to read or watch the television and see the destruction these terrorists caused. They killed 6500 people. That’s a lot. Since when is it wrong to go after bad guys? Answer me that? What is the harm or crime in hunting down terrorists and killing them?