# I hope you come out of Iraq alive, but before you do, kindly go fuck yourself. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 26, 2005, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278 "2005-12-26T20:33:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Only\_Mostly\_Dead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/f19dbf/32.png) [@Only\_Mostly\_Dead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Only_Mostly_Dead)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/81 "2005-12-29T04:55:49Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > If we can get away from the **Brain Wreck** train wreck… > > Colour me disappointed. You and this guy are poles apart politically. Last time I checked, America was a free country and he’s free to have opinions with which you disagree. You may not respect his opinions, but you **must** respect his right to hold them. > > Now, this guy has the courage of his convictions and you’re pitting him for stepping up to the line? > > I suggest you take a good long look at yourself in the mirror. Basically, what **Miller** said. I don’t care that he is so far to the right that he’s falling into the Atlantic, and that I’m somewhere around Las Vegas. I maintain perfectly good friendships and family relations with dyed-in-the-wool conservatives. It’s not his beliefs, his conviction, or his choice to assume military service that I am pitting, and I did not say any such thing in the OP, and I **certainly** said nothing at all about his right to hold an opinion. It is his aggressively glurgey, adversarial attitude that he forces at everybody he knows, for which the poem in the OP is a prime example, and that I pit. It’s his right to quote the poem, and to add as many of his own opinions as he wishes. It’s my right to tell him to go fuck himself for alienating himself from so many people and for quoting a poem that wishes me physical harm and belittes my love for my country. And I would not deny either of us our democratically exercised rights. ---
**Author:** ![threemae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f9b8f/32.png) [@threemae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/threemae)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/82 "2005-12-29T06:46:44Z")
> [@Martin Hyde](#): > > This may be the dumbest thread I’ve ever seen. Indeed. Thanks for putting up the good fight; my head needs a break from these morons. ---
**Author:** ![infamousmom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/d6d6ee/32.png) [@infamousmom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/infamousmom)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 7:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/83 "2005-12-29T07:17:32Z")
Yeah. Well. I have a nephew who’s in the Navy, a medic attached to a SEAL unit. He’s not even 25 yet, and he’s already been to 43 funerals, of people he knew. He’s the third generation Navy man in the family and I’m sure he will be the last. After having been to Afghanistan and Iraq (including Falujah) he talked his younger brother out of a full ROTC scholarship, because he didn’t want anyone else to go where he’d been and see what he’d seen. Y’know, when the first Bush Crusade was going on, I wrote a poem too. If I’d known what George the Third was gonna do, I would have been far more sarcastic. Sitting on my fanny In my favorite easy chair, Watching George and Danny Rattle sabers here and there, Flipping 'cross the tuner For reports of blood and gore– God, I wish I’d checked in sooner! This is such a lovely war! Oh, there’s nothing quite as dandy As the film from CNN, And I keep my clicker handy As the missiles launch again, And I feel my manhood growing, Feel that tingle down my spine, And I’m sure my pride is showing As those jets roar off the line. Oh, we’re gonna kick some asses, Stomp their turbans in the sand, And as each new Patriot passes, Lord, I’ve never felt so grand. Boy, this beats Nintendo hollow! Pulls the plug on MTV! It’s a real tough act to follow! I’m a part of history! Now, you won’t see me enlisting; I’m a little past my prime. But you can bet I’ll be insisting That the young men do their time. So you fellas do your duty! Kick some heinies over there! Hip-hooray! from Sitting Beauty In my favorite easy chair. ---
**Author:** ![Lama\_Pacos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Lama\_Pacos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lama_Pacos)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/84 "2005-12-29T08:23:44Z")
Demanding one’s immediate shutting-up just because they support something at odds with your beliefs is childish and anti-intellectual. Many people would not have as much of a problem if somebody said they wouldn’t mind all violent Iraqi insurgents being vaporized, so clearly nothing is apparently wrong with the inherent _structure_ of the argument, it’s just the finer points that merit a debate. But refusing to address someone’s point is so much easier, right? If the dissenters are so in the wrong, defend your position and show all of us why. Stop it with the freaking righteous indignation hissy fit and explain-- in a rationalistic manner-- why soldiers should not be vaporized, or whatever the opposing argument is. I don’t necessarily agree with the statements made by **Der Trihs** and **BrainWreck** , but as far as I’m concerned, if nobody is willing to actually address them, they’ve won this argument. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/85 "2005-12-29T12:50:47Z")
Fuck that. You’d react to a turd in a punchbowl with a discussion about the merits of punchbowl crapping. There are some things that aren’t topics of polite conversation, and wishing death on our servicemembers ranks right up there. I’m not one of those demanding their banning, but I won’t dignify their “arguments” as anything other than what they are, which is inflammatory anti-American bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/86 "2005-12-29T16:50:38Z")
> [@Lama Pacos](#): > > Demanding one’s immediate shutting-up just because they support something at odds with your beliefs is childish and anti-intellectual. Many people would not have as much of a problem if somebody said they wouldn’t mind all violent Iraqi insurgents being vaporized, so clearly nothing is apparently wrong with the inherent _structure_ of the argument, it’s just the finer points that merit a debate. But refusing to address someone’s point is so much easier, right? If the dissenters are so in the wrong, defend your position and show all of us why. Stop it with the freaking righteous indignation hissy fit and explain-- in a rationalistic manner-- why soldiers should not be vaporized, or whatever the opposing argument is. I don’t necessarily agree with the statements made by **Der Trihs** and **BrainWreck** , but as far as I’m concerned, if nobody is willing to actually address them, they’ve won this argument. Yeah, how silly of people not to debate the idea of Martians vaporizing soldiers in a more “rationalistic” manner. You know, there’s a guy in my office who says he enjoys walking around and kicking stray puppies. Since I called him an asshole for it but never explained to him _why_ I think it’s wrong to kick puppies, I guess he wins. I’m sure the knowledge that he has superior critical thinking skillz will bring him almost as much satisfaction as booting a beagle in the ribs. ---
**Author:** ![Lama\_Pacos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Lama\_Pacos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lama_Pacos)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/87 "2005-12-29T17:15:24Z")
If one person had the strong conviction that kicking puppies was all right, I’d thoroughly expect the other person to rationalize why they think it’s not. If one argument can be “not a topic of polite conversation”, so can any. Why not just bow out from any argument where the other person doesn’t agree with you? > [@](#): > > I’m not one of those demanding their banning, but I won’t dignify their “arguments” as anything other than what they are, which is inflammatory anti-American bullshit. Except not everybody works off of the base belief that anti-Americanism is bad, as I’m sure you know. Everybody can’t agree to only argue points rooted in your core beliefs. I can’t demand that if somebody doesn’t acknowledge the basic fact that Macedonia is the greatest country on earth than I will summarily dismiss any further argument they have. I thought intellectualism and “fighting ignorance” were about critical thinking and analysis, not dismissal and assumption. I’m not saying somebody doesn’t have the right to not _want_ to argue a certain point-- if we were all bound to respond to anything we disagreed with we’d be here forever-- but I think to turn that personal reluctance into righteous indignation trying to prevent _anyone_ from engaging that argument is extremely low. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/88 "2005-12-29T17:43:39Z")
> [@Lama Pacos](#): > > If one person had the strong conviction that kicking puppies was all right, I’d thoroughly expect the other person to rationalize why they think it’s not. If one argument can be “not a topic of polite conversation”, so can any. Why not just bow out from any argument where the other person doesn’t agree with you? > > Except not everybody works off of the base belief that anti-Americanism is bad, as I’m sure you know. Everybody can’t agree to only argue points rooted in your core beliefs. I can’t demand that if somebody doesn’t acknowledge the basic fact that Macedonia is the greatest country on earth than I will summarily dismiss any further argument they have. > > I thought intellectualism and “fighting ignorance” were about critical thinking and analysis, not dismissal and assumption. I’m not saying somebody doesn’t have the right to not _want_ to argue a certain point-- if we were all bound to respond to anything we disagreed with we’d be here forever-- but I think to turn that personal reluctance into righteous indignation trying to prevent _anyone_ from engaging that argument is extremely low. Yes, but some positions are so antithetical to ones own beliefs that there’s no chance of reaching any sort of an accord. If someone came onto the boards arguing that the Holocaust was a good idea, what do you say to him? What argument are you going to come up with against genocide that’s going to change this guy’s mind? By even entering into a debate with someone like that, you’re legitimizing his position. Sometimes, it’s more effective just to call the person a cocksucker and be done with it. Obviously, that’s an extreme example, because it’s one no one here would disagree with, but most everyone has their own ideas of where to draw the line beyond which certain opinions are just unacceptable. **Mr. Moto** and I are miles apart politically, but we’re pretty close on this issue. Wishing death on members of our military is such a totally crack-headed thing to say that I don’t even know how to start addressing a person who holds such an opinion. It’s so totally alien to everything I conceive of as moral or proper that I can only assume someone advocating such a position is devoid of both qualities. How do you debate someone who evidently does not accept, as a basic principle, that human life is precious and worth protecting? Lastly, of course, is the simple fact that this is the Pit, and while good debate can occur here, it’s primary purpose is as a place where you can call an asshole an asshole. And I’ve never seen a thread where **Der Trihs** was anything other than an asshole of the highest caliber, even when he’s arguing for things I agree with. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/89 "2005-12-29T17:45:14Z")
…but **Lama** , righteous indignation’s all they’ve got, ever since it’s become clear, even to them, that the US is the aggressor side in the occupation of Iraq. The hope is that enough shouting of “Support the Troops” will deflect attention away from what those troops are actually doing - aggressively occupying a country that didn’t attack them first. Now, while I’ve wished for the US to lose this war, I’d like it to happen without any more lives lost. Or friendships broken. The OP’s friend sounds like a lot of the Doper pro-militarists - aware they are not on the side of the angels in this one, but too proud or stupid to admit it. I hope they’ll, and he’ll, come around. Maybe after he’s actually been there… ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/90 "2005-12-29T17:59:05Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > How do you debate someone who evidently does not accept, as a basic principle, that human life is precious and worth protecting? Who said I didn’t ? That’s why I despise our military, because they kill so many people for no good reason. It’s the people who “support the troops” who demonstrate no regard for human life. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/91 "2005-12-29T18:02:58Z")
> [@Lama Pacos](#): > > If one person had the strong conviction that kicking puppies was all right, I’d thoroughly expect the other person to rationalize why they think it’s not. If one argument can be “not a topic of polite conversation”, so can any. Why not just bow out from any argument where the other person doesn’t agree with you? Then we disagree. I’d expect anyone who was the least bit rational to not need the reasons kicking puppies isn’t all right explained to them. Not that I couldn’t come up with a logical argument; but some people haold certain fundamental ideas that that are so basically irrational that I figure it’s pointless to even engage them as if they were capable of being swayed by reason. Do you debate every crackpot street corner preacher shouting apocalyptic nonsense, or write e-mails explaining your position to websites run by vehement racists, or Holocaust deniers if you happen to stumble across them? That would get tiring, and doubtless would prove fruitless. If I said I wished they’d bomb the shit out of North Carolina because they were responsible for producing so much of the tobacco that was killing people, would you honestly find that worthy of debate? And if people wrote me off for my view rather than arguing their cases, would you claim I’d “won”? That seems odd to me. In my mind, part of fighting ignorance is knowing when the ignorance isn’t capable of being fought. > [@Lama Pacos](#): > > I thought intellectualism and “fighting ignorance” were about critical thinking and analysis, not dismissal and assumption. I’m not saying somebody doesn’t have the right to not _want_ to argue a certain point-- if we were all bound to respond to anything we disagreed with we’d be here forever-- but I think to turn that personal reluctance into righteous indignation trying to prevent _anyone_ from engaging that argument is extremely low. It’s funny, because to me it’s _you_ who sound full of righteous indignation. I never went off on a tirade about the guy’s post; I just said I wished he’d shut the fuck up, because he didn’t make any real argument and was just spouting stupid shit that seemed designed solely to be inflammatory. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/92 "2005-12-29T18:23:35Z")
> [@Der Trihs](#): > > Who said I didn’t ? That’s why I despise our military, because they kill so many people for no good reason. It’s the people who “support the troops” who demonstrate no regard for human life. Um, that would be me who said you didn’t. Here, let me quote the relevant portion: > [@yours truly](#): > > How do you debate someone who evidently does not accept, as a basic principle, that human life is precious and worth protecting? I’m not sure how you missed that. Heck, it was right there in your last post! I guess we can add “funtionally retarded” to the list of your attributes, right in between “morally vacant” and “intellectually dishonest.” ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/93 "2005-12-29T18:30:38Z")
Lama Pacos, you’re just trying to stifle debate. You no-good debate stifler, trying to silence the opinions of those who disagree with you. That’s you. A no good debate stifler. Because you posted something that disagreed with me, you must be against free speech and free thought. Or maybe you’re just an idiot. Der Trihs wants all US soldiers to die, because some US soldiers have robbed, some have raped, some have murdered, some have tortured. Other idiots want all Muslims to die, because some Muslims have robbed, some have raped, some have murdered, some have tortured. It is perfectly obvious to you that only an idiot would hold the second position. So why isn’t it obvious to you that only an idiot would hold the first position? And why exactly is calling Der Trihs an idiot for wanting all US soldiers to die stifling debate? No, it is debate. He says his stupid opinions that only a very stupid person would say, and we say that he’s a stupid person and that only stupid people would say the stupid things he says. So why are you trying to shout down and stifle my voice? What’s that you say? You’re not shouting me down or stifling my voice, you’re just disagreeing with me and posting an opposing viewpoint? Huh. Maybe you should stretch your empathy muscles a tiny bit and stop complaining that I’m stifling Der Trihs. I’m not stifling that idiot by calling him an idiot. I have no problem with his views getting a wide airing, since the more people that hear them the more people will realize what an idiot he is. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/94 "2005-12-29T18:31:30Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > …but **Lama** , righteous indignation’s all they’ve got, ever since it’s become clear, even to them, that the US is the aggressor side in the occupation of Iraq. The hope is that enough shouting of “Support the Troops” will deflect attention away from what those troops are actually doing - aggressively occupying a country that didn’t attack them first. > > Now, while I’ve wished for the US to lose this war, I’d like it to happen without any more lives lost. Or friendships broken. The OP’s friend sounds like a lot of the Doper pro-militarists - aware they are not on the side of the angels in this one, but too proud or stupid to admit it. I hope they’ll, and he’ll, come around. Maybe after he’s actually been there… You’re full of shit. As I said, I’m left-wing, anti-Iraq War, blah blah blah. That doesn’t mean I’m pro-killing US troops, any more than I’m pro-killing Iraqi troops (not to mention civilians). Pull your head out of your ass. Not everybody who disagrees with you is a rabid ultra-conservative warmonger. ---
**Author:** ![Lama\_Pacos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Lama\_Pacos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lama_Pacos)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/95 "2005-12-29T18:35:08Z")
> [@](#): > > How do you debate someone who evidently does not accept, as a basic principle, that human life is precious and worth protecting? Now, I do want to keep this discussion on the discourse itself rather than the actual debate, but this illuminates my point, so I hope you’ll excuse me for a second in saying that some would say that those who support war don’t believe that human life is precious. That’s the whole _point_: these things are not universally agreed upon, so debating them out is the best and most intellectually honest way to take care of them. > [@](#): > > Then we disagree. I’d expect anyone who was the least bit rational to not need the reasons kicking puppies isn’t all right explained to them. Not that I couldn’t come up with a logical argument; but some people haold certain fundamental ideas that that are so basically irrational that I figure it’s pointless to even engage them as if they were capable of being swayed by reason. Do you debate every crackpot street corner preacher shouting apocalyptic nonsense, or write e-mails explaining your position to websites run by vehement racists, or Holocaust deniers if you happen to stumble across them? That would get tiring, and doubtless would prove fruitless. If I said I wished they’d bomb the shit out of North Carolina because they were responsible for producing so much of the tobacco that was killing people, would you honestly find that worthy of debate? And if people wrote me off for my view rather than arguing their cases, would you claim I’d “won”? That seems odd to me. In my mind, part of fighting ignorance is knowing when the ignorance isn’t capable of being fought. As for people on the streets and such, in my opinion, if you think they’re so crazy, you should ignore them. If you truly believe their beliefs are dangerous and thoroughly wrong, then yes, you should _engage them_, not freak out and resort to name calling as many in this thread have done. Your example about North Carolina and tobacco is almost comically ironic, because an extremely similar belief is held regarding Colombia and narcotics, and the people holding that belief are not treated as marginalized, written-off kooks-- they’re running our governments. But I digress. Yes, the person should be engaged or not responded to! My previous post _said_ that I don’t expect everybody to respond to everything they disagree with. Personally, I often don’t argue something if I know it’s going to get me overly angry or upset. But in those cases, I don’t consider my abstinence some kind of last word on the subject. The eonly thing I expect of people is that if they don’t want to engage, they let others do so without trying to create an environment where that is impossible. There was a recent thread in GD where a poster was saying some very inflammatory things that could be percieved as anti-Semitic; however, to their credit, others actually addressed his points, and, through this exchange, it was clear how ridiculous his agenda was. I consider it a credit to the board that the posters continually engaged him rather than pulling the utterly subjective buck-stops-here card. > [@](#): > > It’s funny, because to me it’s you who sound full of righteous indignation. I never went off on a tirade about the guy’s post; I just said I wished he’d shut the fuck up, because he didn’t make any real argument and was just spouting stupid shit that seemed designed solely to be inflammatory. Not everything, and I mean this in the most literal and non-snarky sense, is about you. I maintain that a number of posters in this thread have pulled the righteous indignation schtick to halt debate; I was not specifically thinking of you when I said so. ---
**Author:** ![Lama\_Pacos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Lama\_Pacos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lama_Pacos)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/96 "2005-12-29T18:37:30Z")
> [@](#): > > Lama Pacos, you’re just trying to stifle debate. > > You no-good debate stifler, trying to silence the opinions of those who disagree with you. > > That’s you. A no good debate stifler. Because you posted something that disagreed with me, you must be against free speech and free thought. > > Or maybe you’re just an idiot. Der Trihs wants all US soldiers to die, because some US soldiers have robbed, some have raped, some have murdered, some have tortured. Other idiots want all Muslims to die, because some Muslims have robbed, some have raped, some have murdered, some have tortured. > > It is perfectly obvious to you that only an idiot would hold the second position. So why isn’t it obvious to you that only an idiot would hold the first position? > > And why exactly is calling Der Trihs an idiot for wanting all US soldiers to die stifling debate? No, it is debate. He says his stupid opinions that only a very stupid person would say, and we say that he’s a stupid person and that only stupid people would say the stupid things he says. > > So why are you trying to shout down and stifle my voice? What’s that you say? You’re not shouting me down or stifling my voice, you’re just disagreeing with me and posting an opposing viewpoint? Huh. Maybe you should stretch your empathy muscles a tiny bit and stop complaining that I’m stifling Der Trihs. I’m not stifling that idiot by calling him an idiot. I have no problem with his views getting a wide airing, since the more people that hear them the more people will realize what an idiot he is. Was this intended to be funny? If so, I didn’t find it very. If not, please outline a little more clearly how I have been stifling debate and I’ll try and stop if I agree that it’s true. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/97 "2005-12-29T19:02:35Z")
> [@woodstockbirdybird](#): > > You’re full of shit. As I said, I’m left-wing, anti-Iraq War, blah blah blah. That doesn’t mean I’m pro-killing US troops, any more than I’m pro-killing Iraqi troops (not to mention civilians). Pull your head out of your ass. Not everybody who disagrees with you is a rabid ultra-conservative warmonger. Umm, I never said everyone who disagrees with me is a rabid ultra-conservative warmonger. I never said anything about people disagreeing with me. Mostly because I never made a statement that you disagreed to. I made a statement about pro-militarists. Read for comprehension: non-pro-militarist != pro-killing US troops. Not that I support your troops, you understand. Far from it. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/98 "2005-12-29T19:17:37Z")
I hope your friend figures his shit out. I definitely don’t want him to die. I don’t feel like my freedom is being threatened by anyone living in Iraq. If America is invaded, I’ll pick up a gun and defend it. I live in New York and I was statistically more likely to be murdered from 90-95 than I was from 2000-2005 including the 9/11 attacks in the statistics. The terrorists and I want the same thing, and that’s US soldiers out of the middle east. I’d like to see an end to this ludicrous left vs right war that spawned the cold war and now the war on terror. I’d like to see no more misguided young men who think that they are protecting my freedom get killed. Erek ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/99 "2005-12-29T19:21:16Z")
> [@Lama Pacos](#): > > Now, I do want to keep this discussion on the discourse itself rather than the actual debate, but this illuminates my point, so I hope you’ll excuse me for a second in saying that some would say that those who support war don’t believe that human life is precious. That’s the whole _point_: these things are not universally agreed upon, so debating them out is the best and most intellectually honest way to take care of them. And, if someone felt that way about me, I wouldn’t expect them to argue politely with me. I’d expect them to call me a lousy son-of-a-bitch. Wether the subject is universally agreed on has nothing to do with it, and the fact that you brought that up makes it clear that you’ve entirely missed my point. I’m not arguing that my position is one of objective truth. I don’t think there’s any such animal. What I’m saying is that some subjective opinions are so far removed from each other that it is not possible for them to peacefully co-exsist. It’s not possible for the idea of racial equality to exsist side by side with the idea of racial superiority. There is going to be a constant conflict between the two until one side or another is completely stamped out. And past a certain point, rational debate no longer serves to eradicate these opinions. Anyone who honestly believes that blacks are inferior to whites (or vice versa) in this day and age is not going to be amenable to rational debate. By this point, they’ll have already heard all the arguments against their position, and have disregarded them. What purposes does repeating them serve? Convincing the person who is actually advocating the racist position that he’s wrong is futile. These hold-outs are best dealt with by ridicule and marginalization, so that their ideas are not seen as attractive or legitimate to other people. > [@](#): > > Not everything, and I mean this in the most literal and non-snarky sense, is about you. I maintain that a number of posters in this thread have pulled the righteous indignation schtick to halt debate; I was not specifically thinking of you when I said so. This isn’t Great Debates. It’s the Pit. The purpose here isn’t, ultimatly, to foster debate, but to allow posters to vent their righteous indignation in a context where it doesn’t harm legitimate debate. And, as I said above, there are some ideas that can only be properly addressed in this forum. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2005, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278/100 "2005-12-29T19:24:50Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Umm, I never said everyone who disagrees with me is a rabid ultra-conservative warmonger. I never said anything about people disagreeing with me. > > Mostly because I never made a statement that you disagreed to. I made a statement about pro-militarists. Read for comprehension: > non-pro-militarist != pro-killing US troops. > > Not that I support your troops, you understand. Far from it. Bullshit. **Lama Pacos** was talking about the people who were jumping on **Der Trihs** in this thread, not pro-militarists in general, to which you came up with > [@MrDibble](#): > > …but Lama, righteous indignation’s all they’ve got, ever since it’s become clear, even to them, that the US is the aggressor side in the occupation of Iraq. The hope is that enough shouting of “Support the Troops” will deflect attention away from what those troops are actually doing - aggressively occupying a country that didn’t attack them first. Maybe _you’re_ the one who needs the reading comprehension. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-hope-you-come-out-of-iraq-alive-but-before-you-do-kindly-go-fuck-yourself/337278.md?page=6)