How are you so certain that the government will always only torture people who “murder others in cold blood”? Are you generally confident in the abilities of the government, or only with regards to torture?
By the way, I would urge my fellow liberals to quit accusing OMGABC of not being black. His arguments fail (IMO) because they’re bad (and immoral) arguments, not because he might not be who he says he is (and I see no reason to believe he isn’t). Whether he’s black or not makes no difference for this discussion, and IMO it’s highly obnoxious (and possibly racist) to harp on this as if it does.
There’s a really good masturbation joke in here somewhere, but I can’t for the life of me find it.
We don’t do for their benefit, you idiot; we do it for our own. I don’t know why this is such a hard concept for some people: we are supposed to be the good guys. And being the “good guys” isn’t something intrinsic about America. We are not born wearing white hats. We are the good guys because we actually attempt to adhere to the principles of liberty and justice we espouse, even if we sometimes get it wrong. If we believe in justice, we must practice justice, even with those who would be unjust to us. If we believe in freedom we must respect the freedom of others, even when they say things (or do things which objectively do no harm) which appall us.
Likewise, those other people don’t act that way because they are the “bad guys”; they are the bad guys because they act that way. If we adopt the worst practices of those we oppose, what remains to differentiate us from them besides the color of the flag we wave?
Case in point: here you are, defending the murder of people in cold blood and inhuman behaviour. How should we treat you, then? Admittedly you’re not engaging in such behaviors yourself - no, you appear to be quite happy to outsource such things to the professionals with your full support. But somewhere across the sea, other people can point to you and say “See what barbaric things these people support and practice. Clearly they are no better than animals.” Well done, sir.
Racist, eh, from the outside view (and not of the Left) the behavior and even the naming (the posting name) do not give me any sense of the validity or the sincerity. The look and the feel is the trolling performance as Kimstu has cited.
The endless naivete and patience you have in engaging the pure trolls as if they are sincere does impress…
I suspect it was my time in the Navy… I’ve personally known folks that are just like a lot of Dopers who are called trolls by many other Dopers.
Trump may have been born on third base but third base is awfully crowded compared to the number for people who achieve trump’s level of success. Same can be said for kim kardashian.
Well then, maybe you should shut up about who is a war-hawk and who isn’t. That was your original point. I mean if you float that argument like it means something and then tell us you don’t really care one way or another then why the fuck should we care either?
You don’t have to cross the ocean to find such people. I think right-wing torture supporters are worthless scum, and the world would benefit from their absence. I hope Trump’s stupidity doesn’t cause non-Republicans too suffer too much, but I don’t much care what happens to his supporters because they listened to Trump say he would have people tortured and their families killed, and voted for him anyway. Piss on all of them.
What he said.
Taking issue with the guy’s handle makes more sense if you point out that he’s more of a radical reactionary than a conservative.
Another poster in a different thread notably referred to OMGABC as:
Omg a Black Imbecile!
As a rule, anything he posts is an accurate reflection of the new moniker.
H was a thief and a cheat and a liar, who never made an honest deal in his life. Various people who did accomplish something, have made remarks to the effect that with all his failures and bankruptcies, Trump would have made more with a fucking savings account.
So we should do the same things, to innocents who don’t deserve it. Got it. Some of us can believe in revenge but tinged with justice, if that makes any sense to a you. I am not ever going to support the deliberate murder of innocent wives, children, or any one else to get my revenge. I’m comfortable targeting all my hate where it belongs.
There are too many responss for me to go through each one, one by one.
Well, that was a lot to type of out just to say very little.
Unlike you, I don’t hold some idealistic view of the world where we must act like we’re “better” to prove a point, nor do I hold to some “good guy/bad guy” standard. This isn’t a movie, and such a position doesn’t win you anything, other than prolonged and detracted wars where one side continues to commit atrocities and the other stand idly by twiddling their thumbs while the other side commits those atrocities.
Strawman alert!
I never once advocated for murder of anyone. You guys sure love making things up. My position is simple: if we’re content to fight these wars against terrorist groups who commit all sorts of human rights abuses (or if these groups are content to fight us), then we should fight to win. We shouldn’t be beholden to doctrines that, quite frankly, don’t apply for terrorists, terrorist groups, terrorists organizations or their families.
Yeah, I know. That’s not a sexy concept for those on the left, but it’s true.
You’re more interested in what amounts to virtue signaling. I’m note interested in achieving peace and ending these wars in the Middle East. I happen to like my position much more than I like yours.
I laughed at this. I’m much more moderate than your average liberal on this board, and much more liberal in the classic sense of the word than your average lob liberal on this board to boot.
There can be honest positions on each side – I think your policy is very dangerous and would lead to more violence and chaos, and more danger to the US. I think one of our strengths is that we refuse to go as low as killers like ISIS do, and the best way to beat them (and those like them) in the long run is to demonstrate to the vast majority of their potential current and future recruits (i.e. the Muslim world) that we would be far, far better allies than ISIS.
I also think your position on this, both on killing innocent families and on torture, to be morally repugnant, as well as strategically disastrous for America’s future.
Terrorists? Okay.
Terrorist groups? Okay.
Terrorists organizations? Okay.
Or their families? NOT OKAY.
Omg a Black Imbecile? Nope. Just plain conservative filth. One of America’s worst Americans.
That’s a bold claim. How much of the US population do you know?
Ah. I thought these quotes were supposedly coming from me personally, instead of them just being another of your vague missives about the board liberals in general with no effort made to distinguish us as individuals.
My honest suggestion to someone accused of something completely wrong is to briefly respond with “That’s bullshit and just your obvious attempt to score some cheap debate points.” If instead, someone responds to “You’re racist” with eight or nine paragraphs of detailed pseudo-rebuttal (likely ending with “I’m not racist, I just see things the way they are” or “I just live in the real world”), then odds are the accusation wasn’t that far off.
I’ve observed a lack of eagerness of Trump supporters to talk in specifics but I’ll ask anyway: what specifically about the last eight years do you object to and what specifically do you think Trump will do differently?
I think this is another case of survival mode vs prosperity mode.
In survival mode, you are fighting for your life. You are fighting for your existence. You are fighting for your family, your friends, your way of life.
It is hard to be moral in this situation. When up against annihilation, every alternative, no matter how reprehensible, is acceptable. When they ask, “But then, how will we be better than them?” You can honestly answer, “We are alive, they are not.”
In prosperity mode, you are not fighting against threats to your existence, you are at most, fighting against threats to your convenience. When up against inconvenience, even the smallest reprehensible act is unjustified. When they ask, “But then, how will we be better than them?” You answer, “We achieved our objectives with as few casualties as possible, we treated their wounded, and sheltered those who would seek refuge from the violence.”
In the war in the Middle East, which of the fighting factions do you believe to be in survival mode, which do you believe to be in prosperity?
Does this at least explain why we need to be better than our enemies?
TL;DR, we can be better than our enemies, because we can afford to be better than our enemies.