DudleyGarrett , can you answer my question in post 113?
[QUOTE=Nava]
If someone can give me the word, I’ll be happy to learn it.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t think we have one. Schadenfreude, stolen from the German, might be it. Even that seems to hold a connotation of delight or glee that I don’t sense you’re trying to express. “Morbidly interested” or even “bemused” might be closer.
[QUOTE=Nava]
If someone can give me the word, I’ll be happy to learn it. Neither “entertaining” nor “interesting” seem to quite fit the bill.
[/QUOTE]
Would “bemusement” fit?
“Morbidly bemused”? Like you said, for most people (including me) there wasn’t a component of joy, more of laughing to avoid crying.
[QUOTE=Dangerosa]
There must be a word for what she is describing - but fun - even with the black humor disclaimer - isn’t it.
[/QUOTE]
Schadenfreude probably isn’t it in Nava’s case, though it may apply to others…“darkly amusing” hits a bit closer. (On preview: bemusement is exactly it.)
For the rest of you who held Nava in such esteem, is this really such a crushing blow? It’s not like she said “Yes, they deserved to die, and I hope they burn in hell!” Hell, I thought the overreactions some Americans took were ludicrous myself. No, “fun” wasn’t the right word, but she’s already made her intent clear. Are we going to hold fuckups over everyone’s heads despite evidence that they are not that kind of person?
[QUOTE=Zebra]
The most common usage, at least over here, is for people acting in a extreme panic.
[/QUOTE]
That’s what running around like a headless chicken means there? Here it means running around without guidance or direction.
[QUOTE=Nava]
If someone can give me the word, I’ll be happy to learn it. Neither “entertaining” nor “interesting” seem to quite fit the bill.
[/QUOTE]
I offer to you: bemused.
ETA: I really need to type faster.
[QUOTE=Nava]
more of laughing to avoid crying.
[/QUOTE]
This is such a far cry from anything you have said up until this point. This I can understand. If this is the truth, why didn’t you say this 3 pages ago?
I know the old argument about dictionaries only describing common usage asf, but let’s see…
And specifically regarding Dresden:
Targeting civilians in order to force an outcome, might be considered terrorism, no matter if a state, group or individual is behind the decision. I think it’s despicable, even when it gets the job done, as it did with the two bombs in Japan and the firestorm in Dresden.
As for Martin Shitstain, I happily volounteer to piss on his chips. I’d even consider contracting some vd first to make it spicey.
For what it’s worth, Nava, I appreciate you telling the truth. Lots of people on this board obviously don’t want to hear it, but there were plenty of Americans, including me, watching events unfold after the attacks that were very, very worried about what our politicians were doing.
I saw news reports showing people in Pakistan and the like celebrating the attacks. I got the feeling that it was a come-uppance kind of thing. Sort of like, at last they get a taste of what the rest of the world has to live with. It didn’t make me feel good. But I appreciate getting to see other people’s points of views, and try to understand the reality that they live in is very, very different from my own.
It was extremely predictable that people would be beating their breast and tearing out their hair over your comment. But it is that kind of brutal honesty that makes me appreciate Dopers that aren’t afraid to tell the truth. Not all of us want to live with our heads wrapped up in an American flag so we can’t see other points of view and yelling USA! USA! so we can’t hear what other people have to say.
[QUOTE=Zebra]
The most common usage, at least over here, is for people acting in a extreme panic.
[/QUOTE]
But that’s still quite different from using it to describe people who have actually been killed, which is what you implied in your asinine post earlier.
I’m sure I’ll probably regret this, but since it’s never stopped me before…
First, I do believe essell’s summary was an excellent one. Good job.
Second, Justin-Bailey, you said [italics mine]:
[QUOTE=Justin_Bailey]
I have never understood the feeling among some non-US people after 9/11 that now America would know what it’s like to live in fear of terrorism.
What kind of fucked up country do you live in that terrorism and the threat of more terrorism at any given time is the norm?
And people think Americans live in some sick “culture of violence.” What a crock of shit.
[/QUOTE]
I think it would be important to note that most other countries that suffer from terrorism don’t do so voluntarily and that what is commented on about our “culture of violence” means we don’t typically experience it in reality, but rather so in our medias. Like TV, songs, movies, etc. At least, that’s solely my perception.
Thirdly, I feel like this observation
[Quote=Zebra]
You do realize that a headless chicken is one that has been slaughtered? Right? Their heads (the chicken’s) don’t fall off due to natural causes.
[/quote]
would, although usually go without saying, not necessarily be something one considers if they use it. I know I have plenty of times and have yet to think about the actual situation that renders chickens headless. Furthermore, despite undoubtedly being not one of the majority, I don’t find it an insult to be called that. Yes, it was a horrible turn of phrase to use in a memorial thread, but it describes very accurately how I felt (and how the few I know did as well). Because, to me, the friggin’ sky was falling and who knew if life would ever be the same, because we as Americans don’t normally face that. Mileage obviously varies here.
Finally, were there not reports of some people dancing in the streets after the attacks? If so, I think that would indicate that, at least, there is a group that found the events of 9-11 something (in addition to? besides? both?) other than many did / seemed to / do.
Also again, “fun” isn’t the best choice in detailing reactions of others who peripherally witness another’s pain. However, I see the point being valid in that those who’ve Been There, Done That routinely and perhaps forever, don’t share our outrage. Why they believe we might be callous to their own plight, but aghast and EVERYONE SHOULD TAKE NOTICE OF HOW BAD OURS IS. Does that make sense? It’s must be akin (very tenuously I’m sure, but the best I can think of off the top of my head) to the comparing done when you lose a pet versus a child. I feel that’s an understandable anger on both sides and despite where most opinions lie, we are talking about feelings and I don’t think that’s quantifiable.
Oh, and to the over-reaction thing. Didn’t anyone here do that? I know a couple in my vicinity who did. Who wanted to book the next eventual flight outta here to get to Osama directly. Who gave up eating French fries due to an unpopular stance. And actually had lyrics tattooed on their bodies that they now regret. So why is it bad to acknowledge this? I think it’s only accurate in some cases and, even now, this thread could point to that. I mean, I’ve seen a lot of apologies not accepted in the Pit, but though a couple probably without a doubt fit the bill, how does one definitely know? Certainly when you factor in cultural differences.
P.S. To Nava, as someone suggested above, I suppose it’s wise to remember this is a US based board. Definitely remain honest in your views, but temper what you posit along side sensitivities (or as pertinent like this was). Kind of like not being an anti-religious zealot (much like I feel sometimes deep in my heart) whilst discussing heavy issues with the devout. It just helps not hurt you or them any excessive amount more than required for the conversation at hand.
[QUOTE=Tibidabo ]
Tens if not hundreds of thousands systematically murdered in Latin America by right wing militias and strongman dictators supported funded and encouraged by the US government?
Not spectacular enough to make an impact in the American psyche if theres no spectacular explosions to replay on the evening news?
I was horrified on Sept 11. Don’t get me wrong.
But the attitude of “poor us, what did we do to deserve this?” pisses me off no end.
You reap what you sow. It’s awful, I don’t condone it or like it anywhere. But it has to be expected when you live in a country with such a cold-blooded, ruthless and aggressive foreign policy
[/QUOTE]
No, this I agree with. America has much to be ashamed of. The poster I reacted to specifically brought up specific actions (horrors) of WWII. America is far from clean, this little expedition into Iraq on false pretenses is our latest exercise in shameful stupidity.
However, I will rightfully object to equating Dresden and etc. to 9/11.
Is that fair enough for you?
Jim
[QUOTE=lorene]
This is such a far cry from anything you have said up until this point. This I can understand. If this is the truth, why didn’t you say this 3 pages ago?
[/QUOTE]
I said it… I think it was in the other thread, though.
ETA: yes, there. Post 15.
[QUOTE=faithfool]
Oh, and to the over-reaction thing. Didn’t anyone here do that? I know a couple in my vicinity who did. Who wanted to book the next eventual flight outta here to get to Osama directly. Who gave up eating French fries due to an unpopular stance. And actually had lyrics tattooed on their bodies that they now regret. So why is it bad to acknowledge this? I think it’s only accurate in some cases and, even now, this thread could point to that. I mean, I’ve seen a lot of apologies not accepted in the Pit, but though a couple probably without a doubt fit the bill, how does one definitely know? Certainly when you factor in cultural differences.
[/QUOTE]
I certainly felt that, days and weeks afterwards, there was an over-the-top reaction. Every single story about a person who died in the attacks mentioned what a saint that person was, as though there wasn’t a single asshole among the victims. However, that didn’t seem to be what Nava was talking about at the time.
I say *seem to be * because it’s gotten so confusing with the twists and turns this thread has taken.
This whole thing is making me too sad, especially after reading WhyNot’s words in the linked thread about community.
[QUOTE=saoirse]
It’s true, Dudley you won’t believe how stupid he can get.
Anyway, I was curious how What Exit? would judge something an act of terrorism. Is it that an army can’t commit terrorism? Saddam Hussein gassed the Kurds because there really was an armed separatist movement there, although there was no declared war.
The firebombing of Dresden served no military purpose, and only terrorized the pouplation. What is it that differentiates it from the attack on the Kurds? Is it the use of gas? I’m pretty sure that inhaling 800º air is no more pleasant. Is it because the Germans did worse things? Or is it because it’s us?
[/QUOTE]
I was comparing 9/11 to Dresden. One was an action (a horrible one) taken during total war. The mission objective does appear to boil down to inflicting terror on the enemy country of Nazi Germany. In that, I agree. However, in that war we constantly exchanged horrors with the Axis, did we not? Was Dresden and opening blow? How does it compare to the firebombing of London, the various bombings in Belgium to open the war? The early submarine warfare against civilian & neutral ships? Do we normally treat acts of total war as the same as acts of terror? The horrors might be equal, but they are two different things, in my opinion. Apparently some may vary on this.
Jim
[QUOTE=beanpod]
I’m going to say something that will be unpopular:
Wow. I don’t really think any of you guys actually paid attention to what she’s saying. She said watching the towers fall hurt. She said her hearts went out to those people. She said she knows about the horror of terrorism because she grew up around it. She said she was not talking about people dying. Like way too many people are accusing her of, she was not making light of the death of innocent people.
She was laughing, horrified, and the incompetence in the aftermath. Just like many of us in the USA were doing here, remember? Not one American thought some of the actions of our government were a little ridiculous or over the top in the face of 9/11? Not one American responded to that horror with black humor? Apparently not. Apparently, if you say one bad thing about America in relation to 9/11, you’re a monster, and asshole, and we don’t need your kind here, you can all go home.
Have we learned nothing in the past 6 years?
[/QUOTE]
Can I just save some typing and repeat your post?
I remember that one of my favorite threads post 9/11 was one in which people tried to come up with the headline for the next The Onion edition. People mocked G. Bush and politicians in general, even some non-politicians. Has the Dope change so much?
[QUOTE=Dangerosa]
Sometimes, Nava’s very very very good English just hits wrong. And, although she has a great grasp of American culture - once in a while her behavior is just - not native. It seems possible that this is one of those cases. There must be a word for what she is describing - but fun - even with the black humor disclaimer - isn’t it.
[/QUOTE]
I can’t (of course) come up with a single word, but the phrase “possible comeuppance due to seemingly usual callous disregard” might be appropriate for what that is meant to convey. Could that possibly work?
And lorene, I concur that this has gotten exceedingly confusing. I think I was going for an overall tone / explanation, but I’m no longer be sure.
[QUOTE=Who_me?]
That’s what running around like a headless chicken means there? Here it means running around without guidance or direction.
[/QUOTE]
And who was doing that on 9/11?
I’m sorry, this thread is getting a little too much for me. Nava, has apologized. Her apologists, need to STFU.
I’m with you, Zebra. In a post 9/11 world we should not mock headless birds.