Hey, there was certainly no dancing in the streets or other unbridled celebrations in the US when WW2 was over. No, none at all.
cmyk basically made the same point without being a jerk about it. I understood what he was saying from the first post he made, but apparently it didn’t contain enough vitriol for you to connect with it.
FTR, my take on Lord of the Flies isn’t necessarily that ‘‘violence begets violence’’ - rather that violence is an inherent part of human nature that we cannot escape. Looking at the current state of the world, and the state of the world throughout human history, it is hard for me to argue with that. To be honest with you, though, I didn’t come in here to talk about English literature.
I never referred to myself as a pacifist until this thread. I’ve always hated conflict (including the conflict in this thread) but I don’t think having an aversion to violence is the same thing as believing violence is never necessary. Thinking over the implications of this, I’m not sure it’s an appropriate label. You have a point about WWII.
The original version of my post went into more detail regarding VE and VJ day, and the difference between a celebration that the war was over, versus a more gruesome dancing-on-Hitler’s-grave thing. I cut it back, and ought to have re-read it. My apologies.
However, in the spirit of reconciliation, here’s someone dancing at Auschwitz.
In retrospect, I think it’d be kosher to dance in Hitler’s grave now. In a river in Russia somewhere.
Anyone wanna get wet?!
Wikipedia says “The remains were thoroughly burned and crushed, after which the ashes were thrown into the Biederitz river, a tributary of the nearby Elbe.”
So, next time we’re in Magdeburg, it’s a date. I’ll buy the first post-dance round. This includes you, Finn, and of course you,** Olives**.
I mostly got my unpleasant impressions from the Straight Dope, where we frequently hold ourselves up as better than the unwashed masses.
Ahh, so it’s in “East” Germany… Kinda weird considering the history, but okay. At least we’re sure to have some good beer! Alcohol helps me loosen up my white-boy mooooves.
I’m feelin’ ya.
That was pretty cool.
I thought that was just a cat brushing up against me.
His first set of claims included the idea that “Again, for sure violence begets violence… and eventually someone will take the higher ground, cut their losses and call a truce.” He both defended and (mildly) criticized the whole violence-begets-violence bit while maintaining that unwarranted violence was a bad thing, something that’s hardly a revelatory argument. My whole point was that there wasn’t a coherent principle at work besides “bad things are bad” and that muddying the water with v-b-v principles and such wasn’t helping.
Don’t know about Dillinger but people in and around Dallas FEARED Bonnie and Clyde. Those two were nothing more nor less that mad dogs.
Apparently SMERSH had the bits in the East, and when they were looking at turning operations over to the East Germans, they decided they’d better make a definite move. This is all from Wikipedia, so this is pretty much rumor, but there you go.
After the Nuremberg war criminals were hanged photos were published of their heads with the ropes still around their necks. Then the bodies were cremated, and their ashes dispersed, so that they could not be housed in a shrine later.
At the time Nazism was a discredited ideology, so we could dis the leaders and get away with it. Currently, Islam is the second largest religion in the world, and most Muslims take their faith seriously. President Obama thought it would be unwise to anger them needlessly, especially when we need the support of as many as possible to protect us from the others.
Fucking hell, did you actually just compare Nazism as a discredited ideology with Islam?
What the fuck is wrong with you?
As I read it he did the opposite of say Islam is discredited, at least with a lot of people:
he points out it is “the second largest religion in the world”.
What do you think he said?
Are you kidding me?
Did your knee jerk so hard that it prevented you from actually reading the post?
So you’re snarking about me not reading it… because you didn’t comprehend it? Really? Okay, let’s play remedial Dope.
-When we executed Nazi war criminals we were able to display their bodies to the public.
-This was because Nazism was a vile ideology that was discredited and we could “dis the leaders”.
-Islam however is not discredited.
-So we can not “dis” Bin Laden, as he is one of the leaders of Islam similar to the way that the Nuremberg trials punished the leaders of Nazism.
-Further, showing the body of Bin Laden would anger “them”, Muslims in general.
-And we need the support of “them”, Muslims in general, in order to protect us from other Muslims.
-Because, after all, Bin Laden is one of their leaders, we can not dis him because rather than being discredited Islam has lots of followers.
Was that really all too complicated for you?
Next time you feel like being stupid and vomiting about “kneejerking”, it behooves you to actually understand what was said. Just, ya know, for appearance’s sake.
I think you’re projecting a fair bit into NDD’s argument there, Finn.