It surprises me that my OP struck such a nerve. At best, all I did was question the merits of various casualty levels. Heck, there are threads all the time denying the existence of - and mocking - God/gods. These folk wish to deny millions of believers everlasting life! Where’s the outrage?!
I also find it interesting that the individual US soldier is granted such an untouchable position. Thanks. Higher than policemen, or just about any other career or profession - which have been regularly lampooned on these boards. Shed some light on the values of at least most folk on these boards. Interesting.
Shodan, it’d depend. I could see that argument taking two forms.
“Kerry’s commie policies are so dangerous that they must be stopped at all costs. If a terrorist bombing is what it takes to stop them, so be it – a few hundred American lives is a small price to pay to prevent American Troops under UN command.” Quite rightly you’d be raked over the coals for making such an argument; to the extent that Dinsdale made such an argument in GD, I think it was right to rake him over the coals.
“If Kerry gets elected to office, there’s certainly going to be huge losses of American lives as his inferior defense policies get put into effect. Far better for a terrorist attack to happen before the election, getting Bush re-elected, than to have Kerry elected and have a huge terrorist event result.” I’d strenuously disagree with you for making such an argument – but I’d disagree based on facts, not on the underlying philosophy.
It seems to me that Dinsdale’s argument is developing into something closer to the latter. It’s still a terrible argument, IMO, but it’s terrible because of its premises and its results, not because of its logic or ethic.
I thought your op was worded badly, but despite my tendancy to “freak out” when issues concerning Desert Storm or the war in Iraq, I defended both your right to post and suggested that maybe you had a point burried underneath your stupid coice word usage.
But the last comment you made to Shodan, proves to me that you a complete and utter irredeemable ass. Keep posting, thats fine with me. The mods, not I will make that decision. But FUCK YOU!
I agree with Askeptic. And I think Daniel’s post rather belittles the urgency of emotion felt by those with loved ones in the war. They aren’t just premises; they’re people.
What askeptic said.
Also, I find it extremely unlikely that had Shodan posted his hypothetical OP, he would have gotten anywhere near the consideration Dinsdalte got. He would have been torn apart (and rightfully so).
I tossed out an arguably extremely worded proposition for possible debate. Someone could have asked for clarification. Presented alternative phrasing or definitions. Or explained why my proposition was full of shit. Yet, precious few if anyone chose to do that. Instead, the near unanimous response was violent ad hominem attacks.
I can think of two explanations for this response. Either a good many folk are so precariously poised on hair triggers that when confronted by certain stimuli, they automatically respond emotionally and violently. Or, they choose to portray themselves in such a manner for any number of conceivable goals. I’m not sure which I consider less desirable.
It seems some people have difficulty distinguishing between what we are doing here – exchanging posts on an electronic message board – and real life.
And it is the esteemed armchair warrior Shodan who brought his nephew into this mess, trying to get some capital out of riding the coattails of an extended family member’s actions. He has called me a good many names. Yet I am forbidden to ridicule behavior on his part that I view as either silly or disingenuous?
Hmm. I think I’m just getting the hang of this place. Maybe I should hang around after all!
Me, unfortunately, too – I wish I hadn’t had the bad luck to simulpost with Dinsdale, inasmuch as it might make it look like i was okay with his last post. Oy gevalt, dude! Not cool!
Huh? In what sense? Have you missed my saying over and over that we have ot recognize the reality of people in this conflict? Have you missed my pointed hypothetical questions toward Dinsdale? Do my links to Iraqibodycount count for nothing?
I thought I’d been very clear, but perhaps I hadn’t. In times of war, people ARE going to die, and it’s legitimate to discuss whether any particular strategy is worth the deaths it’ll entail. It’s also worth discussing this in abstract terms – will 100 deaths now preclude 1000 deaths later, and if so, are we justified in causing (or, more accurately, wishing for) 100 deaths now?
That’s not reducing the people who’d die to “premises.” That’s not discounting the horror of causing any deaths. But it’s treating the death of each of the 100 people with exactly the same gravity as you treat the death of each of the 1,000 people.
The “premises” comment, in context, had nothing to do with any specific deaths. The premises with which I take issue are:
More deaths now will equal fewer deaths later; or
More deaths now will lead to Bush’s leaving office; or
There will inevitably be a large number of people who are going to die in the remainder of this conflict, and the only major question is when they, not how many, will die.
I in no way belittle the emotions of people with loved ones in the war, whether those loved ones are named Tamiqua or Abdullah. But unless you’re an absolute pacifist, you’re going to be advocating somebody’s death at some point.
Dinsdale, I hope that smilie meant that you were not going to hang around. Because it is going to be for me not to get BANNED if stay on the boards. I would like to reiterate the last statement from my last post.
Maybe he did not intend it that way but the conclusion is inescapable. If the USA feels the ends justify the means then it is no better than its enemies who think the ends justify the means. There is no way around it.
The ends do not justify the means and noble ends, no matter how noble, can never justify evil means. If the USA will lower itself to the level of its enemies then it has lost the moral high ground and should not be surprised by the loss of support this means.
I realize this is mostly an American board but you have to realize there are plenty of mostly Muslim boards (and Muslims who talk IRL because they have no access to boards) where the reverse is being discussed and the positions are reversed and some guy is being dragged over the coals because he may have suggested the western invaders may have a point of reason after all. Someone right now is calling him a traitor for defending in any way those who tried to kill (or actually killed) his cousin Omar who was just going about his business.
It is too bad that some people believe killing other people is the way to resolve conflicts but if you live by the sword I suppose you have to be ready to die by the sword.
I hadn’t intended on posting any further to this mess, but this deserves highlighting.
We have Shodan saying the following:
dropzone says that he’d take it easy in response, suggesting time off from the boards to “gain perspective”…though if a “newbie” had done the same thing, dropzone would “fry” him.
Compare that response to the one I got when I postulated someone posting a similar OP:
I got this response:
So, wishing for a big terrorist attack before the election is either a) mildly regrettable (if the poster is a regular), b) horribly vile, if the poster is unknown, or c) “not particularly offensive”.
Inconsistent much?
And if you do intend to respond, try reading the post first. That way, your “anger and frustraction” can be constructively channelled.
Jesus Christ! You people are dramatic! I’ve got an idea: everybody who posted in this thread, including me, quits the board. It can’t help but be improved without us. :rolleyes:
It’s been my experience on these boards that there is a time to keep arguing and then there’s a time to apologize and go feed the ducks for a few days.
Well, I certainly wouldn’t want you to get your dander up over me. It might give you yet another opportunity to run around waving your hands in the air, moaning about how you’re certain to lose control and get banned if I stick around.
That might just be the working definition of “silly”.
