My question is not whether our actions are too high a price to pay to prevent another terrorist strike - My question is whether our actions are really doing ANYTHING to stop the terrorists. If we've killed civilians to prevent terrorist attacks, maybe we can still call ourselves moral. If we've killed civilians to create the warm cocoon of denial, to convince ourselves that we're safe while not stopping anything... then we have most certainly crossed the line in to the unethical. And if we have killed those civilians out of a need for petty revenge, we have gone so far across the line as to be evil ourselves.
I just ask that you consider how effective what we're doing REALLY is, before you call for more of the same. Has OUR killing of civilians done anything?
Please do.
-
BanditAngel
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 1999 4:00 pm
- Contact:
Probably because Rann left.Dennis K wrote:Hmm.
You know, I just felt like saying how pleased I am that in the span of 24 hours this thread has gone from Rann spouting obscenities towards anyone who disagrees with him to an actual serious discussion about current events.
Very pleased indeed.
My own concern about the crossfire victims is simply "How many terrorists will we create by doing this?" If you recall, that was a major problem in Vietnam, creating more enemies every single day of operations.
-
BunnyStompthePig
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 3:28 pm
Okay, American Servicememeber here, so note my prejudiced slant on things... 
(Hey Yuna, you ain't the only Right Wing Texas Boy here!)
Thoughts springing to mind while reading this topic:
1. I fully support Prez Bush. He told us it would be long, he told us he would hunt down the bad guys wherever they may hide. So far he has detailed my brethren and myself to places where clearly our interests lie. He has not sent us into police actions and expended Americans lives in actions where our roles are unclear.
2. I was extremely dissatisified with Clinton. His arrogance in deciding that he was above the law should have seen him impeached. What little he gained us a Statesman was effectively reversed with the farce he made of the highest office. I do not wish that the president be a saint, I merely wish that he is at least honest about his actions. Clinton did not even have the moral courage to admit his actions when faced with evidence, proof and witnesses. In a child, this attitude is intolerable and must be punished, in an adult male in the highest office, it is shameful.
3. We cannot choose to engage in a tit for tat style war. If we in anyway, allow the terrorists to believe that they may get away with such despicable acts of cowardice, then we cannot win. We must exterminate the opposition for they have shown they have no regard for innocent life. If we make punitive strikes and stop, then we will more than likely fall victim to a "peace" that sees civil liberties and privacy reduced even more than now. I for one, am alarmed at the amount of intrusion implemented and allowed now for the sake of national security. If further steps are taken, if suspension of the normal rules of probable cause are suspended based upon the way a person looks, or the spelling of their last name, then we have gone to far and have allowed the bastards to win. America must be strong and must end this threat. That means completely eliminating Al-Queda and demonstrating to the world that we are still the biggest dog on the block. Some may view us as bullies, but this appears to me to be a simple matter of punishing the dog that bit you. We must completely destroy Al-Queda and Bin-Laden to demonstrate to the thinking terrorists of the world that they cannot win. The unthinking, the true believers, and the insane we have only the normal defenses, but the intelligent bastards like Bin-Laden must be taught the consequences of actions taken against America.
4. BJ, This comic was somewhat slanted. I can understand where you come from with this point. I do not agree with it. Some persons have shown that they cannot tolerate the way that Americans live. I do not say that we are innocent. I do not say that American foreign policy did not influence this action in anyway. I state that if a person is weak enough to determine that the only way to propose his opinion to the world is to attempt to kill tens of thousands of peope, then that evil person must be eliminated and all who share his disregard of human life with him. The loss of innocent lives through errors or miscalculations is a horrible by product of war. This is a pathetic excuse, but it is the only one that can be offered to offset the injustice of "friendly fire" incidents;
Evil Lies in Intent.
5. Citrish, I totally lost the thread of who called someone unpatriotic. But you are correct to state that bullies use it. Earlier in this thread somebody compares Rann's Rant to McCarthyism. Rann did have a intelligent rebuttal to that charge, but if he called BJ unpatriotic then I must truly state that his Rant is extremely similiar to McCarthyism.
The great problem with the "Red Scare" was the fact that the labeling of someone as a communist had an almost immediate adverse affect on the person being labeled. Careers and lives were ruined because some people were labeled as communists, often merely for disagreements or different views. The person labeling these "communists", often did so out of malice, or a viewing of the "communists" opinions as dangerous. Often there was no justification and the effects were extensive, view Arthur Miller's career and how long it took him to recover.
"Unpatriotic" is just the modern day version of "Communist" or "Faggot" or "Hippy". It often has no basis, attempts to affect onlookers in a negative manner by disconnecting reason and associating the one being labeled with something dangerous to the herd. To me though, it is more offensive than the earlier epitephs(sp?) because it is so hypocritical. As if calling someones art, or speech or comic unpatriotic is some great act of patriotism.
6. Difference is what makes this country great. Homogenize us all and see what happens.
This somewhat lucid rant brought to you by the council for prevention of things offensive to the greater majority that must therefore be outlawed because new things are dangerous and change is bad hence everyone should only view things of a vanilla flavor because we are the only ones intelligent enough to determine the decency of any modern art form. Often abbreviated as S.T.O.O.P.I.D. F.U.K.S
(Hey Yuna, you ain't the only Right Wing Texas Boy here!)
Thoughts springing to mind while reading this topic:
1. I fully support Prez Bush. He told us it would be long, he told us he would hunt down the bad guys wherever they may hide. So far he has detailed my brethren and myself to places where clearly our interests lie. He has not sent us into police actions and expended Americans lives in actions where our roles are unclear.
2. I was extremely dissatisified with Clinton. His arrogance in deciding that he was above the law should have seen him impeached. What little he gained us a Statesman was effectively reversed with the farce he made of the highest office. I do not wish that the president be a saint, I merely wish that he is at least honest about his actions. Clinton did not even have the moral courage to admit his actions when faced with evidence, proof and witnesses. In a child, this attitude is intolerable and must be punished, in an adult male in the highest office, it is shameful.
3. We cannot choose to engage in a tit for tat style war. If we in anyway, allow the terrorists to believe that they may get away with such despicable acts of cowardice, then we cannot win. We must exterminate the opposition for they have shown they have no regard for innocent life. If we make punitive strikes and stop, then we will more than likely fall victim to a "peace" that sees civil liberties and privacy reduced even more than now. I for one, am alarmed at the amount of intrusion implemented and allowed now for the sake of national security. If further steps are taken, if suspension of the normal rules of probable cause are suspended based upon the way a person looks, or the spelling of their last name, then we have gone to far and have allowed the bastards to win. America must be strong and must end this threat. That means completely eliminating Al-Queda and demonstrating to the world that we are still the biggest dog on the block. Some may view us as bullies, but this appears to me to be a simple matter of punishing the dog that bit you. We must completely destroy Al-Queda and Bin-Laden to demonstrate to the thinking terrorists of the world that they cannot win. The unthinking, the true believers, and the insane we have only the normal defenses, but the intelligent bastards like Bin-Laden must be taught the consequences of actions taken against America.
4. BJ, This comic was somewhat slanted. I can understand where you come from with this point. I do not agree with it. Some persons have shown that they cannot tolerate the way that Americans live. I do not say that we are innocent. I do not say that American foreign policy did not influence this action in anyway. I state that if a person is weak enough to determine that the only way to propose his opinion to the world is to attempt to kill tens of thousands of peope, then that evil person must be eliminated and all who share his disregard of human life with him. The loss of innocent lives through errors or miscalculations is a horrible by product of war. This is a pathetic excuse, but it is the only one that can be offered to offset the injustice of "friendly fire" incidents;
Evil Lies in Intent.
5. Citrish, I totally lost the thread of who called someone unpatriotic. But you are correct to state that bullies use it. Earlier in this thread somebody compares Rann's Rant to McCarthyism. Rann did have a intelligent rebuttal to that charge, but if he called BJ unpatriotic then I must truly state that his Rant is extremely similiar to McCarthyism.
The great problem with the "Red Scare" was the fact that the labeling of someone as a communist had an almost immediate adverse affect on the person being labeled. Careers and lives were ruined because some people were labeled as communists, often merely for disagreements or different views. The person labeling these "communists", often did so out of malice, or a viewing of the "communists" opinions as dangerous. Often there was no justification and the effects were extensive, view Arthur Miller's career and how long it took him to recover.
"Unpatriotic" is just the modern day version of "Communist" or "Faggot" or "Hippy". It often has no basis, attempts to affect onlookers in a negative manner by disconnecting reason and associating the one being labeled with something dangerous to the herd. To me though, it is more offensive than the earlier epitephs(sp?) because it is so hypocritical. As if calling someones art, or speech or comic unpatriotic is some great act of patriotism.
6. Difference is what makes this country great. Homogenize us all and see what happens.
This somewhat lucid rant brought to you by the council for prevention of things offensive to the greater majority that must therefore be outlawed because new things are dangerous and change is bad hence everyone should only view things of a vanilla flavor because we are the only ones intelligent enough to determine the decency of any modern art form. Often abbreviated as S.T.O.O.P.I.D. F.U.K.S
Welcome to the rest of your life!
...
...
...
Are you scared yet?
...
...
...
Are you scared yet?
-
Allan_ecker
- Cartoon Hero
- Posts: 2706
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 1999 4:00 pm
- Location: Portland, OR, USA
- Contact:
I heard someone say, shortly after the attacks, "They say they don't know who did it? Bullshit! They all did it! We should just turn the entire middle east into one big radioactive glass pancake, and start over."
I put my head in my hands, got into the fetal position, and backed up against the wall of my cubicle to to make myself as inconspicuous as possible. I'm pretty sure I cried.
Internally, I must say that I feel the strongest rage possible in my normally cute-and-bouncy soul for many of the cultures over there because they do not treat women with respect. Disrespecting woman probably isn't the worst thing in the world, but to me, it sure FEELS like it.
I was really cheering on the destruction of the Taliban for just that reason. It had nothing to do with terrorism. This was personal.
But anything that kills people should NEVER be personal. That's why I'm glad we went in there with specific intent and not some stupid carpet-bomb solution. I trust my government, because it's made of educated Americans. But I don't trust it 100%, no matter what.
I also agree that, by the nature of these governments, they may always hate us. Anyone who's played Alpha Centaur knows that choosing certain political structures will make certain players hate you even if you continually appease them. Freedom and secularity will always make some people hate us, but hopefully, one day there will be true, consistent, useful and enforced international law.
One more thing:
I probably would never defect to Canada just because the wrong candidate got elected. There are a few things that could make me leave, however. The minute they start rounding up the bisexuals, for example, I am *so* out of here...
I put my head in my hands, got into the fetal position, and backed up against the wall of my cubicle to to make myself as inconspicuous as possible. I'm pretty sure I cried.
Internally, I must say that I feel the strongest rage possible in my normally cute-and-bouncy soul for many of the cultures over there because they do not treat women with respect. Disrespecting woman probably isn't the worst thing in the world, but to me, it sure FEELS like it.
I was really cheering on the destruction of the Taliban for just that reason. It had nothing to do with terrorism. This was personal.
But anything that kills people should NEVER be personal. That's why I'm glad we went in there with specific intent and not some stupid carpet-bomb solution. I trust my government, because it's made of educated Americans. But I don't trust it 100%, no matter what.
I also agree that, by the nature of these governments, they may always hate us. Anyone who's played Alpha Centaur knows that choosing certain political structures will make certain players hate you even if you continually appease them. Freedom and secularity will always make some people hate us, but hopefully, one day there will be true, consistent, useful and enforced international law.
One more thing:
I probably would never defect to Canada just because the wrong candidate got elected. There are a few things that could make me leave, however. The minute they start rounding up the bisexuals, for example, I am *so* out of here...
<A HREF="http://umlauthouse.comicgenesis.com" TARGET=_blank>UH2: The Mayhem of a New Generation</A>
"Death and taxes are unsolved engineering problems."
--Romano Machado
"Death and taxes are unsolved engineering problems."
--Romano Machado
And you're not the only service member here.BunnyStompthePig wrote:Okay, American Servicememeber here, so note my prejudiced slant on things...
(Hey Yuna, you ain't the only Right Wing Texas Boy here!)
Speaking of rights we also have the right to bear arms... Call me "Yuna" again and I'll shoot you.
-
BJ
- Cartoon Hero
- Posts: 1875
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 1999 4:00 pm
- Location: Stevens Point, WI USA
- Contact:
Just a few replies and clarifications...
This hatred runs very very deep, bolstered a good deal by government propaganda. How many Americans harboured such a hatred for Islamic folks a year ago? Not a lot. We get the anti-them propaganda as well.
And in other news...
Cannonshop, I also don't agree with some of the details, but I completely see where you're coming from as well. I know it doesn't matter who's in the white house or congress. There will never be a holistic approach to governing this country, so we're equally screwed by any party, just in different ways. Bush is doing no better or worse a job than anybody else, and I have no beef against him as a person. I've been careful to say the Bush Administration...it's the whole gang.
As to using their countries as a bombing range, they seem to be doing that well enough on their own. If you were in charge, I'd assume the discussion on nuclear attack options would have been nixed quicker. Otherwise, you're probably just as good a bet as anybody. (That's something of a compliment.)
BanditAngel: Nothing we do is going to stop terrorism. It's too scattered and these organisations will easily go underground if need be. The best we can hope for is to stop the cash flow and support lines--which actually has happened a bit.
BunnyStompthePig: Any soapbox comic, political or otherwise, will be slanted. I never said I was fair or even that my opinion is right. I'm just spouting off. We may not agree politically, but I'm very happy to find out that your usual happy, fluffy posts have such a thoughtful and articulate mind behind them. And I fully agree with point #6.
Allan: I'm also pretty happy that our government is, on the whole, more intelligent than most examples of humanity I see in my area. I've heard similar rants ("Bomb them all") myself, and it just depresses me.
Yun: I'm sorry I put you off with the strip. I've never been patriotic in any way (I've avoided every homecoming in my school history because I fail to see the point in rah-rah flag waving), but that's not the same as disliking my country. I really do like it here, and it's a heck of a lot better than a majority of the alternatives. I also mentioned above that I have nothing against GW Bush, and I have never said he's responsible for corporate corruption--I was trying to refer to the government as a whole (I just phrased it poorly). I realise corruption in big business has been going on since Rockefeller...and longer.
As for Clinton, he has nothing to do with current affairs. Sure, he was a liar and an adulterer, but he didn't do anything that Jack Kennedy hadn't already done to greater excess. Name me one politician who hasn't lied--grand jury or not. His extramarital affairs didn't really affect the job he did as president, and I don't feel he was any better or worse than Bush. I'm not defending him, I'm just tired of hearing about someone who really doesn't matter anymore.
Sorry, this reply comes off as kind of harsh. I'm very tired. I really did enjoy your post, even though it may not sound like it.
And finally, I must insist that if you shoot BunnyStompthePig, you use one of those neat guns that shoots those foam discs. That way he can still read the comic (unless he chooses not to) and we can all laugh at the way the discs bounce comically off his head.
And once again, since I can't say it enough: Thank you, everyone, for keeping this discussion intelligent and civil.
I got a couple emails as well raising this point, to which I replied that the thought that these people are jealous of us is arrogant on our part. They hate us. The guys who hijacked those planes lived here for years. They had jobs and families--one hosted a block party for his neighbourhood. They had everything this country has to offer them (and anyone else who wants to move here). They attacked us anyway.jdhays wrote:BJ, did you ever consider that the reason they don't like us is because we exist? (...) America (and Israel) success is a slap in the face to people whose beliefs tell them that they should be on top.
This hatred runs very very deep, bolstered a good deal by government propaganda. How many Americans harboured such a hatred for Islamic folks a year ago? Not a lot. We get the anti-them propaganda as well.
It does, and I'm sorry. It's not a very precise or well-designed strip. I meant to imply that the average Joe in that country would rather we keep to ourselves instead of meddling in their affairs--once again, something that's been going on for years. It sucks over there and has for a long time. People suffer tremendous horrors daily, but the last thing they want is for us to come in and meddle, which is what we do best. If we keep working our international finger in their open wound, we will get slapped. And when we did get slapped, we got a taste of what it's like to be them. I hate what happened, and I mourn the loss of innocent lives. But I refuse to buy into the hatred.jdhays wrote:Your comic implies that we are using a excessive force to squash an insignificant foe.
Yes, we should have. And we chose not to.jdhays wrote:We should have defended ourselves when they carbombed our embassies ten years ago
Exactly.jdhays wrote:How about if everybody keeps to themselves.
And in other news...
Cannonshop, I also don't agree with some of the details, but I completely see where you're coming from as well. I know it doesn't matter who's in the white house or congress. There will never be a holistic approach to governing this country, so we're equally screwed by any party, just in different ways. Bush is doing no better or worse a job than anybody else, and I have no beef against him as a person. I've been careful to say the Bush Administration...it's the whole gang.
As to using their countries as a bombing range, they seem to be doing that well enough on their own. If you were in charge, I'd assume the discussion on nuclear attack options would have been nixed quicker. Otherwise, you're probably just as good a bet as anybody. (That's something of a compliment.)
BanditAngel: Nothing we do is going to stop terrorism. It's too scattered and these organisations will easily go underground if need be. The best we can hope for is to stop the cash flow and support lines--which actually has happened a bit.
BunnyStompthePig: Any soapbox comic, political or otherwise, will be slanted. I never said I was fair or even that my opinion is right. I'm just spouting off. We may not agree politically, but I'm very happy to find out that your usual happy, fluffy posts have such a thoughtful and articulate mind behind them. And I fully agree with point #6.
Allan: I'm also pretty happy that our government is, on the whole, more intelligent than most examples of humanity I see in my area. I've heard similar rants ("Bomb them all") myself, and it just depresses me.
Yun: I'm sorry I put you off with the strip. I've never been patriotic in any way (I've avoided every homecoming in my school history because I fail to see the point in rah-rah flag waving), but that's not the same as disliking my country. I really do like it here, and it's a heck of a lot better than a majority of the alternatives. I also mentioned above that I have nothing against GW Bush, and I have never said he's responsible for corporate corruption--I was trying to refer to the government as a whole (I just phrased it poorly). I realise corruption in big business has been going on since Rockefeller...and longer.
As for Clinton, he has nothing to do with current affairs. Sure, he was a liar and an adulterer, but he didn't do anything that Jack Kennedy hadn't already done to greater excess. Name me one politician who hasn't lied--grand jury or not. His extramarital affairs didn't really affect the job he did as president, and I don't feel he was any better or worse than Bush. I'm not defending him, I'm just tired of hearing about someone who really doesn't matter anymore.
Sorry, this reply comes off as kind of harsh. I'm very tired. I really did enjoy your post, even though it may not sound like it.
And finally, I must insist that if you shoot BunnyStompthePig, you use one of those neat guns that shoots those foam discs. That way he can still read the comic (unless he chooses not to) and we can all laugh at the way the discs bounce comically off his head.
And once again, since I can't say it enough: Thank you, everyone, for keeping this discussion intelligent and civil.
-
Red_Cedars
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 7:51 pm
- Location: Western Washington
- Contact:
Just wanted to say I really hate discussions like this thread, (conversation is like fire, some generate more heat than light) but this quote really made my day. Thanks.BunnyStompthePig wrote: ...
This somewhat lucid rant brought to you by the council for prevention of things offensive to the greater majority that must therefore be outlawed because new things are dangerous and change is bad hence everyone should only view things of a vanilla flavor because we are the only ones intelligent enough to determine the decency of any modern art form. Often abbreviated as S.T.O.O.P.I.D. F.U.K.S
...
R_C
==============
Sometimes, if you listen very carefully,
behind all the noise and confusion,
you can hear the Silence.
==============
Sometimes, if you listen very carefully,
behind all the noise and confusion,
you can hear the Silence.
==============
-
BunnyStompthePig
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 3:28 pm
So two RWTB ASM with the right to bear arms(figuring we're both from TX if not currently there, that must mean there is at least one small arm in our homes)... I think it'd be a draw Yun so let's not do it, just please forget the extra vowel, I swear I didn't mean nuttin' by it.Yun648 wrote:And you're not the only service member here.BunnyStompthePig wrote:Okay, American Servicememeber here, so note my prejudiced slant on things...
(Hey Yuna, you ain't the only Right Wing Texas Boy here!)
Speaking of rights we also have the right to bear arms... Call me "Yuna" again and I'll shoot you.
Beej, as I said I understand your point, and your license to make it. That's what makes JF such a fun link to read when I can. I may disagree with your view, or with a portion of your view, but I can still admire the way you present it, and defend your right to do so.
If Yun does decide to shoot me, I sure hope he uses those foam discs, or maybe a beanbag shotgun shell, or at least aims for my head, cuz lord knows 5cm of concrete can deflect a lot of force!
Sort of a Beej/Caryn addressal, what is Caryn's opinion of this strip? I know Caryn(JF) is just based on Caryn(Psychoblonde), but it does represent her to some degree.
Caryn, how you feelin' these days anyways? You are getting better like I ordered you to right?
Rann, thanks for being so obnoxious, I really feel better for my anti-rant-rants. Now I must return to my usual, moronic, monosyllabic, mostly Caddyshackian humouruesque posts. (Beej has got me all self-conscious now...)
Welcome to the rest of your life!
...
...
...
Are you scared yet?
...
...
...
Are you scared yet?
In a recent development (well, something I saw on AOL this morning), all those of you that hoped to God (or whatever deity you might happen to/not worship) Bin Laden was already dead have pretty much had your hopes dashed. Me? I wasn't really hungering for his death but I thought it would be rather pleasant. Even if he wasn't responsible for 9/11 (which may or may not be up in the air still, I'm terribly uninformed) I would take great pleasure in seeing a terrorist brought to his justice. Basically, Bin Laden came on video and declared 'Attack them everywhere'.
One of my internet friends notified me that there was a fire in his area just as I looked at this article. Coincidence, yes, but it scared me.
I like my warm fuzzy blanket of security. Stupid terrorists...stupid Bin Laden...
One of my internet friends notified me that there was a fire in his area just as I looked at this article. Coincidence, yes, but it scared me.
I like my warm fuzzy blanket of security. Stupid terrorists...stupid Bin Laden...
Angst? I've got angst.
-
Cannonshop
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 572
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 1999 4:00 pm
- Location: Everett,Washington,USA
- Contact:
Security... Maybe that is what is wrong with our culture today- Everyone wants to believe that they can be Safe. More to the point, that the Government can make them "Safe". For Terrorists, no target is "Forbidden" save the one they haven't figured out how to attack. We are in no more danger now, than we were ten or fifteen years ago, we'll be in no more danger from fruits like Bin-Laden and his gang tomorrow, than we are in danger from any one of the hosts of domestic scumbags already present inside our borders.
The ones we grow here, we charge with criminal charges, we don't dignify them by treating them as any kind of political entity. This is also why the Taliban forces brought to GTMO weren't treated according to the Geneva Conventions- they were "Armed Criminals" involved in a criminal conspiracy, not an Army involved in military operations. Quite a bit of the Taliban and Al-Quaeda financing came from the production and marketing of Opiates- Heroin, folks, Afghanistan was exporting it by the ton, not doubt a lot of it bound for American veins. Like other Racketeers before him, Bin-Laden uses a Political-Social movement as cover for his money-making schemes. Remember, this jerk is supposed to be an islamic Fundamentalist- yet, he relies on Dialysis to stay alive. (yeah, he's got bad kidneys, folks!)
As for the arguments about "Good" and, "evil", well...There's an old-school difference between a Terrorist, and, a Freedom Fighter.
It goes something like this:
A Terrorist seeks to inspire Terror, his primary weapons of choice are Civilians, whom he uses as his main targets. Terrorists operate like Gansters in this regard.
A Freedom Fighter seeks to fight his enemy- if Civilians are killed, he regrets it, and, his efforts focus on limiting civilian casualties, even in his enemy's homeland. Freedom Fighters behave much like Soldiers in this regard.
Personally, I hope they catch the SOB, and, I hope they try him at the state level for each and every death his conspiracy caused in New York, Pennsylvania, and, in Virginia. (or, is it Maryland? I can't remember which state hosts the Pentagon...) treating this scumbag like a Criminal Racketeer would send the right message to his pals- that they are nothing more than common criminals, whatever sociopolitical crap they wrap themselves in. I mean, we don't try Nazis for being Nazis, we try 'em for Assault, Bankrobbery, and, Criminal Conspiracy and Racketeering. This is probably reason number one why our domestic brand of Psychotic scum are so weak.
The ones we grow here, we charge with criminal charges, we don't dignify them by treating them as any kind of political entity. This is also why the Taliban forces brought to GTMO weren't treated according to the Geneva Conventions- they were "Armed Criminals" involved in a criminal conspiracy, not an Army involved in military operations. Quite a bit of the Taliban and Al-Quaeda financing came from the production and marketing of Opiates- Heroin, folks, Afghanistan was exporting it by the ton, not doubt a lot of it bound for American veins. Like other Racketeers before him, Bin-Laden uses a Political-Social movement as cover for his money-making schemes. Remember, this jerk is supposed to be an islamic Fundamentalist- yet, he relies on Dialysis to stay alive. (yeah, he's got bad kidneys, folks!)
As for the arguments about "Good" and, "evil", well...There's an old-school difference between a Terrorist, and, a Freedom Fighter.
It goes something like this:
A Terrorist seeks to inspire Terror, his primary weapons of choice are Civilians, whom he uses as his main targets. Terrorists operate like Gansters in this regard.
A Freedom Fighter seeks to fight his enemy- if Civilians are killed, he regrets it, and, his efforts focus on limiting civilian casualties, even in his enemy's homeland. Freedom Fighters behave much like Soldiers in this regard.
Personally, I hope they catch the SOB, and, I hope they try him at the state level for each and every death his conspiracy caused in New York, Pennsylvania, and, in Virginia. (or, is it Maryland? I can't remember which state hosts the Pentagon...) treating this scumbag like a Criminal Racketeer would send the right message to his pals- that they are nothing more than common criminals, whatever sociopolitical crap they wrap themselves in. I mean, we don't try Nazis for being Nazis, we try 'em for Assault, Bankrobbery, and, Criminal Conspiracy and Racketeering. This is probably reason number one why our domestic brand of Psychotic scum are so weak.
-
Red_Cedars
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2002 7:51 pm
- Location: Western Washington
- Contact:
Technically, it's neither. The District of Columbia was set up to be independant of the States. But it IS surrounded by Maryland if that makes a difference (and it doesn't).Cannonshop wrote:death his conspiracy caused in New York, Pennsylvania, and, in Virginia. (or, is it Maryland? I can't remember which state hosts the Pentagon...)
FWIW,
R_C
==============
Sometimes, if you listen very carefully,
behind all the noise and confusion,
you can hear the Silence.
==============
Sometimes, if you listen very carefully,
behind all the noise and confusion,
you can hear the Silence.
==============
What hatred? People have been tripping over themselves in order to portray this as a war on terrorists not Muslims. (It would be nice if more Muslims denounced the terrorists.) With the exception of a few nuts back in Sept., they hasn't been any rasist attacks directed against Muslims. Their have been people detained on immigration charges. They are being treated as people with expired visas, not terrorists. They could have been arrested in August, 2001 and no one would care.BJ wrote:But I refuse to buy into the hatred.
Not every response has been bombing. We've got Col. Powell travelling the globe, using diplomacy to end the state sponsorship of terrorism. In Yemen and Malaysia, it's working. We gave Afganistan months to expel the terrorists. They couldn't, so we went after the terrorists and their sponsors. We are giving Iraq every opportunity to prove he doesn't have biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons. He won't and, since he used them before (against his own people), we are going to have to distroy those weapons. Are these acts of hatred? Is defending yourself an act of hatred? We are not going into these countries, risking the lives of our soldiers, out of hatred.
-
Franc28
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 269
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 1999 4:00 pm
- Location: Montreal, QC Canada
- Contact:
Here's my own final word on this stupid subject :
Boxcutters 3, America 0
Boxcutters 3, America 0
Evil will always win because good is stupid. Yes, that includes you.
http://www.insolitology.com - the bizarre on the web, from Alex Chiu to Scientology, all in one place !
http://www.insolitology.com - the bizarre on the web, from Alex Chiu to Scientology, all in one place !
-
BastetKitten
- Newbie
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2002 5:41 am
- Location: Arlington, VA
I guess you could say the argument wrapped up there with Zorland. I just wanted to get my 2 cents in. It WAS evil what the terrorists did. There is no denying that. I was very on the fence about the whole bombing Afganistan thing. I wasn't to pleased with killing innocent civilians, they (in general) didn't have a thing to do with it. But we couldn't go with out retaliation. I'm still not sure if what we did was right, I guess I never will be. But you can't plese everyone. That was the first thing I learned, when you try to please everyone, someone is always hurt.
Alright. I'm done. *zips up mouth*
Alright. I'm done. *zips up mouth*
Hello, my name is Doc, and I'll be your nit-picker for this evening.BJ wrote:Let's see. I love this country. I love being here, the options I have here and the beauty that surrounds me. I hate the way it's run. This isn't a democracy any more, it's pure capitalism.
America is not now, and never has been a Democracy. America's government is not now, and never has been, Capitalist.
The current form of American government is a Representitive Democracy. Some would claim that in reality it's closer to a Representitive Oligarchy (Goverment of everyone but the rich, by the rich, for the rich). I'll not make any judgement either way, but I will note that I've seen many comments from self-proclaimed Republicans that indicate a belief that only "Loyal" Republicans should be allowed to vote, hold office, etc.
Democracy means that everyone votes on every decision. You can't effectively run a household that way, much less a national government.
Capitalism means you choose the path that generates the most profit. A Capitalist Government would not tax it's citizens, it would pay them dividends. America's government is not capitalist, but is supported by a capitalist economy.
Doc
I believe that Rann has provided a suitable body of evidence that clearly shows that he (I'm guessing) is the formost expert on the actions of self-centered, self-righteous jackasses.Rann wrote:You turned the comic into your own personal soapbox, which is something most self-centered, self-righteous jackasses with a chance to speak to a lot of people do.
Doc
Geography nitpick!Red_Cedars wrote:Technically, it's neither. The District of Columbia was set up to be independant of the States. But it IS surrounded by Maryland if that makes a difference (and it doesn't).Cannonshop wrote:death his conspiracy caused in New York, Pennsylvania, and, in Virginia. (or, is it Maryland? I can't remember which state hosts the Pentagon...)
FWIW,
R_C
The District of Columbia is surrounded by Maryland on three sides, and by the Potomac River on the fourth side. The State of Virginia claims that the Potomac River is entirely in Maryland so that it doesn't have to pay for the upkeep of bridges over the Potomac.
The Pentagon is NOT in the District of Columbia! The Pentagon is in Arlington, Virginia. Arlington, Virginia was the section of Virginia that was supposed to become part of the District, but the State of Virginia put off donating the land to the District and then finally reneged on the entire deal. The Pentagon is accross the Potomac from the Jefferson Memorial (roughly speaking).
Doc
First of all let me state for the record that my threat to shoot BunnyStompThePig was a joke intended to lighten the mood, cause I realize I have a tendency to get over emotional about politics. It's a character flaw I'm well aware of but I'm not sure how to go about fixing it.BJ wrote:Yun: I'm sorry I put you off with the strip. I've never been patriotic in any way (I've avoided every homecoming in my school history because I fail to see the point in rah-rah flag waving), but that's not the same as disliking my country. I really do like it here, and it's a heck of a lot better than a majority of the alternatives. I also mentioned above that I have nothing against GW Bush, and I have never said he's responsible for corporate corruption--I was trying to refer to the government as a whole (I just phrased it poorly). I realise corruption in big business has been going on since Rockefeller...and longer.
As for Clinton, he has nothing to do with current affairs. Sure, he was a liar and an adulterer, but he didn't do anything that Jack Kennedy hadn't already done to greater excess. Name me one politician who hasn't lied--grand jury or not. His extramarital affairs didn't really affect the job he did as president, and I don't feel he was any better or worse than Bush. I'm not defending him, I'm just tired of hearing about someone who really doesn't matter anymore.
Sorry, this reply comes off as kind of harsh. I'm very tired. I really did enjoy your post, even though it may not sound like it.
And finally, I must insist that if you shoot BunnyStompthePig, you use one of those neat guns that shoots those foam discs. That way he can still read the comic (unless he chooses not to) and we can all laugh at the way the discs bounce comically off his head.
Second: I have no intention of blaming Clinton for the current situation. I know better than that. The ones who blame him are the ones who are flustered and can't come up with a logical argument.
Third: I vehemently disagree that what Clinton did had no effect on his presidency. The man looked us right in the eye and lied to us, and to the other two branches of the government, and continued to lie even after he was caught. Comparing him to JFK (whose affairs took place on his own time) is misleading, he's closer in character to Nixon with his apparant belief that as president he was above the law. When a man proves beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt that he cannot be trusted, you can bet all the Dong in Vietman that that affects his ability to do his job.
Fourth: True, that particulr strip turned me off... but only temporarily. Once this political nonsense is over, I'll be back here with a smile on my face
(Note: Dong is Vietnamese currency, FYI)