PNWI Community Thread version 3.0 (KEEP REFRIGERATED AT ALL TIMES)

[siva_chair]

The onus is on you first

To show that moral agency is derived from reason

In other words, NO U

Natural rights are the universal ethics derived from man's nature.

Natural law is discovered by reason from the basic inclinations of human nature. The natural law elucidates what is best for man i.e. what ends man should pursue that are most harmonious with, and best tend to fulfill, his nature.

Ok now your turn nervous system boy.

dumbest thing you've ever said

If people can arbitrarily assign rights to animals, I can just as well do the same for vegetables.

they should be protected from unnecessary abuse, over hunting and the like.

Ok where does this show that animals have rights?

People have to remember humans in nature are a part of the means, not the end.

What are you judging this on?

Man could have not invented rights if he did not have a CNS :/

Man did not "invent" rights, for one. Second, it in no way follows that rights are derived from a CNS. Man couldn't have "invented" rights were it not for DNA or RNA. Does it follow that everything with DNA or RNA has the same rights as humans?

Oh God, I can't believe I missed this post.

I'm seriously crying right now. So bad.

Yes because it wasn't as though I was trying to illustrate the absurdity of something. I was totally serious. :rolleyes:

siva chair have you ever been loved?

maybe if you had a pet they would love you, and that is where the beauty of animals is, even if you are the most insensitive, coarse, and rude person to ever live, but you feed an animal, they will love you. there is something about the loyalty and will (animals have will, it is derived from instinct) of animals that is unbreakable that is admirable to most humans.

if you cannot see yourself in an animal, then you are either lying, or you are not a human.

Have several pets. I don't abuse them at all. You have once again missed the entire point.

Do you have anything other than this lame appeal to emotion bs to add?

[Mr. Ron]

What are you judging this on?



Man did not "invent" rights, for one. Second, it in no way follows that rights are derived from a CNS. Man couldn't have "invented" rights were it not for DNA or RNA. Does it follow that everything with DNA or RNA has the same rights as humans?




I'm judging this on the fact that humans are a part of nature and do not exist to use nature to the extent where only humans are the end and everything else is a means. The importance of life is not to be the end, but to be a part of the means that we should not only be individuals in nature who only work for ourselves, we should be part of the means as individuals who work for the progress of all things in nature. Not just us.


No I'm pretty sure "rights" are just an idea that man came up with. Rights don't exist if man does not exist.

[Reaganista]

hay if it were somehow possible to deprive a vegetable of its valuable future then it would be wrong to do so just sayin

[1338 h4x0r]

Natural rights are the universal ethics derived from man's nature.

Natural law is discovered by reason from the basic inclinations of human nature. The natural law elucidates what is best for man i.e. what ends man should pursue that are most harmonious with, and best tend to fulfill, his nature.

wat

[siva_chair]

I'm judging this on the fact that humans are a part of nature and do not exist to use nature to the extent where only humans are the end and everything else is a means. The importance of life is not to be the end, but to be a part of the means that we should not only be individuals in nature who only work for ourselves, we should be part of the means as individuals who work for the progress of all things in nature. Not just us.

That is all well and good, but now can you back this up with anything other than simple bare assertions?

No I'm pretty sure "rights" are just an idea that man came up with. Rights don't exist if man does not exist.

No kidding because the nature of man wouldn't exist if man didn't exist. It does not follow, however, that he just "made them up."

[siva_chair]

wat

This doesn't surprise me.

[Mr. Ron]

That is all well and good, but now can you back this up with anything other than simple bare assertions?



No kidding because the nature of man wouldn't exist if man didn't exist. It does not follow, however, that he just "made them up."
man is simply a smarter animal, that does not somehow magically separate us from nature. To say that we are not a part of the means and only exist as an end to ourselves is to remove us from the very nature and means we are supposed to exist within.


I don't see what is so hard to understand about man making rights up as he grew in intelligence.

[spitfirejunky]

Tway, PB and siva_chair in the same thread again. Good times.

[Already_Taken]

siva chair if we were still monkies you woulda been eaten by now

[1338 h4x0r]

Remember, because mental retards lack reason, they have no rights

:angry:/

[sweboy]

Wait, are there still actually people who believe in natural rights? Like, up in 2 double zero 9?

[Mr. Ron]

I think so lol

[Iscariot]

I believe in natural rights.

[sweboy]

*awkward silence*

[1338 h4x0r]

I used to think that I could not go on
And life was nothing but an awful song
But now I know the meaning of true love
I'm leaning on the everlasting arms

If I can see it, then I can do it
If I just believe it, there's nothing to it

[Chorus]
I believe I can fly
I believe I can touch the sky
I think about it every night and day
Spread my wings and fly away
I believe I can soar
I see me running through that open door
I believe I can fly
I believe I can fly
I believe I can fly

See I was on the verge of breaking down
Sometimes silence can seem so loud
There are miracles in life I must achieve
But first I know it starts inside of me, oh

If I can see it, then I can do it
If I just believe it, there's nothing to it

[Chorus]

Hey, cuz I believe in me, oh

If I can see it, then I can be it
If I just believe it, there's nothing to it

[Chorus]

Hey, if I just spread my wings
I can fly
I can fly
I can fly, hey
If I just spread my wings
I can fly
Fly-yai-yai

[hismajestythepope]

You should send these lyrics to freedomhouse.org they will appreciate the democratic meaning!

[Knifeboy]

I believe in natural rights

but only for badgers

[hismajestythepope]

Badgers have no rights because they dont vote.

[Knifeboy]

The only reason they don't vote is because they're clever enough to know that voting doesn't matter

most humans aren't even smart enough to figure that one out

[mph4ever]

yeah, when was the last time a badger got drafted or evicted

bright as a badger is the old phrase

[sweboy]

I think it was the great Chinese philosopher Gongsun Long who once said: "Badger badger badger badger badger badger badger - mushroom, mushroom."

[Knifeboy]

Actually, I'm pretty sure the correct phrase was
"Badger badger badger badger badger badger badger badger badger badger badger badger - Mushroom mushroom"

[mph4ever]

we need more badgers on here and less apes

[hismajestythepope]

ive only heard "****** ****** ****** ****** ****** ****** ****** ******. water. melon."

[1338 h4x0r]

I think it was the great Chinese philosopher Gongsun Long who once said: "Badger badger badger badger badger badger badger - mushroom, mushroom."

His greatest student, Wang Hsien, added in a commentary on his teacher's works: "AH! IT'S A SNAKE!"

[Knifeboy]

Yeah but many people believe that only diluted the original meaning of his works

[Iscariot]

I think it was the great Chinese philosopher Gongsun Long who once said: "Badger badger badger badger badger badger badger - mushroom, mushroom."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOxR7rTYuSI

[Iscariot]

Also,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY6mpaVEaTg

[1338 h4x0r]

http://www.weebls-stuff.com/toons/special+edition/

[Aaron]

An animal species that can demonstrate a defined and sophisticated social structure shouldn't be killed.

[Iskandar]

i'm not buying that. surely the spanish were very aware of what terrorists would do given their empire and their occupation of the basque regionThey don't have an empire and the Basque separatists have nothing to do with Al-Qaida.
3 to be precise. not that long ago really.Communism ended two decades ago in Estonia, is it a terrible place?
sure thats exactly what the governments would have you think. everyone who doesn't agree and takes arms to prove otherwise is a terrorist. thats a wrongIf you're fighting for your freedom and have no other choice but to use violence that is very different from taking to violence to have your demands met.
don't know what you're missing unless you are just not into sport at allI'm not. Sports bore me.

[beso negro]

yea it's impossible to be both a sports fan and a socialist. I mean the concept of sporting events is like the antithesis of socialism. they can't deal with the fact that the best player in the league makes more money than the worst player.

[Iskandar]

yea it's impossible to be both a sports fan and a socialist. I mean the concept of sporting events is like the antithesis of socialism. they can't deal with the fact that the best player in the league makes more money than the worst player.No I just find sports really boring.

[Aaron]

Sure we do; it's a matter of marketting. It's uneducated socialists who don't understand the concept.

Sports bore me unless I'm with mates.

[beso negro]

yea because competition scares you

[Iskandar]

I think everyone understands the concept of sports. It's not that complicated.
yea because competition scares youMy friends say I'm the most competitive person ever. At least when it comes to video games and stuff like that.

Thanks for that pop-psychology analysis of my personality though.

[Aaron]

Kick the ball, chase the ball, kick the ball, chase the ball. Stop when the whistle blows.

[Knifeboy]

sports is a snoozefest unless you're participating

[hismajestythepope]

depends on the sport

[Knifeboy]

What sport isn't?

[1338 h4x0r]

Curling

****ING ACTION-PACKED

[Iskandar]

I'm a Canadian so curling is on TV all the time. Nobody watches it though.

I have curled before and it's more fun than it looks.

[Knifeboy]

... Curling is hilarious

WUIIII WUIIII WUIIII they keep yelling

[Iskandar]

Denmark is hilarious.

You actually eat something called smørrebrød. And it's like an open-faced sandwich topped with cucumber and pickled herring. What the hell.

[Dave de Sylvia]

I had curried herring on an open sandwich in Denmark.

[1338 h4x0r]

Heil misguided attempts at appropriating Indian food

[Knifeboy]

Denmark is hilarious.

You actually eat something called smørrebrød. And it's like an open-faced sandwich topped with cucumber and pickled herring. What the hell.

smørrebrød is just a word for open rye bread sandwich, you can put anything on it

[1338 h4x0r]

De entede Tøsens Hiemkomst
Hun vaer i mørck Skog faren vild
Sneens Tepper hafde bredet sig hen
Paa Stien hiem - hendes eeneste Ven

Om hun bare kunde
Folge Stiernernes Baner
Ey hun skulde vildfare
Blandt disse mørcke Graner

Skogens mørcke Arme forbarmede sig ofver dend fremmede Giæst
Giorde hende vaer i siine inderste Tankers Veemod
At i Bergekongens Kammer tørstes efter Christenblod

De Underjordiske:
"Det nærmer sig stille: Een sørgeklæst Pige
Sidder derinde med foldede Hænder
Hun sender een Bøn til det himmeldske Rige"

Ofver hendes Hode
Det drybber fra Qviist
Draabe for Draabe some Blodet
Fra Kroppen til Jesu Christ

Pigen:
"Aa, eismal i ein uggin Skog
Eg kjenn at i Kveld
I Kveld tenkjer ingen paa meg"

[Knifeboy]

skide svenskere

bah at your edit!

[Dave de Sylvia]

marvins revolt

are good danish people

[1338 h4x0r]

skide svenskere

bah at your edit!

Well I realized that Danes generally aren't shitty people and so I took it back

Sagte vender hun Hovedet halfft
Lyddende fjærnt til Ord som bli'r talt
Et Stæd under Bakken, om Hiertets Vee

Pigen:
"Sola gaar bak Aase ned
Skuggan' bli saa lange
Natte kjem snart atteved
Teke meg i Fange"

De Taaren dend fulgte hendes Savn
Een Længsel hiem til siine
Hun vilde saa gierne hafve dem i siin Favn
Sorrigen sadte Rood i navnløs Piine

Hun graader
Hun falmer
Hun seer ey paa Nattesti

Hun falder i Sofn paa Moseseng
Oc aldting tier
Saa dæcker et Mulm
Hendes Drømmers Stier

[Iskandar]

smørrebrød is just a word for open rye bread sandwich, you can put anything on itYeah but you put weird things on it like fish roe and boiled eggs.
Heil misguided attempts at appropriating Indian foodWhite people are really good at stealing other peoples' foods and ruining them.

[Knifeboy]

don't forget mayo and "remoulade"

marvins revolt

are good danish people

I guess I should try to catch these guys live .. The music on their myspace page is pretty good

...

Damn, couldn't you have said this yesterday. Turns out they played a show tonight not too far from here

[Dave de Sylvia]

They play in Ireland a lot because they're on an Irish label, but I've never seen them either.

[1338 h4x0r]

勞動帶來自由

[Iskandar]

Ching chong.

[1338 h4x0r]

lol no

[Iskandar]

本站作家的簡介（繁體中文版）

我叫做 Simon Ager。我的中文名字是葛善明。目前住在威爾斯北部的班哥(Bangor)。 我從這個網站所賺的錢算是我主要的收入，我也為別的網站寫有關語言、旅遊、文化等的文章，而且我正在在班歌 大學作語言學的碩士學位。

我在英格蘭西北部長大的。我的故鄉是靠近蘭卡斯特(Lancaster)叫作Silverdale（銀谷） 的村子。我在幾個國家工作過，包括英國、法國及臺灣，也作過幾種工作在辦公司、旅館、農場等地方。最近在英 國南部的佈賴頓工作了差不多九年在設計多種語言的網站。

我從小對語言及語言學很感興趣。我的母語是英語，在中學的時候我學了法文及德文，我大學的主修是中文及日文 , 另外我還自學過其他好幾種語言。除了我的母語英語，中文我掌握得最好，其次是威爾斯文，愛爾蘭文，法文，德 文, 西班牙文及日文。

我目前在學英國手語 (BSL)，也試試看改善我其他的語言，特別是威爾斯文，愛爾蘭文，蘇格蘭的蓋爾文及曼島文。

查看關於我學習中文及其他語言的更多近况。

另外我也喜歡看書，聽音樂，唱歌，彈吉他，吹單簧管及幾種其他的吹奏樂器，看電影，溜冰，騎腳踏車及單輪車 及作雜技。

Quick, translate that!

[1338 h4x0r]

It's some polyglot's CV

Pretty impressive

[Mr. Ron]

ø_ø

[siva_chair]

man is simply a smarter animal, that does not somehow magically separate us from nature. To say that we are not a part of the means and only exist as an end to ourselves is to remove us from the very nature and means we are supposed to exist within.

Man is a rational animal. The only one capable of reason. It is part of his distinct nature.

How are you arriving at this supposed ends of nature, anyhow? Your argument is full of straw as I have never even made any claims about the "ends of nature."

I don't see what is so hard to understand about man making rights up as he grew in intelligence.

I don't see what is so hard to understand about man having natural rights.

[1338 h4x0r]

WIR WOLLEN EIN VOLK SEIN! (@_@)/

lol

[Mr. Ron]

Man is a rational animal. The only one capable of reason. It is part of his distinct nature.

How are you arriving at this supposed ends of nature, anyhow? Your argument is full of straw as I have never even made any claims about the "ends of nature."



I don't see what is so hard to understand about man having natural rights.
yeah, well that was sort of a tangent that didn't have that much with what you were saying.

[Iskandar]

It's some polyglot's CV

Pretty impressiveYou can read that well? Have long have you been studying?

[808]

Longer than you've been alive.

[siva_chair]

AK-47s rule when you are given one for free.

[Iscariot]

sports is a snoozefest unless you're participating

What no it isn't.

I love these objective claims.

[Iskandar]

It was his personal opinion.

It's my opinion too incidentally.

[Iscariot]

Both of your opinions are wrong, incidentally.

js

[Iskandar]

I'm sorry you feel that way. I hope you can accept my non-sports-liking ways.

[Iscariot]

I can't do that unless you provide me with several alcoholic beverages.

I've hardly had a drop to drink all day and I feel like punching a hole in someone's face.

[Iskandar]

Well, as you're on the other side of the continent, that may prove difficult. If you and I are ever in the same city somehow, I will. Not implying that I support your habit, but as an expression of camaraderie.

[siva_chair]

Watch out Jared I think he is trying to get in your pants!

[Iskandar]

I don't wine and dine.

I just hit and quit.

[mph4ever]

They don't have an empire and the Basque separatists have nothing to do with Al-Qaida.

not saying either of those things. spain had a massive empire and were subject to attacks by freedom fighters all over it. and the basque separatists are fighting for freedom from madrid, separation from madrid if you like.

Communism ended two decades ago in Estonia, is it a terrible place?

talking to the locals then it can be ok. lots of big business is still owned by the minority russians. lots of government officials are ex commies. there is the usual stuff like a youth that recognises what is going on post the soviet union and people are begininning to accept freedom. theres a smal but good underground scene there. the older generation still don't trust anyone especially strangers. it will take while for these setiments to wash through the system. beers cheap, women good looking and the food and vodka exquisite

If you're fighting for your freedom and have no other choice but to use violence that is very different from taking to violence to have your demands met.

of course it is but the rulers will still portray any dissenters as terrorists

I'm not. Sports bore me.
even water sports?

[Iskandar]

not saying either of those things. spain had a massive empire and were subject to attacks by freedom fighters all over it. and the basque separatists are fighting for freedom from madrid, separation from madrid if you like.I don't get it. What time period are you talking about? Modern Spain doesn't have an empire. I don't believe Francoist Spain did either.
talking to the locals then it can be ok. lots of big business is still owned by the minority russians. lots of government officials are ex commies. there is the usual stuff like a youth that recognises what is going on post the soviet union and people are begininning to accept freedom. theres a smal but good underground scene there. the older generation still don't trust anyone especially strangers. it will take while for these setiments to wash through the system. beers cheap, women good looking and the food and vodka exquisiteThese are problems common to all ex-Soviet states. Estonia has transitioned much better than most, though.
of course it is but the rulers will still portray any dissenters as terroristsIf they're violently opposing the state, probably. Whether they are in the right is a different question.
even water sports?I don't think I'm going to dignify this with an answer.

[mph4ever]

I don't get it. What time period are you talking about? Modern Spain doesn't have an empire. I don't believe Francoist Spain did either.

throughout its history spain has had to deal with freedom fighters, from the time it had an empire to today with the basque separatists. i would have thought they would have been very aware of the risks of supporting the invasion of iraq, the treatment of their people outside of spain and the expectation that there would be attacks in spain

These are problems common to all ex-Soviet states. Estonia has transitioned much better than most, though.

the one with the real hangover seems to be lithuania. i've spoken with some that have moved here and the russians ahve a very tight grip on what goes on there

If they're violently opposing the state, probably. Whether they are in the right is a different question.

but the state will always call them terroists, and the press will follow. this is unfair as in a lot of cases they are genuinley freedom fighters. much more so than an army is anyway where they right of the coincidental death of civilians as collateral. in a lot of cases the state is the real terrorist

I don't think I'm going to dignify this with an answer.
you mean you don't fancy a little water skiing or fishing

[Iskandar]

throughout its history spain has had to deal with freedom fighters, from the time it had an empire to today with the basque separatists. i would have thought they would have been very aware of the risks of supporting the invasion of iraq, the treatment of their people outside of spain and the expectation that there would be attacks in spainMaybe they should have foreseen that risk, but that doesn't mean the Madrid attacks were justified.
the one with the real hangover seems to be lithuania. i've spoken with some that have moved here and the russians ahve a very tight grip on what goes on thereThey have a large Russian population.
but the state will always call them terroists, and the press will follow. this is unfair as in a lot of cases they are genuinley freedom fighters. much more so than an army is anyway where they right of the coincidental death of civilians as collateral. in a lot of cases the state is the real terroristIn that case it's up to you to decide the truth for yourself.
you mean you don't fancy a little water skiing or fishingNot really, no.

[Knifeboy]

I love these objective claims.

Both of your opinions are wrong, incidentally.

js

what

[mph4ever]

Maybe they should have foreseen that risk, but that doesn't mean the Madrid attacks were justified.

of course they were not justified but the spanish government brought on those attacks

They have a large Russian population.

lithuanians are the toughest ****ers i have seen. they have had it rough and it shows. they street fight for fun. theres even underground fights going on in ireland now like the travellers used to have. alds knocking **** out of each other until one drops. then go to work cut up on monday. mad

In that case it's up to you to decide the truth for yourself.

and sure lots of can decide the truth for ourselves but the masses haven't got a hope. i'm not even sure the president has a hpe since he is advised what to think by people who have being playing their silly games for along time now

Not really, no.
not as a spectator? or haven't you played a sports game on a console?

[Reaganista]

black kids do that in tha hood

[Iskandar]

of course they were not justified but the spanish government brought on those attacksIndirectly, yes.
and sure lots of can decide the truth for ourselves but the masses haven't got a hope. i'm not even sure the president has a hpe since he is advised what to think by people who have being playing their silly games for along time nowI think people are smarter than we like to give them credit for.
not as a spectator? or haven't you played a sports game on a console?They're not my favourite.

[Reaganista]

dood i never seen this video b4 it is so good who knew
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr0Wv5DJhuk

[mph4ever]

Indirectly, yes.

directly. their action resulted in an attack on their own land because they attacked another peoples land. madrid was direct retaliation. chances are it wouldn't have happened if they didn't show support

I think people are smarter than we like to give them credit for.

yeah, maybe sometimes we confuse it with apathy. or they are programmed too much that they are numb to it all. accepting that state is borderline retarded

They're not my favourite.
so what games are?
dood i never seen this video b4 it is so good who knew
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr0Wv5DJhuk
when i look at the way things like this sterotype females so much i find it disgusting. every so often i can be observed punching the air, don't matter where i am, nobody knows why, just me, its that moment when i say to myself "***** yeah, i don't have a daughter!"

[Iskandar]

directly. their action resulted in an attack on their own land because they attacked another peoples land. madrid was direct retaliation. chances are it wouldn't have happened if they didn't show supportI suppose that was a risk they were willing to take. Other countries which supported the war such as Australia didn't get the same reprisals. I'm sure we can agree it would have been best to not support the war at all. I'm glad my country didn't.
so what games are?Mostly adventure games. Sometimes shooters, rarely racing games. I have a fondness for Super Smash Bros. too.

[Reaganista]

when i look at the way things like this sterotype females so much i find it disgusting. every so often i can be observed punching the air, don't matter where i am, nobody knows why, just me, its that moment when i say to myself "***** yeah, i don't have a daughter!"
wtf r u trying to say

[mph4ever]

I suppose that was a risk they were willing to take. Other countries which supported the war such as Australia didn't get the same reprisals. I'm sure we can agree it would have been best to not support the war at all. I'm glad my country didn't.

bali was australias madrid

Mostly adventure games. Sometimes shooters, rarely racing games. I have a fondness for Super Smash Bros. too.
i like the old mario games from super nes. still have them running on the wii. i'm an rpg and shooter, rtcw, quake series, doom etc fan although my weakness is pro evo soccer.

[mph4ever]

wtf r u trying to say

with the amount of crap used to program pre teen and teen girls like this miley cyrus then i'm glad i don't have to be exposed to it or worry about what it might do to my daughters head, thats all.

[Iskandar]

bali was australias madridWhat happened in Bali? You mean the Bali in Indonesia?
i like the old mario games from super nes. still have them running on the wii. i'm an rpg and shooter, rtcw, quake series, doom etc fan although my weakness is pro evo soccer.I like Mario games. I also like Quake.

[Reaganista]

with the amount of crap used to program pre teen and teen girls like this miley cyrus then i'm glad i don't have to be exposed to it or worry about what it might do to my daughters head, thats all.

wtf r u talkin about that's a great song and a great video

ps do u have a son or something

because the **** they program boys minds wit is soo much worse

[fingers mccoy]

holy **** mph

[mph4ever]

What happened in Bali? You mean the Bali in Indonesia?

when they blew hell out of a pub and club where the majority were australian and english and bin laden said the Bali bombings were in direct retaliation for australia's support of americas war on terror and role in the liberation of east timor

"you will be killed just as you kill, and will be bombed just as you bomb," "expect more that will further distress you."

I like Mario games. I also like Quake.
quake four on xbox360 is the biz

holy **** mph
i'm assuming thats not a compliment, blame free time

[Iskandar]

when they blew hell out of a pub and club where the majority were australian and english and bin laden said the Bali bombings were in direct retaliation for australia's support of americas war on terror and role in the liberation of east timorI did not know that was their motive. Interesting.
quake four on xbox360 is the bizI don't have an Xbox. Hmm.

[mph4ever]

I did not know that was their motive. Interesting.

so bali in loose terms was australias madrid

I don't have an Xbox. Hmm.
i play rtcw. its the best shooter ever, and doom3 on pc, fantasy rpgs too. shooters on xbox360 as long as they have legacy controls available are excellent.

[hismajestythepope]

thats pretty sweet, we should definitely do absolutely nothing about these people.

[mph4ever]

wtf r u talkin about that's a great song and a great video

ps do u have a son or something

because the **** they program boys minds wit is soo much worse

yeah but some dirty little scum bag aint going to try get into his knickers lol

[Iskandar]

thats pretty sweet, we should definitely do absolutely nothing about these people.What people?

[hismajestythepope]

ppl like osama bin ladin

[Iskandar]

The War on Terror hasn't done much to combat them. If anything it's emboldened theme.

[Knifeboy]

http://obamasoundoff.com/

edit: The soundboard was the point of the link, not the article underneath that completely coincidentally fit into this conversation

[hismajestythepope]

And we haven't had a bombing of any sort in the US in quite some time,or like anthrax mailings, and things have quieted down pretty significantly in Iraq.

Yes, at the moment they're emboldened, however we still have militaristic superiority, so in the long run, lol.

[Mr. Ron]

I don't see why the lack of terrorism is comforting

there are usually lengthy gaps between major terror strikes

[Iskandar]

And we haven't had a bombing of any sort in the US in quite some time,or like anthrax mailings, and things have quieted down pretty significantly in Iraq.The anthrax mailings were a hoax. As for Iraq, I have a feeling the militias have just about fought themselves out. You can't have such a destructive conflict forever.
Yes, at the moment they're emboldened, however we still have militaristic superiority, so in the long run, lol.This is an enemy that can't be defeated with military force. For every member you kill there are another three ready to take their place.

[Mr. Ron]

no alex, we just need a high body count, you know, like Vietnam

[hismajestythepope]

The anthrax mailings were a hoax.
for real? now i feel painfully ignorant. :<

As for Iraq, I have a feeling the militias have just about fought themselves out. You can't have such a destructive conflict forever.
This is true, but it actually refutes your theory that terrorists have been emboldened.

This is an enemy that can't be defeated with military force. For every member you kill there are another three ready to take their place.
I disagree completely. There isn't a unanimous support for these factions in their homelands, and a lot of the support they garner is out of fear. When the locals find that there's a more powerful group willing to help them out of that fear, things will turn out for the better.

Sure it's messy and it will take a while, and I'm totally not for violence, but when the violence is towards those who are basically violent because they can't cope with the modern world, hell yeah I'm for it.

[Chu]

As for Iraq, I have a feeling the militias have just about fought themselves out. You can't have such a destructive conflict forever.
I'd use Myanmar as an argument against this, as battles are still fought daily (and have for the past 40 years).

It is for this reason, I was going to reply to Mappy's post as "Yeah, cause Iraq was so heavily in the **** before you guys arrived", then pointing out Myanmar's position, and if Americans really were going for a greater good, they should probably have gone for the country in the most dire situations.
Which further (in my opinion), builds a case for ulterior motives in the invasion of Iraq....

[Iskandar]

This is true, but it actually refutes your theory that terrorists have been emboldened.Not necessarily so. The conflict is primarily between Sunni and Shi'i Muslims. The US Army are just peacekeepers (or supposed to be).
I disagree completely. There isn't a unanimous support for these factions in their homelands, and a lot of the support they garner is out of fear. When the locals find that there's a more powerful group willing to help them out of that fear, things will turn out for the better.But this conflict allows them to gain supporters by claiming it's part of a larger war on Islam, and those killed in it are martyrs. These themes resonate strongly with Muslims, who as a rule are very religious people.

[mph4ever]

Which further (in my opinion), builds a case for ulterior motives in the invasion of Iraq....

rumsfeld said prepare to invade iraq within hours of 911

do you think the allies knew of these motives or were they just dragged along on a wave of democracy, peace, terrorists and wmd?

[hismajestythepope]

Regardless of the motives, Hussein was a modern day Hitler, and I'm very proud of our nation for taking him out of power.

But this conflict allows them to gain supporters by claiming it's part of a larger war on Islam, and those killed in it are martyrs. These themes resonate strongly with Muslims, who as a rule are very religious people.

It allows them to gain more extremist supporters you mean, don't be so general. There are plenty of Muslims who understand this, "Holy War," is non-existent, and just a despicable-perversion of their doctrine.

[siva_chair]

Imperialism ftw!

[mph4ever]

Regardless of the motives, Hussein was a modern day Hitler, and I'm very proud of our nation for taking him out of power.
ends and means ftw

[hismajestythepope]

Imperialism ftw!

yes because we won't be out of iraq within 2 years and will completely control their governent as if it were a colony of the US.

wait no, every argument you make sucks.

[Iskandar]

Regardless of the motives, Hussein was a modern day Hitler, and I'm very proud of our nation for taking him out of power.He was a very bad dude, but (and I hate to say it) removing him might have been worse for the nation than letting him stay. We'll see what happens with the withdrawal though.
allows them to gain more extremist supporters you mean, don't be so general. There are plenty of Muslims who understand this, "Holy War," is non-existent, and just a despicable-perversion of their doctrine.Of course there are but this conflict can make extremists out of moderate Muslims.

[Chu]

I did not know that mph, which is partly why I used the (in my opinion), as I have done very little investigation myself, and have my own assumptions.

Again, it is my opinion that in terms of sheer brutality and dictatorship, living under Hussein would have been as close to democracy as you could get, in comparison with Gen. Than Shwe.

[siva_chair]

yes because we won't be out of iraq within 2 years and will completely control their governent as if it were a colony of the US.

wait no, every argument you make sucks.

Yes because we really went into Iraq to get rid of Hussein. That was definitely our primary goal.

[hismajestythepope]

Yes because we've really benefited from this war, seriously!

He was a very bad dude, but (and I hate to say it) removing him might have been worse for the nation than letting him stay.
I honestly don't see how this is possible at all.

We'll see what happens with the withdrawal though.
word.

Of course there are but this conflict can make extremists out of moderate Muslims.
okay? and then those people become irrational extremists.

[Iskandar]

Again, it is my opinion that in terms of sheer brutality and dictatorship, living under Hussein would have been as close to democracy as you could get, in comparison with Gen. Than Shwe.I don't get it. You mean Hussein was better than Than Shwe? Both were pretty bad dictators, to a point where I'd say it's not very useful trying to quantify which is better. It's like choosing between Hitler and Stalin.

[hismajestythepope]

Hahaha, I like that analogy.

All I'm gonna say is that I have high hopes that Iraq can be like a Germany or Japan in the Middle East, or even the South after the Civil War.

American reconstruction has done great things, historically.

[siva_chair]

Yes because we've really benefited from this war, seriously!

Some people have. Namely, those with large government and military contracts.

[1338 h4x0r]

All I'm gonna say is that I have high hopes that Iraq can be like a Germany or Japan in the Middle East, or even the South after the Civil War.

lol

[808]

I don't get it. You mean Hussein was better than Than Shwe? Both were pretty bad dictators, to a point where I'd say it's not very useful trying to quantify which is better. It's like choosing between Hitler and Stalin.

Why choose one when you can have both?

[Knifeboy]

Regardless of the motives, Hussein was a modern day Hitler, and I'm very proud of our nation for taking him out of power.


godwin lol

American reconstruction has done great things, historically.

lol

[Aaron]

American reconstruction has done great things, historically.

lol wut

[Iskandar]

I honestly don't see how this is possible at all.If one good thing could be said of Hussein it's that he kept order. (Granted he did through brutal methods but anyway). The conflict in Iraq stems from centuries-old religious divisions between the two Muslim sects. Saddam did a lot to exacerbate this rivalry by suppressing the Shi'i majority with his Sunni government. This wasn't helped by Iraq fighting Shi'i Iran in the 1980s war. Attempting to create a democracy didn't help because each group voted along sectarian lines. I fear the conflict may be irreconcilable and the only solution will be to partition Iraq.

A similar situation was at work behind the Rwanda conflict.

[hismajestythepope]

Okay so stability under religious oppression is better than instability with religious freedom?

I disagree thoroughly, but I can see what you mean.

[Chu]

It was a fairly ridiculous call, admittedly.

I guess it's because I have a personal connection to Myanmar, and not to Iraq that I feel more strongly for Myanmar.

[hismajestythepope]

godwin lol
Seriously, I'm that for human rights.

lol
yeah Germany and Japan are in such horrible shape these days.

[Aaron]

America in the 40s and America now are vastly different.

[Iskandar]

Okay so stability under religious oppression is better than instability with religious freedom?

I disagree thoroughly, but I can see what you mean.The people of Iraq are not much freer than they were under Saddam. They are, however, much more likely to get killed.

I'm not saying Saddam didn't need to go, but it might have been better to let him be for a while until he died or got deposed or something and hopefully that opportunity could be used to transition to a different system of government.

[hismajestythepope]

If he died, one of his sons would've taken over, oh no.
America in the 40s and America now are vastly different.
Yeah, it's an even better place, with more emphasis on civil liberties than in the 40's.

[Knifeboy]

yeah Germany and Japan are in such horrible shape these days.

So if I come over and burn down your shack of a home, and you build a new house from bottom up, chopping your own wood, etc. And the home ends up looking really good.. Then I get to take credit?

[Knifeboy]

If he died, one of his sons would've taken over, oh no.

lol at implying that america is in any way altruistic

[siva_chair]

Seriously, I'm that for human rights.

Then why do you support the violation of them?

So if I come over and burn down your shack of a home, and you build a new house from bottom up, chopping your own wood, etc. And the home ends up looking really good.. Then I get to take credit?

Yes dude because the ends justify the means didn't you know?!?

[hismajestythepope]

oh wow another brilliant argument from siva.

yes taking out/mistreating people who oppress others based on religion and the want to torture others is totally a violation of civil liberties.
So if I come over and burn down your shack of a home, and you build a new house from bottom up, chopping your
own wood, etc. And the home ends up looking really good.. Then I get to take credit?

Nice analogy dude.

Except this is a reference to taking out totalitarian governments and setting up democracies in their place...

lol at implying that america is in any way altruistic

where did i imply this at all? lol at assuming that anybody is ignorant who might be in support of something that you aren't in support of.

[siva_chair]

Oh wow trading one tyrant for many smaller tyrants. That is an awesome deal.

[Knifeboy]

oh wow another brilliant argument from siva.


Nice analogy dude.

Except this is a reference to taking out totalitarian governments and setting up democracies in their place...

yes, shack, house

you don't get to take credit for someone elses hard work just because you **** up their ****

[siva_chair]

oh wow another brilliant argument from siva.

yes taking out/mistreating people who oppress others based on religion and the want to torture others is totally a violation of civil liberties.

Yes because starting unnecessary statist wars is totally conducive to civil liberties.

[hismajestythepope]

when one of the results is a possible state that's more free than the previous state in its place, then yes, statist wars can actually be a means of achieving civil liberties.

war is a messy, terrible thing, lots of death, yes, doesn't mean that many of the most beautiful things in the world came out of post-war situation.
yes, shack, house

you don't get to take credit for someone elses hard work just because you **** up their ****
Taking out a totalitarian government, and then providing the liberated people with a means to rebuild isn't, "taking credit," for their hard work, where are you going with this at all?

[Iskandar]

If he died, one of his sons would've taken over, oh no.And we don't know how that would have turned out. It could have been more of the same, like Kim Jong-Il; it could have meant a dramatic shift in the balance of power like when Franco died and Juan Carlos began the Spanish transition to democracy. Not that I actually think his sons would do that, but it might have meant a lessening of restrictions. We'll never know now.

[hismajestythepope]

I really highly doubt that people who personally delighted in torturing their own nation's citizens would be any better of leaders.

[siva_chair]

when one of the results is a possible state that's more free than the previous state in its place, then yes, statist wars can actually be a means of achieving civil liberties.

How arrogant of you to assume that these people would rather have been "liberated" and dead/scarred than continue under the previous regime?

war is a messy, terrible thing, lots of death, yes, doesn't mean that many of the most beautiful things in the world came out of post-war situation.

Oh you mean like more wars?

[mph4ever]

I did not know that mph, which is partly why I used the (in my opinion), as I have done very little investigation myself, and have my own assumptions.

its one of those little things that they slip out every so often when there are much bigger events to distract people.

Again, it is my opinion that in terms of sheer brutality and dictatorship, living under Hussein would have been as close to democracy as you could get, in comparison with Gen. Than Shwe.
yeah but burmas not full of oil or needs a pipeline finished

[hismajestythepope]

How arrogant of you to assume that these people would rather have been "liberated" and dead/scarred than continue under the previous regime?
Its arrogant of me to see taking a family out of power - a family who delighted in the torture of their own people, and executed hundreds of thousands of them, to be buried in mass-graves - as liberation?

Especially when we kept a power vacuum situation from happening.

Oh you mean like more wars?
Oh you mean like how Germany is still a Nazi state and the Japanese think they have divine right to conquer anybody they choose?

Or are you talking about how South Korea is being controlled by the North Koreans these days?

How about all the way back to the Norman invasion of Britain, or the Roman invasion, did those events not bring culture that was previously unseen to that region?

Or are you talking about how World War I and World War II were basically the furtherance of European imperialism?

[Chu]

Well, there are some small oil reserves off the gulf, but they are mainly claimed by India.

But basically, that was the jist of what I had in mind mph.

[hismajestythepope]

I'm sorry, but this analogy of, "Hussein would be as close to democracy as you can get, in comparison to <others>," is downright retarded.

It's like saying WELL THAT HOUSE BEING BUILT OF WOOD WAS THE CLOSEST THING TO BEING FIRE-PROOF IN COMPARISON TO THOSE HOUSES MADE OF STRAW.

[siva_chair]

Its arrogant of me to see taking a family out of power - a family who delighted in the torture of their own people, and executed hundreds of thousands of them, to be buried in mass-graves - as liberation?

It is arrogant of you to make that decision for those people.

Especially when we kept a power vacuum situation from happening.

Lol what? Because religious factions fighting over control of the state apparatus isn't any sort of power vacuum situation or anything.

oh you mean like Germany is still a Nazi state and the Japanese think they have divine right to conquer anybody they choose?

Oh you mean the Nazi state that US interventionism helped create?

Or are you talking about how South Korea is being controlled by the North Koreans these days?

You mean how it was partly due to our involvement that split that country in two to begin with?

How about all the way back to the Norman invasion of Britain, or the Roman invasion, did those events not bring culture that was previously unseen to that region?

There were already cultures in those places. It is pretty arrogant of you to think that the Norman and Roman cultures imposed on those regions were even desired by the original inhabitants.

[1338 h4x0r]

Oh you mean like how Germany is still a Nazi state and the Japanese think they have divine right to conquer anybody they choose?

Both of these countries had at least some framework for representative government at the time we intervened; Iraq did not. In fact, Iraq isn't even a cohesive 'country'. As far as I know, it's an arbitrary set of lines drawn by the British Empire.

[Chu]

I'm sorry, but this analogy of, "Hussein would be as close to democracy as you can get, in comparison to <others>," is downright retarded.

It's like saying WELL THAT HOUSE BEING BUILT OF WOOD WAS THE CLOSEST THING TO BEING FIRE-PROOF IN COMPARISON TO THOSE HOUSES MADE OF STRAW.
Well the idea Hussein is a modern day Hitler, when people like Than Shwe are very much alive, is a bit ridiculous in itself.

[Iskandar]

I really highly doubt that people who personally delighted in torturing their own nation's citizens would be any better of leaders.Nope. But the people are not much better off now. They are only marginally freer, and much less safe. Was it worth it? I think it's too early to tell.
specially when we kept a power vacuum situation from happening.There is a power vacuum right now. Removing Saddam created it.
Well the idea Hussein is a modern day Hitler, when people like Than Shwe are very much alive, is a bit ridiculous in itself.Like I said, both Hussein and Than Shwe are so bad it's not much use trying to quantify which is worse. Both treat(ed) their own citizens like ****. Hussein persecuted Kurds; Than Shwe is persecuting the Karen people. Both have isolated their regimes internationally. Both have stagnated their nations' economies. And so forth.

[hismajestythepope]

It is arrogant of you to make that decision for those people.
I'm pretty sure I was 14 when the decision was made, and if I had a choice in the matter, I'd probably appose it.

Lol what? Because religious factions fighting over control of the state apparatus isn't any sort of power vacuum situation or anything.
well when those people generally target our military and fail to take over the state, yeah.

Oh you mean the Nazi state that US interventionism helped create?
Are you seriously trying to blame America for the holocaust because you can't take historical contradictions of your assertations?

You mean how it was partly due to our involvement that split that country in two to begin with?
So we're responsible for the totalitarian state?

There were already cultures in those places. It is pretty arrogant of you to think that the Norman and Roman cultures imposed on those regions were even desired by the original inhabitants.
The cultures in that area painted themselves with blue mud and fought battles naked against armed forces. They did this because their culture was controlled by charlatans that claimed they had divine and arcane powers.

In other news, Celtic culture, Briton culture, and Anglo-Saxon cultures weren't all-of-the-sudden deleted by the Norman and Roman invasions, however they were brought together, mixed, and augmented, in order to create one of the most successful nations and influential cultures in global history.

[siva_chair]

In fact, Iraq isn't even a cohesive 'country'. As far as I know, it's an arbitrary set of lines drawn by the British Empire.

Same holds true for most of the region, tbh.

[hismajestythepope]

You can kindly shut up any time now siva, as you have yet to make any actual point.
Both of these countries had at least some framework for representative government at the time we intervened; Iraq did not. In fact, Iraq isn't even a cohesive 'country'. As far as I know, it's an arbitrary set of lines drawn by the British Empire.

SADDAM HUSSEIN KEPT RELIGIOUS WARS FROM HAPPENING BY ****ING TORTURING AND KILLING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS PEOPLE WHO DISAGREED WITH HIM, HOW DARE WE TAKE THIS STABILITY AWAY FROM THE IRAQI PEOPLE.

ugh that was such an arrogant move.

[siva_chair]

I'm pretty sure I was 14 when the decision was made, and if I had a choice in the matter, I'd probably appose it.

It was arrogant of "the US" to make that decision for them as well.

well when those people generally target our military and fail to take over the state, yeah.

Lol you are right there is no power vacuum there. :rolleyes:

Are you seriously trying to blame America for the holocaust because you can't take historical contradictions of your assertations?

Are you seriously trying to create a strawman?


So we're responsible for the totalitarian state?

We are partly responsible for creating the situation that caused it to arise as such.

The cultures in that area painted themselves with blue mud and fought battles naked against armed forces.

And?

[Iskandar]

In fact, Iraq isn't even a cohesive 'country'. As far as I know, it's an arbitrary set of lines drawn by the British Empire.So are Jordan and the UAE and those countries are doing fine. The problem with Iraq is that there are three different sectarian groups who don't want anything to do with each other. This situation is very common in African nations.

[Pop music sucks]

Central Africa is seriously chaotic.

[hismajestythepope]

I wasn't comparing the Norman invasion of Britain to a war of liberation, was I just making a point that some ancient wars have sewn the seeds of some of the most glorious nations in modern history.
It was arrogant of "the US" to make that decision for them as well.
"As well," would imply that I had part in making that decision, in other news, doesn't change the fact that I still see it as a positive outcome. IDK MAYBE I'M AN OPTIMIST, I GUESS THAT MAKES ME ARROGANT.



Lol you are right there is no power vacuum there. :rolleyes:
No, there wasn't, because as soon as that power died, we became that power, and now we're slowly transitioning that power to a stable Iraqi Republic.

Are you seriously trying to create a strawman?
I thought it would be rather fitting to respond to a strawman with a strawman.

We are partly responsible for creating the situation that caused it to arise as such.
and thus did nothing to help save the people of South Korea from oppression?


And?

read the rest of that edit.

[mph4ever]

Well, there are some small oil reserves off the gulf, but they are mainly claimed by India.

But basically, that was the jist of what I had in mind mph.

yeah, i think the same sometimes and then i think i'm paranoid because people couldn't act like that against other people, could they?

[Chu]

You can kindly shut up any time now siva, as you have yet to make any actual point.


SADDAM HUSSEIN KEPT RELIGIOUS WARS FROM HAPPENING BY ****ING TORTURING AND KILLING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS PEOPLE WHO DISAGREED WITH HIM, HOW DARE WE TAKE THIS STABILITY AWAY FROM THE IRAQI PEOPLE.

ugh that was such an arrogant move.
And under Than Shwe, 80% of Burmese hill tribes (basically, people native to Myanmar, who aren't Burmese, i.e. military) have been wiped out, with many forced into Thailand as refugees (and Thais don't have enough coming from Cambodia, or Laos, which are both countries America had a hand in ****ing up, where's the rebuilding? It's been almost 40 years), for the simple reason, they're not Burmese. I don't know, but if you want to draw parallels, I'm sure something can be drawn to Hitler.

[siva_chair]

As well would imply that I had part in making that decision, in other news, doesn't change the fact that I still see it as a positive outcome. IDK MAYBE I'M AN OPTIMIST, I GUESS THAT MAKES ME ARROGANT.

No what makes you arrogant is that you think that American needs to take it upon itself to impose it's way of life on everyone else.


No, there wasn't, because as soon as that power died, we became that power, and now we're slowly transitioning that power to a stable Iraqi Republic.

Wow that doesn't sound like imperialism at all....

I thought it would be rather fitting to respond to a strawman with a strawman.

I created no man of straw.

and thus did nothing to help save the people of South Korea from oppression?

It wasn't our place to.

Appointing ourselves as policemen of the world has caused far more problems than it has solved.

read the rest of that edit.

Wow you can point out differences between cultural norms. This definitely justifies imposing your culture on everyone else through military force. Good job.

[hismajestythepope]

And under Than Shwe, 80% of Burmese hill tribes (basically, people native to Myanmar, who aren't Burmese, i.e. military) have been wiped out, with many forced into Thailand as refugees (and Thais don't have enough coming from Cambodia, or Laos, which are both countries America had a hand in ****ing up, where's the rebuilding? It's been almost 40 years), for the simple reason, they're not Burmese. I don't know, but if you want to draw parallels, I'm sure something can be drawn to Hitler.

Okay, so this means that we didn't at least accomplish some good in taking out Hussein?

I'm not saying that going into Iraq was the best decision ever, or that it was justified, though I am saying that I'm proud of our nation for taking out a party reminiscent to Nazi Germany.

Nor am I refuting that there might be places in the world that are in even worse shape than Iraq was.

[hismajestythepope]

No what makes you arrogant is that you think that American needs to take it upon itself to impose it's way of life on everyone else.
No, I'm saying I'm happy that we've taken out a tyrant and given the people he reigned over a chance for a new beginning.

Wow that doesn't sound like imperialism at all....
Yes, because there isn't that whole end to the sentence where I mentioned transitioning that power over to an Iraqi Republic over time...

I created no man of straw.
No, you just made an irrelevant point in attempt to refute my argument that, though lamentable, wars can lead to wonderful things.

It wasn't our place to.
It wasn't? Weren't you just saying that conflict was partly our fault? Wouldn't that mean it would be our duty to keep our allies from the opression that their kindred to their north are still suffering?

Appointing ourselves as policemen of the world has caused far more problems than it has solved.
Yet again, your argument has nothing to do with what I'm talking about, sweet.

Wow you can point out differences between cultural norms. This definitely justifies imposing your culture on everyone else through military force. Good job.
You should really take some reading comprehension courses.

[Chu]

Well, the unfortunate problem here (and this reflects through Laos and Cambodia again), and this is what mph said before, is that there is nothing to be gained by saving anything here (in South-East Asia).
Anything that is worth anything, has claim from India or China.

I can only honestly hope for the same as mph (that people are better then this), but far too often have I seen otherwise. I spent 6 months at an aid clinic in Mae Sot, which is on the Thai/Burma border, far enough away, no serious battles were taking place, but close enough that we were getting buses of people in on a daily basis.

There's even the case of a Burmese refugee camp IN Thailand, the Tatmadaw crossed in and fire bombed the camp.

[siva_chair]

No, I'm saying I'm happy that we've taken out a tyrant and given the people he reigned over a chance for a new beginning.

Yes, you are happy the US made the decision for them.

Yes, because there isn't that whole end to the sentence where I mentioned transitioning that power over to an Iraqi Republic over time...

Yes because it isn't as though many empires throughout history haven't set up local governments or anything.

no, you just made an irrelevant point in attempt to refute my argument that though lamentable, wars can lead to wonderful things.

And you are employing a broken window fallacy.


It wasn't? Weren't you just saying that conflict was partly our fault? Wouldn't that mean it would be our duty to keep our allies from the opression that their kindred to their north are still suffering?

That is completely missing the point. That is like saying that I am justified in burning your house down as long as I make sure no one else burns your house down.

Yet again, your argument has nothing to do with what I'm talking about, sweet.

It has everything to do with what you are talking about.

you should really take some reading comprehension courses.

You should really stop being inconsistent and employing faulty reasoning.

[Iskandar]

Well, the unfortunate problem here (and this reflects through Laos and Cambodia again), and this is what mph said before, is that there is nothing to be gained by saving anything here (in South-East Asia).
Anything that is worth anything, has claim from India or China.It's been said that Darfur will end only when it suits the interests of the great powers in the region. The same could be said of Burma. I don't think most people even know there's a conflict going on there.

[Chu]

No, indeed (as, I believe Mappy has shown), not many people know at all (I wouldn't know, if I didn't have my father as a dad) - I'm not attacking you Mappy, please, I mean no offense.

And with regulated internet access in Myanmar (government run ISP), limited tourist visas, not much information gets out, so it's almost a catch-22.

Though, Myanmar does have Aung San Suu Kyi under house-arrest, if they ever physically harmed her, I'm fairly certain the U.N. (if not the U.S too) would do something to remove the junta.

[hismajestythepope]

Yes, you are happy the US made the decision for them.
Which is better, making decisions with an iron fist, or making decisions to, in the future, allow people to make decisions for themselves?

Yes because it isn't as though many empires throughout history haven't set up local governments or anything.
Yes, but it isn't like America sets up these governments as puppet governments. Stop being so pessimistic.

And you are employing a broken window fallacy.
No, I'm arguing that, though tragic, that war led to a better Germany and Japan in the long run. That's not a broken window fallacy, try harder next time.

That is completely missing the point. That is like saying that I am justified in burning your house down as long as I make sure no one else burns your house down.
So it's unacceptable to try to right your wrongs and defend the freedoms of your allies if you might not have been wholly right in the long run?

Regardless, the point is; whether or not we helped spark that conflict, did we, or did we not keep North Korea from taking over South Korea?

It has everything to do with what you are talking about.
No. You're acting like I'm all about America policing the world, when in reality I'm just pointing out that our policing the world has lead to some positives, not just negatives.

You should really stop being inconsistent and employing faulty reasoning.

its faulty reasoning to point out historical points where wars led to more advanced civilizations, and over-all better well being in certain regions?

There's even the case of a Burmese refugee camp IN Thailand, the Tatmadaw crossed in and fire bombed the camp.
that's pretty ****ed.

[Iskandar]

No, indeed (as, I believe Mappy has shown), not many people know at all (I wouldn't know, if I didn't have my father as a dad) - I'm not attacking you Mappy, please, I mean no offense.

And with regulated internet access in Myanmar (government run ISP), limited tourist visas, not much information gets out, so it's almost a catch-22.

Though, Myanmar does have Aung San Suu Kyi under house-arrest, if they ever physically harmed her, I'm fairly certain the U.N. (if not the U.S too) would do something to remove the junta.Hopefully someday she can be freed and take her rightful place as the elected leader of Burma.

[siva_chair]

Which is better, making decisions with an iron fist, or making decisions to, in the future, allow people to make decisions for themselves?

Neither. Let people make decisions for themselves.


Yes, but it isn't like America sets up these governments as puppet governments. Stop being so pessimistic.

No they would never do something like that....

No, I'm arguing that, though tragic, that war led to a better Germany and Japan in the long run. That's not a broken window fallacy, try harder next time.

Yes, it is certainly a broken window fallacy.

So it's unacceptable to try to right your wrongs and defend the freedoms of your allies if you might not have been wholly right in the long run?

It's unacceptable to force your arbitrary notion of freedom (which isn't in actuality freedom at all, but nevermind that for now) on people.

Regardless, the point is; whether or not we helped spark that conflict, did we, or did we not keep North Korea from taking over South Korea?

Perhaps. It still does not follow that we were justified in our actions.


No. You're acting like I'm all about America policing the world, when in reality I'm just pointing out that our policing the world has lead to some positives, not just negatives.

And these "positives" were not out of some altruistic goal.


its faulty reasoning to point out historical points where wars led to more advanced civilizations, and over-all better well being in certain regions?

It is faulty reasoning to suggest that unintended consequences in hindsight justifies these sorts of aggressions.

[mph4ever]

No, indeed (as, I believe Mappy has shown), not many people know at all (I wouldn't know, if I didn't have my father as a dad) - I'm not attacking you Mappy, please, I mean no offense.

And with regulated internet access in Myanmar (government run ISP), limited tourist visas, not much information gets out, so it's almost a catch-22.

Though, Myanmar does have Aung San Suu Kyi under house-arrest, if they ever physically harmed her, I'm fairly certain the U.N. (if not the U.S too) would do something to remove the junta.

i'm not sure they would. the un is toothless because of the security council and the constant use of veto by countries for their own interests. israel bombs un facilities in gaza and no one said anything of any worth. like you pointed out china has massive control over the region, india too but not as much because of its own fear of china. china will protect its interests and america would find it hard to interfere since china gives it such a free role elsewhere.

maybe obama will see it as opportunity tio stamp his "change" on things and show support for human rights unlike many of his predecessors

[siva_chair]

By invading Burma?

[Chu]

Hopefully someday she can be freed and take her rightful place as the elected leader of Burma.
If there ever was a position titled "Hero of Freedom", it would belong to her, undoubtedly.
She's been under house arrest for 20 years (married for 29, her husband died of prostate cancer in 1999, while she was still under house arrest, having not seen him for 10 years), she was offered freedom by the junta, if she left the country (she didn't). Truly epic.

Also, Alex, "Aung San Suu Kyi was given Honorary Canadian citizenship by the Government of Canada in 2007. She is only the fourth person in history to receive this honour." - **** yeah Canadians.

[hismajestythepope]

Neither. Let people make decisions for themselves.
whoa, that's what we're doing in the long run.

sorry we can't mobilize and pull out fast enough for you.

No they would never do something like that....
I'm sorry, but if you seriously think the war in Iraq was a right-wing conspiracy to set up a puppet government in the Middle East, you're possibly more retarded than I previously though.

Yes, it is certainly a broken window fallacy.
Dude. Nobody cares how many literary devices you can name, it still doesn't change the fact that there's a silver lining to ****ing everything.

It's unacceptable to force your arbitrary notion of freedom (which isn't in actuality freedom at all, but nevermind that for now) on people.

Yeah **** that, we should've just let North Korea spread their totalitarian government to the state that didn't want it.

Perhaps.
Shut up, we did. South Koreans are not opressed by Kim Jong Il. Because of us.

It still does not follow that we were justified in our actions.
How is a nation not justified to defend their allies against an invading totalitarian force? Maybe you don't know this, but the South Koreans had their own military that we helped drive back the North Koreans because they had an upper hand due to Chinese support.

And these "positives" were not out of some altruistic goal.
and so they no longer exist?

It is faulty reasoning to suggest that unintended consequences in hindsight justifies these sorts of aggressions.
No, it's just a pragmatic view on the world's history.

[hismajestythepope]

Summary:

siva chair: OMG AMERICA IS EVIL
hismajestythepope: there's no use in being pessimistic about things, good things could come from this
siva chair: NO
hismajestythepope: /points in history where war lead to positives
siva chair: BUT THOSE WEREN'T THE CAUSES OF THE WAR
hismajestythepope: okay? that's not what i'm arguing
siva chair: YES IT IS STOP USING FALLACIES
hismajestythepope: /facepalming from the west all the way to the east

[siva_chair]

whoa, that's what we're doing in the long run.

sorry we can't mobilize and pull out fast enough for you.

No, we didn't let the Iraqi people decide for themselves. We made the decision for them.

I'm sorry, but if you seriously think the war in Iraq was a right-wing conspiracy to set up a puppet government in the Middle East, you're possibly more retarded than I previously though.

Yes because the US has never ever set up puppet governments.

Dude. Nobody cares how many literary devices you can name, it still doesn't change the fact that there's a silver lining to ****ing everything.

Dude it doesn't matter how many logical fallacies you can employ and subsequently deny, it still doesn't stop you from being wrong.

Yeah **** that, we should've just let North Korea spread their totalitarian government to the state that didn't want it.

We should have let the people of Korea decide for themselves. If they did not want that, they would have resisted.

Shut up, we did. South Koreans are not opressed by Kim Jong Il. Because of us.

No, instead they suffered an untold number of casualties because we (and the UN) took it upon themselves to decide for the Korean people.

How is a nation not justified to defend their allies against an invading totalitarian force? Maybe you don't know this, but the South Koreans had their own military that we helped drive back the North Koreans because they had an upper hand due to Chinese support.

First, the onus is on you to prove that it was indeed justified.

Second, you are completely ignoring the role the US played in exacerbating the conflict.

and so they no longer exist?

Once again, broken window fallacy.

Or if you wish we can go back to Mr. Knifeboy's burning house analogy if you'd like.

No, it's just a pragmatic view on the world's history.

No actually it is using unintended consequences as ethical justifications.

[mph4ever]

By invading Burma?

can't really say, not sure what he has at his disposal.

i wouldn't imagine invasion by american forces would do anyone any good. less intervention is what is required from them, not more.

at the same time a little more respect and support for the un from america among others would be more than welcome, give it a few baby teeth.

nothing to make america feel threatened but a general shift to supporting the un more

it would be a significant gesture to see genuine humaniatrian issues like myanmar, that it cannot be justified interfering in because of oil or militarty contracts or the like, addressed with the support of all the security council members and that they stop voting in their own or their regional allies interests.

[siva_chair]

Summary:

siva chair: OMG AMERICA IS EVIL
hismajestythepope: there's no use in being pessimistic about things, good things could come from this
siva chair: NO
hismajestythepope: /points in history where war lead to positives
siva chair: BUT THOSE WEREN'T THE CAUSES OF THE WAR
hismajestythepope: okay? that's not what i'm arguing
siva chair: YES IT IS STOP USING FALLACIES
hismajestythepope: /facepalming from the west all the way to the east

Actually it is more like:

hismajestythepope: Hey guys look I'm William F Buckley Jr. pt II. I try to justify unnecessary wars with stupid reasoning and logical fallacies.
siva_chair: /points out the numerous logical fallacies in argument.

[Mr. Ron]

Regardless of the motives, Hussein was a modern day Hitler, and I'm very proud of our nation for taking him out of power.




No he wasn't. In fact they were drastically different.

yes because we won't be out of iraq within 2 years and will completely control their governent as if it were a colony of the US.

wait no, every argument you make sucks.
We will have military forces in iraq 10 years from now.

Seriously, I'm that for human rights.


.
then you would have opposed the war, which has killed and displaced far more civillians than Sadam could ever have dreamed of.

[Chu]

Just some information on Aung San Suu Kyi, I found pretty relevant to America.
Very good to see some interest.

On 16 May 2007, 59 world leaders released a letter demanding Myanmar's military government free Suu Kyi and other political prisoners. The signatories include all three surviving former US presidents Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton; [...]

In December 2007, the US House of Representatives voted unanimously 400-0 to award Aung San Suu Kyi the Congressional Gold Medal;[53] the Senate concurred on 2008-04-25.[54] On 6 May 2008, President Bush signed legislation awarding Suu Kyi the Congressional Gold Medal.[55]. She is the first recipient in American history to receive the prize while imprisoned. [...]

On 18 June 2007, the day before Aung San Suu Kyi's 62nd birthday, Senators Mitch McConnell and Diane Feinstein in the United States Senate urged the continuation of trade sanctions on the Myanmar government. In a statement, McConnell said "The best gift we can give Suu Kyi on this day is to continue to urge the international community to press for her immediate and unconditional release, as well as the release of all prisoners of conscience."

[hismajestythepope]

No, we didn't let the Iraqi people decide for themselves. We made the decision for them.
No, we're going to let the Iraqi's do whatever they please as soon as we can finish MOBILIZING AND WITHDRAWING.

Dude it doesn't matter how many logical fallacies you can employ and subsequently deny, it still doesn't stop you from being wrong.
Saying that I'm using logical fallacies does not deny that Europe is a better place because of World War II.

We should have let the people of Korea decide for themselves. If they did not want that, they would have resisted.
Yeah except the North Koreans would've overrun the South Koreans because of Chinese support. If the North Koreans can have a bigger ally support their cause, why can't the South Koreans turn to that ally's rivals in their time of nead?

No, instead they suffered an untold number of casualties because we (and the UN) took it upon themselves to decide for the Korean people.
Oh, so they would've tried to decide for themselves, and then the combined might of North Korea and China, who they clearly didn't want telling them what to do, hence their DEFENDING AGAINST THEM, would've overridden them and opressed them.

GOOD JOB UN, UGH I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU DID THIS.

First, the onus is on you to prove that it was indeed justified.
shut up, you're flat out wrong. we had every justification to defend our allies against the North Korea.

Second, you are completely ignoring the role the US played in exacerbating the conflict.
No I'm not, I'm saying it's irrelevant.

Seriously, none of this is proving that South Korea is under the rule of Kim Jong Il, or that South Korean's wanted North Korean role.

Furthermore, I have friends from Korea, and they sure as hell are happy that the big bad Americans, "told them what to do."

Once again, broken window fallacy.
and so no good came from the meetings and mixings of these cultures?

Or if you wish we can go back to Mr. Knifeboy's burning house analogy if you'd like.
and then i could explain why that analogy doesn't work again.


No actually it is using unintended consequences as ethical justifications.
No it's taking the good of a situation and understanding that I can't travel back in time and prevent every conflict from ever happening.

[hismajestythepope]

Go to school kid, you're in way over your head.

[siva_chair]

No, we're going to let the Iraqi's do whatever they please as soon as we can finish MOBILIZING AND WITHDRAWING.

Oh so in other words "we are going to make a decision for you....but that is ok because we will eventually let you start making your own choices....when we think you are ready for it."

Wow awesome.

Saying that I'm using logical fallacies does not deny that Europe is a better place because of World War II.

Lol what?

Yeah except the North Koreans would've overrun the South Koreans because of Chinese support. If the North Koreans can have a bigger ally support their cause, why can't the South Koreans turn to that ally's rivals in their time of nead?

No one ever said the N. Koreans/Chinese were justified in their actions either.

Oh, so they would've tried to decide for themselves, and then the combined might of North Korea and China, who they clearly didn't want telling them what to do, hence their DEFENDING AGAINST THEM, would've overridden them and opressed them.

Oh so we are going to pretend that we have a crystal ball and can see into the future of alternate history.

The South Koreans would have been successful in a revolutionary movement that overthrew their oppressors and even would have freed the North Koreans as well. See I can make unfalsifiable claims about alternate futures too.

GOOD JOB UN, UGH I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU DID THIS.

You shouldn't be surprised. The UN ****s up lots of things.

shut up, you're flat out wrong. we had every justification to defend our allies against the North Korea.

Oh wow your bare assertions really prove things....

No I'm not, I'm saying it's irrelevant.

Oh so we can applaud the positives in hindsight, but we can't condemn the negatives?

and so no good came from the meetings and mixings of these cultures?

It's awesome that you don't have a ****ing clue what is meant by "broken window fallacy."

and then i could explain why that analogy doesn't work again.

You mean fail again?

No it's taking the good of a situation and understanding that I can't travel back in time and prevent every conflict from ever happening.

You are trying to justify horrible **** on the basis of good things unintentionally coming from them. If you cannot see how absurd this is then there is absolutely no reason to continue with this.

[hismajestythepope]

Oh so in other words "we are going to make a decision for you....but that is ok because we will eventually let you start making your own choices....when we think you are ready for it."

Wow awesome.
Or it's, we took out a dictator, and rather than leaving you to fend against the wolves, we helped you rebuild your infrastructure and absorbed most of the brunt of the insurgencies that would've taken over in a power vacuum situation.

Lol what?
that's all i was saying. you're acting like i'm wrong because i used a "fallacy" that actually makes sense.

No one ever said the N. Koreans/Chinese were justified in their actions either.
AND THEREFORE THE UN IS JUSTIFIED IN HELPING SOUTH KOREA DEFEND THEMSELVES WHEN THEY WERE OUTNUMBERED YOU ****ING IDIOT.

[qoute]Oh so we are going to pretend that we have a crystal ball and can see into the future of alternate history.[/quote]
YEAH DUDE

The South Koreans would have been successful in a revolutionary movement that overthrew their oppressors
Except they were outnumbered, and thus bid for the support of their allies, justifying the actions of their allies.

and even would have freed the North Koreans as well. See I can make unfalsifiable claims about alternate futures too.
yeah dude, because I'm sure the North Koreans are all about their current "government" and that if they had the means to overthrow them, they'd stay oppressed because that's what they wanted.

You shouldn't be surprised. The UN ****s up lots of things.
Defending South Korea was one of the few things the UN did right.

Oh wow your bare assertions really prove things....
I'm allowed to assert that you're wrong, when you're claiming that we made the choice for South Korea. Want to know why? Because that's not how things happened. The way I said things happened is though. I will repeat myself again: the South Korean's were outnumbered, we were actually pushing to liberate their kindred in North Korea, when we were met by the armed might of China and decided to opt for a cease fire.

Oh so we can applaud the positives in hindsight, but we can't condemn the negatives?
that's exactly what i'm saying.

or maybe things happen for a reason, and you and i really have no means to change this.

It's awesome that you don't have a ****ing clue what is meant by "broken window fallacy."
I'm not even gonna ****ing deign to respond to this, want to know why? IT DOES ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, NOTHING, to refute that regardless of what it's called, the statement is true. Good things have come from wars.

You mean fail again?
Yeah dude, because I disagree with you.

You are trying to justify horrible **** on the basis of good things unintentionally coming from them.
YES, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I'M SAYING.

If you cannot see how absurd this is then there is absolutely no reason to continue with this.

It's absurd to state a fact? Where did you prove me wrong that war doesn't always lead to evil in the long run?

[Reaganista]

yeah but some dirty little scum bag aint going to try get into his knickers lol

ooooooooo rly

then you would have opposed the war, which has killed and displaced far more civillians than Sadam could ever have dreamed of.
that's a utilitarian argument not a human rights argument

[siva_chair]

Or it's, we took out a dictator, and rather than leaving you to fend against the wolves, we helped you rebuild your infrastructure and absorbed most of the brunt of the insurgencies that would've taken over in a power vacuum situation.

Or it's we decided for you to take out said dictator.

that's all i was saying. you're acting like i'm wrong because i used a "fallacy" that actually makes sense.

You are wrong because you used a fallacy.

AND THEREFORE THE UN IS JUSTIFIED IN HELPING SOUTH KOREA DEFEND THEMSELVES WHEN THEY WERE OUTNUMBERED YOU ****ING IDIOT.

Putting things in caps doesn't make you right in your argument.

Except they were outnumbered, and thus bid for the support of their allies, justifying the actions of their allies.

Ignoring the fact that the US drafted people against their will to fight this...

...you still haven't justified ****.

yeah dude, because I'm sure the North Koreans are all about their current "government" and that if they had the means to overthrow them, they'd stay oppressed because that's what they wanted.

Therefore, we should just make the choice for them, right?

Defending South Korea was one of the few things the UN did right.

No sorry.

I'm allowed to assert that you're wrong, when you're claiming that we made the choice for South Korea. Want to know why? Because that's not how things happened. The way I said things happened is though. I will repeat myself again: the South Korean's were outnumbered, we were actually pushing to liberate their kindred in North Korea, when we were met by the armed might of China and decided to opt for a cease fire.

And how were the South Koreans justified in making the decision to "liberate" their kindred in N. Korea?

that's exactly what i'm saying.

or maybe things happen for a reason, and you and i really have no means to change this.

"The Holocaust might have killed off someone who would have became a terrible person, therefore the Holocaust was justified" is basically what your argument equals.

I'm not even gonna ****ing deign to respond to this, want to know why? IT DOES ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, NOTHING, to refute that regardless of what it's called, the statement is true. Good things have come from wars.

And the fact that good things have unintentionally or indirectly come from wars does not mean the wars were/are justified.

Yeah dude, because I disagree with you.

No you fail because you are wrong.

YES, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I'M SAYING.

Then you are an idiot.

It's absurd to state a fact? Where did you prove me wrong that war doesn't always lead to evil in the long run?

It's absurd to try to pass off your bare assertions as "fact."

[hismajestythepope]

Or it's we decided for you to take out said dictator.
No, it's, "we took out the dictator for you and now you guys can do whatever you want, just no more ruthless dictators."

You are wrong because you used a fallacy.
so because i used a fallacy, the Nazis are still in power then?

Putting things in caps doesn't make you right in your argument.
but it doesn't make my argument any less factual.

Ignoring the fact that the US drafted people against their will to fight this...
South Koreans or Americans? Yeah, drafts suck, we still supported South Korea in their time of need.

...you still haven't justified ****.
shut the hell up, you're in total denial at this point.


Therefore, we should just make the choice for them, right?
Yes because defending our allies when they ask for our help when they're outnumbered is totally making their choices for them. Read up on the Korean war, you might learn that the only true point you've made was that there was a draft, and that's irrelevant.

No sorry.
lol denial.

And how were the South Koreans justified in making the decision to "liberate" their kindred in N. Korea?
Because the North Koreans wanted communism, not totalitarianism, and when the people of the same nation, but in the southern sections opposed the totalitarian government, maybe they had their relatives and friends in North Korea in mind, rather than the tyrant that took the rights away from them?

"The Holocaust might have killed off someone who would have became a terrible person, therefore the Holocaust was justified" is basically what your argument equals.
No, my argument equals: Germany and Japan were dangerously nationalistic to the point of the whole-sale slaughter of other races. Fortunately, in showing this barbarism, the allied forces were able to topple these powers, and set up very humanitarianly minded, peaceful states in their place.

And the fact that good things have unintentionally or indirectly come from wars does not mean the wars were/are justified.
Cool, I didn't realize I was trying to justify war.

No you fail because you are wrong.
wrong for what? arguing a different point than you keep on thinking I'm arguing?

Then you are an idiot.
says the man who thinks a broken window fallacy means that the good things stemming from the bad things suddenly don't exist because it's referred to as a fallacy for literary means.

and the man who has been trying to argue that wars aren't ethical. which is completely irrelevant to what I was saying in the first place.
It's absurd to try to pass off your bare assertions as "fact."
it's even more absurd to try to refute points that have been historically d0cumented. check mate.

[hismajestythepope]

omfg guys like what right did we have to force our views on the Nazis? What right did we have to overthrow Hitler?

[1338 h4x0r]

I think we shouldn't force our views on siva_chair's penis

Especially as it is impotent and couldn't be used to pleasure a gnat, much less kill 6 million Jews

[hismajestythepope]

yes, it was painfully arrogant of me to think i had that right

[1338 h4x0r]

The Third Reich was 12 years long

siva_chair's penis is 12 Angstroms long

Coincidence? You decide

[hismajestythepope]

i think not

[siva_chair]

No, it's, "we took out the dictator for you and now you guys can do whatever you want, just no more ruthless dictators."

So in other words: "You can do whatever you want, as long as we are ok with it."

Wow.

so because i used a fallacy, the Nazis are still in power then?

Really!?!? Is this the extent of your reading comprehension abilities? Really?!?

but it doesn't make my argument any less factual.

No asserting things and trying to pass them off as facts is what makes our argument less factual.

South Koreans or Americans? Yeah, drafts suck, we still supported South Korea in their time of need.

Unjustly.

shut the hell up, you're in total denial at this point.

Lol.

Yes because defending our allies when they ask for our help when they're outnumbered is totally making their choices for them. Read up on the Korean war, you might learn that the only true point you've made was that there was a draft, and that's irrelevant.

Did every single Korean ask for our help? No.


lol denial.

Lol false.


Because the North Koreans wanted communism, not totalitarianism, and when the people of the same nation, but in the southern sections opposed the totalitarian government, maybe they had their relatives and friends in North Korea in mind, rather than the tyrant that took the rights away from them?

What gives them the right to decide for someone else? Would Saudi Arabia have the right to impose its views on the people of the US because they think it is to our benefit?


No, my argument equals: Germany and Japan were dangerously nationalistic to the point of the whole-sale slaughter of other races. Fortunately, in showing this barbarism, the allied forces were able to topple these powers, and set up very humanitarianly minded, peaceful states in their place.

Lol humanitarianism with bombs.


Cool, I didn't realize I was trying to justify war.

Cool, you were trying to justify the means (war) as a result of the (unintended) ends.

wrong for what? arguing a different point than you keep on thinking I'm arguing?

Idk it could be the whole slew of fallacies you have committed in making your argument.


says the man who thinks a broken window fallacy means that the good things stemming from the bad things suddenly don't exist because it's referred to as a fallacy for literary means.

Says the poster that doesn't even understand what the broken window fallacy is.

and the man who has been trying to argue that wars aren't ethical. which is completely irrelevant to what I was saying in the first place.

Ok, are WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq pt. 1 and 2 justified and if so why?

it's even more absurd to try to refute points that have been historically d0cumented. check mate.

It's even more absurd you have tried to pass off bare assertions and your own personal value judgments as historically documented fact.

[1338 h4x0r]

siva_chair, we already know your penis is small; you don't have to let us all know

[hismajestythepope]

I suffer a condition medically described as, micropenis."

cool bro!

[1338 h4x0r]

This article sheds light on siva_chair's sad sad condition:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,487102,00.html

Unfortunately, his penis really is that small

[hismajestythepope]

So in other words: "You can do whatever you want, as long as we are ok with it."

Wow.
shut up. i dont care how cool you think acting like america is evil makes you. i seriously just dont care anymore.

Really!?!? Is this the extent of your reading comprehension abilities? Really?!?
the point here

your head

No asserting things and trying to pass them off as facts is what makes our argument less factual.
Your asserting that we chose democracy for South Korea, I'm asserting that South Korea asked us for aid when they were outnumbered.

Look it up on wiki.

Unjustly.
by modern standards, but that's the way things were back then, and guess what, things are still like that in a lot of the nations that you think America should be more like.

Lol.

so wait youre not denying that Korean people don't actually like the North Korean government? Seems like that's what you're saying.

Did every single Korean ask for our help? No.
hey why don't you whine about how unjust our actions are, but throw no criticism at the North Korean military, because their actions during and after the Korean War have been really just, right?

What gives them the right to decide for someone else? Would Saudi Arabia have the right to impose its views on the people of the US because they think it is to our benefit?
what you're defending is a disgusting institution of militaristic tyranny, i seriously cannot take you seriously.

Lol humanitarianism with bombs.
Germany has bombs, yes, but they've made so much progress in the name of human rights it's absurd, to deny this just because they have bombs is absurd.

As for Japan, yeah they're a total military power house, they can in fact have a military.

Cool, you were trying to justify the means (war) as a result of the (unintended) ends.
Repeatedly asserting that this is what I'm saying doesn't actually make it so.

Idk it could be the whole slew of fallacies you have committed in making your argument.
there was one broken window fallacy, and those can't be refuted, unless you're willing to argue that the outcomes of the event never happened, you can kindly let the big kids talk.

Says the poster that doesn't even understand what the broken window fallacy is.
lol. you realize I'm an English major, right?

Ok, are WWI, WWII, Korea,
Yes because these were wars against tyranny and hostile conquest.

Vietnam,
never mentioned this, so idk why you brought it up, but pointless pointless war, so sad :/

Iraq pt. 1 and 2 justified and if so why?
The wars are justified, lying about why we were going to war was unjustified.

But finding mass graves in Iraq was justification enough for me to be happy with the outcome.

It's even more absurd you have tried to pass off bare assertions and your own personal value judgments as historically d0cumented fact.
So you're saying that all of the conflicts I mentioned had only negative impacts on the world?

[hismajestythepope]

This article sheds light on siva_chair's sad sad condition:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,487102,00.html

Unfortunately, his penis really is that small

poor kid, no wonder he tries so hard to seem smart

[1338 h4x0r]

In an effort to better understand "small penis syndrome" -- a man's fear that his genitalia could be too small -- the two researchers have surveyed a large number of international studies on the issue from the last few decades. According to Wylie and Eardley, "Concern over the size of the penis, when such concern becomes excessive, might present itself as the 'small penis syndrome,' an obsessive rumination with compulsive checking rituals, body dysmorphic disorder, or as part of a psychosis." The two scientists draw loose parallels between the syndrome and the distorted body images of people with eating disorders.

[siva_chair]

shut up. i dont care how cool you think acting like america is evil makes you. i seriously just dont care anymore.

"America" isn't evil. Certain individuals in control of the state apparatus do evil things.


the point here

your head

Your point = nonsensical and retarded.

Your asserting that we chose democracy for South Korea, I'm asserting that South Korea asked us for aid when they were outnumbered.

Look it up on wiki.

I'm asserting that "South Korea" is an abstraction. Certain individuals in South Korea may have asked us for aid, but not every single person did.

by modern standards, but that's the way things were back then, and guess what, things are still like that in a lot of the nations that you think America should be more like.

I never claimed America should be like any other nation. Good job at failing again.


so wait youre not denying that Korean people don't actually like the North Korean government? Seems like that's what you're saying.

When did I ever assert that they did in fact like or dislike the North Korean government?

hey why don't you whine about how unjust our actions are, but throw no criticism at the North Korean military, because their actions during and after the Korean War have been really just, right?

False dichotomy. Just because I assert that the US government's actions were unjust does NOT mean that I think the North Korean government's actions were just.

what you're defending is a disgusting institution of militaristic tyranny, i seriously cannot take you seriously.

Ok now would be the part where you actually show where I defended any such thing.

Germany has bombs, yes, but they've made so much progress in the name of human rights it's absurd, to deny this just because they have bombs is absurd.

Wow way to miss the point. I was illustrating the absurdity of claiming humanitarian action when in fact we bombed the **** out of those countries during the wars and caused massive loss of civilian life.

As for Japan, yeah they're a total military power house, they can in fact have a military.

They sure can have radiation poisoning.

Repeatedly asserting that this is what I'm saying doesn't actually make it so.

You having argued that is what makes it so.

there was one broken window fallacy, and those can't be refuted, unless you're willing to argue that the outcomes of the event never happened, you can kindly let the big kids talk.

You mean aside from the bare assertions, strawmen, and other such fallacies you have employed along with the broken window fallacy?

lol. you realize I'm an English major, right?

Lol you realize this doesn't mean you don't employ fallacies in your arguments, right?

Yes because these were wars against tyranny and hostile conquest.

So we were justified in employing those tactics ourselves? Oic.

never mentioned this, so idk why you brought it up, but pointless pointless war, so sad :/

Oh, but we were fighting off those evil communists trying to take over South Vietnam!

The exact same "justification" for you have been using for Korea can be applied to Vietnam, as they were both very similar police actions

The wars are justified, lying about why we were going to war was unjustified.

Oh so we only get to place value judgments on the means when we disagree with them now, huh? Way to be consistent.

But finding mass graves in Iraq was justification enough for me to be happy with the outcome.

So that justifies creating more mass graves. And you are happy about that? You are sick.

So you're saying that all of the conflicts I mentioned had only negative impacts on the world?

I'm saying the US was never justified in intervening in those conflicts, regardless of the unintended "positives" that came out of it.

You seem to be arbitrarily applying the whole "ends justify the means" rational, but that isn't really surprising considering most people who employ that utilitarian argument do so in an arbitrary fashion.

[Already_Taken]

omfg guys like what right did we have to force our views on the Nazis? What right did we have to overthrow Hitler?

he waged war on the world

[McP3000]

okay why is everyone making fun of siva's penis

[Already_Taken]

cause its probably pretty small, and that's just funny

[808]

There is nothing wrong with having a small penis.

[Mr. Ron]

eight hundred and eight please confirm/deny the small state of your reproductive organ

[hismajestythepope]

"America" isn't evil. Certain individuals in control of the state apparatus do evil things.
WHOA

Your point = nonsensical and retarded.
NICE

I'm asserting that "South Korea" is an abstraction. Certain individuals in South Korea may have asked us for aid, but not every single person did.
okay cool, you're still wrong, the Korean War was perfectly justifiable from our side.

When did I ever assert that they did in fact like or dislike the North Korean government?
when you were arguing that it's up to the koreans to do their own thing and rebel on their own, because it's apparently unjust to go to allies when outnumbered.

False dichotomy. Just because I assert that the US government's actions were unjust does NOT mean that I think the North Korean government's actions were just.
i was saying you're a retard for criticizing us when we were clearly fighting the good fight.

what's unjust about fighting off tyranny when allies ask for aid? still haven't made a point in this.

Ok now would be the part where you actually show where I defended any such thing.
when you said it was unjust for us to choose whether or not north korea rules south korea?

Wow way to miss the point. I was illustrating the absurdity of claiming humanitarian action when in fact we bombed the **** out of those countries during the wars and caused massive loss of civilian life.
so because we bombed japan and germany during world war ii, the nations now have done nothing for human rights since?

They sure can have radiation poisoning.
yes, this refutes that japan is now better off than they were during their incredibly backwards imperialistic era.

You having argued that is what makes it so.
No, I was pointing out that nothing is inherently good or bad, and that from horror and atrocity, some goodness can be made.

You mean aside from the bare assertions,
yes sir, who cares how historically accurate it is, if you don't understand the situation properly, it's a bare accusation on my part

strawmen,
wow you love that term, maybe you should look it up before you use it though

and other such fallacies you have employed along with the broken window fallacy?
the broken window fallacy is the only thing you accurately pointed out, and it still didn't refute my point that since World War II, Germany is a much better place. So good job guy, you know the names of a few literary devices, pat yourself on the back.

Lol you realize this doesn't mean you don't employ fallacies in your arguments, right?
good one dude, you're awesome at this.

So we were justified in employing those tactics ourselves? Oic.
yeah we killin mad niggas for having different ideals than us

Oh, but we were fighting off those evil communists trying to take over South Vietnam!
cool, cause i totally mentioned vietnam. i also never said the war was pointless.

The exact same "justification" for you have been using for Korea can be applied to Vietnam, as they were both very similar police actions
No, there's a huge difference, the Vietnamese government wasn't totalitarian, and the majority in the south were for communism. In South Korea we were defending the South Koreans, in Vietnam we were defending French holdings. Nice try though.

Oh so we only get to place value judgments on the means when we disagree with them now, huh? Way to be consistent.
I disagree with lying to one's people.

I disagree more with killing 300,000 of your own people for no reason other than a difference of opinion.

So that justifies creating more mass graves. And you are happy about that? You are sick.
Yeah dude. I ****ing love it. It gets me off.

It's crazy to think, but the people who died in this war were fighting for a cause. they were not tortured and killed in mass quantities for the pleasure of a few lunatics.

I'm saying the US was never justified in intervening in those conflicts, regardless of the unintended "positives" that came out of it.
Yeah dude, we should've let North Korea swarm into South Korea and stamp out the freedoms of our allies who vied for our aid. We should've fought Hitler out of France, Poland, Belgium, etc. and then just let him stay in Germany and kill as many Jews as he wanted, as long as it was in Germany. IT'S HIS STATE RIGHT.

You seem to be arbitrarily applying the whole "ends justify the means" rational,
you seem to arbitrarily asserting that war isnt human nature

but that isn't really surprising considering most people who employ that utilitarian argument do so in an arbitrary fashion.
nice, you learned the word utilitarian from tway a few hours ago.

[hismajestythepope]

newsflash: when people dont see eye to eye, they fight about it.

when nations dont see eye to eye they go to war about it.

i personally am non-violent, but what right do i have to assert my non-violence on others?

[mph4ever]

There is nothing wrong with having a small penis.

and its easier to say that when you have a large one, right?

[hismajestythepope]

no seriously, small penises are awesome.

it helps with wearing womens jeans and not exposing my secrets :3.

[808]

and its easier to say that when you have a large one, right?

No, I have a small one.

[mph4ever]

No, I have a small one.

hey i didn't suggest you had or not

[808]

I'm tellin'.

[mph4ever]

ah man, don't do that, i'd be so embarrassed, its not nice to have to stand out from the crowd although i could take my lead from siva and mappy because they seem fairly cool with the idea of being the biggest pricks around here

[Iskandar]

If there ever was a position titled "Hero of Freedom", it would belong to her, undoubtedly.
She's been under house arrest for 20 years (married for 29, her husband died of prostate cancer in 1999, while she was still under house arrest, having not seen him for 10 years), she was offered freedom by the junta, if she left the country (she didn't). Truly epic.She was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
Also, Alex, "Aung San Suu Kyi was given Honorary Canadian citizenship by the Government of Canada in 2007. She is only the fourth person in history to receive this honour." - **** yeah Canadians.I believe we did the same or something similar for the Dalai Lama not too long ago.

[1338 h4x0r]

okay why is everyone making fun of siva's penis

Because he might stop posting if everyone ignores what he says and makes fun of his dick instead. Then the time spent on remarks about his allegedly small penis will be worth it as he will no longer drag threads down with pedantic harangues where he never admits to being wrong about anything.

For all I know, his penis might be huge. But I'm not going to go around trolling with that premise.

I believe we did the same or something similar for the Dalai Lama not too long ago.

The Dalai Lama

:lol: @ him

Tibet without China is ****

[Iskandar]

Actually it's the Chinese who are treating Tibetans like ****, I dunno where you've been the last 60 years or so.

[witchxrapist]

Intense.

[1338 h4x0r]

Actually it's the Chinese who are treating Tibetans like ****, I dunno where you've been the last 60 years or so.

When they learn how to bathe daily, independence will be worth consideration

[Iskandar]

When they learn how to bathe daily, independence will be worth considerationIt's not up to you or the Chinese to decide what the Tibetan people want. This Sinicization stuff is bullshit. It's just another form of cultural imperialism. The Tibetans don't want the Chinese there and I don't think anyone has the right to decide that besides the Tibetans themselves.

[mph4ever]

in before 1000

and understand, all eco systems need a balance, take a fundamental away and it may collapse

[Iskandar]

1000.

[hismajestythepope]

Well yeah. Unfortunately, China = pricks.

[1338 h4x0r]

It's not up to you or the Chinese to decide what the Tibetan people want. This Sinicization stuff is bullshit. It's just another form of cultural imperialism. The Tibetans don't want the Chinese there and I don't think anyone has the right to decide that besides the Tibetans themselves.

They (and Xinjiang) would both turn to **** if China left

[Iskandar]

I dunno, having their human rights abused vs. having highways built.

[hismajestythepope]

how the **** will people get to where they need to be?

[1338 h4x0r]

Heil high-speed rail service and wireless Internet

[Iskandar]

Something tells me Tibetans would rather be free of Chinese domination than have high-speed internet. Given that they are Buddhists and not the most materialist culture ever. You could ask the Tibetan government-in-exile though and see what their response would be.

[Already_Taken]

errr

[Iskandar]

Err indeed.

[Already_Taken]

bastard :-p

[Iskandar]

Who's a bastard?:confused:

[1338 h4x0r]

Something tells me Tibetans would rather be free of Chinese domination than have high-speed internet. Given that they are Buddhists and not the most materialist culture ever. You could ask the Tibetan government-in-exile though and see what their response would be.

But ... Tibet has been part of China for centuries.

Also you don't need to be a materialist to appreciate the benefits of rail service.

[Iskandar]

But ... Tibet has been part of China for centuries.

Also you don't need to be a materialist to appreciate the benefits of rail service.So what? The Ukraine was part of Russia for centuries. How does that give them the right to impose their culture upon them? Honestly I don't mind if Tibet isn't independent, I'd be happy with the Chinese leaving them alone like they did before the Communist era. That's what the Tibetans want and they should respect that. It's supposed to be an autonomous region, not a frontier province.

[hismajestythepope]

Seriously Chris, you're probably not being serious, but I really resent **** like that. Poland wasn't even a sovereign state for the longest time, **** like that is complete b.s.

[1338 h4x0r]

Seriously Chris, you're probably not being serious

I'm dead serious

[hismajestythepope]

I've never been more serious in my whole damn life, mrow.

[1338 h4x0r]

I ... am gonna rape Tibet. hgrrrr

[Iskandar]

It's not really something to joke about. Unless you get a kick out of peaceful monks being arrested without cause and tortured.

[1338 h4x0r]

It's a reference to sickanimation.com

They have sick animation there

But, incidentally, I am dead serious when I assure the validity of China's claims over Tibet and Xinjiang

[Iskandar]

I don't recall that from Sick Animation.

The dragon does.

[Aaron]

This thread is big.

[1338 h4x0r]

Who has the juiciest b-hole in town?
The dragon does, the dragon does

[Mr. Ron]

how many times does your pee split in half? George Buuuush George Buuushh

[1338 h4x0r]

The tune is almost the same

[Aaron]

I once thought I had a gift, my piss had split into 8 streams, then I realised I was pissing through my fly which I'd forgotten to unzip. lol.

[1338 h4x0r]

heil

[Aaron]

heil being drunk. I don't get those crazy sXe kids.

Speaking of which. My boss decided to put a tab on the bar last night when we went to the pub after work. $500 for 12 people. Heil corporate-banking. Economic uncertainty my arse. Drink up.

[Aaron]

20,000. That's like 16,000 posts.

[808]

Where do you work, Aaron?

[Aaron]

Suncorp. A bankassurance and investment group.
http://www.suncorp.com.au/suncorp/business/default.aspx?home
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suncorp

[siva_chair]

okay cool, you're still wrong, the Korean War was perfectly justifiable from our side.

No, it was not.

when you were arguing that it's up to the koreans to do their own thing and rebel on their own, because it's apparently unjust to go to allies when outnumbered.

It is unjust to go participate in statist wars that have nothing to do with your own defense.

i was saying you're a retard for criticizing us when we were clearly fighting the good fight.

And you are retarded for thinking it was the good fight.

what's unjust about fighting off tyranny when allies ask for aid? still haven't made a point in this.

By utilizing tyranny yourself, you do no one good.

when you said it was unjust for us to choose whether or not north korea rules south korea?

It was unjust.

so because we bombed japan and germany during world war ii, the nations now have done nothing for human rights since?

Oh wow that wasn't even the argument good job. The fact that they may have "done something for human rights since them" does not justify the war itself.

yes, this refutes that japan is now better off than they were during their incredibly backwards imperialistic era.

Yes this proves that the war was justified. :rolleyes:

No, I was pointing out that nothing is inherently good or bad, and that from horror and atrocity, some goodness can be made.

You just contradicted yourself. If nothing is good or bad, why are you making value judgments on whether some "goodness" can be made?

yes sir, who cares how historically accurate it is, if you don't understand the situation properly, it's a bare accusation on my part

No the fact that you keep trying to play off your own interpretation and value judgments on historical events without ever justifying it is what makes it a bare assertion on your part.

wow you love that term, maybe you should look it up before you use it though

It's not that I love the term, it's that you employ them.

the broken window fallacy is the only thing you accurately pointed out, and it still didn't refute my point that since World War II, Germany is a much better place. So good job guy, you know the names of a few literary devices, pat yourself on the back.

You obviously fail to understand what a broken window fallacy is.

cool, cause i totally mentioned vietnam. i also never said the war was pointless.

Cool so you are going to just ignore that the same justification we used for entering into Korea is what we used for entering into Vietnam?

No, there's a huge difference, the Vietnamese government wasn't totalitarian, and the majority in the south were for communism.

Wrong on both accounts.

In South Korea we were defending the South Koreans, in Vietnam we were defending French holdings. Nice try though.

Er no. The French had lost Vietnam years before. Our justification given for both Korea and Vietnam was to stop the spread of communism.

I disagree with lying to one's people.

I disagree more with killing 300,000 of your own people for no reason other than a difference of opinion.

Yes so going in a killing 100,000 more totally justifies it.

It's crazy to think, but the people who died in this war were fighting for a cause. they were not tortured and killed in mass quantities for the pleasure of a few lunatics.

And what "cause" is this? Did we bother to ask them if they wanted to die for this "cause?"

Yeah dude, we should've let North Korea swarm into South Korea and stamp out the freedoms of our allies who vied for our aid. We should've fought Hitler out of France, Poland, Belgium, etc. and then just let him stay in Germany and kill as many Jews as he wanted, as long as it was in Germany. IT'S HIS STATE RIGHT.

Yeah dude because I totally said all of those actions are justified.

you seem to arbitrarily asserting that war isnt human nature

Oh so are we going to employ a naturalistic fallacy now?

nice, you learned the word utilitarian from tway a few hours ago.

Nice, you fail again.

[808]

Suncorp. A bankassurance and investment group.
http://www.suncorp.com.au/suncorp/business/default.aspx?home
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suncorp

Get me a job.