A Gutsy Woman

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by NikFu S.

You tell me.

--

"Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we?"

Yes on all fronts, home and abroad. The existence of a military court, is the evidence which proves it.

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by iceman039

While this war is based on oil/control, it has nothing to do with capitalism. you are blaming capitalism -- the reason why there are so many opportunities in this country -- for problems rooted much deeper within our system of checks and balances. We need to limit the power of special interests, however, your assumption that all capitalists are "bloated meatheads" is a fallacy.

I despise bush and his lies that got us stuck in a country we never should have been in. It still blows my mind how you claim that we deserved 911, and that while you have such humanity for others, you have zero sympathy for your fellow americans who died.

I hear a lot of name calling, but few logical points, and even fewer solutions. Judging by your statements, I can derive that you would go to a more socialist government, meaning more taxes and more government control. How would this help your problem with our imperialistic tendancies? It wouldn't, it would make it worse. A more logical solution would be to adopt more local government, with less Federal control. Kind of like the Articles of Confederation.

Furthermore, the broad issue originally raised in this thread, was to do with a continual negative attitude which could become destructive. Self criticism is an essential part of learning but should not stall an objective.

History confirms that morals within the human race have and are on the improve, Why else the existence this of this debate. Capitalism is being damned, even though within this mercenary framework, slavery, child labour and much more has been addressed. The individual human is destined to achieve, we are not bees and absolute socialism is not an option.

Humans are beginning to capitalise on goodness, as well as the material and are achieving in this direction. Change is slow but does exist. Look back within history, overall the evidence is absolutely positive. It is useless to dwell on the bumps along what must be lengthy time frame.

Continuing confidence and a positive outlook is essential, rather than that which is continually negative. The detail, as is overpowering this thread, is irrelevant in the long term. As any old lady will say, “It will all come out in the wash.” I will say, soap and water from the USA, is and has been, assisting within the memorable short term.

[NikFu S.]

Originally Posted by lhopp77

Your statements appear contradictory, but then of course I know you are just kidding.

If it was your scrawny little butt, I bet you would care.

Lee

I know there's a load of contradictions in there. I just get so mentally exhausted coming up with all that I don't want to fix it.

Yes, I would care if whatever you are talking about was me. Same for the woman. Same for everyone.

[NikFu S.]

Originally Posted by iceman039

you are blaming capitalism -- the reason why there are so many opportunities in this country

To an extent, yes, but you fail to understand why and are simplifying whatever I said a great deal. I don't need to elaborate because your point of the war being based on oil contradicts your own point about it not being about capitalism, and as we all know, war is PROFITABLE.

your assumption that all capitalists are "bloated meatheads" is a fallacy.

I would never make such a vague, generalizing statement being that I too, am a capitalist. Don't alter my context.

you claim that we deserved 911

I certainly did not.

and that while you have such humanity for others, you have zero sympathy for your fellow americans who died.

This is an incorrect interpretation. My sympathy is expressed equally among all people, however thinly. Tell me do you have true deep sympathy for people you never met?

I hear a lot of name calling, but few logical points, and even fewer solutions.

What am I, congress? Did I join the SVXN to cure world problems? I used an aggressive tone and I regret nothing.

Judging by your statements, I can derive that you would go to a more socialist government, meaning more taxes and more government control

The only thing you have thus far "derived" is whatever you wanted to, from my post. If anything, I would like less government control, and more humanity and equality.

So far everything you've said was either flat wrong or out of context. What is your objective here?

[iceman039]

"I don't need to elaborate because your point of the war being based on oil contradicts your own point about it not being about capitalism, and as we all know, war is PROFITABLE".

I see your point, but I am merely pointing out that you are wrong to blame capitalism. I am not controdicting myself at all. All economies are dependant upon cheap energy, not just those with free markets. Just cuz we as a nation cannot keep our leadership in check does not mean our entire economic system is to blame.

"The country was attacked? So what? How many countries have we attacked, how many millions of lives have we destroyed? To me, the 9/11 incident hardly balanced the scale out of our favor."

What you are saying here is that we had it coming. It is the same sort of defeatist attitude that Ward Churchill and many other left-wingers have. I was not way off base when I simplified it to "you claim that we deserved 911"

My point is that radical muslims hate us because of WHO WE ARE, not WHAT WE HAVE DONE. They hate us because we are wealthy, religiously diverse, and socially progressive (gays, womens clothing etc). We are Infidels, and they get virgins in heaven when we die. Those uneducated suicide bombers can't give you a logical reason for killing so many innocents. I am not going to apologize for who I am. What makes it ok for them to attack us? Vietnam? Somolia? Panama?

Even IF they had valid grievances against us instead of unprovoked hatred.....

When the Japanese invaded China in WW2 they raped and killed millions. You dont see the Chinese blowing up Japanese children today. How about the Jews? See them killing Germans because of the holocaust?

[svxistentialist]

I've been away a couple of days and this really developed into a debate!

Thanks Harry for stepping in and understanding my approach. Trevor, for a man who himself likes his words and statements to be taken very literally and not altered, you take liberties and offer assumptions that are extrapolations and out of context on the couple of points I did make.

For one, I'm not at all from the roll over and lie down camp.

For another, there is no suggestion of "bend, appease, ignore" in the point I made last.

There is certainly a suggestion that it needs more understanding of the issues involved. Surgical bombing and "Shock, Awe tactics" are US military terms I remember from the first Gulf invasion. The fact that lunatic fringe terrorists brought these terms to bear on two buildings in New York years later is not something that fills my heart with glee.

The point I was making is there is a boomerang effect here. You send it out, it may come back and bite you sometime later.

I say this more as a reflection on US foreign policy, rather than a rationalisation or a justification of why 9/11 happened.

The other sad thing is the public perception of the so called "war on terror". It was very sad to see presumably Muslim children dancing in the streets as the Twin Towers fell. At the same time the majority of Americans would have had no idea why this attack happened. Not HOW it happened, WHY it happened.

So how did America get to be the Big Bad Wolf on the streets of Bagdad, while the majority of her population, the people who vote in the President and his government, while these people appear to be totally un-informed as to how America is perceived as a threat to those who live in the world's tinderbox, the Gulf?

I happen to agree with Trevor's point, that the World Sheriff stance is actually necessary and the Free World we now live in was put in place after WW1 and WW2 by American money and American bravery. Lest we forget.

I just think that this latest episode was knee jerk and not thought through. And I do not actually have an alternative "solution", because the problem is complex, it will require a complex fix, so I'm saying again there is no easy or simple solution.

Plenty of informed and respectful debate like this is a good way to start on getting on with a possible political solution.

Joe

[Trevor]

Joe,

Your rather confrontational comments, have caused me to read again my post, to which you refer.

I agree that as you now confirm, your post was entirely unspicific. This surely left one only to draw conclusions along the lines portrayed/suggested”; i.e. as I said, “The suggestion is that after laying over backwards we should fall.”

You now state:-

“For one, I'm not at all from the roll over and lie down camp.”

“For another, there is no suggestion of "bend, appease, ignore" in the point I made last.”

“I just think that this latest episode was knee jerk and not thought through. And I do not actually have an alternative "solution", because the problem is complex, it will require a complex fix, so I'm saying again there is no easy or simple solution.”

“Plenty of informed and respectful debate like this is a good way to start on getting on with a possible political solution.”

Are you now suggesting that there is a possible political solution?

Surely positive statements, rather than the obtuse are required if any debate is to have value. You have not put forward a solution. I say the best that can/could be done, is being done, perfection being impossible.

Sincere good wishes, Trevor.

[NikFu S.]

Originally Posted by iceman039

Just cuz we as a nation cannot keep our leadership in check does not mean our entire economic system is to blame.

Our leaders are out of check because of greed and self-centered pride. Doesn't sound like capitalism, but capitalism run amock. As in out of control. Read carefully.

What you are saying here is that we had it coming. It is the same sort of defeatist attitude that Ward Churchill and many other left-wingers have. I was not way off base when I simplified it to "you claim that we deserved 911"

You are totally off base. Your interpretation of what I said is COMPLETELY inaccurate. If I thought we "deserved" to get attacked I would say so. I do not hold back, like for example when I think you are an idiot and I think you should be attacked.
No.
What I MEANT is people are so heavy-hearted over something so utterly TRIVIAL, and they assign such monumental significance to this trivial thing (I admit trivial is a strong word here, I don't care), that they fail to realize more horrible things happen not only to us, but to others on a daily basis, and not only do they not complain as much as us, but we have very little reason to complain at all.
I not once mentioned anything about anyone deserving anything, or anything about repercussions, or we should have known, or known how to respond. You simply have a pre-assembled idea of who I am in your noodly head and you are running with it because you can't argue with me unless you pigdeon hole me into your little "leftist defeatist" category. I am as far from defeatist as any person you will encounter in your life. I am uncertain as to how this is not obvious at this point.
If I were to type everything in full context explaining everything with perfect clarity to avoid such accusation it would have easily taken hours and multiple posts. I am NOT enthused about having to continually explain and elaborate so if you don't quite understand, just go away, because you'll find no answers here. I'm not here to entertain a pointless debate. I'm just giving my point of view, because I know it flies in the face of most people here, and if you are one of those people I can not reach you and have no intention of trying. No solutions.

My point is that radical muslims hate us because of WHO WE ARE, not WHAT WE HAVE DONE. They hate us because we are wealthy, religiously diverse, and socially progressive (gays, womens clothing etc). We are Infidels, and they get virgins in heaven when we die. Those uneducated suicide bombers can't give you a logical reason for killing so many innocents. I am not going to apologize for who I am. What makes it ok for them to attack us? Vietnam? Somolia? Panama?

Even IF they had valid grievances against us instead of unprovoked hatred.....

When the Japanese invaded China in WW2 they raped and killed millions. You dont see the Chinese blowing up Japanese children today. How about the Jews? See them killing Germans because of the holocaust?

What is this? They don't hate you because of who you are (how self-centered), they hate you because of who you aren't. You aren't Muslim.
What is this nonsense about people killing people, when did I ever say anything was OK? Never. I never said anyone is justified in killing anyone, I said people AREN'T justified for complaining for years on end about being killed a little, and hypocritical in the process which makes it that much worse.
No you see, I'm afraid to reveal to you it is YOU who are making it OK to kill people.

Now, to [attempt to] be perfectly clear (because it is impossible to be such in so few words), I am not "against" killing. There are plenty of reasons to kill. You will find one of my most radical liberal beliefs is in the right to kill those whom deserve it.
My problem, is with nonsensical, non-directional, pointless killing and racial or ethnic cleansing and genocide. I believe if a man enters my home and attempts to harm or mutilate me, I should be allowed to take him out. I do not think it would be right to go to his house afterwards, and try to kill his family, or friends, even if they are planning to make another attempt on me. If I have learned anything at that point it is how to defend myself from whatever style of attack was used, and that is exactly the scenario that has unfolded in the world. This is why I find the "war" (if you can even call it that. pathetic war if you ask me) disagreeable.
Daddy got struck down and while daddy's killer is also dead, little son wanted revenge and is willing to wipe out an entire neighborhood to get it. He has brainwashed or at the very least temporarily convinced all of his friends that his revenge is just. He allocates the majority of his neighborhoods resources to his cause, no end in site, and secretly plans to take hold of the resources of the oposing neighborhood to make up for it. Six years later he has forgotten about revenge, and has concentrated on drawing out ie stalling the inevitable failure of his campaign, WHILST shadowing the many incompetancies he has thusly withdrawn or shoved under the carpet. Little is ever mentioned about the houses down the street that flooded completely, leaving everyone homeless and dead or dieing. It's not important enough because there is NO ONE TO BLAME, and helping people is more difficult then hurting them.
Pretty soon the son will be moving out of his old House. The only thing he has to show for it is the meaningless deaths of his friends, neighbors, and other various uninvolved or otherwise semi-involved people.

The "war" on "terror".

Now I will give you a useful interpretation.

Terror in itself, is an idea. Nothing more. A person with the power of terror has the power to strike fear into people. Terror for me, as anything more than an idea, does not exist. To me, the people with the power of terror, are none other than our own conservative media and faces of, on, in and around media. Shouting things about "terrorists" and "high risk of attack" and arbitrary color coded systems of terror alertness that never seem to fall below the "iminent danger" level.
We are not fighting a war "on" terror. We are fighting a war, USING terror. If this is a war on terror we are standing on terror and whipping it's ass so it rears up and tramples anyone whom might object. The power of conservative media, is the power of terror. The conservative drones, those without the power of terror, and liberals and everyone else, are the fuel for they enrichen and embolden the terror in themselves and each other.

If anti-US groups thought they could fight us without terror, they would be dead already. But the Islamist are a warrior religion. Decaying and redundant in the modern world, they are largely inneffective at anything they do, unless employed, funded, or otherwise guided by western or western born, western emulating sources.
They know America is greedy. They know America has a lot to lose. They know Americans are afraid to lose everything that makes them greedy. They use us as our own weapons against us, because by being in fear, it makes us weaker.
By us I mean you. The whiner complainers. Crying over every body that turns up, but not every body, just the ones that have an arbitrary importance or significance placed on them.
The major flaw in the Islamists terrorize-us-through-the-media plan was that we did not stay afraid. Our inner defences are also not too shabby, not because the FAA is in fear, but because they want to have more strict control over the airlines. Losing planes is really expensive. I know what you are thinking "Oh but nicky the airlines pay for the planes not the FAA." You are right but you are also wrong. Who do you think the airlines blame for allowing so-called contraband into the airport in the firstplace? And here, the capitalist elite line their platinum pockets but refuse to give us loyal customers decently-sized planes, decent food, or decent luggage stowage, decent regulation, speedy security checks, sober pilots, leg room.
No, no you only get that if you are eilte and spend your life dressed in 3 pieces with ugly brown shoes and a $10 haircut.
This is capitalism gone astray, among many other things I have seemed to ramble on about.

Anyways, I think you get the picture. If not, to hell with it. I'm not writing anymore.

[iceman039]

"Problem. God has nothing to do with running a nation. If it/He did, we would be waging a holy war, not an oily war. This war is based on capitalism, is bred and supported by one thing: capitalism.
Capitalism is running out of control in this country. There was a time when I cared, when I would have supported any reason for anyone to become impossibly rich, but when I learned that the common man is disadvantaged for the gain of a few bloated meatheads, and that I was a common man among common men, I lost interest in the interest of interests.
Perhaps this is a nation under Gods, continually shaped by the dollar, and the common men under employ of these bloated, excrement factories of the super-elite."

*sigh* Ok, so I am reading very very carefully, and I still see your statement that the war is "bred and supported by capitalism".

You seem to be a little confused with your political leaning. According to the above statement, you desire a more socialist society. This is not a bad thing, it is just the way it is... If this is incorrect, it is NOT MY FAULT! YOU SAID IT! You need to be far more specific and selective in what you say if that is the case. Quit telling me that I am misunderstanding your statements, and that I have no idea what you are talking about.

I am tired of having an arguement with someone who talks in circles, so I am not going to post any further. Feel free to tell me once more how you did not say what you said in the above paragraph.

[NikFu S.]

The people funding and supporting the war are capitalists, are they not? I admit that statement is meaningless being that the people not supporting it are also capitalists.
The point was it was not in any way supported by religious motivations (both the nation and the war), and then I went on a tangent about how I hate greedy rich people.
You are a smart guy, I think you could have figured out how meaningless it was. I don't see why you care so much or even responding.

[NikFu S.]

Oh, terrorism, what an endlessly useful tool.
I suppose I should give a perspective other than my own.

For the first time ever, the United States Government is going to declare that a sovereign country's military is a terrorist organization. Iran's Revolutionary Guard, including the elite Quds force, will soon become a "specially designated global terrorist". The proposal was pushed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in an apparent effort to pressure the U.N. Security Council while simultaneously pacifying hawks in the administration. Unsurprisingly, The New York Times reports that Dick Cheney's aides have been pushing for military options in Iran.

http://thenewshole.msnbc.msn.com/arc...15/317590.aspx

and then

THE Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians’ military capability in three days, according to a national security expert.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle2369001.ece

and a cause for nuclear war.

http://www.spikedhumor.com/articles/....html?rh=11637 (c-span video)

Plenty of pretty looking words, none of which written by me.


--

Originally Posted by NikFu S.

If this is a war on terror we are standing on terror and whipping it's ass so it rears up and tramples anyone whom might object.

I couldn't have said that better myself. Oh wait...
Just a little prophetic.

[svxistentialist]

Originally Posted by Trevor

Joe,

Your rather confrontational comments, have caused me to read again my post, to which you refer.

I agree that as you now confirm, your post was entirely unspicific. This surely left one only to draw conclusions along the lines portrayed/suggested”; i.e. as I said, “The suggestion is that after laying over backwards we should fall.”

You now state:-

“For one, I'm not at all from the roll over and lie down camp.”

“For another, there is no suggestion of "bend, appease, ignore" in the point I made last.”

“I just think that this latest episode was knee jerk and not thought through. And I do not actually have an alternative "solution", because the problem is complex, it will require a complex fix, so I'm saying again there is no easy or simple solution.”

“Plenty of informed and respectful debate like this is a good way to start on getting on with a possible political solution.”

Are you now suggesting that there is a possible political solution?

Surely positive statements, rather than the obtuse are required if any debate is to have value. You have not put forward a solution. I say the best that can/could be done, is being done, perfection being impossible.

Sincere good wishes, Trevor.

Hi Trevor

My reply was not meant to be confrontational, I was defending my particular stance on the matter and the statements I made.

I know you like robust conversation anyway.

There's always a political solution; it took us Irish 35 years to come up with one that worked. That said, it can take some of the finest political minds years of negotiations to come up with acceptable and workable solutions. In that respect I don't think it is possible for an individual to "put forward a solution" like you suggest. With that in mind the lack of putting forward a simple or obvious alternative solution is not a valid reason for denying negative critics a say on what is being done, if what is now being done is wrong or not working. By mistakes we learn.

Who was it said "For evil to thrive, it only requires that good men to be silent"?

And the problem with fanatical jihadists such as attacked the Twin Towers, that problem is not directly an Iraq or an Iran thing, it is far broader and more idealogical in nature, not so easy to target in military terms or other terms.

So you can win the war, but can you win the hearts of the people? Because if you can't, we are all doomed to years of this terrorist activity.

Best wishes

Joe

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by svxistentialist

Hi Trevor

My reply was not meant to be confrontational, I was defending my particular stance on the matter and the statements I made.

I know you like robust conversation anyway.

There's always a political solution; it took us Irish 35 years to come up with one that worked. That said, it can take some of the finest political minds years of negotiations to come up with acceptable and workable solutions. In that respect I don't think it is possible for an individual to "put forward a solution" like you suggest. With that in mind the lack of putting forward a simple or obvious alternative solution is not a valid reason for denying negative critics a say on what is being done, if what is now being done is wrong or not working. By mistakes we learn.

Who was it said "For evil to thrive, it only requires that good men to be silent"?

And the problem with fanatical jihadists such as attacked the Twin Towers, that problem is not directly an Iraq or an Iran thing, it is far broader and more idealogical in nature, not so easy to target in military terms or other terms.

So you can win the war, but can you win the hearts of the people? Because if you can't, we are all doomed to years of this terrorist activity.

Best wishes

Joe

Joe,

I don't think we are that far apart in several basic areas.

The problem is that there are not, " some of the finest political minds" on site, "to come up with acceptable and workable solutions."

"So you can win the war, but can you win the hearts of the people?"
It is my view that we must try, rather than sit on the fence and hope and prey. I dare not amplify the latter aspect of the situation.

Cheers, Trevor.