RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed?

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 4:58:54 PM

TheHeretic

Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline

You said I accused you of something, I linked to the post where you admitted to doing precisely that thing. It's a good thing President Bush has a much more stringent definition of what constitutes "an attack" than you do, or we'd be at war all over the world by now.

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.

(in reply to juliaoceania)

Post #: 121

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 5:12:10 PM

MasDom

Posts: 375
Joined: 11/10/2005
Status: offline

My opinion is this..

The flag to me like a circle, or cross represents more to me in my own choice of what it represents, then what i,m told it represents...

To me it represents the old statement about community, and wholeness for the cause of life itself.
Devotion to the week,and the innocent, and every man, woman or child who would stand by your side.
It is a decree of the true American way.
The simple way of saying together we stand, and un-united we fall, but this is only for the purpose stated above.
We serve life, and that is the American pledge, not a government or any asshole out their.

Its that I happily serve, and believe the soldiers we send also believe they serve themselves.
Its to that I pledge myself, but not the flag, because it becomes meaningless.
It only serves that purpose as well, showing a solemn oath in its current purpose even though we were not a nation of peace, far from it.

But to every life we give the peace of mind to, I feel we have served that which is the only purpose.
And only to that I will bow to.

Whether its an anarchy circle when you need to fight oppression, or the symbol of a king when he fights for peace.
All to a purpose..

Blah,balh blah..
So really I like that flag.
But i,m really sick of all the national anthems I have to sit through, seriously..

(in reply to Real0ne)

Post #: 122

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 5:15:25 PM

SugarMyChurro

Posts: 1912
Joined: 4/26/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
Ultimately, volunteers choose to enlist; they have a duty to estimate the consequences, and they only need to undertake a few days of research to understand that joining the US army in today's climate will involve an attempt to impose US values by force.

Damn....!

With respect, NorthernGent - and I am not really disagreeing with you - but in the case of laurell3's father he was just a kid and this was perhaps more than 40 years ago when the available information was pretty much what they told you. Does it have to be said that 19 year old boys do foolish things?

Aside to laurell3: Your dad may have been a great guy, but not because of how he lost his life or because he chose to go to war for that precise cause. I'd say there was more than a good chance that he didn't understand what he was getting himself into at the ripe and wise age of 19. But hey, that's my view only...

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen
...where the military are defending, they are good - and where they are attacking, they are evil?

That's a very sticky one. I think few people would argue against the need for a common defense. But it is deeply complicated by the whims of our corrupt politician's who press those who signed on for the common defense into acts of military aggression. Certainly I blame those highest placed first and foremost. But it must always be remembered that no soldier is bound to perform an illegal act.

Now that's all as complicated as hell and also why I have trouble blaming 19 year old boys for the decisions of wealthy, middle-aged war profiteers.

I never take my focus away from the real bad guys: those with the power to decide.

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 123

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 5:46:43 PM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Here in the US, some join to get a paycheck, training, and possibly cash for college.

Fine. Is it a really a good enough excuse, though? Money in exchange for killing? Isn't it high time the excuses stopped, and the "we were only following orders" routine was swerved? If these people really have a conscience, and they're genuinely unaware of what is ahead, then someone needs to get in schools and provide the information for them to make an informed choice: something along the lines of the results of the nepalm attacks, or children lying in hospitals with limbs hanging off.

The excuses aren't good enough.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Not always, but strife and misery are the companions of War.

In the case of Iraq, the devastation has been laid bare for all to see. How can it be any other way? Modern weaponry will devastate villages and towns.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

The act of war may not be noble, but to serve one's country, in a manner that places you in harm's way. is often seen as noble.

Why is that a noble act? Coming back to the Nazis, I'm sure they would have applied the same logic when they were rounding up the Communists and assorted political opponents. Using force to coerce people is not noble.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

I would hope that any electrician would want to wire something, that a barber would want to cut some hair, and that a soldier would want to kick some ass. If they do not want to kick some ass, then they are likely in the wrong profession.

Placing this in the context of the discussion with E and Laurell, if these soldiers are enlisting to kick some ass in Iraq, then there's something seriously out of order.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Violence is not a bad thing, it is just a thing, and how it is applied determines the good and bad, as well as who's morals you are using to determine good or bad.

An example of good violence would be useful, here, to illustrate your point.

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)

Post #: 124

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 5:56:14 PM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Not high regard, just a philosopher that has a few similar ideas to myself.

Well, he wasn't one for supporting coercion, or nationalism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

My statements stands for how a military should be organized, and I can back it up with quotes from some of the greatest military minds in history.

I wouldn't dispute that, but my statement related to giving the orders to invade.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

The soldiers are doing as ordered, as they should.

The Kapos were doing as ordered in concentration camps; that line of argument isn't good enough for me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

The People need to hold those servants accountable.

Any ideas?

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Complacency and apathy, are often the greatest threats to our liberties, so they are always being threatened. Your own country has it's own history of actions that in retrospect, could be called into question. I see this as part of the learning process of nations, and the people that live within them. Too bad many need to make the same mistakes over and over, to learn the lesson that is trying to be taught.

I'm not seeing the connection to this discussion, feel free to put some meat on the bones. I can guarantee you that I'm neither complacement or apathetic to the situation, I simply don't agree that my freedom is threatened by a foreign nation; there's a distinction between apathy and a difference of opinion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

We will digress on why the Germans stopped, and then kept an aerial campaign going against the british, since it is not truly applicable to the OP. If you want to start that thread, I would be happy to post excerpts of my essays on that, and pull a few things from military experts that have analyzed the war.

That would be interesting. Most of my University years were spent studying Germany 1870-1945, so we could have a decent conversation on this topic. 'Your call if you want to start a thread.

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

I will reread the discussion, but that is not what it seemed to me.

Fine.

Edited to sort quotes.

< Message edited by NorthernGent -- 12/1/2007 5:59:16 PM >

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)

Post #: 125

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 5:59:12 PM

farglebargle

Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave

adding: just realised you did answer wrt to Saudi.
Think FB all that lovely OIL going under the control of a regime that hates the US. Is that a good idea ?

It's dumb to be addicted to something which is under the control of another person.

Oil included.

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to seeksfemslave)

Post #: 126

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 6:06:18 PM

NorthernGent

Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
Ultimately, volunteers choose to enlist; they have a duty to estimate the consequences, and they only need to undertake a few days of research to understand that joining the US army in today's climate will involve an attempt to impose US values by force.

Damn....!

With respect, NorthernGent - and I am not really disagreeing with you - but in the case of laurell3's father he was just a kid and this was perhaps more than 40 years ago when the available information was pretty much what they told you. Does it have to be said that 19 year old boys do foolish things?

To be fair, SMC, when replying to Laurell's position, I deliberately excluded her Father from her quote that I responded to (see post 41). I was replying to the blanket statement that enlisting is noble.

I agree with you on the 40 years point, but not on the foolish 19 years olds point. There's too much at stake for young and daft to be an excuse. Put the shoe on the other foot, 19 years old foreigners are killing people in the US, would it be deemed acceptable and noble?

In the modern age, the information is available for people to consider.

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to SugarMyChurro)

Post #: 127

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 6:12:42 PM

Lordandmaster

Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline

Yeah, funny, I thought our cultural norms involve not spilling soda on people whose private beliefs aren't identical to your own.

This nation was founded on the principles of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness--as a place where you can go to a ballgame and be yourself and not have to worry about what "cultural norms" the guy in back of you thinks you're supposed to be upholding.

And that's about all I have to say, because someone who proposes instilling "cultural norms" through assault, battery, and obstruction of justice isn't really the kind of person I expect to have a productive discussion with.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Got a society that doesn't have cultural norms, LaM???

(in reply to TheHeretic)

Post #: 128

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 6:27:10 PM

Politesub53

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

Back in the Vietnam war many soldiers were conscripts and didnt have much choice. Today many sign up as there is very little work in the areas that they live in. Even though, i think the ones that join up out of nobleness are not inherently bad people.

They join up to protect and serve, and from that point onwards its down to the government to do the right thing. The onus is on government to make sure their goals are just. If they are not, the onus is thrown onto the electorate to throw them out of office at the next election.

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 129

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 6:34:45 PM

SugarMyChurro

Posts: 1912
Joined: 4/26/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
In the modern age, the information is available for people to consider.

I agree with that.

But I'll tell you one thing - 19 year old maturity in Europe or South America is different than what we get in the states. In the U.S., 19 year olds are about as immature as it gets. Now that's a gross generalization, but I think it holds up in actuality despite that fact. There are cultural differences, major ones...

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 130

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 6:36:45 PM

laurell3

Posts: 6577
Joined: 5/5/2005
Status: offline

The problem with quoting the wikipedia or assuming what one state does all do is that we in fact do not have battery here. That's what Sugar's statement was about as well as my response. Googling legal sections and using sources such as wikipedia or some poor schlump from law school's law review article is rarely any competent source of the law.

We also do not have offensive simple touching as a criminal violation. However, if a reasonable person could construe such an act as threatening in a menacing manner, I guess it might be an assault. If it causes bodily injury, which seems doubtful, it definitely would be. I would guess almost all places have disturbing the peace type statutes/infractions that it would fall under. If I drive about 30 miles across the Iowa border, their state statute actually allows for battery that is offensive touching as defined by the victim, pretty much anything involving contact could be a crime under that statute.

However, none of those things were the original post that I responded to.

So again, yes LAM I am familiar with jurisdictions where it would not be a "battery".

< Message edited by laurell3 -- 12/1/2007 6:37:30 PM >

_____________________________

I cannot be defined by moments in my life, but must be considered for by the entirety of my existence.

When you fail to consider that I am the best judge for what is right for me, all of your opinions become suspect to me.

(in reply to Lordandmaster)

Post #: 131

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 6:50:32 PM

SugarMyChurro

Posts: 1912
Joined: 4/26/2007
Status: offline

The 'Lectric Law Library's Lexicon On Battery
http://www.lectlaw.com/def/b012.htm

"A battery is the unlawful touching the person of another by the aggressor himself, or any other substance put in motion by him. It must be either wilfully committed, or proceed from want of due care. Hence an injury, be it never so small, done to the person of another, in an angry, spiteful, rude or insolent manner, as by spitting in his face, or any way touching him in anger, or violently jostling him, are batteries in the eye of the law. And any thing attached to the person partakes of its inviolability if, therefore, A strikes a cane in the hands of B, it is a battery."

-----

So again, we have nothing in the way of what passes for evidence on the internet from you, laurell3. Just your own bald assertions about how you are right and the rest of us just don't get "it."

Are you teaching a course in EST here?

Because, you know, what works for Dr. Phil on TV just might not fly here or in the really real world either.

(in reply to laurell3)

Post #: 132

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 7:06:14 PM

laurell3

Posts: 6577
Joined: 5/5/2005
Status: offline

Sugar, I was responding to LAM's question, I will not start this debate with you again as you're doing the same thing I pointed out before. In my state that definition does not apply as it is written.

Why you take every opinion that is not your own so personally is beyond me. As I told you before, it is not personal.

Edited to add: In response to your statements about my father. Thank you and I agree. I wouldn't know if he was a great guy or if he knew what he was getting himself into as I didn't know him at all.

In general however, my general statement that soliders are noble in their actions stands and is not borne out of some sense of sorrow for the loss of my father. He enlisted on the day I was born in an effort to support two small children at the age of 17 (19 when he died). It may seem odd to you, but I have no great feeling of personal loss for his death except that I feel loss for any death in any war and he is included in the numbers. I have never known anything differently to attach personal feelings to. So no, it isn't any sympathy ploy either as I have no sympathy for myself over his death. I just believe that soliders acts are noble and respect the opinions of those whose opinions vary from mine. However, I do see our flag as a symbol of those who have served which goes back to the original OP.

< Message edited by laurell3 -- 12/1/2007 7:12:22 PM >

_____________________________

I cannot be defined by moments in my life, but must be considered for by the entirety of my existence.

When you fail to consider that I am the best judge for what is right for me, all of your opinions become suspect to me.

(in reply to SugarMyChurro)

Post #: 133

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 7:14:42 PM

SugarMyChurro

Posts: 1912
Joined: 4/26/2007
Status: offline

I don't take it personally - at all - it's that you are spouting nonsense. If anything I find some of the things you and Alumbrado post here basically laughable.

That definition is certainly good enough for a tort.

Why is not good enough for you?

(in reply to laurell3)

Post #: 134

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 7:15:34 PM

laurell3

Posts: 6577
Joined: 5/5/2005
Status: offline

It's not good or bad, it just isn't what the law here is and I can't quote something that doesn't exist, which again, was what my statement was based upon.

< Message edited by laurell3 -- 12/1/2007 7:27:40 PM >

_____________________________

I cannot be defined by moments in my life, but must be considered for by the entirety of my existence.

When you fail to consider that I am the best judge for what is right for me, all of your opinions become suspect to me.

(in reply to SugarMyChurro)

Post #: 135

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 7:40:54 PM

Lordandmaster

Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline

Please, this is ridiculous. Pouring soda on someone under the circumstances that Heretic described is assault in the third degree according to Nebraska's revised statutes (that's section 28-310 for those of you following at home). You want to get into specific cases? Fire away. There are dozens of good cases. People have been convicted of assault in the third degree in Nebraska for acts like dunking someone's head in a toilet.

The fact that your state doesn't call it "battery" doesn't mean it's not illegal. I said this:

quote:

Are you implying that intentionally spilling soda on a stranger ISN'T a crime? Yeah, laws vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, thanks for reminding us--but are you aware of a jurisdiction where it wouldn't be considered an offense?

Why don't you just concede that what Heretic wants to do to people who don't take off their hats for the National Anthem is illegal anywhere in the United States? That doesn't preclude criticizing Sugar for citing Wikipedia and God knows what else as sources of law.

quote:

ORIGINAL: laurell3

The problem with quoting the wikipedia or assuming what one state does all do is that we in fact do not have battery here. That's what Sugar's statement was about as well as my response. Googling legal sections and using sources such as wikipedia or some poor schlump from law school's law review article is rarely any competent source of the law.

We also do not have offensive simple touching as a criminal violation. However, if a reasonable person could construe such an act as threatening in a menacing manner, I guess it might be an assault. If it causes bodily injury, which seems doubtful, it definitely would be. I would guess almost all places have disturbing the peace type statutes/infractions that it would fall under. If I drive about 30 miles across the Iowa border, their state statute actually allows for battery that is offensive touching as defined by the victim, pretty much anything involving contact could be a crime under that statute.

However, none of those things were the original post that I responded to.

So again, yes LAM I am familiar with jurisdictions where it would not be a "battery".

< Message edited by Lordandmaster -- 12/1/2007 7:41:30 PM >

(in reply to laurell3)

Post #: 136

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 7:52:03 PM

laurell3

Posts: 6577
Joined: 5/5/2005
Status: offline

I think I already said that in the post you quoted. There's no doubt it would be disturbing the peace or disorderly conduct if nothing else. I'm not supporting the guy dropping his drink on people, obviously that's ridiculous. That has nothing to do with my post about wikipedia.

I'm not sure I get your point. I conceded that already. That was not the point of the original post.

< Message edited by laurell3 -- 12/1/2007 7:55:04 PM >

_____________________________

I cannot be defined by moments in my life, but must be considered for by the entirety of my existence.

When you fail to consider that I am the best judge for what is right for me, all of your opinions become suspect to me.

(in reply to Lordandmaster)

Post #: 137

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 8:29:33 PM

SugarMyChurro

Posts: 1912
Joined: 4/26/2007
Status: offline

Yeah, I suck - no LexisNexis access here. And even if I had it, how am I supposed to link anyone else to it?

I work with what I have.

Everything I say is lie.

(in reply to laurell3)

Post #: 138

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 8:42:39 PM

laurell3

Posts: 6577
Joined: 5/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

Yeah, I suck - no LexisNexis access here. And even if I had it, how am I supposed to link anyone else to it?

I work with what I have.

Everything I say is lie.

sigh..I've never said everything you say is a lie, or that you suck. Sometimes you are incorrect, sometimes I am too.....let it go.

_____________________________

I cannot be defined by moments in my life, but must be considered for by the entirety of my existence.

When you fail to consider that I am the best judge for what is right for me, all of your opinions become suspect to me.

(in reply to SugarMyChurro)

Post #: 139

RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed? - 12/1/2007 8:44:12 PM

OrionTheWolf

Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

Fine. Is it a really a good enough excuse, though? Money in exchange for killing? Isn't it high time the excuses stopped, and the "we were only following orders" routine was swerved? If these people really have a conscience, and they're genuinely unaware of what is ahead, then someone needs to get in schools and provide the information for them to make an informed choice: something along the lines of the results of the nepalm attacks, or children lying in hospitals with limbs hanging off.

The excuses aren't good enough.

I offered explanation. I would not offer excuse, because I reject your indictment.

quote:

In the case of Iraq, the devastation has been laid bare for all to see. How can it be any other way? Modern weaponry will devastate villages and towns.

Such is life. I guess I am cold, but I remove emotion from my decision making process, when it is applicable. I am not about to engage in the old arguement of this war, since everyone's opinions are firmly entrenched.

There are soldiers and fighting there, that is what needs to be dealt with. I say pull the troops and let the Sunnis, Shites, and Kurds slaughter one another. Then when that civil war is over (if it ever ends), we can tally up all the dead kids and see who was right. I am pretty sure everyone will be wrong.

quote:

Why is that a noble act? Coming back to the Nazis, I'm sure they would have applied the same logic when they were rounding up the Communists and assorted political opponents. Using force to coerce people is not noble.

It is a noble act, based upon perception. Are you asking why I consider it noble? To sacrifice part of your life, for the community, is seen as noble by me. Other opinions may vary. There is no logical arguement for or against, as the perception of noble is based upon one's ethics and morals. Obviously yours and mine, do not align.

quote:

Placing this in the context of the discussion with E and Laurell, if these soldiers are enlisting to kick some ass in Iraq, then there's something seriously out of order.

Your opinion that it is seriously out of order. I say that anyone that wishes to be a soldier, at any time, should have the drive to want to kick some ass. It is called motivation and killer instinct. Those that join to be engineers, may want to build schools, those that join wanting to be medics, may want to help the populace.

quote:

An example of good violence would be useful, here, to illustrate your point.

Sure. Over 200 years ago my country was under tyranical rule, so a group of pioneers banded together to form their own nation, and through use of violence broke the chains of tyranny. Are you sure this is a debate that would be useful?

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to NorthernGent)

Post #: 140

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Hmmm. Has this been discussed?

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.102