RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped

RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

NorthernGent -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 5:10:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife We were attacked and the people who attacked us have never been brought to justice. Or you could say that the West (in more recent times the United States) has been bullying countries with far less firepower for a long time.....and a fraction of the debt was repaid. You could keep going until the debt is repaid in full, or you could quit while you're ahead. Justice? Bollocks. The US has a long history of imposing it's version of 'justice' inside the borders of unwilling foreign nations. So, this means the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon were justified? No, it doesn't. It means the following: as justice is your main concern, you'd be well served by starting with the visible/tangible war-lords living on your doorstep, rather than undertake a wild goose chase where you have little hope of catching those involved and delivering justice.

rulemylife -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 5:11:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Slavehandsome At no point does killing thousands of Afghanis while protecting our pipeline there justify spending the incredible amounts of money we've thrown at the occupation. The U.S. taxpayers deserve better than this. You know really, this is just an an unbelievable statement. We invaded Afghanistan to find the killers who attacked us. The one thing Bush did right. To suggest it has some ulterior motive is ridiculous.

NorthernGent -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 5:15:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife I'm sorry, do you mean we have to strive for perfection before we can hold accountable those who took some 3,000 lives? No. I mean you can take a look in the mirror and see a country that walked out of the International Court of Justice when it ruled that the United States should reimburse Nicaragua for invading their sovereignty (translated from 'training right-wing revolutionaries to overthrow a democratically elected government and authorising the massacre of a fair number of people in the process'). Put simply, I can't take the moral outrage of the United States seriously given their recent history, but that doesn't mean 3,000 people deserve to die. I'm assuming you can see the distinction, or are you operating in the realms of: 'you're either with us or against us'?

rulemylife -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 5:23:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife You know Philo, you always present good arguments and I respect your opinions, but if you don't see the differences here I don't know what to say. ...fair enough, Rulemylife. Let me see if i can express myself a little clearer. The 9/11 atrocity is highly emotional for Americans. As it should be. My home country has a few terrorist atacks in its history and they have a similar effect. What i was trying to suggest though is that if a response to 9/11 is predicated solely upon the concept of justice, then the US also has to consider that it needs to accept that other countries also deserve justice. i picked out the mining of Nicaraguan ports as an example. In the past the US illegally mined a foreign country's ports purely for ideological reasons. Just as the 9/11 attackers acted for ideological reasons. Both actions were wrong. Both actions cry out for justice. But to ask for justice for one of them while denying justice for the other is not justice. If it is justice we seek, then one country's need for it does not trump another countrys need. Justice supercedes national interests. Slavemike wrote, "justice is what the American people demand" (my italics). i'd argue that the italicised qualifier is wrong. Justice is what all people demand and deserve. Not just the American people. No, in my view what you are trying to do is equate social justice with criminal justice.

slvemike4u -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 5:26:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u You do understand the difference between interpetation and misattrbution,don't you? Probably not in your terms, no. Only as they are defined in the dictionary. Have a nice day. K. Well if one assume's we are both operating with the same dictionary....than we shouldn't have a problem.Of course I will continue to interpet and respond to post's in the fashion I choose to. A nice day to you as well Kirata.

slvemike4u -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 5:29:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife I'm sorry, do you mean we have to strive for perfection before we can hold accountable those who took some 3,000 lives? No. I mean you can take a look in the mirror and see a country that walked out of the International Court of Justice when it ruled that the United States should reimburse Nicaragua for invading their sovereignty (translated from 'training right-wing revolutionaries to overthrow a democratically elected government and authorising the massacre of a fair number of people in the process'). Put simply, I can't take the moral outrage of the United States seriously given their recent history, but that doesn't mean 3,000 people deserve to die. I'm assuming you can see the distinction, or are you operating in the realms of: 'you're either with us or against us'? Whether or not you take the moral outrage seriously is beside the point. What does matter is the U.S. has both the means and the intention of bringing binLaden and his cohorts to justice...by what ever means needed. Sometimes it is good to be the biggest guy on the block.Arrogant yes...but all the same still the biggest guy on the block.

rulemylife -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 5:32:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent No. I mean you can take a look in the mirror and see a country that walked out of the International Court of Justice when it ruled that the United States should reimburse Nicaragua for invading their sovereignty (translated from 'training right-wing revolutionaries to overthrow a democratically elected government and authorising the massacre of a fair number of people in the process'). Put simply, I can't take the moral outrage of the United States seriously given their recent history, but that doesn't mean 3,000 people deserve to die. I'm assuming you can see the distinction, or are you operating in the realms of: 'you're either with us or against us'? No, I'm not. But I'm also not operating in the realm of the U.S. deserves what it gets.

philosophy -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 5:44:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife No, in my view what you are trying to do is equate social justice with criminal justice. ....well, two points. First off, they're both justice. To deny one while demanding the other is inconsistent at best. Slavery was a crime against social justice, 9/11 a crime against criminal justice. Both are wrong. Secondly, the US actions in Nicaragua did lead to the deaths of many innocents. Those US actions were driven by a desire to export an ideology. They are considered offences against criminal justice by most people world-wide. What you appear to be trying to do is apply different definitions of what is justice and what is a crime according to whether the US dishes it out or suffers it.

rulemylife -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 5:55:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife No, in my view what you are trying to do is equate social justice with criminal justice. ....well, two points. First off, they're both justice. To deny one while demanding the other is inconsistent at best. Slavery was a crime against social justice, 9/11 a crime against criminal justice. Both are wrong. Secondly, the US actions in Nicaragua did lead to the deaths of many innocents. Those US actions were driven by a desire to export an ideology. They are considered offences against criminal justice by most people world-wide. What you appear to be trying to do is apply different definitions of what is justice and what is a crime according to whether the US dishes it out or suffers it. No, as you are well aware, what governments do is not always the will of the people they govern. To try to justify a terrorist act on civilians based on what country they are from or what government they live under is to justify terrorism itself.

slvemike4u -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 6:18:57 PM)
Well said Rule.....

Politesub53 -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 6:44:47 PM)
I think if Bush and Blair hadnt been so eager to get rid of Saddam, Afghanistan may have been further down the road to peace. The WMD nonsense was a costly blind alley to go down. Its obvious more ground troops will be needed in Afgnanistan, although venturing into Pakistan could be a nightmare if the government there are against it. Maybe the best news for peace, was the announcement that the Iranians are to attend the meeting on peace talks. They have already had meetings with NATO officials.

philosophy -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 6:52:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife To try to justify a terrorist act on civilians based on what country they are from or what government they live under is to justify terrorism itself. quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Well said Rule..... ...and now one or both of you can quote where i attempted to justify any terrorist act at all. Come on......quote me. Otherwise, what will be obvious is that neither of you have attempted to comprehend what i've been trying to say at all.......and then making up spurious character attacks to cover up your lack of understanding.

slvemike4u -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 7:12:52 PM)
Philo,I agreed with rule's post as it pertains to Governments and its citizens....I'm sorry you saw that as a "spurious character attack"...it certainly wasn't meant as one. Though I do disagree with you here I have never felt yours was a character I would care to impugn in any way shape or form 9/11 is not a subject that lends itself to reasoned debate on the part of most Americans.....if you felt my endorsement of Rule was a character attack I apologise for the misunderstanding...it wasn't meant as such.

philosophy -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 10:29:03 PM)
...fair enough slvmike4u.......but you did appear to agree with rule that i had somehow attempted to justify terrorist acts. i categorically did not. Therefore my annoyance and my challenge to quote wherever you felt i had. You do make a very important point regarding the ability of any nation to discuss things rationally that have struck at whatever it percieves to be its heart. i can understand that it is very difficult. Nevertheless the attempt must be made.......the alternative is to play into the terrorists hands.

slvemike4u -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 10:47:14 PM)
Well I'll say this Philo,such a discussion would not be with the likes of bin Laden.Might not even be possible until he is dispatched to search for his 70 virgins.At that point moderate voices can possible have a discussion without 9/11 clouding the conversation.

philosophy -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/27/2009 11:51:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Well I'll say this Philo,such a discussion would not be with the likes of bin Laden.Might not even be possible until he is dispatched to search for his 70 virgins.At that point moderate voices can possible have a discussion without 9/11 clouding the conversation. ...then should i not be able to have a civil discourse with US citizens until such time as their fellow citizens who funded the IRA terrorist atrocities have been brought to justice? Of course not. That would be to let the terrorists win. Terrorism is an act that is designed to cause its victims to lose sight of their more noble aspirations. It is like the bully that pokes the weakling in the chest until they strike back and, in the bullys eyes, create a justification. After the London bombings a website was put up called 'we are not afraid'..... http://www.werenotafraid.com/ .... and from that site...... "The historical response to these types of attacks has been a show of deadly force; we believe that there is a better way. We refuse to respond to aggression and hatred in kind. Instead, we who are not afraid will continue to live our lives the best way we know how. We will work, we will play, we will laugh, we will live. We will not waste one moment, nor sacrifice one bit of our freedom, because of fear. We are not afraid." ......that attitude is the best response to terrorism from the citizenry.

NorthernGent -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/28/2009 2:07:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Whether or not you take the moral outrage seriously is beside the point. What does matter is the U.S. has both the means and the intention of bringing binLaden and his cohorts to justice...by what ever means needed. Sometimes it is good to be the biggest guy on the block.Arrogant yes...but all the same still the biggest guy on the block. Mike, it is exactly the point in relation to 'justice', which is the conversation I'm haing with Rulemylife (the one to which you chose to reply). Whether or not the US has the means at its disposal, really is beside the point (unless you're intending to change the course of the discussion).

NorthernGent -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/28/2009 2:14:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent No. I mean you can take a look in the mirror and see a country that walked out of the International Court of Justice when it ruled that the United States should reimburse Nicaragua for invading their sovereignty (translated from 'training right-wing revolutionaries to overthrow a democratically elected government and authorising the massacre of a fair number of people in the process'). Put simply, I can't take the moral outrage of the United States seriously given their recent history, but that doesn't mean 3,000 people deserve to die. I'm assuming you can see the distinction, or are you operating in the realms of: 'you're either with us or against us'? No, I'm not. But I'm also not operating in the realm of the U.S. deserves what it gets. When you go waltzing into someone else's back garden, something will come back the other way. Every empire from here to Outer Mongolia has been booted out of countries where it has set up shop.....seems the US isn't learning the lesson from history. Anyway, back to the discussion at hand:...... Your cry for 'justice' will be taken seriously when you target your own government and its supporters; otherwise, you're seeking revenge for an issue that has its roots in US foreign policy.

NorthernGent -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/28/2009 2:18:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife To try to justify a terrorist act on civilians based on what country they are from or what government they live under is to justify terrorism itself. That's a ridiculous point, primarily because you're defining terrorism to meet your ends. I'm sure many Arabs and muslims consider themselves freedom fighters while considering the United States to be the terrorists.

VanessaChaland -> RE: Obama: Taliban and al-Qaida must be stopped (3/28/2009 2:23:43 AM)
Bush doctrine.? Oh, you mean Christian extremism. :) quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY So far, Obama's actions in relation to Muslim extremism generally meets with my approval. After all, it's pretty much the Bush doctrine. [8D][:)] Firm

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125