quote:

if you want to boil things down to "primate politics" then you don't get to also use morality as a guage of behavior as one excluded the other.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b
Well, at least we don’t hurl shit at each other anymore like the other primates.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

So it would appear that if the cornor grocery store refused to sell you food because they did not like your attitude you think that it would be ok to rob them of the food you feel you need instead of seeking a more frendly grocer or reducing your intake.

I said "cut off." If the asshole as 7-11 doesn’t want to sell me food
It is interesting that the person at the theoretical 7-11 who refuses to sell you food is an asshole...why is he an asshole? What I posted was that he refused to sell to you because of your attitude.  How does that make him an asshole?

I’ll take my business across the street to Wilson Farms. If, on the other hand I am unable (for whatever reasons) to secure any food then, yes, I might resort to robbery. Basic survival instincts will trump any notions of right and wrong.
How far will you travel to buy food before you resort to thugging those who wont sell to you because of your attitude? 

quote:

Since the U.S. is 70% self sufficient in oil we could sell ourselves oil at any price we choose and only purchase the remaining 30% from sources besides Iran. Of course that might cut into the profits of the oil cartel. Or we could choose to conserve by cutting back on oil usage (how much oil does it take to run a war in Afghanistan and Iraq)...It may seem like a silly thought for a country to live within its means but we as citizens are expected to live within our means. Am I missing something here?

You’re missing quite a lot actually. I am talking about actions and reactions, causes and effects. You’re talking about reasoned responses (which is asking a lot from the human race) to non-critical situations, I’m talking about instinctive responses to critical situations.
I don't believe you are.  The difference between higher primates and the lower primates is the ability to reason instead of react instinctively.  You have on more than one occasion mentioned that the U.S, (as do most countries) has plans to invade virtually every country on the planet.  This is hardly in the realm of instinctive.  If our leaders cannot reason with any given situation then why are they our leaders?

If there were a sudden drop in oil supply, a sudden increase in price so that our economy ground to a halt (no food shipments, no heating fuel, sudden massive unemployment, etc), how do you think we would react?
Since this has never happened in the history of the world why do you bring it up as a possibility

Your statement about self sufficiency seems to indicate that you believe that the oil companies have control over the world wide market of oil.
Actually they do.  More to the point they have absolute control of the oil in the U.S.  which represents 70% of what we use.


This is the fallacy of control. The false belief that change can be arrested. There is no control. We live in a constantly changing universe and history is littered with the corpses of those who thought they had control.
Perhaps you should read a little history.  Start with the history of the Rothschild cartel. 
As for the constantly changing universe....I have not seen much real change in the past several thousand years.  The rich get richer and the poor get pregnant. My understanding is that you get pregnant by getting fucked.

There is also the question of who decides (i.e. who gets to have the false belief that they have control while fucking over people in the process). Who decides what constitutes living within our means?
That does not seem such a difficult question....figure out what your means are and live within them.

Who decides what is the proper amount of energy usage for each of us? Who amongst us know exactly how much gasoline I need each week? If that person is someone other than me,
So on a life boat if you are bigger,stronger or better armed you can have as much water and food as you choose?

I’d like to know where they got this knowledge and more importantly, where they get the arrogance to think they could know.
One might ask the same question of you.  Where do you get the arrogance to say I will take what ever I think I need no matter that you feel you need it also.

quote:

I am a little confused as to just who is the fanatic...the hungry lion or the wounded gazelle? ( the predatory oil consumer or the oil producer who is about to be thugged out of his oil)

I would think that would be obvious.
If it were obvious I would not have asked the question.  I am not a mind reader.

quote:


 


So it would appear that all the talk about soverignty, freedom, national self determination, democracy,etc are just so much rhetoric.

You’re beginning to catch on.
By "catch on" do you mean that I have discovered that you are just dealing in rhetoric to cover your approval of thuggery?

But you have to add to that all the talk about God, white supremacy, black power, liberalism, conservatism, etc., etc., etc.

quote:

This is international thugery at its bassest and to justify it with such rehtoric is fatuous.

No, this is good, old fashioned, primate politics at work.
I do not see anything good or old fashioned about thuggery.  You on the other hand seem to embrace it with both arms.

I agree that rhetoric is fatuous (it is, in fact, one of the base principles of my philosophy),
It would appear that you are embracing fatuous rhetoric.

the difference between you and me as that you simply respond with another form of rhetoric.
And this rhetoric would be ????
The only difference I have seen so far is what I call armed robbery and thuggery you like to call "good old fashioned primate politics"

Another form of ideology covering up the true cause of humanity’s problems which is – drum role please – good, old fashioned, primate politics. In other words, our animal instincts.
You may be proud of operating with your animal instincts...civililzed society has eschewed it.


What we need to do is to stop attacking one ideology with another (that is pretty much all we have been doing down through history) and see ourselves as we truly are – an overly cleaver species of primate. That is the necessary first step in achieving balance between our fundamental human nature and our ability to reason. I’m not overly hopeful but I try to remain optimistic.
It is my opinion that your continual use of primate politics to justify your behaviour and the behaviour of those leaders you approve of is the primary reason for your lack of hope.

quote:

So if bush & co. decide to go and thug Iran out of their oil you would not object and raise your voice and say No !!! Mr. president it is wrong to go and steal that which is not for sale?

If that is the case, I would object. Unlike you, however, I am not locked into a single mindset of good guys and bad guys that tells me that any conflict with Iran is the result of Bush and Co. wanting to thug Iran out of their oil. There are numerous (surface) possibilities that could lead to conflict.
I am quite sure that bush & co. can come up with any number of "excuses" but the bottom line is the oil.

Bush will be gone in two years. Will the hostility between the Islamic world and the Western world vanish with him?
That has never been my contention.


Will Iran suddenly say, "oh, that big meanie, Bush, is gone, let’s stop supporting terrorists and give everybody hugs instead."?
I believe that Iran will continue to do what they are doing as long as they perceive a threat to their national soveringty.  If attacking a soverign nation (Iraq & Afghanastan) is not terrorism then how would you characterize it?

quote:

In one of your previous posts you suggest that you would feel justified in attacking first if you felt that you were in imminent danger of being attacked. From what you have posted here it seems to me that Iran would be the one in imminent danger of being attacked.

I didn’t suggest it, I stated it as a fact. I stand by it. I see self defense not just as a human instinct, but as a human right. But self-defense can also be used as rhetoric and as I see it, both sides are already attacking each other. What happens next is merely a matter of scale.
While the threat from the U.S. aganst Iran is pretty obvious what do you see Iran doing that could be construed as intimidating the U.S,?  As far as I know they have no troops poised at our boarders.  They have no weapons target at the U.S.  They have no fleet of ships off of our shores threatning us.

quote:

I am surprised that you do not feel some ethical revulsion at stealing: because that is just exactly what you seem to be advocating. "If you wont sell me your oil I will come and take it" I can fully understand why Iran might want some sort of deterent to that sort of mind set. We are not god....We do not own the world...We do not have any right to pillage what some may refuse to sell us.

I feel ethical revulsion at a lot of things, including stealing. If I seem to be advocating it, it is only because you take what I say, run it through your ideological filter, and arrive at something different.
I am unclear just which "idiological filter" you are speaking of.  You say you are against stealing except when you want to.  When we spoke of the 7-11 not selling you food based on your attitude the seller becomes an asshole without any attempt on your side to resolve the conflict, he becomes instantly an "asshole".  In your response to my question you never once sought to figure out just why he would not sell to you.  This is hardly an idiological filter but rather a failure on your part at any sort of introspection or seeking of a causal purpose to him not selling food to you.  He does not agree with you so he is, instantly and without consideration of any other facts, an "asshole".


I wouldn’t blame Iran one bit for trying to fend off a U.S. invasion. I don’t blame us, either, for trying to fend off their terrorist activities.
So far I have not seen you post any credible evidence that Iran is involved in terrorist activities against the U.S.

So where does that leave us?
Us?  Have you  a mouse in your pocket?  You are the one trying to make a case for the U.S, attacking Iran and taking their oil not me.
thompson

quote:


Argentina


See also: Demographics of Argentina

Argentina's indigenous population is about 403.000 (1 percent of total population)[9]. Indigenous nations include the Toba, Wichí, Mocoví, Pilagá, Chulupí, Diaguita-Calchaquí, Kolla, Guaraní (Tupí Guaraní and Avá Guaraní in the provinces of Jujuy and Salta, and Mbyá Guaraní in the province of Misiones), Chorote, Chané, Tapieté, Mapuche, Tehuelche and Selknam (Ona).

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Do you have any other examples of the U.S. operating on a high moral plane?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Tell you what, you condemn the Marshal plan as imperialism and I will condemn the Russians for Eastern Europe and we can call it a day.

quote:

ORIGINAL: caitlyn

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Do you have any other examples of the U.S. operating on a high moral plane?

He didn't say high moral plane ... he said higher moral plane. I think you are not agreeing, because you are changing his meaning.
 
Example:
 
If you buy the thinking that The Marshall Plan was done for economic gain, then you are able to throw out the notion of high moral ground.
 
But, since no matter the reason, quite a bit of good came of it, you can at least say that a higher moral ground is being achieved than invading other people's country based on questionable truths.

• We invaded Iraq, based on faulty intelligence, and out-and-out lies.
  
• We had a Defense Secretary that denied our brave soldiers, enough men to secure a hostile border. Those men are paying the price to this day.
  
• We are engaged in the inhumane treatment of prisoners.
  
• We make linkage between governments and terror organization, that do not exist.

(talk about high moral ground ... I'm defendng Michael)

quote:

Mental masterbation in public bores me as does academic twaddle masquerading as hard science.

quote:

It isn't I who is accusing others of having a "singular mode of thinking" now is it?

quote:

Thanks for playing...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

(In my best imitation of the computer voice from the original Star Trek...) "Working..."