Subject:
|
Re: Have you hugged a terrorist today? (was: A Measured Response...)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 15 Sep 2001 11:00:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
422 times
|
| |
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message
news:GJowB8.H8s@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Amy Hughes writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> > > I decided I am not going to go through and point out the individual
> > > instances in these threads where people have used language that
> > > attempts to dehumanize our aggressors
> >
> > I'll grant only that we share much genetic material. Maybe even moreso • than we
> > do with, say, mold spores.
>
> I disagree with Richard and agree with you on this. I have said before • that
> I personally require certain standards of behaviour before I will consider
> someone as human (and not merely genetically related to me). These
> terrorists, by my standards, are not human. I'm not "attempting to
> dehumanise" them, they chose that course themselves. At least in my eyes,
> and they've given up any hope of my caring what they think of themselves.
> They initiated the use of force in a cowardly and craven manner against
> innocents. The race will be better off without their genes.
Seriously, what nation in the world has not "initiated the use of force in
a cowardly and craven manner against innocents"? Further, I would love to
know what your "certain standards of behaviour" are? I assume it is OK to
exploit the developed world so we in the west can have DVD players and the
like? 25000 children die every day because of lack of clean water - is that
acceptable? Is that civilised?
Scott A
>
> But I think you go too far in the following:
>
> > > A measured response is called for
> >
> > What would you consider a measured response?
> >
> > Perhaps we could invite Bin Laden to a national barbeque and have a huge • love-
> > in, then, when we've convinced him that we're such nice folks, we can • strike a
> > deal with him...
> >
> > 1) We'll help you kill the infidels in Israel and sweep them into the • sea.
> > 2) We'll build all your people nice homes in the Jerusalem 'burbs.
> > 3) We'll all convert to your perverted... errr... inspired version of • Islam.
> >
> > In return, you agree to kill only half of us.
> >
> > I shoulda been a diplomat.
>
> I REALLY don't think Richard is calling for this. Maybe Jason Railton is,
> but not Richard. I'm not sure exactly what level of action he is in favor • of
> but it surely is much stronger than this and it's not fair to characterise
> his stance quite this way.
>
> He and I disagree, I think, about the need to disassemble/dismantle a few
> states. I think the LP and I disagree about it, for that matter. The time
> has come for the US to make the world safe (again), whatever the cost,
> whether the world helps pay or not.
>
> But you do Richard an unitentional disservice when you characterise his
> advocated course of action as the above level of appeasement. I think we • all
> ought to put our cards on the table and be concrete in what exactly we
> advocate, so perhaps Richard could be a bit more clear, but surely it • isn't
> this.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
49 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
