 | | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) As I said, it was more likely a charge - remember they were probably weaponless - whether they were intending to hurt the hijackers is anyone's guess. My aim in their position would be (if I had time to think about it): 1. Try and get control (...) (23 years ago, 21-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) weaponless (...) You have to be kidding!!! These hijackers more than likely had killed some crew, possibly some passangers, and almost certainly the pilots. The passangers knew this. They also knew, via phone conversations, that planes were (...) (23 years ago, 21-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
"Eric Kingsley" <kingsley@nelug.org> wrote in message news:GK0IsA.GL2@lugnet.com... (...) Even if the F-16 did shoot them out the sky, the passengers on board did not know that was going to happen. I can't believe it was a cover up, as the reports (...) (23 years ago, 21-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) Which is a kind of attack. (...) Unarmed attacks are nevertheless attacks. You've been caught in a logical contradiction and unless you can get away with redefining pacifism to mean something it does not, you're stuck. Admit it and move on. (...) (23 years ago, 21-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) An *excellent* point. In addition, your point illustrates a good refutation of the oft-quoted line by Gandhi about "many things are worth dying for, nothing is worth killing for." If, for instance, the passengers had reason to suspect, as they (...) (23 years ago, 21-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) This is one of the most ridiculous statements I've seen on this whole topic. Without violence? How ludicrous! "Please Mr. Terrorist, can I have control of the plane?" "Why sure you can, good man, here you go" Passive resistance taking a plane (...) (23 years ago, 22-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
Yeah, but you know what guys -- who cares about pacifism? Pacifism is beside the point... The point is whether we should retaliate violently absent proof of the correctness of what we are doing. The point is whether we should be rushing to (...) (23 years ago, 22-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) Hmmm. OK. It seemed like some were making a pretty big point of it... (...) To my knowledge we have not physically acted in response to what happened yet. I think you should wait on the rushing to conclusions part because until we do something (...) (23 years ago, 22-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) Eric, let's not go there. I happen to think Richard goes a bit too far but if we cannot tolerate voices of dissent and discuss this rationally we are too far gone to triumph, and too far gone to *deserve* to triumph (1). All viewpoints should (...) (23 years ago, 22-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Raving Out Loud (was: Thinking Out Loud...)
|
|
Eric, your note suggests that you just generally missed the point. But there are few point in particular that I think are worth making. (...) Your tone suggests not only that you think his safety could be imperiled, but also that you wouldn't be too (...) (23 years ago, 22-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Raving Out Loud (was: Thinking Out Loud...)
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes: <snip the parts that I agree with and that aren't needed for the following> (...) I'm with you on the "some popular opinion" part, but I don't see the president as calling for us to go (...) (23 years ago, 22-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
Hello Larry, (...) While in tendency, I do agree, I would probably state these issues less black and white. Yes, our standards ARE correct, which for me means that we ARE allowed to apply them in OUR part of the world. At least most of them. Yes, we (...) (23 years ago, 22-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) Well first of all we are all wearing our emotions pretty close to the vest now-a-days so I may have said something I wouldn't have under normal circumstances. Unfortunately these arn't normal circumstances. I see where what I said sounded like (...) (23 years ago, 23-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) No, actually these circumstances are VERY normal. Violence goes on in our world everyday in the name of capitalism -- whether it is the sweatshop that made your sneakers, or trade in South American women for use as captive prostitutes. I am (...) (23 years ago, 23-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) So what did you mean when you said this less than 4 days after the attack? ==+== Secretary Powell declined to specify what would be done but said a week deadline for all of bin Laden's organization to be turned over to the west was not (...) (23 years ago, 27-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) Sounds entirely consistent to me. The first message expressed a desire to have the existing powers-that-be in Afghanistan turn over bin Laden on their own, rather than simply rolling out NATO within the week (and without due consideration) to (...) (23 years ago, 27-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) A one week deadline for a particular event is not inconsistent with an entire series of events taking months or years to transpire. (23 years ago, 27-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
|
(...) In the former quote above he calls for restraint. In the latter quote above he can't wait for action. Read his latter comments in context: ==+== The aggressor has made the mistake of attacking the homeland. They will pay. If I were Saddam (...) (23 years ago, 28-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
