Subject:
|
Re: Thinking Out Loud...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 22 Sep 2001 14:17:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
712 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> Yeah, but you know what guys -- who cares about pacifism? Pacifism is beside
> the point...
Hmmm. OK. It seemed like some were making a pretty big point of it...
>
> 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 conclusions and the establishment of impossible goals.
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 you can't say a final conclusion has been made.
As to the establisment of impossible goals, you don't know that either until we
fail. If you listen to the presidents speach again you will not hear him say
"eliminate the threat of terrorism entirely" what he said was we need to
"eliminate those terrorist organizations that have a global reach". That seems
a reasonable, although still very difficult, goal to achive.
>
> What has happened to reason? Why does the U.S. oppose bin Laden being given
> over to a neutral party for trial? Can an unbiased Grand Jury really be
> convened in the state of New York?
Of course it can't if it is made up of New York (or for that matter any
American) citizens. That is what the World Court is for.
Oh and by the way there are no "neutral parties" in this. (I know you love
that one).
>
> I see madness ahead for us all. No one defends true justice, just all of
> this wild west, "dead or alive", with us or against us type crap spewing
> from the hellish mouth of our president.
Well sir, I suggest you keep your big mouth shut and not say that in public.
If you do you are asking for big time trouble. Hey I didn't vote for GW but I
am behind him 100% at the moment (although like Larry I think he invokes "God"
way to much at a religiously sensitive time).
Oh and by the way, when it comes to bin Laden "dead or alive" works just fine
for me. Actually I prefer the dead part.
>
> ...where are the TRUE defenders of our great republic? I for one did not
> change my views about ANYTHING just because of the events of 911. That's
> what the terrorists want -- that is what I will not do. Get a grip, people!!!
Well I feel anyone that can't reassess their views after 9/11 (It is a date not
a number) is out of touch with reality. ALL reality changed on 9/11 if you
can't recognize that and change your views accordingly I feel sorry for you. I
think you need to "Get a grip" and take the world for what it is now. If you
think we should sit back and let the terrorists do as they please I suggest
moving to Afganistan then and see how you like it.
You seem to think it is a virtue that you can hold to your views after such an
event. I don't. You need to put the world in its current context and
establish your views accordingly. You can't just use the world in its context
of 2 weeks ago and say basically nothing has changed.
>
> -- Hop-Frog (who knows the difference between a love tap and murder with a
> blunt instrument)
I suppose you think 9/11 was a "love tap" then?
Eric Kingsley
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | 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)
|
55 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
