Subject:
|
Re: From Reason: "It's all bad news - Chaos in occupied Iraq"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 25 May 2004 18:27:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1172 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
On what basis do you declare these people to be psychotic, inhuman and
irrational?
|
View the horrific video of these people screaming “Allah is the Greatest!” as
one of them slowly slices off the head of an innocent human being and then
holding up the severed head as a trophy and answer your own question.
| |
Is it because they go to extraordinary lengths to force others
to accept their extremist religious doctrines?
|
“Extraordinary” doesn’t even begin to describe the degree to which they are
willing to go.
| |
Is it because they kill
innocent civilians in the name of a greater cause?
|
“Kill”? “Savagely butcher” might be a better.
| |
Is it because they act
pre-emptively against foreign entities whom they deem to be threats?
|
No.
| |
The motivation of terrorists has to be our concern; if it is not, then we
are embracing Dubya’s mad notion of an unwinnable (by definition) war on
terror.
|
It must be winnable; the alternative is our destruction. Their motive is to
establish Shariah over all the world. What don’t you understand about that?
| |
It is far too convenient to dismiss the views of one’s enemy as insane or
inhuman.
|
Really? But what if that’s indeed what they are?
| |
That way, you spare yourself the trouble of considering whether any
of those views have validity.
|
What if those views indeed have absolutely no validity?
| |
Instead of writing them off, why not consider
their root?
|
Who cares? They are killing innocents, and are dedicated to continue the same.
They do not deserve further consideration.
| |
Might it have something to do with the US’s overbearing and
hair-trigger military presence in most of the world?
|
Perhaps, but then how would you explain their terrorism in other countries?
It doesn’t, and the “US/Israel scapegoat” argument falls completely apart.
| |
Might it relate to the
US’s fanatical support of every aggressive, anti-Palestinian policy that
Israel creates?
|
Answer me this: How come you never hear of any Christian Palestinians blowing
themselves up and killing innocent Israelis? They are just as “oppressed” as
the Muslim Palestinians....
| |
Might it simply have something to do with the US’s rampant
cultural colonialism?
|
Even if it were, how can the US government be held responsible for that? What
would you suggest we do about it? We are a free society. They hate that and
what it produces. TS.
| |
The United States has no moral authority to condemn any nation or entity for
employing extreme tactics to force that entity’s agenda, even if that agenda
directly opposes that of the US.
|
I reject your moral equivalence.
| |
We have shed more innocent blood in
Afghanistan and Iraq than al Qaeda has shed in the entire world.
|
Well, they are 1 WMD away from evening the score and taking a big lead, and they
are trying to do just that.
| |
We have no
right to pretend that we are somehow above reproach or fit to judge.
|
We are not above reproach, but we do have the right to judge. You sound like
an anarchist, Dave!
| |
| |
Try to get this through your thick skull: they want everybody (not just
the US) either to become one of them or die. That’s it.
|
Dubya has stated outright that countries must join the US or will be
considered enemies. Would you like me to provide examples?
|
What he meant was that countries who harbor and abett terrorists, while not
actively engaging in terrorism, are placing themselves in the crosshairs of the
war against terrorism.
| |
The point is that you’re condemning terrorists for seeking to force the world
to accept their doctrine, but you praise Dubya for his steadfast insistence
that the world accept his doctrine.
|
BINGO! YES! OF COURSE I AM! Because their doctrine is oppression and tyranny,
and Bush’s is Freedom and Liberty!
| |
The fact that you agree with one and
disagree with the other is significant;
|
Damn right!
| |
Conservatives generally seem to have
little problem with hegemonic, micromanaging regimes when those regimes
coincide with the Conservatives’ agenda.
|
That is a separate issue. Suffice it to say that Conservatives want the
spreading of Freedom and Democracy.
| |
Have you examined anything by Anne Coulter, Mike Savage, Sean Hannity, or
Rush Limbaugh since the advent of Dubya’s war on terror? They advocate
violent aggression against Arabs simply because they’re Arabs.
|
Please. I have heard and read a lot from these individuals. Please cite (but I
hope you are not talking about profiling).
| |
Do you
condemn those media-saturating, extremist Right-wing demagogues as soundly as
you condemn a few nearly anonymous Muslims?
|
I condemn ideas, not people. Sometimes a blind squirrel finds a nut every now
and then-- even Al Franken (although it’s hard for him to make points with his
foot in his mouth)
JOHN
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
163 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
