Subject:
|
Re: From Reason: "It's all bad news - Chaos in occupied Iraq"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 26 May 2004 05:17:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1358 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
This post is rather long. Sorry about that, for anyone who’s following.
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
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.
|
Well, I watched the entire “beheading” video, and honestly it’s not
particularly more horrifying that the pictures from Abu Ghraib.
|
Well, even pictures of Nick Berg’s slaughter couldn’t have compared with the
audio and video portrayal of it.
| |
Yes, it’s a
brutal, premeditiated act, but at least it wasn’t an institutional (and,
apparently, officially endorsed) effort to dehumanize the very people we’ve
been claiming to liberate.
|
I believe we are talking about rogues, not policy, because that kind of behavior
serves absolutely no useful purpose (as an intelligence gathering strategy, that
is). But we have been vigilant and condemned the behavior and are punishing the
perps. Where is the same indignation from Berg’s executioners? There, of
course, is none, because this is apparently the will of Allah.
| |
Certainly you must know that I’m no more upset by Muslims screaming ‘Allah is
the Greatest’ than I am about the US President declaring that God is on Our
Side or Generals declaring that
our god is
better than their god.
|
An offensive comparison. At least compare apples to apples. The equivalent
would be our general slicing off the head of a prisoner on camera and declaring
that “our God is better their God”. Of course that would never happen. The
worst part of the Berg execution was the chanting, IMO. Pure savagery and
inhumanity.
| |
Why do you advocate murderous Christian
fundamentalism while decrying murderous Islamic fundamentalism?
|
Are you suggesting that the US policy is guided by Christian fundamentalism?
Please. Merely because Bush may be a Christian fundamentalist (if he even is
one) is irrelevant. His policies are guided by protecting America, not by some
apocalyptic, religious belief.
| |
| |
| |
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.
|
Or the degree to which we are willing to go. How many Iraqi civilians
have died because of US action?
|
How many were spared torture and execution at the hands of SH’s regime?
| |
And how many American civilians have died
because of Iraqi action?
|
How many were spared because we took the fight TO al-Qaeda?
| |
| |
| |
Is it because they kill
innocent civilians in the name of a greater cause?
|
|
|
Let’s be clear here. The deaths of innocents is never our intention. That
makes a big difference. All the difference.
| |
| |
“Kill”? “Savagely butcher” might be a better.
|
Is the beheading of a single person more or less horrific than the airbombing
of 40+ civilians at a wedding party?
|
I think more facts need to be revealed in order to judge those events.
| |
| |
| |
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?
|
You are arguing by assertion, which is a fallacy. Instead, if you wish to
maintain your claim that these people are insane or inhuman, then you must
very specifically spell out the following:
1. How do you determine that they are insane or inhuman?
|
Because human, civil, sane people do not slice the heads off of innocent people
while chanting to their God.
| |
2. How do you determine that you are fit to judge their relative insanity or
inhumanity?
|
My fitness is irrelevant to their immoral behavior.
| |
3. On what basis do you determine that the United States is fit to judge
their relative insanity or inhumanity?
|
Same as above. Their immorality is unrelated to ours.
| |
4. On what basis do you determine that the United States has the moral
authority to act against them?
|
They acted against us. We have the right to defend ourselves.
| |
5. On what basis do you determine the appropriate response to the enemy?
|
Now you are talking specifics and military strategy. I would say we generally
try to neutralize any given threat as quickly, safely, and cheaply as we can.
| |
6. On what basis do you determine that the United States is not equally
guilty of the crimes it accuses the so called “insane” of committing?
|
Because we have codes of conduct to which we try to adhere. They have none.
| |
Clearly, if you are able to declare these people to be insane and inhuman,
you must have clear guidelines for making that determination. Please present
those guidelines, so that we may properly assess these people. Additionally,
we must naturally subject Dubya and his administration to the same review.
I look forward to examining your criteria.
| |
| |
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?
|
Again, this is argument by assertion, and it’s a fallacy.
| |
| |
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.
|
Every objection you have raised thus far applies equally (or more so) to the
actions and policies of the Bush Administration. Do you condemn the
Adminstration equally, or do you apply your criticism only to those who do
not profess to worship at the Americhristian altar?
|
Please let’s dispense with the anti-Christian rhetoric. Your attempts at
equivocation are at best specious and at worst offensive to Christians who don’t
appreciate being unjustly compared to the dirtbags who perpetrated the Nick Berg
slaughter.
Yeah, Bush is a Christian. So what? It’s where he gets his values. No worse
than from where ever you get yours or Kerry gets his. Kerry’s a Christian-- why
do you support him?
| |
| |
| |
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.
|
You’re presenting a false dilemma (again, a fallacy). You are asserting
that, because terrorists strike at American interests for reasons pertaining
to American action, terrorists must therefore strike at all nations for
reasons pertaining to American action.
|
No, I am saying if our actions are the cause of terrorism against us, then how
do you explain the actions of terrorists perpetrated upon other countries which
have engaged in no provocation? The answer is that it is not anything we do
that incenses these fanatics, merely that we are.
| |
Since your assertion doesn’t address mine, I don’t see how a response is
relevant.
|
Even if I granted that we had an “overbearing and hair-trigger military presence
in most of the world”, my point is that we would be a target even if we didn’t
have such a presence.
| |
| |
| |
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.
|
Once again, you are arguing by assertion, which is a fallacy. Please spell
out specifically why you reject the moral equivalence, and state your
reasons. A sound-byte answer is insufficient.
|
By what authority do you assert that the United States has no moral authority to
condemn any nation or entity? You are hoisted by your own moral relativism.
| |
| |
| |
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.
|
So we’re justified in killing as many innocent civilians as we wish?
|
No, merely pointing out that a numbers-game argument is meaningless.
| |
You’re
explicitly advocating governmental terrorism enacted by the United States
military! And then you wonder at my claims of moral equivalence?
I question your ability to evaluate this subject clearly.
|
I question whether you are understanding me clearly, which I suspect, given the
above assertion. Where did I advocate governmental terrorism?
| |
| |
| |
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!
|
Yet again, this is argument by assertion. Why do you assert that we have
the right to judge but Muslim extremists (presumably) do not?
|
I base it on how we treat our fellow human beings and how they treat their
fellow human beings. Our system is morally and ethically superior.
| |
| |
| |
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!
|
Which Bush are you referring to? Dubya, who closed down a newspaper to
prevent free speech?
|
There is a fine line between free speech and treason.
| |
Dubya, whose administration actively suppresses dissent
and debate?
|
Problem is, Dems are such poor losers that they don’t know when enough is
enough. It’s pitiful that some Dems are still fuming about the 2000 election!
We had the debate on the war. We went to war. Why are we still debating
whether we should have gone to war? Kerry, that hypocrite, voted to go to war!
There would be a lot less suppression if there were more civility.
| |
Dubya, whose handlers confine protesters in “free speech” zones
to prevent them from being heard?
|
Protesters? Or hate-spewing partisans who just want the president to look bad
on the evening news?
| |
Bush has no interest in preserving freedom or liberty in the United States or
elsewhere.
|
You know, it’s comments like that wot cause unrest.
| |
| |
Suffice it to say that Conservatives want the
spreading of Freedom and Democracy.
|
No, that does not suffice. Conservatives what to impose religious doctrine
on the legislature,
|
Like it or not, our country was founded on religious principles and the
Judeo-Christian tradition is tied inexorably to this country. That is not to
say that following those traditions is in any way mandated, just from where we
got our values. That is a far cry from “religious doctrine”
| |
they want to restrict the right to marry by altering the
US Constitution,
|
That is only proposed to protect the institution of marriage from being
REDEFINED by activists with their social agendas.
| |
they condemn dissent as criminal speech, and they actively
call for the murder, torture, and suppression of Arabs and Muslims.
| |
| |
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).
|
I presume that you mean that, because profiling of Arabs is inherently
racist, we therefore can omit that bigoted tactic from our discussion.
Correct?
|
I’m talking about profiling as a smart investigative strategy that goes beyond
racism. But if you don’t mind, I’d rather not go there.
| |
Well, here are a few besides:
Mike Savage, calling for Iraqis
to have “dynamite put in their orifices.”
|
Shock Jock. He does the ranting thing. Not my cup of tea.
| |
Ann Coulter, advocating
the murder of civilians, the assassination of foreign leaders, and the
conversion-by-the-sword to Christianity.
|
She’s usually very witty and erudite, skewing inconsistent liberal positions.
But give her a break; the date of that column was 9-12-01!
| |
Rush Limbaugh, dismissing the
forced and systematic torture of Iraqi citizens as no worse than voluntary
frat hazing, and that such torture was carried out by “the babes.”
|
I want to know all the facts before I pass judgment on Abu Gruppy(1) As for
Rush; don’t underestimate him. He can hold his own in defense of
Conservativism.
| |
And I can’t find the one I had in mind for Hannity,
|
The guy knows his stuff, but maybe not as logically minded as a Coulter or a
Medved. You forgot to mention Laura Ingraham-- also conservative and very
intelligent as well (clerked for Clarence Thomas)
| |
but
here’s one of loony
Pat Robertson advocating the nuking of the Pentagon because it doesn’t adhere
to his insane notions of propriety.
|
I don’t think he was serious (I know he wasn’t). I don’t ever watch or hear
him, and would probably not see eye2eye with him on much. I do share his
frustration with our State Department, however...:-)
| |
Okay, I was off the mark in the “Arabs because they’re Arabs” phrasing, so I
retract that. Nevertheless, these Right Wing zealots call for the
overwhelming use of unjust force against the very people they presume to
decry as extremist. How are their calls for torture and murder less dangerous
than those of Islamist extremists?
|
Theirs is at best rhetoric; the Islamists’ are well-worn policy.
| |
| |
| |
Sometimes a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then
|
|
It’s not hard to find a nut when discussing Right Wing zealotry.
|
I’m just curious. Whom would you describe as a “Left Wing” zealot?
JOHN
(1) Ha, a shot at my beloved president:-)
|
|
Message has 5 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
|
|
|
|
