Evil strikes again....

[strummingram]

So you don't think that they hate us because we are not Muslim or say that being gay is not a sin or allow women to have equal rights?

I don't know how much our culture and lifestyles play a part in their contempt. But, I can pretty much bet-the-farm that going over there and deposing elected leaders one day, and propping up regimes that are friendly to us so we get the first dibs on their natural resources the next day, and then bombing them the next decade when that regime has decided it needs more room to suppress their citizens, and the next decade doing the same thing, and the next decade doing the same thing, have a helluva lot more to do with it than us having the LOGO channel and The Ellen Degeneres show. They probably don't like our self-deprecating culture that feeds into perverse behaviors, but does it make them kill themselves and others to stop it? No... not at all.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Ok, so what exactly is your argument then? You are the one who said it would be ok to kill them if there is a 1% chance they would become a terrorist. How are you coming up with your 1%?

It was an off-hand estimate I picked out of thin air for the sake of a discussion. It was to invite debate as to what that percentage would have to be for you to be willing to kill him, 100%? .00001%? The answers will differ from person to person. People like Strum wouldn't even do so at 100% it seems (which is scary).

 

[TarHeelNation11]

What's more egregious... nuking the Middle East or nuking hot dogs . .?

Asking for a friend.

 

[strummingram]

Have you ever been standing in front of a car/bus/train? Why'd you move? You wouldn't have had to do anything proactive to kill yourself, it would have happened naturally. And if you're not afraid of dying, it certainly wasn't fear that got you to move.

Come on, man... this is weak.I have self-preservation instincts in my "code." Fight-or-flight, you know. I'm not talking about baser instinct stuff. You're not either. You're talking about planned, methodical, premeditated killing of other people. You're going to try to defend your decision to murder people by comparing it to me not jumping out of the way of a train?

I'm not afraid of dying from a snake bite, but I don't go chasing copperheads with my wrist sticking out yelling "Bite me, please!"

 

[DeanFor President]

He had the same mentality as you.

I have grown up. You should try it. Or stay simple, your choice.

Ahhhh, nothing like the smell of grossly misplaced liberal intellectual and moral superiority. It smells like......a hairy Berkeley feminist's Birkenstocks.

 

[DeanFor President]

Bull... shit!

That is extremely arrogant and presumptuous. I'm surprised you would say that.

Arrogant and presumptuous? I'm surprised you DIDN'T say it.

 

[tarheel0910]

It was an off-hand estimate I picked out of thin air for the sake of a discussion. It was to invite debate as to what that percentage would have to be for you to be willing to kill him, 100%? .00001%? The answers will differ from person to person. People like Strum wouldn't even do so at 100% it seems (which is scary).

Ok, so what is your justification for killing innocent people then? Your whole premise was that it was ok to kill them if there was a chance they might be a terrorist. What do you use to determine if there is a chance?

 

[strummingram]

So you don't think that they hate us because we are not Muslim or say that being gay is not a sin or allow women to have equal rights?

This meme, while exaggerated for effect online, is closer to why they've decided to make it personal:

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Come on, man... this is weak.I have self-preservation instincts in my "code." Fight-or-flight, you know. I'm not talking about baser instinct stuff. You're not either. You're talking about planned, methodical, premeditated killing of other people. You're going to try to defend your decision to murder people by comparing it to me not jumping out of the way of a train?

I'm not afraid of dying from a snake bite, but I don't go chasing copperheads with my wrist sticking out yelling "Bite me, please!"

Oh I know they're different situations. I'm more trying to figure out where the line is where your self preservation stops. Is it when you're within seconds of getting hit by a bus? Is it when you're within minutes of getting bit by a snake? Is it when you're within months of getting blown up by a terrorist?

Just trying to better understand your rationale.

 

[strummingram]

Ahhhh, nothing like the smell of grossly misplaced liberal intellectual and moral superiority. It smells like......a hairy Berkeley feminist's Birkenstocks.

I love having the smell of women on me. Don't show your envy so much. I see your hole cards, too.


"grossly misplaced liberal intellectual and moral superiority"... very eloquent. It doesn't really apply, but it sounds good.

 

[tarheel0910]

I don't know how much our culture and lifestyles play a part in their contempt. But, I can pretty much bet-the-farm that going over there and deposing elected leaders one day, and propping up regimes that are friendly to us so we get the first dibs on their natural resources the next day, and then bombing them the next decade when that regime has decided it needs more room to suppress their citizens, and the next decade doing the same thing, and the next decade doing the same thing, have a helluva lot more to do with it than us having the LOGO channel and The Ellen Degeneres show. They probably don't like our self-deprecating culture that feeds into perverse behaviors, but does it make them kill themselves and others to stop it? No... not at all.

The terrorist leaders certainly use our culture and lifestyle as a rallying cry to get people to blow themselves up. I'm generally not in favor of deposing leaders or propping up regimes so I can agree with you that it plays a part as well.

 

[strummingram]

Oh I know they're different situations. I'm more trying to figure out where the line is where your self preservation stops. Is it when you're within seconds of getting hit by a bus? Is it when you're within minutes of getting bit by a snake? Is it when you're within months of getting blown up by a terrorist?

Just trying to better understand your rationale.

Thank you for trying. That's progress.

I don't live in fear of people. I'm not suspicious of people around me. My instincts are not wired that way. I'm not that primal. You may call me naive, or stupid, or insane, or whatever. But, at least I'm not afraid.

 

[strummingram]

The terrorist leaders certainly use our culture and lifestyle as a rallying cry to get people to blow themselves up. I'm generally not in favor of deposing leaders or propping up regimes so I can agree with you that it plays a part as well.

How do you know that? Why would they need to reach for stuff like that when they have such blatantly obvious other mechanisms at hand... like the fresh grave of their loved ones? Truth be told, they might actually want some porn now and then! In that sense, I agree with you. If they all got laid a bit more often, and maybe had sufficient protein in their diets, they'd get along better with people. I keed... a little.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Ok, so what is your justification for killing innocent people then?

I don't think killing innocent people is ok. You're not even twisting my words, you're trying to change my argument and doing a bad job doing so. I said in the poast you're dissecting that I'm not ok with killing innocent people - but there is a discussion to be had if would-be terrorists are innocent. Where I'm trying to steer the conversation is when does the innocence get lost? Is it not until they blow someone up - or is it when they're studying how to properly blow someone up - or is it when they get the thought in their head that blowing someone up might be a good move - or when?

 

[tarheel0910]

How do you know that?

By their own words. You can find speeches and video of them denouncing our way of life.

 

[tarheel0910]

I don't think killing innocent people is ok. You're not even twisting my words, you're trying to change my argument and doing a bad job doing so. I said in the poast you're dissecting that I'm not ok with killing innocent people - but there is a discussion to be had if would-be terrorists are innocent. Where I'm trying to steer the conversation is when does the innocence get lost? Is it not until they blow someone up - or is it when they're studying how to properly blow someone up - or is it when they get the thought in their head that blowing someone up might be a good move - or when?

This is what you said

If there's even a 1% chance that those kids grow up to be an extremist that hurts my family - I'm double-tapping them and not thinking twice about it.

So, all I'm asking you to do is to explain how you got to that 1% and what makes it ok at that point. Just explain that part of your argument. If you just "double-tap them" then you aren't really trying to figure out anything. You are eliminating the chance to figure out when the innocence is lost if that is what you are doing without thinking twice about it.

 

[strummingram]

By their own words. You can find speeches and video of them denouncing our way of life.

I know. I know they do try and push that idea that we're heathens and disgusting. But, to me, that's not far from what happens over here. We have our own moral groups (from every extreme) that try to convince people that "those people are immoral" to get more membership and validate what they think and do.

But, there are a lot of Muslims that live peaceful in this country despite the pervasive lifestyles and celebrity worship we have here.

To me, the best strategy is to teach other people that we are all brothers and sisters. I know that sounds sappy and hippy-ish. But, it's true. If people all realized that this planet is our country and we need to see our similarities instead of our differences, then things might simmer down. People have to make individual choices first, however. That's why I have moved away from identifying myself as "American." We're human beings first. These labels and divisions are making us very scared and dangerous human beings.

 

[tarheel0910]

I know. I know they do try and push that idea that we're heathens and disgusting. But, to me, that's not far from what happens over here. We have our own moral groups (from every extreme) that try to convince people that "those people are immoral" to get more membership and validate what they think and do.

I agree that kind of talk happens with other groups, but those groups aren't flying planes into buildings or killing people with a bomb at a concert.

But, there are a lot of Muslims that live peaceful in this country despite the pervasive lifestyles and celebrity worship we have here.

You're right. I'm certainly not trying to say all Muslims do this. The vast majority of them don't. I'm not trying to single them out based solely on their religion.

To me, the best strategy is to teach other people that we are all brothers and sisters. I know that sounds sappy and hippy-ish. But, it's true. If people all realized that this planet is our country and we need to see our similarities instead of our differences, then things might simmer down. People have to make individual choices first, however. That's why I have moved away from identifying myself as "American." We're human beings first. These labels and divisions are making us very scared and dangerous human beings.

I think we can and should do those things, but if someone commits a crime or an act of terror I believe that person should be held accountable.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

So, all I'm asking you to do is to explain how you got to that 1% and what makes it ok at that point. Just explain that part of your argument.

I already explained the 1% as an offhand estimate here:

It was an off-hand estimate I picked out of thin air for the sake of a discussion. It was to invite debate as to what that percentage would have to be for you to be willing to kill him, 100%? .00001%? The answers will differ from person to person. People like Strum wouldn't even do so at 100% it seems (which is scary).

And, I never asserted that there was a 1% chance of them becoming a terrorist. The first word in the poast you quoted was If . And yes, for me, a 1% chance would be enough. I don't know how we'd determine 1% was the actual chance, I which is why I prefaced it with "If".

You are eliminating the chance to figure out when the innocence is lost if that is what you are doing without thinking twice about it.

I'm asking the question now - when is the innocence lost?

 

[tarheel0910]

I'm asking the question now - when is the innocence lost?

I'm not really sure how you could measure something like that. I guess I would say once they start to get actively involved with terrorism. I wouldn't want to drop a bomb on them just because they started hanging out with the wrong people. It's something you would have to judge on a case by case situation. That's basically what we do now by gathering intelligence and monitoring suspects. Is it perfect? No, but I don't think there is a perfect solution. Just dropping a bomb on one terrorist group and their family won't solve the problem. If your goal is to destroy any possible threat without consequence then the only way you can guarantee that would be to kill every single person who lives outside of the US. I'm just not able to make that leap.

 

[uncboy10]

You most certainly can defeat them, but not by playing by "civilized" rules. You have to be willing to make the price for their atrocities beyond what they are willing to pay. We've done that on occasion exactly by stooping to their level...and they don't like it.

Trump nailed it when he said "go after their families". THAT'S the price they aren't unwilling to pay. The head-shed knows it, and as I said above, we have done it before. Sometimes those unintended targets aren't unintended at all.

I have lived with them, and while they don't give one fat rat's behind about you or your family they certainly care about their own. Look at the rhetoric Bin Laden's son is spouting now. We should have taken out everyone inside that compound when we killed Bin Laden.

A suicide bomber is willing to die to kill you...but 99% of them aren't willing to sacrifice their families to accomplish your death. The POS that exploded himself in Manchester has family in England and Libya...kill them all, and let the world know why they died. The world won't like it but it will become a safer place. You can't deal with savages successfully without playing by their rules. They are willing to kill everyone in your family. Be willing to kill theirs. It's the only game they understand.

Wow, that was next level stupid. You obviously don't know anything about Islamic jihad. They strap bombs to their own children and use them as weapons. They gladly use human shields in direct conflict. Not only is your strategy inhumane, its completely irrational based on the information at hand. You also completely fail to account for the people who become radicalized after their innocent loved ones are killed.

We... I'm sure you'll be pulling triggers and firing the missiles. Truth be told, you would. You're a lot more like the "16th Century sheep herders" than you're willing to admit.

Agreed.

I realize it's answering hate with hate, but they simply don't understand anything else and to be honest, it DOES work.

Those children are being taught to hate and kill your children. Right now...at this moment.

I know of at least one bombing with collateral casualties that was anything but an accident. The building was laser painted by an operator and the bomb was guided to the target. It took out two radicals and at least 20 of their immediate family members. It also completely eradicated the threat of an attack that was imminent and completely destroyed the will of a terror cell.

Did innocents die? Yes. Did it also save countless innocent lives? I have absolutely no doubt that it did.

And the surviving family members and friends of those "innocents" certainly became more likely to become radicalized. In fact, its statistically probable that at least 2 people who knew them went on to become jihadists. So you probably created more radicals than you destroyed.

I didn't say I want to kill everyone in every Islamic country. But if taking out the families of suicide murders stops others from committing these heinous acts then I'm all for it.

Thats funny... cause it sounds a lot like you want to kill everyone in every Islamic country. And its not exactly subtle...

our innocents > their innocents

Your mindset perfectly distilled. "My group is better than the other group." You don't even realize how primitive your own mind is, do you?

 

[strummingram]

Your mindset perfectly distilled. "My group is better than the other group." You don't even realize how primitive your own mind is, do you?

I don't think he cares.

It's a slow, painful process to get from "small tribes" to "one big tribe."

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Or we could just keep doing what we're doing - talking a big game against terrorism but not actually doing anything about it. It's worked out great so far.

 

[heelbent]

Wow, that was next level stupid. You obviously don't know anything about Islamic jihad.

I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken young man.

 

[strummingram]

Or we could just keep doing what we're doing - talking a big game against terrorism but not actually doing anything about it. It's worked out great so far.

Well, politically in America, it comes in handy to keep terrorism around. It's useful to both parties. They know that, too. They have their best interests in mind as well.

 

[uncboy10]

I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken young man.

You display your ignorance with every word you post on the subject.

 

[strummingram]

You display your ignorance with every word you post on the subject.

Heelbent has first-hand experience with these people. Give him credit for that. That doesn't mean I agree with what he thinks should be done about them. But, his experience shouldn't be overlooked. I think it's somewhat like Chris Kyle's experience. Now, that will also create its own bias toward them, of course. But, heelbent has had quite a bit of first-hand experience over there. I give him props for that.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Well, politically in America, it comes in handy to keep terrorism around. It's useful to both parties. They know that, too. They have their best interests in mind as well.

I have no doubt about that, that's for sure. It perfectly explains why they take such a lackadaisical approach to dealing with it.

 

[uncboy10]

Heelbent has first-hand experience with these people. Give him credit for that. That doesn't mean I agree with what he thinks should be done about them. But, his experience shouldn't be overlooked. I think it's somewhat like Chris Kyle's experience. Now, that will also create its own bias toward them, of course. But, heelbent has had quite a bit of first-hand experience over there. I give him props for that.

First hand experience does tend to bring a lot more bias into the equation. When you start justifying the death of innocent children it becomes clear that said bias has complete control of your mind.

edit. I should actually clarify. Not the death of innocent children. But specifically targeting innocent children as a war tactic. That is disgusting. Not sure how anyone could respect a person who suggests such a thing.

 

[bleeduncblue]

Islam is a religion of PEACE, yet we have to be super careful not to offend them.

Christianity is a religion of HATRED, yet we can offend them anytime, anyplace.

Makes sense.

 

[tazki]

You display your ignorance with every word you post on the subject.

As do you .

 

[tazki]

Heelbent has first-hand experience with these people. Give him credit for that. That doesn't mean I agree with what he thinks should be done about them. But, his experience shouldn't be overlooked. I think it's somewhat like Chris Kyle's experience. Now, that will also create its own bias toward them, of course. But, heelbent has had quite a bit of first-hand experience over there. I give him props for that.

Strum I never agree with you but that was okay

 

[strummingram]

I agree with Brian May:

 

[DeanFor President]

Strum and Boy have swilled the liberal BS that all cultures are equal. Sorry, but just because you say it doesn't make it so. They don't want to be "one big tribe" with us. You see, they don't get to have their end of the world party with the returning Mahdi until no other religion is worshipped on earth, and the "people of the book"- Jews and Christians- are eradicated, converted, or properly subdued. They have no wish to "coexist" as the bumper sticker that most likely resides on both of their cars implores us.

Churchill knew all about Islam in 1899, which is wayyyyy before US foreign policy adventures and the Shah of Iran:

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.
The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property—either as a child, a wife, or a concubine—must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die. But the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science—the science against which it had vainly struggled—the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."
Winston Churchill, 1899

Churchill was pretty smart.

Here is Jefferson over 200 years ago, wondering why they kept attacking and killing us with NO PROVOCATION:

"We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the Grounds of their pretensions to make war upon a Nation who had done them no Injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our Friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation. THE AMBASSADOR ANSWERED US THAT IT WAS FOUNDED ON THE LAWS OF THEIR PROPHET, THAT IT WAS WRITTEN IN THEIR KORAN, THAT ALL NATIONS WHO SHOULD NOT HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THEIR AUTHORITY WERE SINNERS, THAT IT WAS THEIR RIGHT AND DUTY TO MAKE WAR UPON THEM WHEREVER THEY COULD BE FOUND, AND TO MAKE SLAVES OF ALL THEY COULD TAKE AS PRISONERS, AND THAT EVERY MUSSELMAN (MUSLIM) WHO SHOULD BE SLAIN IN BATTLE WAS SURE TO GO TO PARADISE"
Thomas Jefferson, on the Barbary Wars, approx. 1804-1814

For the hundredth time, Islam's animus toward the West has NOTHING to do with mid- 20th Century US foreign policy.

 

[strummingram]

For the hundredth time, Islam's animus toward the West has NOTHING to do with mid- 20th Century US foreign policy.

Islam is a religious philosophy. It has no "animus" against anything, it's intangible.

The PEOPLE absolutely have animus toward the West when they are responsible for much of the chaos in their homeland since the end of World War I. That's why the violent reactions are so frequent since then, especially in the last 40 years. Actions have consequences.

 

[DeanFor President]

Islam is a religious philosophy. It has no "animus" against anything, it's intangible.

The PEOPLE absolutely have animus toward the West when they are responsible for much of the chaos in their homeland since the end of World War I. That's why the violent reactions are so frequent since then, especially in the last 40 years. Actions have consequences.

More proof that you can't fix stupid. Both the examples I posted are from before WW!. They don't fit your Pollyanna worldview, so you gloss over them.
You know less about Islam and what motivates Muslims to take up jihad than a potted plant. You'd still be trying to hug them even as the blade creased your throat.

 

[GACMAN]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/26/world/middleeast/egypt-coptic-christian-attack.html?_r=0

Evil Strikes Again!!!

 

[heelmanwilm]

Look we've attempted to force western culture and religion on a people because

A. Oil
3. "God tells us to"

Aaaaaand it didnt work. Doesnt justify what they're doing but it does explain it. Just leave em the hell alone. They wanna wallow in backwards thinking and live in poverty then have at it.

 

[strummingram]

More proof that you can't fix stupid. Both the examples I posted are from before WW!. They don't fit your Pollyanna worldview, so you gloss over them.
You know less about Islam and what motivates Muslims to take up jihad than a potted plant. You'd still be trying to hug them even as the blade creased your throat.

People have been going to war with one another for as long as there have been people.

You lack empathy and you refuse to accept any culpability. What's new? You act like these people are genetically predisposed to it. You're right you can't fix stupid... or stubborn.

 

[DeanFor President]

People have been going to war with one another for as long as there have been people.

You lack empathy and you refuse to accept any culpability. What's new? You act like these people are genetically predisposed to it. You're right you can't fix stupid... or stubborn.

We're not discussing "people going to war," we're discussing Islam and it's centuries- long unprovoked conquest and slaughter of Christians, Jews,and other Muslims who aren't the right kind of Muslims. And I was discussing it by providing examples of their jihadi behavior that predate the mid-20th Century, which is when you say their anger toward the West began. But as usual you choose to ignore those since they destroy your weak sauce position.

How am I culpable when they started this about 1400 years ago?
I have plenty of empathy. I am empathetic toward you based on your pathetic naivete and desperate need to defend a religion whose adherents would happily filet you with no compunction. Bless your heart.