• Unsurprisingly, Donald Trump supports waterboarding and will move to end it's "status as a war crime
    455 replies, posted
[QUOTE=wystan;49701064]No, I mean kill are enemies until they the cease being our enemies.[/QUOTE] Sooooooo, genocide, then. Because if I systematically started shooting each one of your relatives except you, at what point would you drop any plans for revenge and instead offer to move out of town to make the killings stop? No, seriously. I demand you answer this question. Defend the above quoted statement. How many killings do you justify? How many humans get to die in US custody without due process because President Wystan is in charge of the CIA and the military? What's the number?
[QUOTE=wystan;49701083]If he isn't innocent and does want to destroy America prior to America even touching him, why we fretting over his abduction? He chose his side.[/QUOTE] So the concept of inspiring more people to rise up against you who you will in turn kill or torture for the "right reasons(they chose their side even though you chose it for them in so many ways)" who will the inspire more friends and family to do the same and etc and etc? No issue with that? No issue with committing genocide because they "chose" wrong when they are reacting as emotionally as you are. How do you have empathy and miss this basic fucking fact?
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49701092]Sooooooo, genocide, then. Because if I systematically started shooting each one of your relatives except you, at what point would you [B]stop[/B] your plans for revenge and instead offer to move out of town to make the killings stop? No, seriously. I demand you answer this question. Defend the above quoted statement. How many killings do you justify? How many humans get to die because President Wystan is in charge of the CIA and the military? What's the number?[/QUOTE] Well if you killed me and everyone connected to me, that would end the violence wouldn't it? I don't advocate genocide, especially since there is almost always some racial or religious undertone to it. I want to kill those who want to kill me, not those who disagree with me, not those who look different, not those born in other countries.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701083]If he isn't innocent and does want to destroy America prior to America even touching him, why we fretting over his abduction? He chose his side. [/QUOTE] From his point of view, you chose your side by not being an Islamic fundamentalist. Is he therefore justified in abducting and torturing you?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49701103]So the concept of inspiring more people to rise up against you who you will in turn kill or torture for the "right reasons(they chose their side even though you chose it for them in so many ways)" who will the inspire more friends and family to do the same and etc and etc? No issue with that? No issue with committing genocide because they "chose" wrong when they are reacting as emotionally as you are. How do you have empathy and miss this basic fucking fact?[/QUOTE] No issue with killing those who would kill me if given the chance. [editline]8th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=CatFodder;49701115]From his point of view, you chose your side by not being an Islamic fundamentalist. Is he therefore justified in abducting and torturing you?[/QUOTE] I'm not looking convert and kill those who simply don't believe what I do. Stop comparing me to them.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701117]No issue with killing those who would kill me if given the chance.[/QUOTE] Even though you started the war and are continuing it at every turn
[QUOTE=wystan;49701117]No issue with killing those who would kill me if given the chance.[/QUOTE] ...which is what they say about [i]you[/i]. It's comical how you can't see the cycle. You're ok with killing them cos they're ok with killing you cos you're ok with killing them...
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49701132]Even though you started the war and are continuing it at every turn[/QUOTE] Not the war against ISIS, which is what this is about is it not?
YOU ARE ADVOCATING FOR CONVERT OR DIE POLICIES. You need to understand this dude. You're starting a war. Demanding the smaller force roll over and die or convert to your side because you have the military power to demand that. You are continuing this war at every turn and scratching your head as to why they want to convert or kill you? How are you not getting this? You commit genocide or you stop doing this whole thing.
[QUOTE=CatFodder;49701133]...which is what they say about [i]you[/i]. It's comical how you can't see the cycle. You're ok with killing them cos they're ok with killing you cos you're ok with killing them...[/QUOTE] The "cycle" started with them. Their reasons for wanting to kill me differ than mine.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701146]Not the war against ISIS, which is what this is about is it not?[/QUOTE] How do you not understand the USAs role in creating ISIS which includes having tortured their previous attempts?
[QUOTE=wystan;49701112]Well if you killed me and everyone connected to me, that would end the violence wouldn't it? I don't advocate genocide, especially since there is almost always some racial or religious undertone to it. I want to kill those who want to kill me, not those who disagree with me, not those who look different, not those born in other countries.[/QUOTE] "Kill enemies until they cease being our enemies." You said this. First off, there's the tricky issue of defining 'enemy' and I'm not even going to trust you with a discussion on this one so don't even bother. At what point does killing stop breeding more hatred against the aggressor? Do you realize that you're basically implying that America must become a dominant superpower that rules by fear, such that anyone who has a problem with it dare not speak out for fear of being branded an enemy and crushed beneath superior firepower? So, you're President-Dictator Wystan now. How much blood is on your hands on the day North Korea, ISIL/whatever-they're-called-this-month, Iran, and the rest of America's enemies are cowed and sign disarmament treaties where they agree to never threaten America again? Give me a number. How much killing will have to happen before America's enemies realize that resistance is responded to with lethal suppression 100% of the time and their only choice is to stop before they self-genocide-by-cop themselves in Operation Impressive Title?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49701161]How do you not understand the USAs role in creating ISIS which includes having tortured their previous attempts?[/QUOTE] That alone is not the reason ISIS came to power, it stems from the Arab Spring and the Syrian Civil War, both of which occurred outside of US meddling, though of course we (like the rest of the world) soon came to meddle. Do not try and pin this solely on the US [editline]8th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49701172]"Kill enemies until they cease being our enemies." You said this. First off, there's the tricky issue of defining 'enemy' and I'm not even going to trust you with a discussion on this one so don't even bother. At what point does killing stop breeding more hatred against the aggressor? Do you realize that you're basically implying that America must become a dominant superpower that rules by fear, such that anyone who has a problem with it dare not speak out for fear of being branded an enemy and crushed beneath superior firepower? So, you're President-Dictator Wystan now. How much blood is on your hands on the day North Korea, ISIL/whatever-they're-called-this-month, Iran, and the rest of America's enemies are cowed and sign disarmament treaties where they agree to never threaten America again? Give me a number. How much killing will have to happen before America's enemies realize that resistance is responded to with lethal suppression 100% of the time and their only choice is to stop before they genocide by Operation Impressive Title?[/QUOTE] I'm defining enemies as those who live to kill Americans and are anti-west (that includes you Canadians too). The killings stop when other people stop deciding to slaughter and commit acts of terrorism against innocents, if that day never comes, that's on them.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701176]The killings stop when other people stop deciding to slaughter and commit acts of terrorism against innocents, if that day never comes, that's on them.[/QUOTE] And here you reveal your utter lack of understanding of the root causes of [B]why[/B] America has any enemies and why terrorism occurs. Real life is not a G.I. Joe cartoon.
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49701218]And here you reveal your utter lack of understanding of the root causes of [B]why[/B] America has any enemies and why terrorism occurs. Real life is not a G.I. Joe cartoon.[/QUOTE] We didn't start killing their innocent civilians first.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701083] I don't want to sound like an edge master.[/QUOTE] you're doing a really bad job then
[QUOTE=wystan;49701231]We didn't start killing their innocent civilians first.[/QUOTE] If you're going to let this boil down to "HE STARTED IT" and 9/11 I don't think anyone needs to respond to you.
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49701246]If you're going to let this boil down to "HE STARTED IT" and 9/11 I don't think anyone needs to respond to you.[/QUOTE] Am I wrong?
[QUOTE=wystan;49701231]We didn't start killing their innocent civilians first.[/QUOTE] Do you think that the West's meddling in the Middle East started after 9/11?
Remember that time the CIA helped overthrow Iranian democracy and install the Shah and then it bit America in the ass? Wystan doesn't seem to.
[QUOTE=CatFodder;49701251]Do you think that the West's meddling in the Middle East started after 9/11?[/QUOTE] No of course not. But the nature and tone of Middle East affairs was certainly different. [editline]8th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49701261]Remember that time the CIA helped overthrow Iranian democracy and install the Shah and then it bit America in the ass? Wystan doesn't seem to.[/QUOTE] Totally comparable to the war crimes committed by ISIS right, or various terrorist attacks committed by other groups
If only life were so black and white
[QUOTE=wystan;49701272]Totally comparable to the war crimes committed by ISIS right?[/QUOTE] Well, if you want comparable to ISIS' war crimes, the US [B]diiiiiiiiiid[/B] arm Saddam against Iran (remember them) and then Saddam kind of went and committed war crimes on the Kurds with everything he had left over. And then America invaded Iraq a few years later and bombed them back into the 1920s and then left them in Saddam's hands for another decade before coming back, bombing what little had been built up and what was left, before capturing and hanging Saddam and trying to quick jiffy-up a democracy before running off, allowing the place to fall to sectarian violence. Which likely directly fed support for ISIS. America also went and bombed a bunch of Afghanistan up, killing a ton of civilians in the process, while trying to hunt for the Taliban, including utterly fucking up killing bin Laden nearly a decade earlier than they finally did. They also armed bin Laden about a decade before (sound familiar) before he decided to spit in America's eye and brought tons of unwanted occupation and suffering onto Afghanistan. Which likely directly fed support for ISIS. How are you actually any better?
[QUOTE=wystan;49701272]Totally comparable to the war crimes committed by ISIS right[/QUOTE] such as torture
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49701316]Well, if you want comparable to ISIS' war crimes, the US [B]diiiiiiiiiid[/B] arm Saddam against Iran (remember them) and then Saddam kind of went and committed war crimes on the Kurds with everything he had left over. And then America invaded Iraq a few years later and bombed them back into the 1920s and then left them in Saddam's hands for another decade before coming back, bombing what little had been built up and what was left, before capturing and hanging Saddam and trying to quick jiffy-up a democracy before running off, allowing the place to fall to sectarian violence. Which likely directly fed support for ISIS. America also went and bombed a bunch of Afghanistan up, killing a ton of civilians in the process, while trying to hunt for the Taliban, including utterly fucking up killing bin Laden nearly a decade earlier than they finally did. Which likely directly fed support for ISIS. How is you actually any better?[/QUOTE] Collateral damages happens, it sucks, and it's unfortunate but it's unavoidable. Still none of these are comparable to to rounding up people and executing them because they don't believe in what we do. I won't justify and argue for the war in Iraq, that is/was a sham. [editline]8th February 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Zukriuchen;49701318]such as torture[/QUOTE] Torturing a few people determined to kill innocents is not the same as killing thousands of actually innocent people.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701343]Collateral damages happens, it sucks, and it's unfortunate but it's unavoidable. ... Torturing a few people determined to kill innocents is not the same as killing thousands of actually innocent people.[/QUOTE] How do you manage to have these two thoughts at the same time? The cognitive dissonance is actually causing my pores to bleed.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701064]No, I mean kill are enemies until they the cease being our enemies. [/QUOTE] Robert McNamara thought this would work in Vietnam. Do you want to know how that turned out?
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49701363]How do you manage to have these two thoughts at the same time? The cognitive dissonance is actually causing my pores to bleed.[/QUOTE] One is intentional and the other isn't? Not that hard to figure out.
[QUOTE=wystan;49701343]Collateral damages happens, it sucks, and it's unfortunate but it's unavoidable. Still none of these are comparable to to rounding up people and executing them because they don't believe in what we do. I won't justify and argue for the war in Iraq, that is/was a sham. [editline]8th February 2016[/editline] Torturing a few people determined to kill innocents is not the same as killing thousands of actually innocent people.[/QUOTE] You're literally advocating for "rounding up" the people that kill innocents and executing them. And when people say "hey now you've made it so all their families hate us too, and now they'll kill innocents and hate us, and then their relatives, and then their relatives," you just go "kill them too." At this point you're [i]quite literally[/i] saying to just kill everyone who doesn't "believe in what we do." That's genocide. How are you not realizing the hypocrisy of your statements?
[QUOTE=CatFodder;49698841]It's funny how you talk about 'intellectual masturbation' then immediately launch into a pretentious polemic. What's your actual opinion on torture?[/QUOTE] There was nothing pretentious about it, if anything it was anti-intellectual I guess. I have none, I don't make broad moral prescriptions like that. If you need an answer: it either works or it doesn't. [QUOTE=Zukriuchen;49698880]What's unappealing about the knowledge that you're not a horrible person? I mean, if you want me to tell you about the political advantages I could. We could talk about how standing up for people is a fantastic way to get support and one of the best deterrents to terrorism. How it factors into your population's mental health to know your government isn't making questionable decisions, and thus how it factors into productivity and the aforementioned support - both at home and internationally, since, say, a populist government like Brazil with a president that vehemently opposed the government in her early years would have a hard time publicly supporting immoral practices. But when you're disregarding morals as nothing but abstract concepts, that's not what it boils down to, is it?[/QUOTE] I don't see why we can't do both, exactly because morals are nothing as they're being prescribed in this thread are nothing but abstract concepts. So it [i]works for us[/i] to be cruel to militants and be good guys for the rest. We are moral insofar it is in our interests, nothing more. You're taking it too far if you your rigid adherence to the former, which is typical for self-righteous liberal universalism, means sacrificing the latter. I don't prove to myself I'm not a horrible person by affording to people I've never met, and who likely despise who I am, various rights enforced by my own government I fund and otherwise don't exist. It makes no sense, and I don't find it to be the hallmark of a good person to be so criminally naive. A good person would be responsible and loyal to what he comes from, after all. It is one thing to afford rights to national citizens, particularly since it fosters a healthy capitalist national economy, it's another to do the same to the enemy out of a mental disorder called liberalism. [quote]I find it hard to take anyone who unironically uses "intellectual masturbation" as a critique of an argument seriously.[/quote] I don't, people like to regurgitate a bunch of dogma hammered into them by a post-modern Western liberal culture, like the moral of a story to a Disney movie, and call it state policy. For example: "That's exactly what the terrorists say/do, too!" Who gives a fuck? Who cares about your musings of the world where everything is relative and meaningless? Keep shooting and bombing if only for the sake of our energy interests. Does that offend your liberal sensibilities? Because that's the sort of thing it boils down to. [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;49699266]it's only purpose can possibly be to say "I live in the real world, you don't, your voices, arguments, are unimportant here" which is so incredibly condescending and meaningless that I just don't care enough to argue about beyond that. [/quote] The feeling is completely mutual. When I see your typical center-left liberal immediately try to place themselves 'above' the western conservative or the muslim reactionary in our present context, whether through some murmurs about cultural relativism, moral equivalence, individualist appeals, our tainted past, or whatever, I instantly turn off. You can't have a debate at all with someone like that. These are the sort of people that actually believe that they have some kind of point when they say that ISIS and the European far-right feed off each other. :v: It's exactly the same deal when liberals 80 years ago were drawing parallels to another dual threat to their power that squeezes them on both sides, fascism and socialism. It's meaningless intellectual masturbation, squirming at that. The simple fact is liberals do live in another world. They are not a mass movement, they have no national or class loyalties, after 1945 they aspire to some pseudo-internationalist 'humanitarian' ideal which is really just a smokescreen for the dominance of international finance and rootless employers. They are idealists and so fervently believe in things that are so true and real that they need states to make sure they exist in the first place. Here they are wasting half a thread telling a user how bad of a person he is for not being an indoctrinated liberal ideologue, but instead rather unapologetic in his feelings and apparent double standards for a community he shares an organic relationship with. He really owes no explanation nor has anything to apologize for. He has interests, he recognizes them, and sees how he shares them with others and other times how he doesn't. That is the hallmark of a good person, not extolling some list of abstracted morals at every opportunity. It is one thing to question everything, it's another to be a liberal.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.