Sometimes non-action is more heinous and deplorable then taking action

1234689

Comments

  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    angelica wrote:
    Interesting. You consider it self-defense when you take the role of aggressor in a battle that you enter by choice?


    yes, just as in self defense laws in this country... self defense is also when you come to the defense of others in danger
  • dmitry
    dmitry Posts: 136
    my2hands wrote:
    great quotes and all... but how has that worked out for the slaughtered in darfur?


    maybe you can go teach these to the janjaweed militia that is murdering children

    are you on your way over there yet, or still just want other people to go?
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    dmitry wrote:
    are you on your way over there yet, or still just want other people to go?

    i was thinking about sending you actually...


    do i investigate when my house is burglarized? no, i call the people that signed up to do that and are experts at it...

    and for the record, if my military engaged in only causes such as the ones i am talking about here, i may have actually signed up years ago. but as long as they continue to misuse and abuse their power for immoral actions such as Iraq i will pass.

    some people around here are appearing so naive it really is funny at this point. all you guys keep doing is post quotes and refuse to provide answers to how to actually stop something like this once diplomatic efforts have failed... but i guess that is how internet peace activists think and operate... post some quotes on a message board and claim to be anti war and this will solve the worlds problems and stop a genocide, afraid to make the tough decisions or even attempt to question their overly rigid moral code :rolleyes:
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    Abookamongstthemany wrote:
    What? The inability to understand people have differing viewpoints on this matter?

    I think it's more sad.


    no, the fact that there are so many naive people that will continue to argue a position that is obviously and GROSSLY wrong.

    putting their ideals ahead of innocents getting slaughtered


    so abook, how would you stop the darfur genocide? how would you stop murderers hacking children with machetes and then burning their village down and raping their mothers? and remember, this is not a hypothetical situtation
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    flywallyfly wrote:
    Ralph Nader a warmonger?

    A: Well I think when there’s mass slaughter going on or about to go on, as in some countries, there should be a multinational expeditionary force to help those people. Burundi is an example.


    of course. it really is not that complicated...
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    my2hands wrote:
    great quotes and all... but how has that worked out for the slaughtered in darfur?


    maybe you can go teach these to the janjaweed militia that is murdering children

    I wonder if action in Darfur will help the people like action helped the innocent families in Dresden who were bombed. I wonder if action will liberate them like the Japanese people in Nagasaki and Hiroshima were liberated. Or will action bring peace, like it brought peace to the innocent people who were bombed in Kosovo by NATO?

    Just look at the war in Iraq today. Do you actually believe things will be different in Darfur. That the military won't target innocent civilians as it has always done in the past?
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    my2hands wrote:
    no, the fact that there are so many naive people that will continue to argue a position that is obviously and GROSSLY wrong.

    putting their ideals ahead of innocents getting slaughtered


    so abook, how would you stop the darfur genocide? how would you stop murderers hacking children with machetes and then burning their village down and raping their mothers? and remember, this is not a hypothetical situtation

    Kabong already asked this. You are the one who suggests handling it with action. What kind of action are you talking about?
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    El_Kabong wrote:

    can you or any of the other ones supporting it plz define 'military intervention' clsuter bombs? du weaponry? bunker busters? white phosphorous? shock and awe?


    i see kabong is taking an inch and strecthing it to a mile... of course no one is going to advocate using that shit

    bunker busters? in the sudan? come on dude...

    maybe you didnt notice but i am not talking about unilateral preemptive war... i am talking about the world collectively, through the UN, providing security and protection for innocent people getting slaughtered. if it has to develop into a larger "war" such as WW2 then so be it, we didnt start the fire, i just want to put it out. and by the way i dont need to give an analogy or a hypothetical sitatuation since what i am talking about is a reality
  • angelica
    angelica Posts: 6,038
    my2hands wrote:
    yes, just as in self defense laws in this country... self defense is also when you come to the defense of others in danger
    You reveal the flaws in your own logic.


    Defense of others is not defense of the self.

    And because you opt to be the aggessor in your self-appointed role, "self-defense" is no longer applicable.
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    Collin wrote:
    Kabong already asked this. You are the one who suggests handling it with action. What kind of action are you talking about?


    nuclear weapons :rolleyes:



    you guys are too much... you act as if we are advocating for a mass bombing camapaign and nuclear weapons.

    it is really comign off as pure comedic gold at this point...
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    my2hands wrote:
    nuclear weapons :rolleyes:



    you guys are too much... you act as if we are advocating for a mass bombing camapaign and nuclear weapons.

    it is really comign off as pure comedic gold at this point...

    Just answer the question. What kind of action are you advocating for?

    You agreed Bush did an excellent job in the first gulf war, even though numerous atrocities were committed. So you see, I'm a bit confused as to what you are suggesting.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    angelica wrote:
    You reveal the flaws in your own logic.


    Defense of others is not defense of the self.

    And because you opt to be the aggessor in your self-appointed role, "self-defense" is no longer applicable.

    flaws in my logic? if i defend you from attack, then that is considered self defense in this country in a court of law. because people understand that sometimes people have to step up and protect others.


    your logic is to sit back and watch 1,000,000 peeple get slaughtered...

    and i am flawed :rolleyes:




    DEFENSE, SELF-DEFENSE - A defense to certain criminal charges involving force (e.g. murder).

    Use of force is justified when a person reasonably believes that it is necessary for the defense of oneself or another against the immediate use of unlawful force. However, a person must use no more force than appears reasonably necessary in the circumstances.

    http://www.lectlaw.com/def/d030.htm


    who is flawed?
  • angelica
    angelica Posts: 6,038
    my2hands wrote:
    great quotes and all... but how has that worked out for the slaughtered in darfur?


    maybe you can go teach these to the janjaweed militia that is murdering children
    You and I both know we are powerless to change many things in this world. Your stance of violence doesn't make you personally more enabled than myself or Abook. The problems of the world continue, despite your position also. Let's keep that in mind. Your potency in terms of the violence you advocate is in your mind (unless you act it out in ways I'm not aware of). On the other hand, your potency in terms of creating change and peace and helping others is palpable. If you are still in the same career, you help people every day, and in terms of action, you support and live what I stand for as well.
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    Collin wrote:
    Just answer the question. What kind of action are you advocating for?

    You agreed Bush did an excellent job in the first gulf war, even though numerous atrocities were committed. So you see, I'm a bit confused as to what you are suggesting.


    it is fun watchuign you guys wiggle and stretch


    you keep asking "what EXACTLY would you do, how many trops, how many tanks, how many apache's would you use"?

    you use what is enough to deter the threat. that can obviously depend on the threat. you guys act like we are talkign about invading a country and carpet bombing it? are you capable of seeing the difference?
  • angelica
    angelica Posts: 6,038
    Beyond ideology, in terms of action and outcome, authentic power entails knowing and accepting where one is powerless. Therefore one hones a laser-focus on where one's power IS. This is why one authentically empowered person can influence thousands, or millions. All it takes is one person.

    Inauthentic power entails acting on powerlessness, in maladaptive ways perpetuating cycles.
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    my2hands wrote:
    it is fun watchuign you guys wiggle and stretch


    you keep asking "what EXACTLY would you do, how many trops, how many tanks, how many apache's would you use"?

    you use what is enough to deter the threat. that can obviously depend on the threat. you guys act like we are talkign about invading a country and carpet bombing it? are you capable of seeing the difference?

    What do you mean it would depend on the threat. We're talking about the situation in Darfur. You know the threat.
    my2hands wrote:
    how would you stop the darfur genocide? how would you stop murderers hacking children with machetes and then burning their village down and raping their mothers? and remember, this is not a hypothetical situtation

    Also, many mission have been mission to restore peace or bring peace, or to protect people, yet even in these missions innocent people were also murdered and slaughtered and bombed.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • angelica
    angelica Posts: 6,038
    my2hands wrote:
    flaws in my logic? if i defend you from attack, then that is considered self defense in this country in a court of law. because people understand that sometimes people have to step up and protect others.



    DEFENSE, SELF-DEFENSE - A defense to certain criminal charges involving force (e.g. murder).

    Use of force is justified when a person reasonably believes that it is necessary for the defense of oneself or another against the immediate use of unlawful force. However, a person must use no more force than appears reasonably necessary in the circumstances.

    http://www.lectlaw.com/def/d030.htm


    who is flawed?

    It is self-evident that self-defense always refers to defending one's self. In your country, around the world, and in basic logic.

    If you look, you'll realize your definition is for DEFENSE and Self-defense. Defending others remains different than defending one's self. Both use defense as your meaning says. Only one entails "self-defense".
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    angelica wrote:
    It is self-evident that self-defense always refers to defending one's self. In your country, around the world, and in basic logic.

    If you look, you'll realize your definition is for DEFENSE and Self-defense. Defending others remains different than defending one's self. Both use defense as your meaning says. Only one entails "self-defense".



    what do you think should be done to stop a genocide? the one in darfur for an exact example


    lets see if you will do what has not been done in over 100 posts...
  • my2hands
    my2hands Posts: 17,117
    I WILL ASK ONE MORE TIME... WHAT WOULD YOU DO TO STOP THE GENOCICDE IN DARFUR OR ANY OTHER GENOCIDE???




    if you feel so strongly about your ideals on this matter then you should be able to give me an answer as to how to stop the mass killings of innocent people, in reality... all i have seen so far is a bunch of quotes and talking in circles about "self"
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    my2hands wrote:
    what do you think should be done to stop a genocide? the one in darfur for an exact example


    lets see if you will do what has not been done in over 100 posts...

    You mean give a real answer, like you didn't do?
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední

Categories