|
|
|
Fireballn
Skeptic Friend
Canada
179 Posts |
 Posted - 04/10/2003 : 20:29:55
|
With all of this talk of war, many of us will encounter "Peace
Activists" who will try and convince us that we must refrain from
retaliating against the ones who terrorized us all on September 11,
2001, and other dates.
These activists may be alone or in a gathering.....most
of us don't know how to react to them. When you come
upon one of these people, or one of their rallies, here
are the proper rules of etiquette:
1. Listen politely while this person explains their
views. Strike up a conversation if necessary and look
very interested in their ideas. They will tell you how
revenge is immoral, and that by attacking the people who
did this to us, we will only bring on more violence.
They will probably use many arguments, ranging from
political to religious to humanitarian.
2. In the middle of their remarks, without any warning,
punch them in the nose.
3. When the person gets up off of the ground, they will
be very angry and they may try to hit you, so be careful.
4. Very quickly and calmly remind the person that
violence only brings about more violence and remind them
of their stand on this matter. Tell them if they are
really committed to a non-violent approach to undeserved attacks,
they will turn the other cheek and negotiate a solution.
Tell them they must lead by example if they really believe what they are saying.
5. Most of them will think for a moment and then agree
that you are correct.
6. As soon as they do that, hit them again. Only this
time hit them much harder. Square in the nose.
7. Repeat steps 2-5 until the desired results are
obtained and the idiot realizes how stupid of an
argument he/she is making.
8. There is no difference in an individual attacking an unsuspecting
victim or a group of terrorists attacking a nation of people.
It is unacceptable and must be dealt with. Perhaps at a high cost.
We owe our military a huge debt for what they are doing for us
and our children.
We must support them and our leaders at times like these. We have no
choice.
We either strike back, VERY HARD, or we will keep getting hit in the
nose.
Just a few punches to mention:
Twin Towers & Pentagon - 2001
USS Cole
Twin Towers - 1993
American Embassy - 1998
Kuwait - 1991
source-email....
|
If i were the supreme being, I wouldn't have messed around with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers 8 o'clock day one!
-Time Bandits- |
|
|
ktesibios
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 04/10/2003 : 21:04:41 [Permalink]
|
Ancient.
Considering your timing, I'm tempted to think that
you think that this is somehow an appropriate refutation of opinions which don't support the neo-con doctrine of "preemptive war".
In that case, you need to demonstrate how the atrocities of Sept. 11, 2001 relate to a long-planned policy which speaks openly of the desire for "dominance", except as a convenient excuse for beating up whoever the chosen enemy-du-jour might happen to be.
You also need to explain how retaliation against the organization responsible for said atrocities includes a doctrine of lashing out against anyone who impedes the Grand Plans of our ruling "elite".
Can you do either, or is the extent of your thinking on this limited to regurgitating the stereotypes of some anonymous bully-wannabe? |
"The Republican agenda is to turn the United States into a third-world shithole." -P.Z.Myers |
 |
|
|
Franc28
New Member
29 Posts |
Posted - 04/10/2003 : 21:55:02 [Permalink]
|
What to do in reply to Fireballn's schoolyard bully tactics :
1. Point out to Fireballn that the US was attacked by a specific number of terrorists, not entire nations.
2. Point out to Fireballn that the US is currently engaging in pre-emptive warfare, which is the most PC way to say "killing people for no concrete reason", and makes the US little more than a rogue state.
3. Point out to Fireballn that the greatest threat to freedom right now is not a bunch of tinpot Middle Eastern dictators, but the enormous political power that the US government is applying to stamp out civil rights in its own country.
4. Point out to Fireballn that he is little more than a schoolyard bully in search of a point.
5. Punch Fireballn on the nose.
|
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 04/11/2003 : 02:57:53 [Permalink]
|
Well, I can say this. If I were at a rally of some sort, despite the reasons, and some prick attempted ANY act of aggression directed toward me or my family, I would have no problem making sure that 'attempt' never went beyond the 'attempt' stage through ALMOST any means necessary. At least, my act of violence will be directed at another person that has unquestionably assaulted me, and shows signs of continuing that assault.
I would not act in such a cowardly manner that I would lash out at the easiest target simply to restore my ego.
Now, do I have a problem with using military force to remove a sadistic and corrupt petty dictator?
Of course not!
On the other hand, I do have a problem with doing it preemptively, and unilatterally.
I have a problem with using bribery, extortion and any other means available to try to influence our closest allies, or to buy the loyalty of those dependent on US foriegn aid.
I have a problem with a foriegn policy that resembles more the actions of a schizophrenic child, than a rational plan for world peace and fiscal responsibility.
And, I do have a problem with a Secretary of Defense trying to run a war in a manner that makes Robert McNamara look like a blithering genius. (The only saving grace for Rumsfeld is the complete ineptness of the Iraqi military leadership, and the skill, knowledge and training of our heroic men and women in uniform).
To be perfectly honest, the true patriotic Americans are those that have the balls to stand up for what they believe, and to express their concerns about our actions in the face small minded people that blindly follow the path laid out for them by their present leader and his/her ancillary media. The liberties guaranteed us in our Bill of Rights are not to be set aside for any reason. These people that belittle, and that call for the muzzling of other concerned Americans, to me, are no better than the lackies that groveled at Saddam's feet. They are pittiful creatures, but even they deserve their right to free speech. And, I have not yet heard of any of these "Peace Activists" calling for violence against the 'hawks', or for them to be silenced. They simply call for an end to hostillities.
quote:
We either strike back, VERY HARD, or we will keep getting hit in the nose.
Have you ever thought that if you address the reasons people have for their anger, rather than just exacerbating that anger, then it may just go away without too many people losing their lives? Perhaps, the approach of showing compassion and understanding from a position of strength may go a hell of a lot further...
|
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 04/11/2003 : 07:21:29 [Permalink]
|
Nancy Pelosi has said it best: : "We could have toppled that statue for a lot less."
Fireballin', my friend, I'm a disabled VN vet who thourghly opposes this illgitimate and immoral 'war'. I walk with a cane. That stick is my friend. It is also my ally. I could break bones with it, were I given provacation. See what I'm sayin'?
It doesn't pay to mess with someone who you don't know. 
Edited to add: Iraq had nothing to do with the attacks listed at the bottom of your post.
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
| Edited by - filthy on 04/11/2003 07:23:38 |
|
|
|
rickm
Skeptic Friend
Canada
109 Posts |
Posted - 04/11/2003 : 19:35:17 [Permalink]
|
Perhaps I am wrong, but I don't think that Fireballin is responsible
for the text he posted. After rereading his post, at the very bottom it said "source e-mail". |
How can I believe in God when just last week I got my tongue caught in the roller of an electric typewriter?
-- Woody Allen, Without Feathers, 1975 |
|
|
|
Fireballn
Skeptic Friend
Canada
179 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2003 : 01:08:22 [Permalink]
|
| Rickm.....exactly iam not responsible.....but this is a very one sided anti-war forum and i think both sides should be discussed. This war has both sides pro and con, and if you cant see the duality you are missing half the battle. There are too many 'yes' men just trying to fit in here. |
If i were the supreme being, I wouldn't have messed around with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers 8 o'clock day one!
-Time Bandits- |
| Edited by - Fireballn on 04/12/2003 01:16:57 |
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2003 : 04:29:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
this is a very one sided anti-war forum and i think both sides should be discussed
Fireballin, this e-mail that you've posted is not a defense of the war in Iraq, but a rather sophomoric attempt at humor at the expense of 'peace activists'. The original post does not state a position, other than that of pre-emptively attacking whatever we may dislike in the hope that we beat the world into submission--Into being just as paranoid as we may be. I've received dozens of these types of letters, and all of them have an underlying theme of intolerance in the guise of patriotism, and/or national security.
Furthermore, if one can believe that this letter cites a logical defense for war with Iraq, then it could only be that Iraq was responsible for the events of 9/11, and therefore we must punish that nation. So, respectfully, I ask for evidence of this argument. Can you or the original author supply that evidence?
quote:
With all of this talk of war, many of us will encounter "Peace Activists" who will try and convince us that we must refrain from retaliating against the ones who terrorized us all on September 11, 2001, and other dates.
What has this to do with Iraq?
|
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
| Edited by - Tim on 04/12/2003 04:31:21 |
|
|
|
Franc28
New Member
29 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2003 : 06:43:05 [Permalink]
|
This retard is Canadian ? I'm ashamed. It looks like there blood-thirsty bastards everywhere, not just in the US.
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2003 : 07:52:41 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Rickm.....exactly iam not responsible.....but this is a very one sided anti-war forum and i think both sides should be discussed. This war has both sides pro and con, and if you cant see the duality you are missing half the battle. There are too many 'yes' men just trying to fit in here.
Fireballin, that's what free speech is all about, but I fear that your e-corespondent would like to deprive me of mine. Violently.
We welcome opposing points of view! How can you have a discussion without at least two sides? Unfortunatly, many who come here lack staying power.
Fire, please don't tell me you've fallen for the "Saddam was behind 9/11!" flim-flam? Or that any Iraqis were among the hijackers.
quote:
Just a few punches to mention:
Twin Towers & Pentagon - 2001
USS Cole
Twin Towers - 1993
American Embassy - 1998
Kuwait - 1991
Twin towers: Al Quada led by religious loony-toon Osama bin Ladin, who hated the secular Saddam regime almost as much as he hated us. The hijackers involved were from Saudi Arabia (15).,Egypt (3), and the United Arab Emerites (1). No Iraqis.
USS Cole: Al Quada again. Suspects were apprehended, but escaped from jail just a few days ago, and that'll make you think, won't it.
American Embassy: Al Quada again.
Kuwait: Now at last, we get to Saddam with a righteous charge. How ever, he got his hand slapped and was forced to retreat. Like fools, we failed to finish the job. So we have spent 12 years trying to starve him out for non-cooporation with inspectors. And tossed a few high explosives at him, now and then.
My question is: Why a 'war' with Iraq now? And what's the hurry? The fuckwit Bush just couldn't wait to attack Iraq with the mightiest military in the world, making the term: 'fish-shoot in a barrel' seem heroic.
Another question that comes to mind: Is this war really to liberate the Iraqi people, or is it to get an American hand on the oil tap? And is the War Against Terrorism evolving into a war on Islam?
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
| Edited by - filthy on 04/12/2003 07:54:36 |
|
|
|
Fireballn
Skeptic Friend
Canada
179 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2003 : 18:15:54 [Permalink]
|
Filthy, I dont think there is enough evidence to connect 9/11 to Iraq.....yet. The email isnt designed to prove anything it does show there can be two sides to look at something.
I also believe there is a lot wrong with this war, but I believe the free world should be in Iraq right now. The Americans should finish the regime change, help rebuild the country, try to peace keep until some sort of democracy is up and running. It is working in Turkey, there might be hope for Iraq. After all this,(and many other humanitarian duties) I believe America should pull out and leave Iraq to the Iraqi people.
THE CASE FOR WAR
Proponents of military action argue the opposite — that nothing could be worse than waiting until Saddam is stronger, perhaps armed with an atomic weapon with which he could threaten the entire Middle East.
Richard Perle, one of the leading pro-war voices in Washington, acknowledged that attacking Saddam could cause him to try to use what weapons he already has.
"But the danger that springs from his capabilities will only grow as he expands his arsenal," Perle, a top Defense Department consultant, wrote recently. "A pre-emptive strike against Hitler at the time of Munich would have meant an immediate war, as opposed to one that came later. Later was much worse."
The picture of Saddam trapped "in his box" in Baghdad is a dangerous delusion, said Kenneth Pollack, an Iraq expert who worked at the CIA and the White House.
"Containment is eroding," Pollack said.
Iraq's proceeds from smuggled oil have soared to $3 billion annually and its neighbors are scrambling to increase trade with Baghdad, giving it more political power, he said. Syria allows weapons and spare parts to flow across its territory to Iraq.
Pollack and other advocates of "regime change" in Baghdad say that Saddam has never abandoned his decades-long quest for a nuclear arsenal and other weapons of mass destruction. Neither a war with a U.S.-led coalition in 1991 nor sanctions that have cost Iraq's economy billions of dollars nor the current U.S. threat to destroy his regime have deterred him.
Secretary of State Colin Powell is due to present to the United Nations on Wednesday U.S. evidence that Saddam has manipulated the current U.N. weapons inspections.
Saddam is so devoted to acquiring and keeping weapons of mass destruction because they form the core of his power and bolster his boundless ambition to dominate the Middle East, those in the "pro" camp say.
They put no faith in U.N. inspections and, on the question of nuclear weapons, note that the IAEA gave Saddam a clean bill of health in the 1980s. It was not until after the gulf war that the world realized Baghdad was trying five separate covert routes to develop nuclear arms, and was close to succeeding.
Once he has the bomb, Saddam might not be deterred by the U.S. nuclear arsenal because he has a penchant for risk-taking and misreading the outside world, Pollack says in his recent book, "The Threatening Storm."
Powell also is expected to present proof that that the Iraqi regime maintains ties with terrorists, including al-Qaida.
While the strength of those links is in dispute, after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Bush and his team say they can't afford to take the risk that Saddam might share his deadly weapons.
The "pro" camp acknowledges a war could be costly in lives and money, although some of its members predict that Saddam's unpopular regime will fall quickly.
A successful multi-ethnic democracy in Iraq, backed by the United States, could serve as a model for political change in other Arab nations and take the edge off arguments that Washington cares only about the region's oil.
That is not the principal reason for going to war, said Patrick Clawson, deputy director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. But, he said, "this factor magnifies the importance of doing it well."
BY WARREN P. STROBEL
Washington Bureau
|
If i were the supreme being, I wouldn't have messed around with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers 8 o'clock day one!
-Time Bandits- |
|
|
|
Franc28
New Member
29 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2003 : 18:57:12 [Permalink]
|
Is there a point to your cut and pasting ? I can post ten articles against the war for every one you post.
|
|
|
|
Fireballn
Skeptic Friend
Canada
179 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2003 : 19:53:41 [Permalink]
|
"We welcome opposing points of view! How can you have a discussion without at least two sides? Unfortunatly, many who come here lack staying power."
Filthy, what you say here makes sence. I was wondering how can a whole forum think the same way? With all the thousands of people who believe in the war one would figure that their voice would be heard. (at least a representation of the masses)
So people who think the same group together. I guess it's human nature. It doesn't make for a hospitable environment for opposing points of view.(right or wrong) They then leave and find forums that cater to their point of view and recieve all the peer admiration that goes along with the group think.
Kinda like a cross section of society as a whole......... |
If i were the supreme being, I wouldn't have messed around with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers 8 o'clock day one!
-Time Bandits- |
|
|
|
PhDreamer
SFN Regular
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2003 : 19:56:32 [Permalink]
|
This forum is not a cross-section of society. The set of all skeptics is not a cross-section of society.
I am not rabidly anti-war. What I am opposed to is the propaganda; zero Iraqi WMDs ought to be a big PR problem, but it probably won't - we've dethroned the tyrant, the Iraqi people are jubliant. What, me worry? Eighteen months passed and an entire government was dismantled after 9-11 before any suggestion of Saddam's involvement. I saw an SUV today with "Support our troops. Remember 9-11" written on the back glass. We're falling for it. We're letting our opinions be warped by propaganda. Never before has skepticism been so important, and seemingly in such short supply. |
I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery.
-Agent Smith |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
|
|
Fireballn
Skeptic Friend
Canada
179 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2003 : 20:59:31 [Permalink]
|
| Ph, I didnt say that this forum is a cross section. I was stating how like minded people are drawn together. In society we hear the terms like 'white middle class neighbourhood', or the blue collar area of town. These people have common interests and live in proximity to one another. I was trying to make a correlation between how people choose their forums, and society as a whole. I know there is not such defining borders.....but it is of some social psychological interest. |
If i were the supreme being, I wouldn't have messed around with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers 8 o'clock day one!
-Time Bandits- |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
