|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
 Posted - 09/14/2001 : 01:20:35 [Permalink]
|
Tiptup your statement was not only derogatory, it was just wrong. You basically said that people that want peace cause war and you didn't say it nicely. All i see is a bunch of rhetoric and you pull Jimmy Carter's name out of a hat. he hasn't been president for over 20 years and 3 republican administrations and a democratic one have had ample time to fix whatever it is you think is broken. I also think I follow world events including terrorism quite a lot. I bet I am aware of a lot more than you think. That's beside the point. You came out with a slam and I responded appropriately even though it's hard to tell exactly who you were slamming. All those fruitcakes that want peace I guess.
Fortunately i think the US is going to do the right thing and follow international law. I will be able to deal with that just fine and I bet it's effective and one way or another the purpetrators will be brought to justice. By following international law the US can hope to maintain the respect you may have noticed worldwide following Tuesday's events. Rogue bully states don't get respect. They get fear which works in a way, but then you never have any real friends and allies. Nobody shed any tears when the Soviet Union fell apart.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
 |
|
|
Tiptup
Skeptic Friend
USA
86 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 01:50:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Tiptup your statement was not only derogatory, it was just wrong. You basically said that people that want peace cause war and you didn't say it nicely. All i see is a bunch of rhetoric and you pull Jimmy Carter's name out of a hat. he hasn't been president for over 20 years and 3 republican administrations and a democratic one have had ample time to fix whatever it is you think is broken.
I certainly hold my ideas within the realm of being wrong, if I implied otherwise then forgive me. Also my statements are taken from fact and not a "hat". A good example to back up my thought is the Executive Order issued by Jimmy Carter to outlaw assassination. Not only did this result in preventing the US from doing this action when it may have been needed, but it prevented us from dealing with people who have assassinated anyone and a whole host of other problems. The two republican administrations saw no immediate need to repeal it, and if they had it would have resulted in a bunch of la-la land people getting all upset. Then the Clinton administration probably thought the order was a good idea or something so that answered that, and Bush has just inherited this mess and should soon be repealing the nonsensical order based off news and statements I have been witnessing these last few days. This is just one small example of what has happened to US intelligence. If you want examples of badly handling terrorist organizations from the standpoint of our military's actions, then just review about every action Clinton ever took in the Middle East regarding people like Bin Laden. A good overview was a frontline special I saw about a year or two ago. I am not spreading derogatory remarks or rhetoric, I am stating logical views that are unclouded by touchy feelings or silly worldviews. I suggest that you calm down and simply state what you disagree over me with and why, not resort to name-calling. Good night. |
|
|
|
ronnywhite
SFN Regular
501 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 02:49:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I am not spreading derogatory remarks or rhetoric, I am stating logical views that are unclouded by touchy feelings or silly worldviews.
Tiptup, although I like reading your input, which certainly has it's merits, I don't see the rationality, or understand your claim of a rock-solid foundation, for some of your statements. For example:
Logic? I don't think the integration of your own religion into your viewpoint- whether it's valid or not- exactly overflows with logic.
Name calling? I hadn't noticed any in his reply, although I did note you mentioned "flower children," which although thinly veiled, seems to qualify. Although I'm sure my views, and those of a few others, are bound to clash with those who've worn-out several "Rambo" videotapes, I doubt anyone posting replies here walks around in an LSD-induced psychosis and burns draft registration cards.
Regarding diminished intelligence capabilities, you sound like you advocate the type of "look the other way" attitude we had towards the CIA a short while back, when they lied to the Warren commission and ran unannounced little wars here and there. It's not that robust intelligence capabilities aren't necessary, it's just that these agencies should be held accountable to SOMEBODY. And the man responsible for Mr. Hussein still being alive to terrorize Iraq and others today isn't Mr. Carter, it's George Bush Sr- former director of the CIA- who could have taken him out along with the rest of his cronys before concluding the Gulf War.
I look forward to reading more of your posts.
Ron White |
|
|
|
ronnywhite
SFN Regular
501 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 02:49:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I am not spreading derogatory remarks or rhetoric, I am stating logical views that are unclouded by touchy feelings or silly worldviews.
Tiptup, although I like reading your input, which certainly has it's merits, I don't see the rationality, or understand your claim of a rock-solid foundation, for some of your statements. For example:
Logic? I don't think the integration of your own religion into your viewpoint- whether it's valid or not- exactly overflows with logic.
Name calling? I hadn't noticed any in his reply, although I did note you mentioned "flower children," which although thinly veiled, seems to qualify. Although I'm sure my views, and those of a few others, are bound to clash with those who've worn-out several "Rambo" videotapes, I doubt anyone posting replies here walks around in an LSD-induced psychosis and burns draft registration cards.
Regarding diminished intelligence capabilities, you sound like you advocate the type of "look the other way" attitude we had towards the CIA a short while back, when they lied to the Warren commission and ran unannounced little wars here and there. It's not that robust intelligence capabilities aren't necessary, it's just that these agencies should be held accountable to SOMEBODY. And the man responsible for Mr. Hussein still being alive to terrorize Iraq and others today isn't Mr. Carter, it's George Bush Sr- former director of the CIA- who could have taken him out along with the rest of his cronys before concluding the Gulf War.
I look forward to reading more of your posts.
Ron White |
|
|
|
Greg
Skeptic Friend
USA
281 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 04:19:37 [Permalink]
|
I apologise to everyone for feeling sorry for myself in my previous post. Being so close and not being able to do anything is quite frustrating and I don't get drunk so I can't anesthetise myself. I wish I were in the National Guard or an EMT or something so I could help. The local hospitals were put on alert stating that there would be an influx of patients from NY, they never came.
Please everyone, consider giving to the Red Cross (call them) or Catholic Charities (they don't proslytise). These are the main relief organisations operating there now.
Don't blame each other. There's plenty of time for reflection later, when emotions aren't so high. We all need to be united and focused.
Greg.
|
|
|
|
James
SFN Regular
USA
754 Posts |
|
|
The Rat
SFN Regular
Canada
1370 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 07:36:21 [Permalink]
|
After two days of sombre reflection I see no reason to change my views as stated in the original post;
quote:
The minds which could plan and execute such things are clearly not normal. Blind hatred, fuelled by religious and ethnic differences, is behind this.
Arthur C. Clarke once said "Isn't killing someone in the name of religion a pretty good definition of insanity?" Yes, it is. Religious beliefs are based on a fantasy, no more real than a slip of paper in a fortune cookie. They may give comfort to some, and I have no quarrel with that, but there comes a time when rationality must take a stand and denounce religion in general for the way it allows irrationality to gain legitimacy in the eyes of humanity. And, I believe the fundamentalists in all religions are a danger to civilization. This may sound as if I am being a fundamentalist regarding rationality; so be it.
quote:
I fear that there is absolutely no short term solution, and that other like minds will feel emboldened, take action, and that more devastation will occur.
I still feel, and fear, this aspect of it. Early reports suggest that terrorists are still attempting to board aircraft. The usual suspects are reportedly already on the move from their lairs, dispersing to avoid the inevitable retribution. With the latest commercial satellites having a resolution of about 2 metres (only slightly more than average human height), I hope that the best military ones are doing better, and that they are tracking actual individuals, the better to ensure that their eradication is efficient.
In the meantime our lives are becoming like these contemptible bastards want them to be. I work at Toronto City Centre Airport, located on the island offshore. I don't have a glamorous job flying aircraft, I'm simply a 'ramp rat', one of the guys who fuels up planes, moves them around, and does whatever is needed. I can no longer go there without being watched by police. I have to wait for them before I am allowed near commercial aircraft. Private pilots with planes based there used to be able to bring their cars out to their aircraft if they wanted to load up for a weekend away; no more.
Perhaps most depressing of all is that from my vantage point on the island I have a beautiful view of the Toronto skyline, the city I have called home for most of my life, the city I love. I looked at it last night and saw aircraft smashing into the Bank of Montreal tower, the TD Centre, the CN Tower, Commerce Court, Skydome...
I hear people say we should act civilized. Fine, but let's remember that it is often just that, an act. We cannot deny the fact that we are animals, with the same basic biochemistry as a chimpanzee, platypus, or cockroach. If we sometimes lose our civilized attitude, well that's perfectly human too.
quote:
And I feel so damned helpless...
I still do.
Some will not agree with what I have said. I disagree with what some others have said. But I want to thank you all for participating in what is a very trying time for all of us. If there is one aspect of humans that truly sets us apart from all other species, I believe that it is our ability to communicate complex and abstract ideas and to learn from them. We must continue to do that.
Free speech; excercise it or SHUT UP!
Edited by - The Rat on 09/14/2001 07:39:12 |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 09:02:21 [Permalink]
|
Tiptup, your attempt to level blame at someone is just wrong. It is a gross oversimplification at the very least. If you knew much about history, you would know why the CIA had some checks put in. The CIA murdered democratically elected officials abroad that were guilty of no crimes versus the US. They just didn't want to do whatever we said. Regardless of the reason, we can't give the CIA or any other organization the green light to kill whoever they want.
Even with this law, Ronald Reagan tried to kill Qhaddafi but failed miserably. You seem to think that if the CIA was given the go ahead that they could go out there and do whatever they want. Well in real life they are not the best organization. If they are so good, where was the warning on this attack in the first place? Things are a little more complicated than you seem to think.
And for your information, a President only signs a law passed by both houses of congress. Fixing the blame on one man is not entirely fair. Besides that, maybe it was left in place because it was needed. The CIA did some things that were wrong. They screwed up and something had to be done about them. Check your history books and you will see what I mena.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 09:53:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Even with this law, Ronald Reagan tried to kill Qhaddafi but failed miserably. You seem to think that if the CIA was given the go ahead that they could go out there and do whatever they want. Well in real life they are not the best organization. If they are so good, where was the warning on this attack in the first place? Things are a little more complicated than you seem to think.
Many horrible events that the CIA was credited with they just didn't do. That's a basic problem with working in secrecy--nobody really knows what you are doing.
But the political climate from the 60's on made them out to be "the bad guys". They can't tell us everything that they have saved us from to defend themselves. Any movie you see about them they are just pure un-American evil.But that's Hollywood.
Now they are cut back to fewer than 800 field agents.
On TV, yesterday, I saw the very same people who were complaining that they wanted the CIA gone, bitching that they didn't know that the WTC disaster was going to happen.
The WTC happened with out warning for two reasons.
We no longer have enough agents. Good as they are they can't be everywhere.
And two: the terrorists were damn good at what they did. The corodination of so many agents and the converting every day objects (airliners) into huge bombs was brilliant.
The idea that we can out think an enemy at every turn is just wishful thinking.They may very well be crazy, but they are far from being stupid.
We need our old "evil" George Bush CIA back.
-------
The brain that was stolen from my laboratory was a criminal brain. Only evil will come from it. |
|
|
|
Snake
SFN Addict
USA
2511 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 15:28:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The corodination of so many agents and the converting every day objects (airliners) into huge bombs was brilliant.
The idea that we can out think an enemy at every turn is just wishful thinking.They may very well be crazy, but they are far from being stupid.
We need our old "evil" George Bush CIA back.0
Brilliant or simplistic? Everyone or at least many are looking at nuclear bombs, heat seeking missiles and countries like China and Russia to attack, I think the Cold War was a farce.
You know the term 'over qualified', well I think this is a case like that. The government is over looking under sophisticated enemies. The government is over qualified to detect an idea that primitive.
Rap Crap is to music what Paint by Numbers is to art. |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 15:57:04 [Permalink]
|
Brilliant or simplistic is besides the point. All anyone can ask is that
1. we get some warning or even better
2. It's stopped before it happens
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Tiptup
Skeptic Friend
USA
86 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 16:50:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
ronnywhite:
Tiptup, although I like reading your input, which certainly has it's merits, I don't see the rationality, or understand your claim of a rock-solid foundation, for some of your statements. For example:
Logic? I don't think the integration of your own religion into your viewpoint- whether it's valid or not- exactly overflows with logic.
I know this may be hard for many to understand but my religious beliefs are very important towards the formation of my other beliefs, they cannot be separated very easily, sorry if I offended you but I cannot change who I am. I like to let people know where I come from so that they do not have to feel as if I am trying to hide my true views. I would ask tolerance from those this would make uncomfortable, and if you find problems with the views that result from my religion then please debate them on that basis, not from the notion that spirituality is not a real factor in people's belief systems. As for logic in general, what can I say? I learned how to express myself from a public school. Please be patient with the inaccurate stating of my views and wildly changing ideas. The anger and other emotions I am daily being swept by aren't making this easier.
quote:
Name calling? I hadn't noticed any in his reply, although I did note you mentioned "flower children," which although thinly veiled, seems to qualify.
Yeah after I signed off last night that stupid statement of mine stuck in my head. "Name Calling? What was I thinking?" In actuallity I was attempting to express the figurative name calling of the ideas I was attempting to post. "Flower Children" was simply a quote of something @tomic said, nothing bad was meant by it. I thought it was actually kind of a cute reference. And if any of you are wondering the other names I placed were made out of anger in an attempt to label a certain group of thought, not anyone in particular. I personally am swayed by those views to some extent (as with any good argument), and any hostility might be against myself.
quote:
Regarding diminished intelligence capabilities, you sound like you advocate the type of "look the other way" attitude we had towards the CIA a short while back, when they lied to the Warren commission and ran unannounced little wars here and there. It's not that robust intelligence capabilities aren't necessary, it's just that these agencies should be held accountable to SOMEBODY. And the man responsible for Mr. Hussein still being alive to terrorize Iraq and others today isn't Mr. Carter, it's George Bush Sr- former director of the CIA- who could have taken him out along with the rest of his cronys before concluding the Gulf War.
I do not believe in a totally unencumbered and unaccountable CIA, but I do believe in the idea that sometimes dirty work needs to be done. It is this factor is what we should look the other way from, so as to not compromise our agents, and not have our security as a nation, be overruled by a bunch of lawyers. While at the same time keeping them answerable to elected officials, and not to a bunch of unknown bureaucrats. But today this is certainly not the biggest problem within the CIA, and I think it is time we somewhat went back in the other direction. I do not see how this is all that disagreeable. |
|
|
|
Tiptup
Skeptic Friend
USA
86 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 16:51:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
@tomic:
Tiptup, your attempt to level blame at someone is just wrong. It is a gross oversimplification at the very least. If you knew much about history, you would know why the CIA had some checks put in. The CIA murdered democratically elected officials abroad that were guilty of no crimes versus the US. They just didn't want to do whatever we said. Regardless of the reason, we can't give the CIA or any other organization the green light to kill whoever they want.
I do not want someone to think I am blaming anyone. That would be derogatory and was not what I was doing. When I just reread your earlier statement I noticed your statement that you believed I was trying to say that people who want peace cause war. This is nonsense, and if that came across from my views then I am sorry. That would not only be morally wrong for someone to hold that view, it would also be incredibly stupid.
I was merely trying to express my love hate relationship to a certain worldview that is completely unrealistic and devoid of logic. I would think that everyone strives for peace, and as a Christian I feel it is my duty to do so.
If it were simply the seeking peace that brought about the decayed state of our nation's defense, then this would be a cruel and heartless world indeed. During the hippy movements of the 60's onwards (before I was born) a worldview with the notion that pain, suffering, and death can be eliminated through human actions within government. The common sense and logic that made this country great and America had practiced until then, was all but thrown out the window. The logic of how the universe itself worked was discarded as people began believing that everything deserved to have everything perfect, and in a major lapse of sound judgment, they believed government was the perfect engine to bring about this utopia. I want to eventually get into this in the politics section when I will try to reply to things I read on this board echoing these beliefs.
What I was trying to point out in my earlier posts within this thread was that I believe this worldview has had bad effects on our foreign policy and national defense. You brought up how certain people are hypocritical regarding this nation's actions to and from the world; the people I was speaking of are hypocritical as well, but in the opposite direction. In their naivety, socialist minded people (who I think can accurately be labeled as the "Blame America First" crowd) began to engage in nonsensical policies of nation building (the belief that we can force government on other people), disarmament, and creating "stability" at the cost of everything else.
This line of thought believed that we don't really have to worry too much about our defense so long as we are nice to everyone. This was a dangerous mix with their policies that unwittingly ticked off certain groups of people. I'm not saying that it caused what happened, but it didn't help in my mind.
quote:
@tomic:
Even with this law, Ronald Reagan tried to kill Qhaddafi but failed miserably. You seem to think that if the CIA was given the go ahead that they could go out there and do whatever they want. Well in real life they are not the best organization. If they are so good, where was the warning on this attack in the first place? Things are a little more complicated than you seem to think.
If our CIA wasn't so badly weakened and compromised by people who couldn't stomach the work that was needed then we just might have gotten that advanced warning you speak of. Now I am not saying that everything the CIA has ever done is a good thing, and I do believe a number of abuses occurred. It is almost a given that we cannot do everything perfectly, and sometimes people don't even try.
As for the executive order against assassination, that wouldn't have been so bad if lawyers hadn't gotten their hands on it. Based on that one rule they came up with a million others that severely limited what US intelligence could do. You need to understand that this was a big problem, even if our agents weren't trying to assassinate someone.
quote:
@tomic:
And for your information, a President only signs a law passed by both houses of congress. Fixing the blame on one man is not entirely fair. Besides that, maybe it was left in place because it was needed. The CIA did some things that were wrong. They screwed up and something had to be done about them. Check your history books and you will see what I mena.
I'll do that, but I suggest you should check out just what an Executive Order is. |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 17:20:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Brilliant or simplistic is besides the point. All anyone can ask is that
1. we get some warning or even better
2. It's stopped before it happens
Couldn't agree more. But when it comes to intelligence work--it is not something that "nice guys" can do. If you tie their hands behind their backs -make them behave- you get what you've just seen. If you let them have free reign they are going to do things that aren't polite. Even with free reign there is no guarantee that they will win every time.
It's a dirty job, not the province of the dainty.
-------
The brain that was stolen from my laboratory was a criminal brain. Only evil will come from it. |
|
|
|
Zandermann
Skeptic Friend
USA
431 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2001 : 18:00:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
... If you tie their hands behind their backs - make them behave - you get what you've just seen. ... It's a dirty job, not the province of the dainty.
My late uncle (US Army Intelligence) used to rail against those in our country who wanted all the information with none of the 'dirty hands' that made it possible to gain that information.
One can only wonder what might have been avoided were we able to place a few operatives in bin Laden's organization.
...or if they were allowed to take him out. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
