|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
 Posted - 10/17/2007 : 16:02:12
|
There was a comment (over here, a response by Gorgo to one statement by H. Humbert) that raised some interest to me.Originally posted by Gorgo
| And I'd like to point out that a great many patriotic Americans joined the military after our nation was attacked on 9-11 for all the right reasons |
Their hearts may have been in the right place, but they joined for all the wrong reasons. Crime does not solve crime. |
You are begging the question. To clarify, is your position that all military action is crime? Do you instead mean to take the position that all US military action in Iraq since 2001 is criminal?
Or are you saying that all military support, regardless of the amount of participation in certain actions, is criminal?
Please clarify your position, Gorgo, because the impression I have from your above statement is very offensive.
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
 Posted - 10/17/2007 : 19:20:25 [Permalink]
|
Or are you saying that all military support, regardless of the amount of participation in certain actions, is criminal?
Please clarify your position, Gorgo, because the impression I have from your above statement is very offensive.
|
Is that your main concern about statements made? That some person will decide to be offended?
|
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
 |
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2007 : 20:34:39 [Permalink]
|
Aw, jeeze, Gorgo! You could have just answered the man.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2007 : 20:51:34 [Permalink]
|
| I concur with Mooner. Boron seems to be making an genuine attempt to get deeper into something you said, and you, Gorgo, respond in a way that smacks of condescension. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2007 : 20:58:40 [Permalink]
|
Without clarification, I will have to assume what you really meant and argue against that. I don't like building strawmen. This will waste my time and yours, and will ultimately lead to more frustration than is necessary.Originally posted by Gorgo
Is that your main concern about statements made? That some person will decide to be offended? |
Perhaps I wasn't clear. You are patently wrong. Please clarify or defend your statement quoted in the first post of this thread.
I would have guessed by now, Gorgo, that you have seen my typical arguments and might even have understood them. First, your choice of phrase "decide to be offended" is begging the question. This is a very common trait of yours. Will you, after you've explained your military/criminal delusion, please explain why you think people won't be offended unless they decide to become so?
Clearly, you are unconcerned about offending people, since you accomplish these three offensive goals with just one question (though it was incorrectly separated into two questions):
1) You fail to clarify your position, as I requested.
2) You imply that I am not very concerned about the validity of your argument, though I had just asked you to clarify your position.
3) You use the same logical fallacy I pointed out to you in my previous post: begging the question. |
| Edited by - Boron10 on 10/17/2007 20:59:35 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 02:26:11 [Permalink]
|
Offense seemed like a main point of your question. I am not totally unconcerned about what people decide to be offended about, but that begs the question. I didn't ask what I thought, nor did I say that it was wrong to be concerned. I asked why you seemed to make it such an important thing. I guess I don't get an answer, I just get told that I'm begging some imaginary question, and that I didn't answer your question that I didn't understand. I don't get an answer, but I'm supposed to follow your rules. Some discussion would be helpful, otherwise you come off as some sort of Grand Inquisitor that I'm supposed to give some great importance.
I didn't say that every war was a violation of international law. Attacking Afghanistan and Iraq are violations of international law. Certainly, Iraq is more clearly a violation, but it is still a violation of the UN Charter to attack other countries. Afghanistan did not bomb New York. Some criminals bombed New York. It was a crime. There was no war. Afghanistan's planes were not headed towards the U.S.
Thousands of people have been murdered and great chaos caused for no good reason, and wars of other kinds are being waged against other countries while Americans applaud. The attack and occupation of Iraq is a crime in all respects. It is no better than bludgeoning an old person on the street for their nickels, and the attack on the people of Afghanistan is not far behind.
I may have overgeneralized, I see, as I may have misintrepreted the statement to which I responded. I suppose a lot of people joined the military for good reasons after, as well as before, 9/11. My response was for those who joined the military because of 9/11. He didn't say "because", but I assumed that is what he meant.
Do I think all war is unnecessary? I don't know. I just haven't seen one that was very noble, or very constructive. That is, war being defined as large groups of people attacking other large groups of people. But, I understand that I am ignorant about a lot of things, so I don't know. I just don't see it yet, maybe some day I will. However, I did not make the statement that "all" miltary action is a violation of international law. It may be a crime, but as we've seen, there are different definitions of the word 'crime' so I am careful how I use that word.
To sum up what I think your question is, I think some armed force may be necessary on some occasions. I do think the attacks on Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Haiti, Korea, and Venezuela, some of which are not what you would call military attacks, are nonetheless more destructive than productive, some of them violate international laws. Laws which I don't think are particularly glorious, by the way. They're not my laws. They are the laws made by conquerors, and the conquerors use them when they are convenient, and ignore them when they're not. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 06:05:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by marfknox
I concur with Mooner. Boron seems to be making an genuine attempt to get deeper into something you said, and you, Gorgo, respond in a way that smacks of condescension.
|
I see, and the questions I ask are not genuine? Are you not at all curious to find out why reality is only important if it doesn't "offend" anyone? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 06:19:56 [Permalink]
|
I would have guessed by now, Gorgo, that you have seen my typical arguments and might even have understood them. |
I don't even understand that sentence.
Who decides to be offended when you're offended? Julius Caesar? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 07:40:51 [Permalink]
|
What constitutes criminal behavior is not always easily defined. While some crimes are clear cut (driving 60 miles an hour in a 35 mile an hour zone to go to the grocery store on a clear day), others are unclear (driving the speed limit can be cited as reckless is weather conditions are bad enough.) Crimes themselves are defined by human consensus, and there is often much confusion regarding the interpretation of the letter of the law.
The military action in Iraq is pretty complicated and there are thousands of individual Americans involved, so it is not too much to ask you to clarify what you mean by it all being "criminal".
As for what is offensive, I think it is pretty clear that what is offensive is if something is being called criminal which is not, and that can be offensive for a whole variety of reasons. For instance, if I call something criminal which is not, it reduces the meaning of real criminal actions by over-using the term. It also tarnishes the image of the person or persons being labeled criminals.
Gorgo, why not just engage in the conversation? If you do, I imagine what would happen is that you and boron, and probably some other people, would end up disagreeing about what is criminal behavior. And depending on how extreme the disagreement is, some people might be offended. But until you answer boron's initial question, everything will remain tense and unclear. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 07:56:23 [Permalink]
|
I was attempting to engage someone in discussion. The fact that you aren't interested in aspects of the discussion that I'm interested in is interesting, but, to put it in your own terms, it is condescending of you to think I have to also view the world as you do, and engage in discussions as you do.
I have replied to him on his terms, despite my better judgment. My initial reaction to his earlier posts is that he is just an angry young man that likes to snipe at people. I've tried to put that aside and engage him in discussion, but I get more of his pseudo-intellectual sounding crap, and for some reason, you support it.
Again, I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt here. What is your problem? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 10/18/2007 08:09:34 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 08:11:30 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by marfknox
What constitutes criminal behavior is not always easily defined. |
Are you saying there is some question that attacking a country and creating chaos and overseeing the death of tens of thousands of people over a period of 16 years is not a violation of international law?
|
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 08:12:46 [Permalink]
|
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 10/18/2007 08:12:58 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 08:15:16 [Permalink]
|
You know, this could actually be an interesting conversation if it could get going. For instance, boron wrote: | Or are you saying that all military support, regardless of the amount of participation in certain actions, is criminal? |
Am I guilty of criminal behavior for having paid my taxes which support the Iraq war? |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 08:39:53 [Permalink]
|
Am I guilty of criminal behavior for having paid my taxes which support the Iraq war?
|
Well, we are coerced into paying taxes, but why is it really all that different from funding any criminal enterprise? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 08:41:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by marfknox
You know, this could actually be an interesting conversation if it could get going. |
We've had lots of these conversations here, but it generally gets stopped by some sacred cows. Something I was trying to address in my first post. We don't want to talk about certain things in certain ways, because it might offend someone's sacred cows.
As the OP shows, it's not important whether a statement is false or true, it's only important that it be non-offensive. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 10/18/2007 08:42:48 |
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2007 : 09:12:28 [Permalink]
|
I'll start from the bottom and work my way up here.Originally posted by Gorgo
Originally posted by marfknox
What constitutes criminal behavior is not always easily defined. |
Are you saying there is some question that attacking a country and creating chaos and overseeing the death of tens of thousands of people over a period of 16 years is not a violation of international law? |
Clearly there is "some question" about the legality of US military actions in Iraq, since we are still there and nobody is going to jail for it (you could make an argument for the individuals who have committed torture or murder, but they are not responsible for the actual invasion). If, as you seem to assume, there was no question that US actions in Iraq are illegal, there would be stronger repercussions.| I was attempting to engage someone in discussion. The fact that you aren't interested in aspects of the discussion that I'm interested in is interesting, but, to put it in your own terms, it is condescending of you to think I have to also view the world as you do, and engage in discussions as you do. |
Gorgo, I recommend you read our mission statement. It's on nearly every page. The point of these discussion forums is to promote critical thinking. This includes questioning our assumptions. If you are uninterested in discussing a premise of yours, I think we would all appreciate it if you would just say so; that way, we could just ignore you.| I have replied to him on his terms, despite my better judgment. My initial reaction to his earlier posts is that he is just an angry young man that likes to snipe at people. I've tried to put that aside and engage him in discussion, but I get more of his pseudo-intellectual sounding crap, and for some reason, you support it. |
Thank you for answering my first questions. I will address your above answer shortly. I have a sneaking feeling that I'll be spitting into the wind here and just distracting from my desired subject of conversation, but: Why do you think I'm angry or sniping? Oddly enough, I have developed a similar opinion of you (except for the age part, but hey).
I am glad you have finally chosen to engage me in discussion; however, I would call your first post in this thread a "snipe," since you failed to clarify your point and indirectly accused me of arguing from emotions. Do you understand why that is rude?
It's good to know that I write "pseudo-intellectual sounding crap" in these message boards. Does anybody else feel that way about my writing? If so, I will change my style: I want a discussion, not a fight.| Again, I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt here. What is your problem? |
If that's true, I would hate to see how you respond to people you've decided don't deserve the benefit of the doubt. B10:
I would have guessed by now, Gorgo, that you have seen my typical arguments and might even have understood them. |
I don't even understand that sentence. |
Let me rephrase: you and I have been regulars on this particular message board for several years. I had assumed that you understood my typical arguments, and would know that I am more interested in finding facts and valid arguments than I am about offending people. Thus, the questions in your first post seemed little more than a shot at me, and an attempt to evade the actual discussion.| Who decides to be offended when you're offended? Julius Caesar? |
Huh? What does deciding to be offended have to do with anything? You erroneously assumed that people "decide to be offended" with your first post in this thread. I called you on it, and you handwaved it off, just like you initially did to my first request for clarification (I see that you have answered my first questions, though, and I appreciate it).Originally posted by marfknox
I concur with Mooner. Boron seems to be making an genuine attempt to get deeper into something you said, and you, Gorgo, respond in a way that smacks of condescension. |
I see, and the questions I ask are not genuine? Are you not at all curious to find out why reality is only important if it doesn't "offend" anyone? |
Perhaps if you had answered my questions and then asked yours in the same post, you wouldn't have appeared condescending.
Your questions appear genuine. I apparently made the mistake of assuming that you had a representative enough sample of my writing to know your question was unnecessary.
I will address the meat of your point in a follow-on post shortly. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Crime or Military Action
Topic Locked
