Osama Bin Laden scared little coward died in a filthy cave

To Diogenes and Smiley

Joeslogic wrote:
You profess Islam right Smiles?

Your cultural relativism is a quite christian trait. And within the intelligensia its still the safest path. A rethoric that includes confrontation with other is against this christian maxime. Joeslogic , on the other hand, is easier to interpret , from the view of the old testament or heathen/natural religion. ( Of course, if Joe was a muslim, the koran would grant him the right to jihaad. Christianity does not grant tyhe right to take revenge. Jesus clearly states that material wealth is detrimental to following him. That christians should live as pacifists, on charity and faith, while. Preferably chaste, while waiting for HIS return and the end of the world. Personally, i believe this impossible standard has contributed much to progress and human rights, peace and prosperity ).


"what my personal beliefs are is irrelevant to how i am going to interpret a persons actions",

Smiles. Your claim to moral objectivity is more spurious than Joeslogics crusadermentality. It is based on a real threat to the status quo and pax americana.

"Because I don't denounce people for believing what they want. As long as they keep it to themselves. If they're not bothering anyone, then I don't have a problem with it".

But Dio. Muslims ARE bothering christians and buddhists and hindus and animists in Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Pakistan, Egypt, and Sudan.

Christians have bothered people too. But nowadays they are more or less tame and civilized.

 

Three posts with valid points in one context but, not in another looks like there is a bit of a double standard. I wish I had time to appropriately respond, got to go to work.

 

Xerc I’m not at all surprised that you picked up on the moon god point. And I only half believe the others did not. While I could make a very compelling case for the moon god theory the point is not germane to my argument. My problem is with Islam and the Muslims who follow it into the world of hatred and murder. Otherwise I could tolerate it with no complaints regardless of the validity of there religion. The media emboldens the non participating Muslims by validating the terrorist’s position. This keeps the shallow and stupid percentage of the population in the US and world wide complacent in there position on the war as if there are two morally equal sides one is just more powerful and overreaching there jurisdiction. This emboldens the spineless anti-America political party into a belief (possibly true) that they can gain political capital by investing what political capital they have in the loss of the war on terror. This gain at the expense of the Iraqi people, who are not part of the radical terrorist movement, and truly want peace and prosperity. Now ridiculous, immoral, radical, untruthful position goes so far as to be called out for what it is so long as it is anti Bush administration. I am just one person pecking away at a keyboard on a forum. The fact that it so intensely inflames certain people on such a scale is just testament of proof for how far gone and brainwashed the general public as a whole is.

 

does no one else here see a direct correlation between ignorance and lack of education as well as poor socio-economic status that leads to the 'bothering" of anyone? no one seems to mind that 50million women worldwide have been "circumcised" or that in india honor killings are commonplace is much of the rural lands.... but when somethign happens to "one of us" then panties knot up....

dearest joe
in reference to this comment "This keeps the shallow and stupid percentage of the population in the US and world wide complacent in there position on the war as if there are two morally equal sides one is just more powerful and overreaching there jurisdiction. "


ohhh sooo THATS what it's about? morality? you attacked iraq because you couldn't stand to let the people suffer? my apologies...... i mean.... it's not like the insurgents would like to have cruise missiles and b2's, they're clearly as well armed as you are and as well trained, there is definitely nothing off balance over there....... joe you present yourself as both shallow and stupid by making such a comment.. shallow because you refuse to see the actions you defend as nothing short heroic, you fuss because everyone that has a problem with the us in iraq doesn't meet in one big field so you can clusterfuck the shit out of them

 

http://www.boston.com/news/world/eu...for_muslim_women_a_deadly_defiance/?page=full



What was this girl guilty of that she should be gunned down by her own brother?

 

XerxesX stated.

No argument, but their holy text didn't tell them to do that, their local demi-god did. Someone who commits an act in the name of a God isn't necessarily acting in a way that is alligned with their beliefs.

Joeslogic said.

Which "Media" are you referring to, because I don't know what you're talking about.

Really now. I think that you're mistakenly assuming that the Invasion of Iraq and the War on Terror are the same thing. They're seperate entities. The war on terror has been and will continue to be fought throughout the world. The war on Terror has been on-going, and will continue to go on for some time. The war in Iraq was a policy blunder, and a mistake, based on false intelligence. The protest is against the war in Iraq, I don't see many "end the occupation of Afghanistan" posters. And there's a reason, because that is a legitimate battle in the war on terror.

Which political party would that be?

Ah, the majority of whom are Muslim, and if I'm interpreting what I'm hearing correctly, would turn and kill there sister for wearing a skirt.

Are you saying that I'm typing this as part of a Political agenda. You're reading entirely too much into it. I'd just like to see you push the same standard across the board. If someone is a coward for hiding in a cave, then certainly one would be a coward for hiding behind the might of the most advanced and well armed nation on the planet, when he was not willing to fight for that nation himself.

What, you think I spend my entire day worrying about what you said and coming up with witty retorts. I don't think anyone in these forums gives 2 shits about what is said after they log out. Please, I'm sure I'm not the only one with better things to do than worry about what's being said in the fugly forums. This is a place to come and rant and bull-shit. Half the people in these forums aren't even sane, let alone well educated or rational.

 

man please...... that's like saying burning people at the steak is endorsed by god......... stop..... being.... a...... hypocrite.....

 

S wrote
does no one else here see a direct correlation between ignorance and lack of education as well as poor socio-economic status that leads to the 'bothering" of anyone?

Burned widows and stoned lovers and circumcised childbrides are likely to disagree. Not with your "correlation", but with your focus. Most human tragedies, ( exempting psycopatic behaviour ), can be cattegorized as you do. It still needs a response from society.

D wrote
No argument, but their holy text didn't tell them to do that, their local demi-god did.

The Holy Koran gives a muslem community the right to wage war against an oppressor. All government can be seen as oppressive. Especially a non-muslem one. Their holy text tells them this, as opposed to the bible that says not to go to armed struggle in said cases.

Of course the most "HEROIC" stance in this case is that of the outgunned insurgents. But it should be noted, that as long as they are opperating without uniforms, they are non-lawful combatants according to the geneva-convention.

 

well xerc that was my point......... why don't you go stop that kind of more BLATANT oppression and disregard for human life..... is it too not offending your morals as much as terrorism is? no? why? because it's not happening to any americans? so morality only applies to those you deem worthy of affecting it? or is this whole discussion of morals a bunch of blatant bullshit?

heh since when is america concerned with the geneva convention? the whole reason for bombing yugoslavia was because there were soem half million refugees (not sure on figure)........ you know how many afghanis have fled into pakistan? 3 million. when it happened to yugoslavia it was called ethnic cleansing....... but when the US did it it's called........ what?

uranium depleted bullets have been used in iraq since the gulfwar, the cancer rates have gone up 1000%.... what about the new pass at torture laws? no? doesn't count as a violation right? why? because who's supposed to give a parking ticket to the parking intendant right?

 

Hi Smiles

Its not easy to just go and stop something. That is on a practical level and not on a theoretical and moral one.

As for americans. I am not one. Jugoslavia was a threat close to the industrial base of europe and thus recieved more attention. Refugees in the himalayas are likely to get less attention from western powers. Is that strange ?

Your suggesting that USarmy or the worldcommunity or ME, should go into muslem societies and change their laws for the better is of course just :?: :roll:

I was not aware this was a discussion of moral. I believe Machiavelli makes a valid point here.

USA and Geneva. Depleted uranium and white phosporous are points of contention within the GCframework.

to give a parking ticket to the parking intendant. Thats totally beside the point and refers to pure power. USA wants to be seen as a civilized country and thus they have an interest in upholding to international treaties they have signed. Ref GC.

 

damn they sure make it look easy to get up and blow some shit up

no and neither is the double standard when it copmes to media coverage of american indescretions....... you set a country back 60 years with regards to it's infastructure for doing something you yourself do three years later in a BIGGER way..... and the fact that you do it in the "himalayas" makes it ok?

heh
isn't that what Operation Iraqi Liberation was about? sure wasn't about WMD's apparently, nor the oil....... free the people from an opresive tyrant and all that

heh then talk to joe joe who thinks that america is fighting this war from moral high ground. yes let's apply machiavelian ethics to the actions of a democratic society.. those aren't contradictory at all

yeah i have a feeling that if iran were using depleted uranium or white phosphorus and not the US that there wouldn't be much contention about that...... still what about the torture laws there is little "contention" about them....... and the prisioners at guantanamo?

which part is besides the point? teh fact that when it's to their advantage the US is first in line to bomb the fuck out of violator of the GC but when it's them doing it the community is supposed to be doing....... what?
i'm sure saddam wanted to be seein as a gentlemen too but conflicting interest got the better of him..... much like america that abuses their stance as a superpower..... don;t get me wrong any superpower would be just as bad to varying degrees...... but don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining

 

Dio said:

Not true, Thousands of crimes against non-Muslims are committed on a daily basis. While these crimes may be committed by a minority. The majority sits silent. To sit silent and not actively work to flush out the perpetrators much less to at least denounce these acts is to be an accomplice. Why because these acts (should I remind you again with the photo of the girl with the chopped head?) are justified according to the Koran.

What are you mistakenly assuming it was not?

No Dio what I am point out to you is your obvious stubbornness and ignorance. You and smiley self righteously proclaim that I only see one view and that I have said things you find offensive against a maggot like Osama. Then you turn around and say you don’t give a shit about him. It’s obvious your only argument is to spew out the same ole Anti-American crap that goes around. What ever the topic may be if there is an anti-American spin. There is Dio, and his sidekicks.

Smiles did not have shit to say that made any sense on the post with the graphic. Then here he comes with the ridiculous numbers and facts.

3- Million wow smiles. And who counted all the heads are you sure it was not 3-Million and 38 or maybe 2-Million 999-Thousand 976?

Cancer rates up 1000 percent? Gee Smiles aren’t we throwing the propaganda out there a little early? Who needs the tinfoil hat now?


Smiles said:

Well let it be from now on known then; start some shit with us, and we can blow some shit up all the while making it look easy.

WTF? Smiles were you wearing your tinfoil hat for those two?


Seems the hate America crown has a nice little recipe for there fact bending strategy. Attempt to assist any anti-American group by spreading propaganda. Apply a double standard with any rules ie Geneva Convention. It is ok for any group fighting against America to disregard these rules. While at the same time we will accuse Americans of breaking these rules. Regardless of weather or not the rules apply or not.

 

Hi Smiles
No piss intended ! But local strongmen have to wake up and smell the coffee. Its no longer possible to play superpowers against eachother under a dual nuclear umbrella.

Democracies will play powerpolitics. Your assumption of purely benevolent policies is naive. The question is wether its possible to find a balance of power and reduce tension and increase the sharing.

Smiles said:
Quote:
damn they sure make it look easy to get up and blow some shit up

It IS easy to blow shit up. Its hard to controll hostile or disputed areas.

 

Posted: Wed Jan 18, 2006 12:06 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Smiles
No piss intended ! But local strongmen have to wake up and smell the coffee. Its no longer possible to play superpowers against eachother under a dual nuclear umbrella.

There is one fault in what i say here, but that is a separate subject, thusly i start a new thread called. What the fux with IRAN ?!?

 

firstly to xerx who's actually making points and not resulting to verbal shit slinging and the usual "lalallalalala i can't hear you"

xerx i'm not under the assumption that any nation can have purely benevolent policies.... i even stated that any people with as much power as the americans would surely abuse it........ what I AM against is Americans trying to rationalize their actions as benevolent


now on to joe

joe the 3 million figure came straight of the mouth of the professor for international Diaspora for the university of toronto..... next time i present information i'll make sure to make an annotated bibliography with works cited as well as signed statements by all of the parties quoted..... ok? and it seems funny you would get hung up on figures when the figures for serbian "genocide" in Yugoslavia seem to decrease every fucking year even 10 years later..... We all now what happened the last time you discredited information I presented….. .someone wound up looking stupid, k thanks sit down now

as for your last comment about weather rules apply or not.... why wouldn't they apply? i mean you just throw all these phrases out there and put all my quotes in parentheses and rant about how lunatic they are..... yet you dont dispute the facts by presenting other contrary to them by more reputable sources

joe would have you believe that the media in the US supports terrorism because they have now begun to air argument by the opponents to this war in iraq

joe next time you choose to dispute an argument or something you find unfair kindly say why..... not just "you crazy! you terrorists are all crazy! with your lies! your terrorist lies!"

 

Smiles you’re living in a fairy tale land. When backed into a corner you just make shit up to fill space I guess, that was a complete waste. I must say at least you’re consistent though.

 

Joeslogic said

In reference to the war in Iraq not having anything to do with the war on terror, Saddam Hussein was a ruthless strongman who very effectively controlled the country and it's dissidents and insurgents. If anything Saddam Hussein was anti-terrorist, who did everything he could to stamp it out in his own country. Iraq was not used as a training ground for terrorists under Saddam, now it is. Iraq had no intention of passing WMD to terrorist's, that would have been a threat to Saddam Hussein's power. Iraq also never possesed weapons of mass distruction. Sure, the Bush Administration said that the invasion of Iraq was about the war on terror, but every link they have between Iraq and Terrorism went flat. How exactly is Iraq about the war on Terror?

To clearly state the facts, I have no problem with the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, I think it is appropriate, and that we did the right thing as a nation, but the War in Iraq is bull-shit, and was completely illegal. Read Federalist Paper #4, and you'll understand why the founding fathers made it difficult to launch an offensive war. Iraq is a mistake, and will go down as a second Vietnam. A war based on lies that we never should have been involved in in the first place.

The war on Terror can't be fought with ground troops, it must be fought as a hearts and minds campaign. As far as dealing with religious fanatics, we as a nation (the United States) have far too many religious zealots as is. Intelligent design, anyone?

By the way, the only way representative government works is through conflict. Am I supposed to agree with everything the government does? I don't, because that would make me a complacent idiot. I don't trust the government to protect my rights, that's why my family and I retain a lawyer. Why would I then trust that same government when it says that it is trying to protect the rights of citizens that are not even it's own?

 

thanks joe the corner you backed me up into gave me no alternative....... with your cunning facts and figures you have abundantly presented and not just the idiotic denial the average man would succumb to.... nope not you joe

 

Dio
I think we obviously agree on Afghanistan but you’re dismissing a lot of evidence on the wmds as well as terrorist links. History will show lots of evidence to back that up 10 years or so from now. The spin then will be that it was all made up. For right now I will have to respectfully disagree. For now there really is a lot of evidence not circulated. To pull off the theory that the president as well as both parties in congress after looking at evidence we had at the time overwhelmingly voted for the war. But that it all was a big conspiracy theory is really on shaky ground. Then there has to be huge motive for this to be pulled off and I just do not see the motive.

 

Joeslogic said...

I don't make decisions based on evidence I don't have. The problem I have with the WMD arguments is the government said that they knew Saddam had WMD. If they knew he had them, they had to know where they were, otherwise they didn't know that he had them. They didn't know where they were, therefore they didn't know that he had them. As far as the terrorism links, based on the evidence I've seen, I don't buy that there were any links, I'm not big on faith in politicians telling the truth.

Joeslogic also said...

I don't think it was a conspiracy theory. I think that pretty much everyone in congress was playing politics, and gambling that this would work out. It didn't, and now the republicans are on the defensive, and the democrats are attacking on an issue they are every bit as much at fault for. Congress is full of fork tongued bastards, don't think that I trust any of them.