I should probably add that since 9/11 I have been feeling very insecure, and as an American, I've been much too spoiled to be able to handle that. I have a right not to be afraid and I demand and support my government's efforts to kill anybody and everybody that scares me. I want to be able to go back to sleep in my old life. Naturally, as an exceptionally paranoid individual, I mentioned how spoiled I am, didn't I, that will mean that a lot of people will probably have to die. I just want to say, that in addition to not being able to handle fear, I don't want any guilt either. So screw all of you who say anything that would make me question my motives or look inside. I, especially, know what I'm hiding inside, and believe you me, you don?t want to know. So cool it please. Lets just get on with killing the Iraqis and stealing their oil and pretend it's in the name of justice. Please, please,....please don't ask me to think, to question, to examine to doubt. Oh no, please don't ask me to doubt. Doubt, that leads straight to..... well you know where. I demand to be certain. And I will be. I can quote a million other cowards like me who agree.
HendrixFan
Diamond Member
- Oct 18, 2001
- 4,646
- 0
- 71
I honestly dont remember Saddam cheering after 9-11, and if he had, I would bet Bush would mention it in every speech. The only thing I remember were fundamentalist Muslims (which Saddam is not) cheering. Alot of that cheering came from Pakistan, but we are cool with that dictator for now, even though Al Queada have fled into his country.
So many mistatements in such a short sentence.
Saddam did praise the attacks. One need not be a fundamentalist to cheer for something you approve of.
Pakistan has also allowed us to openly operate in their country to catch fleeing taliban, which has put significant pressure on that leader.
HendrixFan
Diamond Member
- Oct 18, 2001
- 4,646
- 0
- 71
I said the only thing I remembered were the fundamentalist muslims on TV cheering, I may very well be wrong though.
Pakistan did allow us to use their soil, and their dictator (or President as Bush now calls him) is benefitting tremendously in his arms race with India as a result. Of course, the Taliban have fleed into Pakistan (and the US protected northern Iraq for good measure), so Im not sure which leader is feeling "pressure". Taliban leaders or the Pakistani leader?
Pakistan did allow us to use their soil, and their dictator (or President as Bush now calls him) is benefitting tremendously in his arms race with India as a result. Of course, the Taliban have fleed into Pakistan (and the US protected northern Iraq for good measure), so Im not sure which leader is feeling "pressure". Taliban leaders or the Pakistani leader?
Both are feeling pressure. The president of pakistan(marshareef *sp*) is quite unpopular in pakistan for allowing the US to operate there.
MadRat
Lifer
- Oct 14, 1999
- 11,999
- 307
- 126
Chechnya didn't turn dirty until the Chechnyans started being brutal to the Russian soldiers. Its hard for the Russia people not to be cold when they find movie after movie of Russian soldier tortured then beheaded. Some of the Russians had their fingers systematically blown off as they interogated them. Some were promised freedom then had their heads blown off. It is truly sickening what those bastards in Chechnya have done. If you don't remember it was twenty-five years of Chechnya terrorism that led to the series of war between them and the Russians. I was once sympathetic to the Chechnyans because Russia was killing civilians in retaliation, like when the Russians levelled a village of 21 homes to kill a rebel leader. The problem is that Chechnyan civilians have to be considered combatants when even the women and children are a source of their terrorists. Let them all burn.
What are you trying to say?
"I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend with my life your right to say it...and then I'll kill you for saying it."
Not exactly, but that can be true. If someone wants to make course remarks, one also has to be willing to accept what those remarks result in.
Hypothetical,
If it can be proven that Osama bin Laden gave the orders for the actions of 9/11 would you agree that the death penalty would be appropriate? He committed no overt actions but only said something.
Personally, once it had been proven, I would say terminate him.
Of course, fry him. Wouldn't it be the same as Hitler ordering the extermination of 6,000,000 Jews? He didn't pull any switches but he's definately responsible. A more relevant question would be is the guy down the street from Hitler guilty of anything because he agrees with Hitler.
In my book, the guy down the street is just as guilty. He did not give, but he gives the support which made the order possible.
Why is he just as guilty? Let's say he wasn't down the street. Let's say he was on the other side of the world. Now is he just as guilty?
I think you're just arguing for the sake of arguing and don't actually believe that someone should be killed for saying something you don't agree with.
If you can think and say anything you want what use would things like inquisitions be. Not only must you think and say the right things, you must appear to do so also. The way to do that is to chant death to wrong thinkers. You must not only think right, you must feel certain. Any doubt or questioning and you're done for. Only fear is bravery.
Musharraf. Yes, this is correct, there is an alliance of (6?) Islamic hardliner parties that have been getting a lot of seats, and have support of the military now. I hope they do not overthrow the dictator. I think the dictator Musharraf is still better than islamic fundamentalists. Pakistan is the country to keep an eye on, not Israel, not North Korea. Whatever happens in that country in the next year or so will impact the world, lets hope fundamentalists don't take control of the only Islamic nation that has Nuclear weapons.
His approval of the action, helped make the action possible. He could have done to stop the action, but gave approval instead. In the end people are responsable for their actions or inactions.
What if the Germany population decided they did not support the killing of Jews, would this event in WWII been avoided?
That would depend on context. I also think you be beleive free speech comes without consequence.
I think that if one is in a position of power, or has subordinates under him, that individual should be held responsible for any actions those under him are ordered to take.
Examples...
OBL
Hitler
Manson
You get the idea. Isn't it like this already?
Examples...
OBL
Hitler
Manson
You get the idea. Isn't it like this already?
There is a reason why the US military has plans to confiscate those weapons if the wrong people get power in Pakistan.
Gaard - <<Why is he just as guilty? Let's say he wasn't down the street. Let's say he was on the other side of the world. Now is he just as guilty?>>
charrison - <<His approval of the action, helped make the action possible.>>
I strongly disagree...but just to keep the analogy as close to the SH comparison as posible, let's say the guy on the other side of the world only cheered Hitler after the Holocaust was committed. Now is he just as guilty?
charrison - <<His approval of the action, helped make the action possible.>>
I strongly disagree...but just to keep the analogy as close to the SH comparison as posible, let's say the guy on the other side of the world only cheered Hitler after the Holocaust was committed. Now is he just as guilty?
No, I would not say he is just as guilty, but that agreement and verbal support of a terrorist can be added to the list of charges against him. By itself it is not deserving of a death penalty. In addition to his other numerous crimes, it is just one more strike against him.
Well the person on the otherside also gave support, but has no direct control/influence on the politics of region on the otherside of the world. He guilty of supporting a murderious regime, but had little to no controll over it. Now if he supplied moneys to build gas chambers and such, then the story is once again different.
Ok. I was just trying to find out exactly what charrison meant when he said this...
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Zakath15
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: MadRat
Some of you are missing the point of this whole crusade.
Remember 9/11. It may have not been Saddam behind it, but he cheered them for it. Let him pay with his life.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So he cheered them on?
Doesn't America support free speech?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free speech also comes with responsability.
It sounds like he's saying that he agrees with MadRat.
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Zakath15
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: MadRat
Some of you are missing the point of this whole crusade.
Remember 9/11. It may have not been Saddam behind it, but he cheered them for it. Let him pay with his life.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So he cheered them on?
Doesn't America support free speech?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free speech also comes with responsability.
It sounds like he's saying that he agrees with MadRat.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter