[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>Scott H:
True, but most specially in the minds of the deranged and fanatical. Most people are capable of evaluating the reality of good and evil human intents, ideas, thoughts, words and deeds as a continuous spectrum. It is those who act out their fantasies and illusions of absolutism who are usually the maniacs who do the worst things and start all the trouble.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Which is why we need to stop bin Laden and people like him.
So, uh, are we saying that we should respect terrorists because we have had blood on our hands too? We are ashamed of our mistakes and sins.
Are we saying that our friends and families deserved to be killed in NYC, DC and PA? Is this karma or justice to us, them? Killing is wrong, we know that.
Are we going to sit on our high horse and pretend we're better than others by pointing this out to everyone? Acting like a goddamn sage by stating the obvious doesn't make someone a better person or others less so.
Is this just about tit for tat? Who started it? Who cares? Does anyone really know any more? Let's be better people by first leaving the juvenile motives and rationales behind.
I just don't understand any of this. On one hand people here are posting comments about our past or others' past. We're lost in semantics about what defines a terrorist. Who really gives a flying **** what you call these idiots, be it Tim McVeigh, the troops at Mai Lai, Mohammed Atta, the Israeli army, whoever. I'll call them "my first born" but it doesn't change anything because the meaning is the same and the act is still terrible.
So, uh, did we deserve this? Is that what people are suggesting? Are we no better? Are you doing anything about it other than posting in inane computer forums, stamping your feet? I don't understand what's the problem here, where the disconnect is.
[quote]So, uh, are we saying that we should respect terrorists because we have had blood on our hands too? We are ashamed of our mistakes and sins.<hr></blockquote>
I don't know if that is what other people want to say. What I wanted to say, what I said, when I started this topic was that I respect them for their willingness to die for their cause.
I never said their cause was right.
I never said I respect them for killing.
I never said you had it coming to you.
I did point out that as much as you feel they're evil for a reason, they have their reasons for thinking you're evil. It does not help dismissing those reasons as wrong.
I did point out that they have had their fair share of victims too, innocent victims.
I did point out that America's getting involved in situations, taking sides, is indirectly responsible for the attacks on your country.
<strong>I don't know if that is what other people want to say. What I wanted to say, what I said, when I started this topic was that I respect them for their willingness to die for their cause.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And that's no reason to respect someone. There's a lot of people willing do die for their cause. So you may have to spread your respect rather thin. Why not respect people for their cause rather than their willingness to die for it.
I would imagine that respecting someone for their cause is more difficult for you. In that case you?d have to make a judgment about the cause. That is if it is ?right? or ?wrong?. Rather than do that you wimp out and just respect everyone willing to die for their cause.
I have much more respect for people willing to LIVE for their cause using non-violent methods. But when someone perpetrates an act of gross human cruelty on the 9/11 scale, you must react in the only language they comprehend: violence. Getting to bin Laden isn't entirely about bringing him to justice, but to show others with similar plots up their sleeves that we're not going to take it anymore.
<strong>I have much more respect for people willing to LIVE for their cause using non-violent methods. But when someone perpetrates an act of gross human cruelty on the 9/11 scale, you must react in the only language they comprehend: violence. Getting to bin Laden isn't entirely about bringing him to justice, but to show others with similar plots up their sleeves that we're not going to take it anymore.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hear hear!! That is what I have been trying to say all along. Just becuase someone is willing ot die for their cause does not make their willingness to die commendable. For all you know they could be psychopathic. Is that commendable? Hardly. And I also agree, the measure of retribution we are willing to dole out will be equally in proportion to how many terrorists will think twice before trying to stage an attack on the US again. If it means their extinction for the attack, they will not do it. If it means a slap on the wrist, we stand no chance of having peace.
Comments
Last I check what we did was get involved with one side of an already existing conflict.
I never claimed the stuff wasn't bad, but I fail to see how all that stuff is the direct result of U.S. involvement.
Jeffrey Dahmer was a psycho whether or not Frigidaire gave him a free freezer or Ginsu gave him a set of really nice knives.
<strong>Scott H:
True, but most specially in the minds of the deranged and fanatical. Most people are capable of evaluating the reality of good and evil human intents, ideas, thoughts, words and deeds as a continuous spectrum. It is those who act out their fantasies and illusions of absolutism who are usually the maniacs who do the worst things and start all the trouble.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Which is why we need to stop bin Laden and people like him.
<strong>What wars did we *start* in South/Central America??
Last I check what we did was get involved with one side of an already existing conflict.
I never claimed the stuff wasn't bad, but I fail to see how all that stuff is the direct result of U.S. involvement.
Jeffrey Dahmer was a psycho whether or not Frigidaire gave him a free freezer or Ginsu gave him a set of really nice knives.</strong><hr></blockquote>
and also last I checked a great many were funded by the Soviet Union. But heck? The US must be to blame for that too somehow.
Are we saying that our friends and families deserved to be killed in NYC, DC and PA? Is this karma or justice to us, them? Killing is wrong, we know that.
Are we going to sit on our high horse and pretend we're better than others by pointing this out to everyone? Acting like a goddamn sage by stating the obvious doesn't make someone a better person or others less so.
Is this just about tit for tat? Who started it? Who cares? Does anyone really know any more? Let's be better people by first leaving the juvenile motives and rationales behind.
I just don't understand any of this. On one hand people here are posting comments about our past or others' past. We're lost in semantics about what defines a terrorist. Who really gives a flying **** what you call these idiots, be it Tim McVeigh, the troops at Mai Lai, Mohammed Atta, the Israeli army, whoever. I'll call them "my first born" but it doesn't change anything because the meaning is the same and the act is still terrible.
So, uh, did we deserve this? Is that what people are suggesting? Are we no better? Are you doing anything about it other than posting in inane computer forums, stamping your feet? I don't understand what's the problem here, where the disconnect is.
Here's summary of my position on the whole thing:
Bad thing happened.
Make sure it no happen again.
I like people, try to do good.
Want to be friends in future.
(Tough, I know.)
Nothing makes sense here.
I don't know if that is what other people want to say. What I wanted to say, what I said, when I started this topic was that I respect them for their willingness to die for their cause.
I never said their cause was right.
I never said I respect them for killing.
I never said you had it coming to you.
I did point out that as much as you feel they're evil for a reason, they have their reasons for thinking you're evil. It does not help dismissing those reasons as wrong.
I did point out that they have had their fair share of victims too, innocent victims.
I did point out that America's getting involved in situations, taking sides, is indirectly responsible for the attacks on your country.
And I stand by that.
<strong>I don't know if that is what other people want to say. What I wanted to say, what I said, when I started this topic was that I respect them for their willingness to die for their cause.</strong><hr></blockquote>
And that's no reason to respect someone. There's a lot of people willing do die for their cause. So you may have to spread your respect rather thin. Why not respect people for their cause rather than their willingness to die for it.
I would imagine that respecting someone for their cause is more difficult for you. In that case you?d have to make a judgment about the cause. That is if it is ?right? or ?wrong?. Rather than do that you wimp out and just respect everyone willing to die for their cause.
<strong>I have much more respect for people willing to LIVE for their cause using non-violent methods. But when someone perpetrates an act of gross human cruelty on the 9/11 scale, you must react in the only language they comprehend: violence. Getting to bin Laden isn't entirely about bringing him to justice, but to show others with similar plots up their sleeves that we're not going to take it anymore.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hear hear!! That is what I have been trying to say all along. Just becuase someone is willing ot die for their cause does not make their willingness to die commendable. For all you know they could be psychopathic. Is that commendable? Hardly. And I also agree, the measure of retribution we are willing to dole out will be equally in proportion to how many terrorists will think twice before trying to stage an attack on the US again. If it means their extinction for the attack, they will not do it. If it means a slap on the wrist, we stand no chance of having peace.