Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 51 (9179 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,197 Year: 5,454/9,624 Month: 479/323 Week: 119/204 Day: 19/16 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   War and Morality. Al Qaeda v USA
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5987
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 151 of 175 (622389)
07-02-2011 9:02 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by anglagard
07-02-2011 5:58 PM


Re: The Woven Image
Pledging allegiance to the Flag of Texas? Sounds like what my father had to go through when his family moved there in the 1920's. It was like they thought the universe revolved around Texas -- he was even taught to capitalize every "T" because it stood for Texas.
I'm sure that the principal had not thought that one up on his own nor on the spur of the moment. Jehovenah's Witnesses have long had problems with the Pledge of Allegiance so I'm sure that policy had long been in place.
Has she since learned that those idiotic devisive words were added by Congress in 1954? Or that they then trashed the National Motto in 1956? Never mind defacing our currency in 1955.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by anglagard, posted 07-02-2011 5:58 PM anglagard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by anglagard, posted 07-02-2011 9:21 PM dwise1 has replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 948 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


(1)
Message 152 of 175 (622392)
07-02-2011 9:21 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by dwise1
07-02-2011 9:02 PM


Re: The Woven Image
dwise1 writes:
Has she since learned that those idiotic devisive words were added by Congress in 1954? Or that they then trashed the National Motto in 1956? Never mind defacing our currency in 1955.
Knew it in elementary school. She is a math major who graduated from JC before graduating HS.
Aren't you a mathematician? If so I'd watch out! She is also an officer in the Secular Student Alliance and the Gay Straight Alliance, and member of the film club (wonder where she got that from?).
Proud father crap aside, as to the policy, yes their hands were tied by court decisions, much to their consternation.
Also, she (and I, as a veteran) objected to any pledge to Texas woven idols even more than to any USA woven idols.
Patriotism, my ass.
Guess I'd best shut up, am derailing.
Edited by anglagard, : No reason given.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by dwise1, posted 07-02-2011 9:02 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by dwise1, posted 07-02-2011 10:24 PM anglagard has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5987
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 153 of 175 (622401)
07-02-2011 10:24 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by anglagard
07-02-2011 9:21 PM


Re: The Woven Image
Software engineer. BS Computer Science, my second of three bachelor degrees, prefaced by German and followed by Applied Math. I made it slightly past the full three semesters of calculus, but the concepts have been able to stick with me and I do like to fiddle with mathematical problems.
I didn't learn that nasty bit of history until well into my adulthood, but then we didn't have access to the Internet until I was past 50 (though I had researched that before then, in the mid-80's). I had missed personally experiencing that transition by a couple years. Though at one opening-day for Little League, a slightly old man, apparently the beneficiary? of Catholic school, shared how the nuns used to "correct" them (yard-stick instruction, I gathered) for adding the new words, "under God", to the Pledge, which makes me strangely appreciative of Catholic sensibility, in this one regard, at least.
She is also an officer in the Secular Student Alliance and the Gay Straight Alliance, and member of the film club
They have those in Texas? From what one escapee from Texas told me, Austin was the only spot of civilisation to be found in the entire state.
As a veteran myself, about to have to retire due to age, I swore solemn oaths to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. And that is where my loyalty still lies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by anglagard, posted 07-02-2011 9:21 PM anglagard has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 154 of 175 (622468)
07-03-2011 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by Modulous
07-01-2011 1:40 PM


Re: European whitewash
I can't speak for Germany being low on national whitewashing
Most Germans seem very contrite about their nations past. It is an ugly stain on their national conscience.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by Modulous, posted 07-01-2011 1:40 PM Modulous has seen this message but not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 155 of 175 (622469)
07-03-2011 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Phat
06-25-2011 5:57 AM


What does Al Qaeda want from us? Why are these people under such enormous social and cultural pressure to fight us?
In a nutshell: Al Qaeda is comprised of religious fanatics who want the entire world to convert not only to Islam, but their extremist brand of Islam. That's the ultimate goal. America is an immediate goal, as America is a representation of all that is wrong in the world.
Fighting America and her allies is for them reminiscent of Saladin fighting the Crusaders for the Holy Land.

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Phat, posted 06-25-2011 5:57 AM Phat has not replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 460 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 156 of 175 (622535)
07-04-2011 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by onifre
07-01-2011 1:32 AM


Re: Perspective
Sorry to keep you waiting but I have been out revelling in fine decadent western style. Gotta keep that Great Satan alive and writhing.
It is still the fault of the US that this is taking place.
What, that the Taliban are killing their countrymen by the score? Or that we have paused long enough to notice that it is happening? You don’t think that they kill each other when we are not there? What about the 30 million Afghans who are living without the basic human rights that we take for granted. Every day, on and on, war or no war.
Look, I get that they want me dead, but so what? Al Qaeda has less members than any militia here in the US.
It took about 2 dozen people to pull off the 9/11 attacks. Maybe 100 more zealots with $millions actually is something to worry about.
13,000 civilians killed to stop such a small force - at the cost of BILLIONS lets not forget - while our economy falls apart, doesn't seem worth it.
As I understand it, most of the money goes back into your economy. Maybe that is the most immoral part.
Wouldn’t it be nice if we could bring them into the world economy. Just give them the money to develop their own resources. The problem is that they would have to start with building schools and teaching people how to do science. Next thing you know they would be listening to music and having opinions.
Shall we pass this problem onto our children as well? How is this shortsightedness different from Chamberlain’s? Do you really think that the world would be a better place if the Taliban were still ruling Afghanistan? If UBL were still alive and running training camps and perfecting his craft unmolested. If Saddam Hussein was still in charge of Iraq. Should we stand idly by while North Korea gets some nukes. You know North Koreans are shorter than South Koreans due to chronic malnutrition.
The US should have gone into Pakistan and Saudi Arabia i It's where the hijackers where from and where Bin Laden was found, respectively.
There are some really smart people at the helm in the free countries of the world. Maybe not the Bush’s and Blairs and Harper’s but all those people behind them. People whose entire lives are dedicated to deciphering satellite photos or rooting through the morass of international politics and the global economy. People who don’t care about who gets elected next but only that we can still hold elections. Maybe they know some things that we don’t see on CNN. While Pakistan and Saudi Arabia both have some dismal human rights records, do you really think that the world would be a more peaceful place had we invaded them?
Afghanistan was one of the worse countries in that area, and since our invasion, has become worse yet.
How so?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by onifre, posted 07-01-2011 1:32 AM onifre has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by Straggler, posted 07-04-2011 4:29 PM Dogmafood has not replied

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 177 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 157 of 175 (622537)
07-04-2011 4:29 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by Dogmafood
07-04-2011 4:11 PM


Re: Perspective
Dogma writes:
Maybe 100 more zealots with $millions actually is something to worry about.
Yep - Those tea-partiers are certainly something to be concerned about.....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by Dogmafood, posted 07-04-2011 4:11 PM Dogmafood has not replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 460 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 158 of 175 (622576)
07-05-2011 7:48 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by Straggler
07-01-2011 7:13 AM


Re: Perspective
The logical conclusion of your combined statements is that the conflict will only be over when Islamic fundamentalism has been eradicated. Do you think this is a realistic goal?
I think that it is a necessary goal. Every bit as realistic as eradicating polio or malaria.
I don’t know of any nation that isn’t desperately trying to end it’s involvement.
The US among them.
How moral is it for them to be there in the first place? What are they trying to achieve and how morally justified is that aim? That is the question you (and they) should be asking.
I think that it is more moral than not being there. More kind than starving them down with sanctions in order to save ourselves the discomfort of boots on the ground. More humane than abandoning all of those innocents to the tyranny of the war lords and religious despots.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Straggler, posted 07-01-2011 7:13 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by Straggler, posted 07-05-2011 8:34 AM Dogmafood has replied

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 177 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 159 of 175 (622585)
07-05-2011 8:34 AM
Reply to: Message 158 by Dogmafood
07-05-2011 7:48 AM


Re: Perspective
Dogma writes:
Straggler writes:
The logical conclusion of your combined statements is that the conflict will only be over when Islamic fundamentalism has been eradicated. Do you think this is a realistic goal?
I think that it is a necessary goal.
Well if that is the actual aim we should hardly be surprised that Islamic fundamentalists see it as an us or them fight to the end. No wonder they are willing to blow themselves up. This attitude is an absolute recipe for terrorism.
Dogma writes:
Straggler writes:
How moral is it for them to be there in the first place? What are they trying to achieve and how morally justified is that aim? That is the question you (and they) should be asking.
I think that it is more moral than not being there. More kind than starving them down with sanctions in order to save ourselves the discomfort of boots on the ground.
"Ourselves"....? Would you go there to fight? Would you send your kids there to fight?
Dogma writes:
More humane than abandoning all of those innocents to the tyranny of the war lords and religious despots.
If the people:
A) Vote in an Islamic fundamentalist regime
B) Tell us they don't want us in their country
Would you consider that good enough cause to stop interfering?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Dogmafood, posted 07-05-2011 7:48 AM Dogmafood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by Dogmafood, posted 07-05-2011 9:31 AM Straggler has replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1136 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 160 of 175 (622592)
07-05-2011 8:53 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by dronestar
07-01-2011 9:43 AM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
Hmm, . . . "unflattering accounts"? Besides the slavery example, is that one of the best examples you can remember of non-white-washed schooling? Doesn't the British empire in the 1700s and 1800s have a lot of imperial history that was quite barbaric and cruel and filled with atrocities. Since I am not very familiar with British history (1000 years of!!!), I will not argue this point.
The British Empire wasn't really covered in my school history course at all (course contents differs depending on examination board, school and time of education - explaining the different answers from other Brits). Time of education's probably the most significant there, since the national curriculum is like the health service. It's reformed every couple of years without ever waiting to see the effects of the previous reforms by governments eager to be seen to be doing something.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by dronestar, posted 07-01-2011 9:43 AM dronestar has not replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 460 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 161 of 175 (622594)
07-05-2011 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 159 by Straggler
07-05-2011 8:34 AM


Re: Perspective
Well if that is the actual aim we should hardly be surprised that Islamic fundamentalists see it as an us or them fight to the end. No wonder they are willing to blow themselves up. This attitude is an absolute recipe for terrorism.
Yeah, it sucks Straggler, I agree. So we should just give up? Let them carry on? We are right and they are wrong. I suppose we can wait until they bring the war to us but I would rather not.
"Ourselves"....? Would you go there to fight? Would you send your kids there to fight?
That is a good question. I think that I might if my situation were different. I am not much of killer though. I would certainly go build a bridge or school. If my children wanted to go I would support that decision.
If the people:
A) Vote in an Islamic fundamentalist regime
B) Tell us they don't want us in their country
Would you consider that good enough cause to stop interfering?
Do people vote in Islamic fundamentalist regimes? If your neighbour is beating his wife and she says, through bleeding lips, that it is OK, would you look away? When the brain washed members of a cult say that it is OK for them to kill themselves and their children is that enough cause to not interfere?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by Straggler, posted 07-05-2011 8:34 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Straggler, posted 07-05-2011 12:41 PM Dogmafood has replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1426
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 162 of 175 (622612)
07-05-2011 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by anglagard
07-02-2011 1:53 AM


Re: Soft Targets vs Terrorism
anglagard writes:
Learn some history, a lot of mine is oral and firsthand.
Ok, your email was full of emotion. Apparently you have some family members with "experience", therefore this topic MAY be ultra personal to you. Let us try to adopt a non-personal attitude and consider just the facts, ok?
anglagard writes:
Of course not, as I am more stupid than Palin according to you.
Well, it is NOT stupid to be wrong. However, it IS stupid to be willfully wrong. (IMO, as Palin IS profoundly mentally retarded, I am doubtful you are "stupider".)
Your reply did not specifically address my five items. Try again, for EACH item, state agree or disagree and we'll go on from there:
1. america intercepted messages from Japan to Russia indicating JAPAN WANTED to SURRENDER.
2. Japan had already considered surrendering if america would just allow Japan's Emperor to keep his seat on the throne. america said no, but AFTER bombing Negasaki and Hiroshima, america gave into Japan's request.
3. america knew japan would surrender unconditionally when Japan found out that Russia would join the fight. So, america hastened the two bombings BEFORE Japan COULD surrender for an american show of power toward Russia.
4. if ANY regards towards human life was any factor at all, america could have detonated the first bomb over water as a deterent/warning.
5. The second, even more unnecessary, bomb was completely and utterly criminal. All communication was broken in Japan and america gave no time for the Japanese to assess the first bomb's damage before detonating the second.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by anglagard, posted 07-02-2011 1:53 AM anglagard has not replied

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 177 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 163 of 175 (622615)
07-05-2011 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by Dogmafood
07-05-2011 9:31 AM


Re: Perspective
Straggler writes:
The logical conclusion of your combined statements is that the conflict will only be over when Islamic fundamentalism has been eradicated. Do you think this is a realistic goal?
Dogma writes:
I think that it is a necessary goal.
Straggler writes:
Well if that is the actual aim we should hardly be surprised that Islamic fundamentalists see it as an us or them fight to the end. No wonder they are willing to blow themselves up. This attitude is an absolute recipe for terrorism.
Dogma writes:
Yeah, it sucks Straggler, I agree. So we should just give up? Let them carry on? We are right and they are wrong. I suppose we can wait until they bring the war to us but I would rather not.
Listen to yourself!!! They equally believe that they are right and you are wrong. They equally feel that it is their right to take the fight to the West before we wipe out their culture in exactly the way you are advocating that we should. Your approach is a recipe for unending conflict with both sides equally convinced of their own moral righteousness.
Something has to give.
Dogma writes:
That is a good question. I think that I might if my situation were different. I am not much of killer though. I would certainly go build a bridge or school. If my children wanted to go I would support that decision.
I have worked for a volunteer aid agency and would volunteer again in a country that wanted volunteers for such projects. But that is hardly comparable to occupying another country and plundering it's resources in the name of freedom is it?
Dogma writes:
Do people vote in Islamic fundamentalist regimes?
The aim (the official one - not your aim of wiping out Islamic fundamentalists) in Afghanistan and Iraq is for an elected government. It is quite possible that a rather extreme Islamic and anti-Western government could be voted in.
What do you suggest we do at that point? More pre-emptive strikes and regime change until the people have the sense to vote in a government you approve of?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by Dogmafood, posted 07-05-2011 9:31 AM Dogmafood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by Dogmafood, posted 07-06-2011 11:33 AM Straggler has replied

  
Dogmafood
Member (Idle past 460 days)
Posts: 1815
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 164 of 175 (622767)
07-06-2011 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by Straggler
07-05-2011 12:41 PM


Re: Perspective
Your approach is a recipe for unending conflict with both sides equally convinced of their own moral righteousness.
Something has to give.
Yes. Something does have to give. Should we change our opinion on universal human rights? Shall we not champion them for the oppressed? Do you really think that Islamic fundamentalists have a viable approach to the world that should be tolerated in the name of religious freedom? There is a big difference between saying that you have to behave like this and saying that you cannot behave like that.
Is there ever a point when we should pick up our guns and make a stand for what we believe? The conflict is there and we ignore it at our children’s peril. What is your real world alternative? Appeasement? Peace in our time?
But that is hardly comparable to occupying another country and plundering it's resources in the name of freedom is it?
I do not think that is what is happening in Afghanistan. Do you have some evidence to the contrary?
The aim (the official one - not your aim of wiping out Islamic fundamentalists) in Afghanistan and Iraq is for an elected government. It is quite possible that a rather extreme Islamic and anti-Western government could be voted in.
What do you suggest we do at that point? More pre-emptive strikes and regime change until the people have the sense to vote in a government you approve of?
I guess it boils down to if we believe in universal human rights all the time and for everyone or only when it is easy to do so. What do we do with criminals who commit another crime?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Straggler, posted 07-05-2011 12:41 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by Straggler, posted 07-06-2011 12:18 PM Dogmafood has not replied

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 177 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 165 of 175 (622776)
07-06-2011 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by Dogmafood
07-06-2011 11:33 AM


Policing The World?
I still have no idea who you think it is that should be policing the world in the way that your position demands? Which body has the moral right, the necessary wisdom, the lack of self interest and the practical resources to go round overthrowing (even if democratically elected) ALL of the regimes that don’t adhere to the standard of human rights that you and I can agree would be ideal?
For example if the US doesn’t meet these standards (and many would say that it doesn’t — Guantanamo, waterboarding, abu ghraib etc. etc. etc. etc.) are we (who?) going to inflict regime change on the US government for human rights abuses?
Dogma writes:
I guess it boils down to if we believe in universal human rights all the time and for everyone or only when it is easy to do so.
There are brutal dictatorial regimes all over the world. Yet we seem disproportionately interested in changing the regimes in the ones that just so happen to be in the oil rich Middle East. The rest of them we seem more than happy to sell arms to.
And let’s not forget that many of those who we now oppose were once the people we were selling weapons to as well.
Your idealism is lovely. But not really backed up by the reality of the situation as it is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Dogmafood, posted 07-06-2011 11:33 AM Dogmafood has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024