Is the media hurting the war?

Am I missing something? What is wrong with undermining an unjust war? Would your friend have complained if the "media" had been undermining, say, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1980?

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

No. What scenarios are you talking about? The so-called "ticking bomb scenario" which, in the entire history of torture, has never occurred?

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

Well, that's exactly the problem with having this sort of conversation with your friend. The war in Iraq is, in many respects, beside the important point, which is that Americans are no smarter nor more moral than anyone else in the world, and that Americans are just as likely to be manipulated by those in power to support nefarious ends.

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

No, because then it would be a label that would be automatically slapped on people who are to be tortured. We know that this will happen because torture that is actually occurring right now is already being justified by this very claim of imminent threat.If people decided that preventing the murder of Santa Claus is justification for torture, then Guantanamo Bay and the prisons of Iran and North Korea would be filled with people suddenly accused of attempted santacide.

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

I don't understand the problem. How is this different from any other time one evaluates and weighs risks in one's life? When I was in Africa, I was worried about the health risks that we knew were associated with the malaria prophylaxis that we were using. But I was more worried about the actual risks of actually getting malaria.What we do is take the risks that maybe, perhaps, it is possible that it just might happen that one day, somewhere, there might be a suspect who knows about a ticking bomb and will divulge the information under torture even though such a thing has never yet happened in real life, and weigh it against the risks of people using a legal loophole to torture people as a means of terrorizing a subject populace which we know is actually occurring right this very minute in a great many different nations.To me, this is obvious. One assumes risks that we know are very small in order to mitigate against risks that we know are great. Where in your life do you purposely put yourself at risk of a known, identifiable danger in order to protect yourself from a theoretical possibility that you read in a badly written spy novel? Why should we as a society put ourselves at risk from a common, existing danger in order to protect ourselves from cheap screen writers' fictitious fantasies?Edited by Chiroptera, : tags

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

Thanks. I wasn't sure if I stated my opinion very clearly or not. McCain does say it a bit more eloquently than I did (although he has the advantage of being a professional politician, heh).Getting back to the OP: What examples does this clown your friend have in mind?Edited by Chiroptera, : unspellcheckable grammar typo

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

One more point: This is, of course, ridiculous. There is a lot of myths about exactly what threat Germany and Japan posed to the U.S., and exactly which American interests these two countries would have threatened. (But an actual invasion of North America was not one of these threats.)Nonetheless, your retarded cousin friend does have a point. I just watched Grave of the Fireflies last night, a Japanese animated movie about the end of WWII from the viewpoint of a couple of Japanese orphans. There were two scenes showing U.S. bombers dropping incendiary devices on civilian residential areas (and one scene where a U.S. fighter is strafing civilians). It is known that the Allies adopted a policy of targeting civilians in order to weaken their resolve to carry on their war effort.Now it is possible that if the U.S. media had a policy of accurately reporting the results of these terror campaigns (and presenting the nationals of these countries as human beings instead of inhuman beasts), the public may have developed an aversion to these policies and forced their leaders to cancel them. In that case, it might have been possible that the civilians in these countries would not have been as weary of the war, and perhaps the invasions of these countries would have been a bit harder to undertake.But in a democracy, isn't it up to the electorate to weigh the risks and benefits of proposed policy decisions to determine what the proper policies should be? If our leaders can only carry out their policies by withholding information from the electorate, isn't that against the very principles of democracy?- Even if this were true, what does it mean? That there are limits to the sacrifices that people are willing to make? That your pet lemming friend is so smart that he can determine what sacrifices people should be required to make?Your friend is an ass. Like most conservatives, your friend hates the very idea of democracy. Like most conservatives, he knows what is right and what is wrong, and he is willing to do whatever it takes to enact his ideology into policy, even it means lying to the voters, even if it means writing the rules to keep a minority in power, even if it means jailing and torturing dissidents.

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

Actually, we didn't. We were fighting against fascism, remember?

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

Well, then your friend is betraying his anti-democratic fascist beliefs. It is up to the people to decide whether or not a particular war, or even war in general, is worth fighting or worth continuing. F*** it! If the electorate, after carefully weighing the facts of the matter and engaging in informed debate, decide that it is better allow the Taliban to come into the U.S. and rule than it is to risk life and limb, then that is their decision! If your friend thinks that it is so important to kill people and risk being killed to prevent this, then it is up to him to go into the hills and fight.

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

This seems strangely relevant:

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

Maybe. But then it becomes problematic when a "watchdog" agency is set up to watch out for and punish "abuses" of freedom of press.For example, many countries routinely use their libel laws to harass and punish journalists who displease those in power. Even a couple of Western European countries have been known to try this.Besides, of "yellow journalism" were to be punished, I wonder how long Fox News would remain on air?Added by edit:Heh. Or those clowns who were trying to "Swiftboat" Kerry in the last election.But I've always felt that the only remedy for the abuse of free speech is to make use of free speech yourself.Edited by Chiroptera, : No reason given.

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

Hi, nem.I was mostly commenting on what I thought was initial point: However, I might have misinterpreted what you said, as you now say: So, if by "steep penalties" you meant exposure and possible loss of credibility thereafter, then I have no problem with what you say. In fact, as you point out, we already have organizations dedicated to that task. (I already have FAIR's website bookmarked.)

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

Tal claims that he works in military intelligence.I'll let you read his previous posts and wonder whether someone in intelligence is really allowed to log onto anonymous message boards and brag about all this intelligence he has access to, which would knock all our socks off if only he could divulge it.

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

You want to know how to fix that? Go to a library. After one afternoon, you will know far more about this subject (or any other) than Tal.

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger

Good question. I've always found it strange that someone in military intelligence would be unaware of basic information that anyone with a library card can get a hold of.

---

Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger