Fascinating
- Thread starter vraiblonde
- Start date
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Why do you do this?
We face religious fundamentalists whose way of life is DYING due to Western influence. They see us as the enemy, the Great Satan and they can either see their world die or they can fight back.
Read the numerous fatwahs. Read their words, not mine.
You know damn well what it was.PsyOps said:
We face religious fundamentalists whose way of life is DYING due to Western influence. They see us as the enemy, the Great Satan and they can either see their world die or they can fight back.
Read the numerous fatwahs. Read their words, not mine.
So how is that our fault and what can we do about it?Larry Gude said:
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Of course it's...
We had nothing coming to us. Our enemy chose to attack us, to declare war on us, same as the Japanese, same as the Germans. Japans reasons were that we were interfering with their ambitions. Same with Germany. Did we all go to different schools? 'Reason' and 'invited' are two different things where I come from. How do you intend to ever address a problem if the word 'reason' makes you think you deserved it?
The reason you got in a car crash is because the other guy hit you. Does that mean you deserved it? The reason the burgler stole your TV is because you had one. Does that make you think you deserved to be robbed?
...it's rediculous! Does that make them any less sincere and devout in their cause? Do you doubt, for a second, that the pilots of 9/11 were reciting 'God is great' over and over and over as they dealt what they saw as a heavy blow to their enemy? You seem to want to take ownership over our enemies motivation. They are rediculous, therefore, that CAN'T be their motivation, thus, we must...what? Tell them what to think? Pretend their reasons are not real?
Never be an explanation? Are you kidding? How about war? That's what they think it is. Oh, right, their reasons don't count because they're rediculous. Why did 40,000,000 die in WWII? Some rational reason?
We had nothing coming to us. Our enemy chose to attack us, to declare war on us, same as the Japanese, same as the Germans. Japans reasons were that we were interfering with their ambitions. Same with Germany. Did we all go to different schools? 'Reason' and 'invited' are two different things where I come from. How do you intend to ever address a problem if the word 'reason' makes you think you deserved it?
The reason you got in a car crash is because the other guy hit you. Does that mean you deserved it? The reason the burgler stole your TV is because you had one. Does that make you think you deserved to be robbed?
Oh, good. I'm talking to the man that represents all the American people. The reason? There's that word again. Why, golly, does that mean Americans are rediculous? By your logic, I should reject what the American people say is their reason and come up with another one. How about 'Americans don't understand why 9/11 happened and they want a real simple one so they don't have to think and Rudy gives them the simplest; He lived through 9/11 therefore he knows our enemies motivation and they don't. You do the thinking, Rudy!
Larry Gude
Strung Out
I could care less...
They have their reasons and no one seems to want to believe them.
...if it's our 'fault' in their eyes. They, in my opinion, are a bunch of psychopaths stuck in the year 700 ad. I could give a #### what they think. I don't wanna live their way. If that means us or them, as they say it does, then we should blow Mecca and Medina off the face of the Earth. They'd do it to us. They tried to do it to us. 9/11 was intended to cause massive economic chaos in the US. Why do we keep playing around with these people?vraiblonde said:
They have their reasons and no one seems to want to believe them.
PsyOps
Pixelated
I understand your point. I'm more concerned about how your point will misinterpreted as justifying their thinking.Larry Gude said:
We, Americans, also have a "way of life" that is equally important and thriving in this world. Muslims have been migrating to the west because it is a more attractive "way of life" than what Muslim countries have to offer. Perhaps one of the reasons why their way of life is DYING is because of their methods of violence. They need to figure out a way to make "their way of life" more attractive and influencial to their own or it will continue to die.
Given that, my question is: Can't we all just get along? Or do we have to yield to their threats? Here is another fact Larry that you are leaving out of this. We are now at war. Regardless of how we got here, we are here. Your theory (as right as it may be) only gives credibility that they are right in attacking us and we were wrong in being in their “holy land”. We may not be able to justify to the radical Islamists why we are in their country, even though the local host governments don’t have a problem with it; but there is nothing that can justify their actions in butchering thousands of innocents.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Fascinating...
...how you interpret words. You seem to completely understand Bin Ladens reasons, and the 19 on 9/11 and the people of the '93 attempts and the Cole attack and the embassies and the Kohbar Towers and the suicide bombers in Iraq yet, somehow, you fear that the word 'reason' means 'right' or 'correct' or 'just' or 'reasonable' or 'proper'.
Just fascinating.
PsyOps said:It gives credence to their cause and states that “Well, if we just didn’t happen to be in their ‘holy land’ we wouldn’t have been attacked”. Should one man (the leader of a corrupt and evil cause) dictate where we position our military? The US government should yield to the likes of Bin Laden, a rogue without a country, in his best interest and not global interest? Did Bin Laden become the global spokesperson for global causes and all that stands against him get to meet his wrath?
Were we in Saudi Arabia unjustly? If so, was it unjust according Bin Laden? Who in the world is dictating our global policy here Larry?
You know, if only evil Europeans hadn't brutally stolen this land from the native "indians" there wouldn't be such a evil America to have their military desicrating the mideast today.
...how you interpret words. You seem to completely understand Bin Ladens reasons, and the 19 on 9/11 and the people of the '93 attempts and the Cole attack and the embassies and the Kohbar Towers and the suicide bombers in Iraq yet, somehow, you fear that the word 'reason' means 'right' or 'correct' or 'just' or 'reasonable' or 'proper'.
Just fascinating.
PsyOps
Pixelated
As I said, I understand your point. Reason = explanation. Not Reason = justification. As I said, I am concerned about the hardline anti-war leftists that will take what you write as a: "See, even folks from the right agree we were wrong".Larry Gude said:
I don't even stretch this as to say what the hijackers did on 911 was Reason = explanation. There is no explanation for what they did.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Look...
...if I say 'red' and someone hears 'green' there isn't a whole lot I can do about that but reiterate that I said 'red'. If you react and start gesticulating up and down questioning whether I said 'green' or not who, exactly, is misrepresenting?
Rudy acted like a cheap, greasy politician in response to Paul stating FACT over a very huge issue and the lemmings, who are all, obviously, scared to death that they don't really understand what we're doing and why latched onto Rudy like the Messiah. They heard Paul say 'reason'. They heard Rudy say 'invited'. They cheered. For what? Hell if they know.
I guess the next topic should be the state of education in this country; the reasons we act like lemmings.
PsyOps said:
...if I say 'red' and someone hears 'green' there isn't a whole lot I can do about that but reiterate that I said 'red'. If you react and start gesticulating up and down questioning whether I said 'green' or not who, exactly, is misrepresenting?
Rudy acted like a cheap, greasy politician in response to Paul stating FACT over a very huge issue and the lemmings, who are all, obviously, scared to death that they don't really understand what we're doing and why latched onto Rudy like the Messiah. They heard Paul say 'reason'. They heard Rudy say 'invited'. They cheered. For what? Hell if they know.
I guess the next topic should be the state of education in this country; the reasons we act like lemmings.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
How about door #3?
...we kill them? Where in the hell did I, of all people, ever leave out that we're at war? I've argued with you, endlessly, that the problem we have is our CIC telling us, over and over, that we are at war and yet he treats it as some sort of police matter and, in the case of bad guy #1, like some forgotten nuisance.PsyOps said:
Larry Gude
Strung Out
It's not...
They have 100% credibility with most Muslims world wide.
If you invite me over to your house and you say it's fine to bring beer and I bring beer yet your kids hate beer and think it's evil, but it's still your house and your rules and one of your kids just can't take it and eggs my house because I brought beer over and you throw him out and then he throws a brick through my window and flattens my tires and threatens more because I destroyed his happy home, it's not a theory. It's WHY he is doing what he is doing.
He has already defied you as father. He has crossed a line attacking me.
You won't do anything about it because you don't want to upset the rest of your kids and I want to get along with you because you provide something I really want, be it friendship, a product, whatever.
That is what this boils down to. Your son is out to get me. You don't want me to kill him or have him arrested. I value our relationship enough to go along. My house hasn't been egged, my property has been left alone for quite some time.
...a theory; it is their own words.PsyOps said:
They have 100% credibility with most Muslims world wide.
If you invite me over to your house and you say it's fine to bring beer and I bring beer yet your kids hate beer and think it's evil, but it's still your house and your rules and one of your kids just can't take it and eggs my house because I brought beer over and you throw him out and then he throws a brick through my window and flattens my tires and threatens more because I destroyed his happy home, it's not a theory. It's WHY he is doing what he is doing.
He has already defied you as father. He has crossed a line attacking me.
You won't do anything about it because you don't want to upset the rest of your kids and I want to get along with you because you provide something I really want, be it friendship, a product, whatever.
That is what this boils down to. Your son is out to get me. You don't want me to kill him or have him arrested. I value our relationship enough to go along. My house hasn't been egged, my property has been left alone for quite some time.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Look...
...it doesn't matter what the leftists say so no one should cater to them, their fears, their motivations. They are a given. People like you and St. Rudy blowing this thing up are the ones catering. Had Rudy simply said "Now, Ron, given their reasons, what should we do about it? and Paul is on the spot.
Instead, Rudy blows it up; "How dare you imply this is our fault! Harumph! Harumph!" Now, there is this rift that didn't exist because people are actually afraid of how other people, who could care less about facts in the first place, interpret a word.
Smooth move, Rudy.
PsyOps said:
...it doesn't matter what the leftists say so no one should cater to them, their fears, their motivations. They are a given. People like you and St. Rudy blowing this thing up are the ones catering. Had Rudy simply said "Now, Ron, given their reasons, what should we do about it? and Paul is on the spot.
Instead, Rudy blows it up; "How dare you imply this is our fault! Harumph! Harumph!" Now, there is this rift that didn't exist because people are actually afraid of how other people, who could care less about facts in the first place, interpret a word.
Smooth move, Rudy.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
It's not in our national interest to leave the region...
We set a timetable to move from the interior, say, start in 6 months, to be gone in 12. We move to massive bases in Saudi and Kuwait and Iraq's border and ports and airports and kill Iranians and Syrians and Saudi's and all others trying to get into Iraq to cause trouble.
Let Iraqi work it out inside. They have the man power. They have to find their way and their will. We can't give them the way and we sure can't provide them with the will if we're doing the policing.
We make a big, constant show that we are staying in the region BECAUSE of insurgents and that we need to stand by.
Our presence and Muslims fighting Muslims in Iraq destroys OBL's position. He is then a failure, a loser and wrong.
Inshallah.
...it is in our national interest to let the Iraqi's have their civil war so they can decide who they are going to be.vraiblonde said:
We set a timetable to move from the interior, say, start in 6 months, to be gone in 12. We move to massive bases in Saudi and Kuwait and Iraq's border and ports and airports and kill Iranians and Syrians and Saudi's and all others trying to get into Iraq to cause trouble.
Let Iraqi work it out inside. They have the man power. They have to find their way and their will. We can't give them the way and we sure can't provide them with the will if we're doing the policing.
We make a big, constant show that we are staying in the region BECAUSE of insurgents and that we need to stand by.
Our presence and Muslims fighting Muslims in Iraq destroys OBL's position. He is then a failure, a loser and wrong.
Inshallah.
I heard Ron Paul justifying the 9-11 attacks as well. Sorry. Ya'll can spin for your boy, but I sat right there and watched it.Nucklesack said:
His basic jist was that if we weren't over there interfering in the Middle East, terrorists wouldn't attack us. This plays right into his nonintervention, isolationist views that he is very clear about.
So we started it by getting in their business and defiling their soil with our presence. Therefore we had it coming.
He even specifically mentioned Iraq, which he would like us to abandon, and said that we'd been bombing them for 10 years (no wonder they're pissed). But the fact of the matter is that Saddam invaded another country, the UN (led by the Great Satan) kicked his butt back to his own turf, then HE refused to comply with the terms of cease-fire. So WHO'S fault is it that the US is at war with Iraq? Ron Paul says it's our fault and we should butt out.
I don't think he could have been any clearer.
Wrong. He was giving Osama bin Laden's "explanation" on why we were attacked.Nucklesack said:
The TRUE explanation is that the Islamic fundies have hated the US for as long as I can remember, and anything else is just a handy excuse. The fact is that we do not have military bases in any country where we have not been invited. And OBL doesn't have a thing to say about it, until he gets his own country and can refuse to let us set up shop there.
Why didn't he take out the Brits? Why not the Australians? You'd think he'd REALLY hate China. Shoot, the Netherlands is the epitome of debauchery - they make us look like a bunch of Puritans - yet OBL didn't seem inclined to mess with them.
Why not?
Larry Gude
Strung Out
So...
...to you the word 'reason' means 'just' or, in Rudy's case 'invite'?
I agree Paul is saying this would not have happened if we ascribed to a non intervention foreign policy. I agree that there is an argument to be made that had we never set one boot in the Middle East, ever, that people like OBL would still find a reason to invade or attack non believers. I do not, however, agree that Ron Paul said OBL was just in attacking us or right or proper.
Paul is illustrating, or trying to, that the REASON the founders advocated non intervention is precisely because it can become a rather sticky situation.
Had W killed OBL long ago and had he chosen to actually fight in Iraq instead of play cop we might not be having this argument. Of course, W's argument is that is must be, by necessity, messy, which, of course, goes right back to the Founders, and Pauls argument; avoid the messy.
Put another way, if we knew then this is where we'd be, W would have never gotten the authorization. The isolation argument is based on the likelihood of these type things not turning out as intended.
vraiblonde said:
...to you the word 'reason' means 'just' or, in Rudy's case 'invite'?
I agree Paul is saying this would not have happened if we ascribed to a non intervention foreign policy. I agree that there is an argument to be made that had we never set one boot in the Middle East, ever, that people like OBL would still find a reason to invade or attack non believers. I do not, however, agree that Ron Paul said OBL was just in attacking us or right or proper.
Paul is illustrating, or trying to, that the REASON the founders advocated non intervention is precisely because it can become a rather sticky situation.
Had W killed OBL long ago and had he chosen to actually fight in Iraq instead of play cop we might not be having this argument. Of course, W's argument is that is must be, by necessity, messy, which, of course, goes right back to the Founders, and Pauls argument; avoid the messy.
Put another way, if we knew then this is where we'd be, W would have never gotten the authorization. The isolation argument is based on the likelihood of these type things not turning out as intended.
Of course he did. If he'd let that go, I'd have wondered if he was asleep.Nucklesack said:
Welcome to politics, Ron Paul. Enjoy your stay.
Then why would he even bring it up?Larry Gude said:
