Terrorism

[Goldy]

Oh, here it is: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachus..._charlieticket/  I guess they're testing it first on just one line, the one to the airport, which I've never even used. This is sort of sad:

For commuters using the new CharlieTickets yesterday, the biggest challenge appeared to be how to properly place the tickets in the new fare gates. Almost every time, customer service agents had to remind commuters to turn their tickets around and slide the end with the arrow into the slot.

That does not reflect the average intelligence of Bostonians!... Just the average intelligence of the human race. :p

[LowCrawler]

Hundreds of thousands of people who are infinitely more innocent die every day in Africa, alone.  Such situations help one get some perspective on matters; they tend to put 9/11 in its place.

Truth is, I do not value the lives of those three thousand people who died on 9/11 any more than the life of any other human being.  Far as I'm concerned (and I am very concerned), If you're going to mourn the loss of life perpetrated by evil men, look to Africa, look to the Ivory Coast, or look to Iraq.  America knows nothing about losses the way that such people do.  I never understood how folks can lose their grasp on essential humanity in the name of some animal cause.  Well **** that - that's just not something I stand for.

So answer me this: why do you, personally, value the lives of those those three thousand American people more highly than any three thousand innocent people killed in Afghanistan?  Why is Osama Bin Laden any more evil than the American army?  Because he made us bleed first?

Christ it's all so senseless.

[snapback]52197[/snapback]

because those 3k are my countrymen, my brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts... you get the picture. One American is far more important to me than a hundred foreigners.

[Dubbilex]

Not to me.  This is the first year I was embarrassed to celebrate the Fourth.

[Goldy]

The difference is that terrorists specifically target groups of civilians. The US goes after terrorists as part of a war against them, with unwanted civilian deaths. Obviously those people are valued the same as any other civilians, including Americans, but what would you have our country do? Allow the attacks to go unpunished forever, so the deaths will only be on our side, thereby lessening the loss of life overall? Psshhh. It would be nice if the world worked that way, but no.

I'm sorry, but when it comes to Afghanistan, the relatively minor number of civilian casualties - 1300, you quoted the "generous" stat of 3000 - is acceptable. A retaliation after 9/11 was necessary, and it was done with as few civilian deaths as possible, especially considering the hundreds of thousands in previous wars. While you're at it, consider the mass murdering and torturing carried out by Saddam, again on civilians. You talk about perspective.. well, try having some.

Until terrorists start sending suicide human-relief people with loaves of bread attached to their bodies immediately following a suicide bombing, you can't compare the deaths caused by them to the deaths caused by Americans.

[Bryan]

if all the lm'ers pitch in we may be able to but a small island....

In my island high speed internet access is paid for in the minor taxes. and we have 20 hour work weeks. (admins get paid as a primary job). Security will consist of a lack of gun laws and only one airport with a strict "by invitation only policy." The primary lanugage will be "PHP." And so long as im the dictator we will have a dimocracy.


Bryan

[Dubbilex]

One can look at things in two ways, and only two: either everybody is right from their own point of view, or everybody is wrong from a cosmic eye (the two mean the exact same thing; this is something like the half-empty half-full perplexity).  Everybody.  There is no middle ground.  Existence cannot account for the fact that there are seven billion separate entities on this planet harboring seven billion separate paradigms.

Osama Bin Laden does not sit in a cave-lair and gush about how evil he is.  No, he believes he is fighting evil, himself.  Likewise, George W. Bush does not sit in an office and exult in just how low he had to go to become President in this country - he does not think about it in that way.

These two men share a very significant quality (although neither would admit it):  they are both dead certain that they have justice on their side - just like everyone else.  In this world, there are no absolutes; there is no true right and there is no true wrong.  Osama Bin Laden is no more wrong for blowing up the World Trade Center than The United States is for blowing up Kabul - being told that either is the truth depends entirely on whom you ask.

Point is, the only truths that exist are individual truths.  My own truths are probably very different from the truths of a child who lived in Fallujah; that does not make mine any more right than theirs.  That would be impossible.  Just because I believe something is wrong does not make it so. It makes it wrong to me, and perhaps people with a mindset similar to my own.  

And that's it.  Existence in a nutshell.

[Asal]

Or maybe it's part of Bush's policy....if you keep the people afraid of people without, then the people within have more power, especcially those in power.  

A common fear is as good as a common enemy when you are looking at it from the standpoint of what the people will do/put up with to ensure their 'security'.

[Goldy]

Actually, things can be funtamentally wrong, totally against nature. People can think they're right in, say, shooting some random stranger on the street for no reason, but they're actually wrong by any reasonable standards. And then there are repercussions which are justified and right.

Of course anyone can be right according to their own point of view, but that's irrelevant here.

[Dubbilex]

There is nothing fundamental about wrongness.  The 'reasonable standards' that you speak of are societal and human.  Just leave nature out of this.  Nature does not feel and, to be honest, nature doesn't give a damn whether or not you shoot a man just to watch him die.  Nature is ice cool.  Nature is calm as a Hindu cow.

Osama Bin Laden is not evil.  Maybe you don't like him, but to his own people he is a hero in all senses of the word.  And I can guarantee that neither of you are ultimately correct in your assertion.  Osama Bin Laden, like everything and everyone else in the world, just exists.  The mind shades that existence (black, white, gray, etc.).

Now, obviously I have pretty strong opinions of my own.  I think that George is a crook and that most political men aren't any better; the Iraq War does not agree with me; I think Salman Rushdie is the greatest author in the world.  I just try my best not to believe that such opinions accurately represent the way that things really are.

[LowCrawler]

dubb's right. For a long time now ive had a hard time believing in good and evil.. its just two people seeing a situation differently. You use an example like robbing and killing an old lady as something that has to be evil... but why is that really wrong? because society says it is. If we lived in a world where old women were pests then you'd be doing a good thing by killing one. Think back to the days where beating up a black guy was far from evil, it was encouraged. Those people werent bad, they just didnt know any different. Notice there i didnt say know any better... i said different.

[Goldy]

Osama Bin Laden is not evil.  Maybe you don't like him, but to his own people he is a hero in all senses of the word.  And I can guarantee that neither of you are ultimately correct in your assertion.  Osama Bin Laden, like everything and everyone else in the world, just exists.  The mind shades that existence (black, white, gray, etc.).

[snapback]52231[/snapback]

You're right. Since right and wrong is a human concept, the distinction is based on human points of view. So I guess it's more accurate to say that by the standards of any civilized society, Osama and people like him are evil. In the minds of rational, educated humans who are not misled by religion and other bogus teachings, that's clear.

Then again, you do always hear that humans are the only species to murder eachother. So maybe it is fundamental.

[Dubbilex]

Well sure - I think the death of any innocent human being is unjust (and maybe the guilty ones too.  We could get into the topic of just what it is that causes the guilty ones to do what they do, but I don't think you or I want to :p).  

I've no problem with folks being overwhelmed with loss when thinking about 9/11; I just could never figure why they aren't overwhelmed with the same sense of loss when they think about anybody else dying in the world.  Even if we're on different sides, the 'Iraqi Insurgents' are people with families, lives, histories, stories, and the death of each and every one of them is kind of a bluesy thing to me.

But yeah.  Of course I agree that Osama Bin Laden really struck a low blow.  However he did have his reasons - that's something that every person in this country really should realize.  I respect his tenacity, but I guess just not his methods.  Anyways, people are mean to each other.  That's just how people are.  I've just always held onto this hope that it doesn't need to be that way, is all.

[SwiftSpear]

Hundreds of thousands of people who are infinitely more innocent die every day in Africa, alone.  Such situations help one get some perspective on matters; they tend to put 9/11 in its place.

Truth is, I do not value the lives of those three thousand people who died on 9/11 any more than the life of any other human being.  Far as I'm concerned (and I am very concerned), If you're going to mourn the loss of life perpetrated by evil men, look to Africa, look to the Ivory Coast, or look to Iraq.  America knows nothing about losses the way that such people do.  I never understood how folks can lose their grasp on essential humanity in the name of some animal cause.  Well **** that - that's just not something I stand for.

So answer me this: why do you, personally, value the lives of those those three thousand American people more highly than any three thousand innocent people killed in Afghanistan?  Why is Osama Bin Laden any more evil than the American army?  Because he made us bleed first?

Christ it's all so senseless.

[snapback]52197[/snapback]

because those 3k are my countrymen, my brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts... you get the picture. One American is far more important to me than a hundred foreigners.

[snapback]52211[/snapback]

Why?  Family maby, but people of the same nationality as you deserve no respect over people of any other nationality.  The American sense of patriotism is so twisted and skewed.

[Manta]

He didn't say they deserved more respect; he only said that they were more important to him because he has a connection to them in some way.

[ziggot]

I do my best to just stay out of political discussions because it always just makes me mad, and I enjoy being chillaxin'. However, when someone decides they are going to call me and my best friends evil, I take some offense.

The American Army today is the most caring and compassionate fighting force the world has EVER seen. Have you ever been under direct fire from people trying to kill you with rpgs and aks and NOT fired back because you knew the kids in the neighborhood and worried for THEIR safety more than your own? I dont think so, but I might be wrong.

Since you got me going dubb, I also am quite sure that there are universal evils. Rape. Argue that one. Animals dont do it. If a male gorilla gets turned down, he yells a lot, gets pissed, and leaves. He doesnt rape. People can reason and should ,if for the only reason that we can. I see the point that with large scale political views evil is unclear but in everyday life there are definite evils. Anyone want to argue that Hitler isnt evil? indeed.....

Similarly, dont feel sorry for insurgents. They knowingly kill a large group of children to get ONE american soldier. heroes I tell you. Especially when they intentionally target the American groups that are building infrastructure, schools, delivering aide and helping out the poor of Iraq. Maybe you should stop being so wishy washy and stand for something. You can stand purely for peace, but unless you personally sacrifice for your stance, who cares?

Asal, if people are willing to do whatever it takes to ensure their security, why cant the armed forces recruit? People arent giving up freedoms for security, they do it because Americans are an apathetic people. We would rather suffer minor injustices than be inconvenienced by doing anything about it. Hell, American Idol starts in an hour, I cant protest now.

All that said, my friends and I fight and die for your right to say what you want Dubb(oh the evil of it all) and I do respect what you say, especially the Africa stuff which is totally right.

Ive been ranting, I apologize, O'Doyle rules.

[Dubbilex]

Ziggot, my belief is that the American armed forces should not be in Iraq, facing these difficult moral dilemmas.

Do you think animals marry each other?  For animals, reproduction happens like this: Female unconsciously exudes pheremones saying 'Take me oh take me, big boy!,' male wanders by, makes a kid, and gets the hell out of there.  There are exceptions to this rule, in which the animals mate for life (the barn owl, some wolves, etc. etc.) but, in general, that's the way it goes.  Do you call that love?

Islam dictates that these hypothetical children, killed for that one soldier, go to paradise for sacrificing themselves in the name of Allah.  What I'd like for you to admit is that [fundamentalist] Muslims have their own beliefs, and they just might be a little different from what you would consider morally correct.  But that doesn't make them wrong.  It just makes them different from you, OK?


Anyways, would you like to know what I stand for?  I know I flip-flop a lot, right?  Just like a liberal, right?  I stand for America not being a foreign invader.  I think that if you'd like to support the troops, you should work to bring them home.

[Rath]

They will come home when things wont go back to chaos when they leave.

Islam dictates that these hypothetical children, killed for that one soldier, go to paradise for sacrificing themselves in the name of Allah. What I'd like for you to admit is that [fundamentalist] Muslims have their own beliefs, and they just might be a little different from what you would consider morally correct. But that doesn't make them wrong. It just makes them different from you, OK?

If they believe its ok to kill children, then we can believe its ok to kill those that would kill children.

[SwiftSpear]

Ziggot, my belief is that the American armed forces should not be in Iraq, facing these difficult moral dilemmas.

Do you think animals marry each other?  For animals, reproduction happens like this: Female unconsciously exudes pheremones saying 'Take me oh take me, big boy!,' male wanders by, makes a kid, and gets the hell out of there.  There are exceptions to this rule, in which the animals mate for life (the barn owl, some wolves, etc. etc.) but, in general, that's the way it goes.  Do you call that love?

Islam dictates that these hypothetical children, killed for that one soldier, go to paradise for sacrificing themselves in the name of Allah.  What I'd like for you to admit is that [fundamentalist] Muslims have their own beliefs, and they just might be a little different from what you would consider morally correct.  But that doesn't make them wrong.  It just makes them different from you, OK?


Anyways, would you like to know what I stand for?  I know I flip-flop a lot, right?  Just like a liberal, right?  I stand for America not being a foreign invader.  I think that if you'd like to support the troops, you should work to bring them home.

[snapback]52263[/snapback]

I belive that Americans probably never should have gone into iraq in the first place, but I belive an even larger crime would be to go in, install a power vaccume, and then leave as if it's none of thier buisness.  Like it or not you guys have a responsibility to overseeing the creation of the new democracy, and the construction of an iraqie military to defend such an organization.  After that it's up to the iraqies what they want to do with thier government.

[Dubbilex]

Rath - a fundamental belief in Islam is that that those who do Allah's work on earth will receive rewards in whatever comes after.  This is obviously something that is interpretable in a million different ways (for instance: a fundamentalist may believe that blowing themself up to cleanse the infidels is enforcing Allah's will, giving them a golden ticket to Heaven.  In a dissimilar fashion, many other Muslims believe that, in being peaceful rather than violent, they earn the same).

Anyways, I would have preferred that America hadn't, Like Jefferson wrote, 'gone in search of foreign monsters to slay.'  Now that we're waist deep in a thing we will not be out of for quite some time, you're absolutely right that it would be malicious to pull out.  

'Course, I also believe that it was malicious to involve ourselves in the first place (here's looking at you, Washington).  Clearly, we've dropped the ball this time.

[SwiftSpear]

There is nothing fundamental about wrongness.  The 'reasonable standards' that you speak of are societal and human.  Just leave nature out of this.  Nature does not feel and, to be honest, nature doesn't give a damn whether or not you shoot a man just to watch him die.  Nature is ice cool.  Nature is calm as a Hindu cow.

Osama Bin Laden is not evil.  Maybe you don't like him, but to his own people he is a hero in all senses of the word.  And I can guarantee that neither of you are ultimately correct in your assertion.  Osama Bin Laden, like everything and everyone else in the world, just exists.  The mind shades that existence (black, white, gray, etc.).

Now, obviously I have pretty strong opinions of my own.  I think that George is a crook and that most political men aren't any better; the Iraq War does not agree with me; I think Salman Rushdie is the greatest author in the world.  I just try my best not to believe that such opinions accurately represent the way that things really are.

[snapback]52231[/snapback]

Damn, I missed this before...

I personally belive there is an ultimate moral standard...  Yes I am still forced to agree with dubb, because I really don't belive humans know/understand the moral standard.  To me that is the nature of sin, the loss of the knowledge of what is good, we know both good and evil, not definitively one or the other.  People have all constructed moral axioms around themselfs however, and I think most of those contain some hint of the original goodness of the first one, but obviously there is so much difference between them all that they all can't be right.  I think the safest bet is to keep it relitively simple, and then see anything outside of the simplest of moral conundrums as a shade of gray.  For instance, murder is wrong because it is essentially one human being evoking his will against another's will to live, in so essensially claiming that he/she is greater then all other humans, which we can see as a logical phalacy, because every human belives themself as the greatest.  Rape falls along the same lines, but rather then the ending of a human entity, it is the damanging of a human entity.  Personally I also add selfishness too my list, because it seems to be the root of all pain in the world.  Anything else either falls partially into one of those catagoires or does not, and thus is a shade of gray based on how close or far it falls.