Due to a myriad of reasons, TGRR has not been posting here.
However, he's got a fire under his ass.
Check it:
http://dolphin.esosoft.net/erisbarandgrill.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=8592
http://dolphin.esosoft.net/erisbarandgrill.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=8593
He asked for it not to be x-posted, so you'll have to read it there, or at POEE.
is he preaching from the top of the WAAAAHHH-mbulance?
:lulz:
I still see no point in having a secret mod.
the point was that Roger wouldn't have anyone to publicly berate every time he didn't like something about how the board was running. You see, Roger pretty much HATED that Lauren gave the site to me and not him (though he didn't help his cause by slandering her at every opportunity for 3 years straight) and when I sent out the word that we were rebuilding this site and trying to make it the best collection of asshats on the internets, he acted like a 3 year-old and insisted that he wouldn't come back here and contribute unless I made him an admin. I decided that the draw of being THE place to find TGRR's writings would be worth the occasional annoyance of his primadonna-like ways and agreed.
After a year and a half of dealing with his bullshit (I'm actually considering publicly posting our last email exchange at EB&G to protect myself from his continued slander; if I do it will be hilarious and links will be posted. He was basically frothing insane at the end), I decided I had changed my mind. Since I am a man of my word, I could not in good conscience revoke his admin-hood, so I resorted to one of the oldest tricks in the book. I abdicated and let someone else do my dirty work for me. Underhanded and Machiavellian, you say? Sure it was, but it allowed me to technically keep my word, which is important to me. Now that he's taken his voluntary leave of this site (his membership is still active and I believe he is still a mod, just not an admin), I'm gonna ask my long-time friend who was kind enough to take the reins for a bit if he'll turn the MGT account back over to me and there will be no more "secret mods" or whatever the fuck you wanna call it.
Y'all can think whatever you want, but it boils down to the fact that this is my website and I take the responsibility of providing an arena for this community very seriously and IMO the good of the entire community must take precedence over the demands of one irrational asshole.
If anybody really gives a shit about all of this and has further questions, I'd be happy to answer them. As far as I'm concerned, this place is thriving with or without Roger and if there were any doubts in my mind about how I handled this they have been allayed by the recent influx of seemingly intelligent noobs.
for what it's worth, i don't think giving someone else the power to do something for you that would make you break your word, constitutes as "keeping to your word".
while technically it may, it doesn't grant you any sort of moral high ground (IMO), because if you give your word again, who knows what sort of tricks you'll go through to not-quite-break-it-but-make-it-happen-anyway?
i just wanted to point out that, yes, technically you kept your word, but what is that worth? you say it's important to you to keep your word (same goes for Roger, btw), why is it important to you? is it (for you) still satisfactory if you're only technically keeping it?
apart from that (i'm truly curious about these technicalities surrounding "keeping your word"), i'm not gonna take a stance one way or another, because i think i've just seen the tip of the iceberg, and even that part is a fucking trainwreck.
[was going to post, but then 000 said exactly what I was going to]
ZOMFG, I just thought I'd crawl out from under my stone for a minute to see what's shakin' in PD-land... and here we are AGAIN. Brilliant. I love this place, so comfortable in it's never-changing state of... no I'm not gonna say it. ;)
Hi all, btw. :D
Quote from: triple zero on March 01, 2008, 04:42:04 PM
for what it's worth, i don't think giving someone else the power to do something for you that would make you break your word, constitutes as "keeping to your word".
while technically it may, it doesn't grant you any sort of moral high ground (IMO), because if you give your word again, who knows what sort of tricks you'll go through to not-quite-break-it-but-make-it-happen-anyway?
i just wanted to point out that, yes, technically you kept your word, but what is that worth? you say it's important to you to keep your word (same goes for Roger, btw), why is it important to you? is it (for you) still satisfactory if you're only technically keeping it?
apart from that (i'm truly curious about these technicalities surrounding "keeping your word"), i'm not gonna take a stance one way or another, because i think i've just seen the tip of the iceberg, and even that part is a fucking trainwreck.
I have to say I agree with 000, because politicianing your way around your given word doesn't actually make you any more trustworthy than if you'd broken it directly; possibly less so, in fact.
Is it allowed for lurkers to lol at drama from the sidelines? I still dont see any major differences between admins here, in what they do. Sure, some cosmetic changes, but in the end it comes down to who's pressing the keys to keep the site running and not bringing down the wrath of lawsuits.
Seems a shame to lose the .. distinctive writing of TGRR over that, imo.
Ofc I may be missing the issue entirely, as I wasnt here during the 'big board wars' or w/e the huge drama flare-up was before.
Also regarding ECH 'technically' keeping his word - it sounds as though he had decided the 'spirit' of his word was going to be broken, I guess at least that was a way around further shenanigans.
I wasn't here for all that either. Basically, I feel that if you have an ongoing personality/style conflict with another admin, and you're the site owner, you're justified in saying "OK, you know what? This isn't working out, I need you to step down as an admin". Doing it in a straighforward way probably would have resulted in a public blow-up, but also in less loss of trust than doing it in a circuitous way that preserves your honor on a technicality only.
It doesn't particularly faze me that there's drama between ECH and Roger. What's new?
However I have got to say that I'm not particularly impressed by the way either of them have handled themselves.
Well,no. Roger storming off the forum in a huff disappointed me. Finding out that ECH had, indeed, orchestrated the cutting of Roger's access also disappointed me.
MY ROLE MODELS HAVE FAILED ME BAWWWWWWW!
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 02, 2008, 02:37:41 AM
MY ROLE MODELS HAVE FAILED ME BAWWWWWWW!
<Roger> There is no crying in Discordia! </Roger>
:cry:
Ha, sure there is.
Quote from: http://www.poee.co.uk/bip/index.php?title=Trolling#The_LandmineThe Landmine
Any large community is going to have a certain amount of 'history' (read: butthurt) among certain of its posters. There will be a certain amount of animosity lurking beneath the surface between these people. Or it could be a tired and super-old debate that only causes more problems than it solves whenever it rears its ugly head. Whatever. The point is that should you stumble upon what this is, you will almost certainly piss off certain members if you make any references to it, bring it up again or even ask questions about it.
Quick, someone target us! We're a prime trolling environment! :lulz:
this:
Quote from: triple zero on March 01, 2008, 04:42:04 PM
for what it's worth, i don't think giving someone else the power to do something for you that would make you break your word, constitutes as "keeping to your word".
while technically it may, it doesn't grant you any sort of moral high ground (IMO), because if you give your word again, who knows what sort of tricks you'll go through to not-quite-break-it-but-make-it-happen-anyway?
i just wanted to point out that, yes, technically you kept your word, but what is that worth? you say it's important to you to keep your word (same goes for Roger, btw), why is it important to you? is it (for you) still satisfactory if you're only technically keeping it?
apart from that (i'm truly curious about these technicalities surrounding "keeping your word"), i'm not gonna take a stance one way or another, because i think i've just seen the tip of the iceberg, and even that part is a fucking trainwreck.
and this:
Quote from: Nigel on March 02, 2008, 12:57:23 AM
I wasn't here for all that either. Basically, I feel that if you have an ongoing personality/style conflict with another admin, and you're the site owner, you're justified in saying "OK, you know what? This isn't working out, I need you to step down as an admin". Doing it in a straighforward way probably would have resulted in a public blow-up, but also in less loss of trust than doing it in a circuitous way that preserves your honor on a technicality only.
are both correct motorcycles. It didn't take me long to figure out that I handled this poorly, however, in my defense, I've never had to do this online before. It's much easier in a kitchen, where you can just tell your sous-chef to get packing before he sees the business end of your cleaver. For what it's worth, there is no one else here that would cause me to feel the need to be so duplicitous to solve a dispute; I hope my credibility with the rest of you is not irreparably damaged. It occurs to me that when you are the person who is ultimately responsible for the site, everyone else is, in a sense, both your boss and your guest since a one-man site would be very boring indeed (Cf: PD.org).
In short, I apologize to you all for "politicianing" in this place.
there should be a post by roger here. where is it? did you delete it roger?
last post showed up as roger.
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 02, 2008, 04:20:32 PM
this:
Quote from: triple zero on March 01, 2008, 04:42:04 PM
for what it's worth, i don't think giving someone else the power to do something for you that would make you break your word, constitutes as "keeping to your word".
while technically it may, it doesn't grant you any sort of moral high ground (IMO), because if you give your word again, who knows what sort of tricks you'll go through to not-quite-break-it-but-make-it-happen-anyway?
i just wanted to point out that, yes, technically you kept your word, but what is that worth? you say it's important to you to keep your word (same goes for Roger, btw), why is it important to you? is it (for you) still satisfactory if you're only technically keeping it?
apart from that (i'm truly curious about these technicalities surrounding "keeping your word"), i'm not gonna take a stance one way or another, because i think i've just seen the tip of the iceberg, and even that part is a fucking trainwreck.
and this:
Quote from: Nigel on March 02, 2008, 12:57:23 AM
I wasn't here for all that either. Basically, I feel that if you have an ongoing personality/style conflict with another admin, and you're the site owner, you're justified in saying "OK, you know what? This isn't working out, I need you to step down as an admin". Doing it in a straighforward way probably would have resulted in a public blow-up, but also in less loss of trust than doing it in a circuitous way that preserves your honor on a technicality only.
are both correct motorcycles. It didn't take me long to figure out that I handled this poorly, however, in my defense, I've never had to do this online before. It's much easier in a kitchen, where you can just tell your sous-chef to get packing before he sees the business end of your cleaver. For what it's worth, there is no one else here that would cause me to feel the need to be so duplicitous to solve a dispute; I hope my credibility with the rest of you is not irreparably damaged. It occurs to me that when you are the person who is ultimately responsible for the site, everyone else is, in a sense, both your boss and your guest since a one-man site would be very boring indeed (Cf: PD.org).
In short, I apologize to you all for "politicianing" in this place.
But then you said:
Quote from: East Coast Hustle
3. Anyone who reads about how I chose to handle the situation and thinks "OMG, what an underhanded dick!" is probably destined for a life of burger-flipping or medical data entry. Anyone who knows how the world actually WORKS will understand exactly what it's like to be put in that situation and to have to try to handle it in a manner that will be least damaging to all parties involved. It's called "realpolitik", and it's supposed to be effective. It is not, necessarily, supposed to be fun or make you popular with the weekend lunch crowd.
http://dolphin.esosoft.net/erisbarandgrill.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=8686&pid=224023#pid224023
13th post on page, 3rd paragraph
So I guess you aren't sorry, are you, ECH? No, it seems that - by your own words - you think that everyone you are "apologizing" to is a sap. But I am sure you meant your apology...
Technically.And I am sure they are all safe from any further abuses...
technically.
Quote from: Faust on March 02, 2008, 04:39:16 PM
there should be a post by roger here. where is it? did you delete it roger?
last post showed up as roger.
I hit the wrong button, and had to redo it.
Goodbye, again.
Oh maaaaaaaan.
:popcorn:
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 02, 2008, 04:20:32 PM[ this and this ] are both correct motorcycles. It didn't take me long to figure out that I handled this poorly, however, in my defense, I've never had to do this online before. It's much easier in a kitchen, where you can just tell your sous-chef to get packing before he sees the business end of your cleaver.
i can understand that. good that you're admitting you handled it poorly.
QuoteFor what it's worth, there is no one else here that would cause me to feel the need to be so duplicitous to solve a dispute; I hope my credibility with the rest of you is not irreparably damaged. It occurs to me that when you are the person who is ultimately responsible for the site, everyone else is, in a sense, both your boss and your guest since a one-man site would be very boring indeed (Cf: PD.org).
In short, I apologize to you all for "politicianing" in this place.
no.
if you're saying "i would only to this to Roger, but never to any of you guys, honest", that isn't really going to cut it if you want to restore your credibility to me.
let me first point out that you don't particularly owe me any kind of explanation, as i'm just this guy with an opinion, okay, an opinion of you, one that may be slowly shifting, but this is foremost between you and Roger.
in fact, pretty much the only way i see out is you settling this dispute with Roger.
because that would prove to me, that even if you slip up again in the future and apply "machiavellian realpolitik" to anyone on this board, you're able set things straight again.
so what is it, "handled it poorly" or "realpolitik" ?
Be warned, 000: He has now started trying to dig up my personal life, like that Tentasticle guy did. There's no guarantee he won't do the same to anyone else who pisses him off.
He's lost his mind entirely. Just thought I'd give you a heads up.
No finger pointing, but srsly.
(http://www.fozzilinymoo.org/Fozzolog/2003/07/images/retard_chamber-4.640x480.jpg)
Quote from: synaptyx on March 02, 2008, 08:41:26 PM
No finger pointing, but srsly.
(http://www.fozzilinymoo.org/Fozzolog/2003/07/images/retard_chamber-4.640x480.jpg)
I'll have you know that I'm a model G.
:lulz:
It's pretty clear to me that ECH isn't the best person to be in a position of influence with the Administration, for having been caught lying to our faces about his actions and motives, misappropriating the trust of the forum.
The idea of allowing a "Shadow Admin" is as inconceivable to me here on PD as it is for my country. I don't consider it a good option.
I propose that a new and impartial admin be in place. I'm not sure about the rest of the crew, but I don't feel like placing my trust of the site into whoever feels like seizing control at any given time.
Thats me! I am the one who seized control.
I have emailed akk and evt about the position.
Well done you. How about we actually decide on someone to admin now.
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 02, 2008, 10:47:29 PM
Well done you. How about we actually decide on someone to admin now.
we wait for all the fighting to be over before making any drastic, heat of the moment changes. There is no rush on this.
Quote from: Faust on March 02, 2008, 10:54:18 PM
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 02, 2008, 10:47:29 PM
Well done you. How about we actually decide on someone to admin now.
we wait for all the fighting to be over before making any drastic, heat of the moment changes. There is no rush on this.
I'm done, so long as ECH doesn't feel the screeching need to continue.
Don't wait on me.
What do you mean by the fight being 'over?'
I don't see how the situation has any conclusive resolution. TGRR haet ECH and vice versa, and ECH isn't leaving. So who's fighting?
roger you were being really really hard on ech, you would keep the drama with him to a minimum if he does too?
If you're negotiating for Roger to come back and for all this to be concluded, my position is that we should have them back on as mods, but not admins. There can't be any incongruity between them in the "chain of command" or this will happen again.
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 02, 2008, 11:00:35 PM
What do you mean by the fight being 'over?'
I don't see how the situation has any conclusive resolution. TGRR haet ECH and vice versa, and ECH isn't leaving.
But I am. I am posting in this thread only, and once I am convinced that I won't be followed all over the internet, etc, I am gone.
Why? I think everyone knows why.
Because although I did everything - as an admin - right, resisted the temptation to edit or delete people like AKK, etc, I was wrongfully and "secretly" (though not so secretly, it turned out) stripped of my admin abilities. (The admin abilities don't mean so much as the PRINCIPLE of the thing...shit, it's not like being able to enter News was the high point of my fucking day, or anything).
I have since been told that - while this is a shame and all - I will not be reinstated...the sole concern seems to be making sure that it never happens to any of YOU.
And I see no reason to put up with THAT, either. I will not be shat upon by commission OR omission. Nor will I put up with the notion that a mugging victim is somehow as guilty as the mugger, because "he was involved", as if that somehow makes him as guilty as the mugger.
Now, if you'll take my advice, for what it is worth, you'll put Cain in charge and move on.
But you'll do it without me.
Or kil...aw, fuckkit.
I vote for an admin "tag-team" of Cain and Faust, for each have their merit and expertise that are key to the stewardship of the site. TTM and I can remain the mods, because tbh there isn't a lot of modding to do here.
How does that sound?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 02, 2008, 11:09:20 PM
I have since been told that - while this is a shame and all - I will not be reinstated, etc...the sole concern seems to be making sure that it never happens to any of YOU.
I never said that, i just don't want to change anything without hearing from everyone, that way i avoid responsibility.
i think the decision should be made slowly and methodically.
Quote from: Faust on March 02, 2008, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 02, 2008, 11:09:20 PM
I have since been told that - while this is a shame and all - I will not be reinstated, etc...the sole concern seems to be making sure that it never happens to any of YOU.
I never said that, i just don't want to change anything without hearing from everyone, that way i avoid responsibility.
i think the decision should be made slowly and methodically.
"I think that mugging victims should be given back their stuff. Well, some of it. Eventually. Maybe."
Roger, you're interested in admin status?
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 02, 2008, 11:15:39 PM
I vote for an admin "tag-team" of Cain and Faust, for each have their merit and expertise that are key to the stewardship of the site. TTM and I can remain the mods, because tbh there isn't a lot of modding to do here.
How does that sound?
Do whatever you please. It makes exactly zero difference to me. I did nothing wrong, and I am being treated like I ran around deleting accounts, etc.
I am being treated as if what happened to me was REASONABLE, was something that should be made PERMANENT, because what happened, happened, and it was somehow my fucking fault, or something that needed doing ANYWAY, despite the fact that I DID NOTHING WRONG.
Well, shit. There I go, getting all pissed off again. There's an easy cure for that.
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 02, 2008, 11:22:00 PM
Roger, you're interested in admin status?
I am interested in having what was done to me made right.
But apparently, that should maybe happen, eventually, if "everyone agrees".
Justice, John Ashcroft style.
i dont see you as a mugging victim, i see you as someone who had his pride bashed unfairly who can stand up for himself.
The problem was Ech made the decision without talking to people, based on his relationship with you. He made a personal move without consulting you or anyone else, and then made a dumb move trying to hide behind the secret admin thing. Those were personal actions, not admin actions. I wont make changes without consulting others.
edit; and by the time i am done typing it had been said already.
Quote from: Faust on March 02, 2008, 11:26:29 PM
i dont see you as a mugging victim, i see you as someone who had his pride bashed unfairly who can stand up for himself.
Easy for you to say. How am I supposed to "stand up for myself" or to make it right? Hack the fucking board? No thanks.
Quote from: Faust on March 02, 2008, 11:26:29 PM
The problem was Ech made the decision without talking to people, based on his relationship with you. He made a personal move without consulting you or anyone else, and then made a dumb move trying to hide behind the secret admin thing. Those were personal actions, not admin actions. I wont make changes without consulting others.
Reversing a wrong is not "making changes".
Go consult others, and be damned.
I wish the others on the team would comment, it's hard to move forward without others' input.
But, how's this sound? ECH has stepped down, so I guess he's not an admin anymore. TGRR, Cain, and Faust are admins and TTM and I compose the mods.
Just advancing my observations and ideas.
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 02, 2008, 11:28:47 PM
I wish the others on the team would comment, it's hard to move forward without others' input.
Tell you what. You let me know when you guys decide if redressing a problem is as important as addressing it.
You know where to find me.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 02, 2008, 11:28:17 PM
Reversing a wrong is not "making changes".
I wouldn't be reversing a wrong I would be doing exactly the same thing he did.
Quote from: Faust on March 02, 2008, 11:31:41 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 02, 2008, 11:28:17 PM
Reversing a wrong is not "making changes".
I wouldn't be reversing a wrong I would be doing exactly the same thing he did.
Reinstating something wrongfully taken is the same as wrongfully taking it in the first place?
Well, shit. I did not know that.
You know what this reminds me of?
Keepaway. Remember Keepaway? That nasty little game, usually played on some poor fat kid with glasses?
The person starting the game grabs the poor bastard's hat, books, etc, and tosses it to someone else. The kid is made to run from person to person, for everyone's enjoyment. Then they pretend that they're going to be reasonable, and give it back.
Then they toss it some more. It's a nasty, humiliating game. The funniest thing I ever saw was the victim simply kicking the perpetrator in the balls, and then continuing to kick the little fucker until he wound up having surgery on his testicles.
While I propose no such violence, I will say that I will not hang around and endure the humiliation of having a situation in which I was wronged bandied around as if *I* was on trial. Nor will I ASK for my due, because I should not have to, should I?
Nor do I give a fuck for any excuses, petty rationalizations, or anything else. In fact, I don't give a fuck at all, anymore.
Felix, mad props. I'll see you other places, I am sure.
But not here.
TGRR,
Off to write YotR #6. But not for posting here. Have a nice life, and I wish you well.
one man juries are awesome, they make you feel just super.
I wont be rushed and i wont make the decision on my own.
i want to hear from everyone.
Ok, I'm throwing my hat in for Roger as admin.
be specific, full pharoh from on high as mgt? or sub admin like before?
Someone email me either when the forum has finished burning down, or else when we've decided what is going on.
I've tried to stay out of this as much as possible. I don't like getting involved with fights between friends, even where there is a clear case of something I don't like happening, because often both sides feel they deserve unreserved support, and that is something I cannot give.
I also have to take the forum into account, as a whole. You're talking about making radical changes without having one of the main players in how this forum runs even present. Some would, and probably will, argue that ECH shouldn't be present or have a say in what is going on here.
But I'll say this. Unless this is cleared up in such a way as everyone gets something they can agree on, then we will be back here in 3 months, in 6 months, in a year...all the while sapping away energy from vital and interesting projects. You may want the quick solution, you may even demand it. But unless a deal between everyone can be thrashed out and all this stupid, petty dominance games come to an end, then this place may as well shut up shop now. There's no point in its further existence if this is what it is going to be like, because I sure as hell wont stick around, and anyone interested in accomplishing anything other than "I trolled some other Discordians, lol" wont be either.
Take that as you will. I'm too busy trying not to fail my course to have the time to go more in depth.
well said, we take as long as we need, and that includes hearing from ech.
I would be throwing my hat in with Roger... except that this feels more like bribery than righting a wrong. I think I lost a good deal of respect for Roger (grudgingly earned I might add) when he ran off because of a Tiff with ECH over goddess damned admin powerz on a fricking Internet Forum.
I miss Roger's posts and his hateshit and his mocking... I would love to see him return as a poster and admin... but not conditionally as if the Forum had wronged him, rather than a overworked aggravated admin. I stuck up for Roger when this happened and I wish I could now.
Roger, come play... please?
Somebody with a lot of the chat in IRC please x-post it here?
ech was wrong to remove roger and not include anyone else. He should have spoken to roger.
Saying he was not the mgt to avoid responsibility on that was also wrong.
Roger has every right to deal with an attack on his pride in whatever way he wants, even if it was a LOT of annoying bitching.
I was wrong to lie to roger to give ech the privacy he wanted. he wanted breathing room he did not earn.
I way wrong to hijack management, but its a bit late for that now.
im putting roger back as he was.
sorry for taking so long about this.
This has nothing to do with who is the new mgt. this is just to do with what happened to roger.
Hear hear.
I am new, but I definitely think we should sit on this for a while. Everything is out in the open now, and this is a New Situation, one in which everyone has a say. This is not about righting A wrong, it is about righting the MULTIPLE wrongs done when the users didn't have a say in the proceedings. Now we do, and we get to decide, as we should have before, whether or not we want Roger as an admin. In the meantime, I think we are definitely best off not having ANY admins. We don't really need them at the moment, and it avoids anyone making any revenge or power plays.
Frankly, as much as I like Roger (god knows why, but I do) and am even rather fond of ECH, I do not think anyone who is insane or has a giant ego should be admins. That rules out Roger and all chefs everywhere.
Therefore, I say we sit on it for a while, and decide in a week or so.
I certainly do not want to feel rushed or extorted into choosing an admin.
Get on IRC, it's pretty much all happening there.
Quote from: Nigel on March 03, 2008, 12:57:12 AM
I certainly do not want to feel rushed or extorted into choosing an admin.
nor I.
and I think we shouldn't worry about it until ech has his say.
Roger has been reinstated because people agree it was the wrong thing to do.
Quote from: Faust on March 03, 2008, 01:02:58 AM
Quote from: Nigel on March 03, 2008, 12:57:12 AM
I certainly do not want to feel rushed or extorted into choosing an admin.
nor I.
and I think we shouldn't worry about it until ech has his say.
Roger has been reinstated because people agree it was the wrong thing to do.
OK.
Quote from: Faust on March 03, 2008, 12:42:30 AM
ech was wrong to remove roger and not include anyone else. He should have spoken to roger.
Saying he was not the mgt to avoid responsibility on that was also wrong.
Roger has every right to deal with an attack on his pride in whatever way he wants, even if it was a LOT of annoying bitching.
I was wrong to lie to roger to give ech the privacy he wanted. he wanted breathing room he did not earn.
I way wrong to hijack management, but its a bit late for that now.
im putting roger back as he was.
sorry for taking so long about this.
This has nothing to do with who is the new mgt. this is just to do with what happened to roger.
:mittens: I like you, Faust. A lot.
Also, wtf channel is the irc?
irc.maddshark.com
#discord.
there be much arguing.
edit:two d's
also, with some luck, soon irc.principiadiscordia.com will point to the chat also....but that's for Faust to deal with, if he so chooses. :)
DRAMA OVER YAY(?)
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 03, 2008, 12:16:12 AM
I would be throwing my hat in with Roger... except that this feels more like bribery than righting a wrong. I think I lost a good deal of respect for Roger (grudgingly earned I might add) when he ran off because of a Tiff with ECH over goddess damned admin powerz on a fricking Internet Forum.
I left because I was only here based on a deal in the first place. When the deal was broken, there was no reason to remain.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 03, 2008, 12:16:12 AM
I miss Roger's posts and his hateshit and his mocking... I would love to see him return as a poster and admin... but not conditionally as if the Forum had wronged him, rather than a overworked aggravated admin. I stuck up for Roger when this happened and I wish I could now.
Roger, come play... please?
Hold one. I have an idea.
Quote from: Faust on March 03, 2008, 01:02:58 AM
Quote from: Nigel on March 03, 2008, 12:57:12 AM
I certainly do not want to feel rushed or extorted into choosing an admin.
nor I.
and I think we shouldn't worry about it until ech has his say.
Roger has been reinstated because people agree it was the wrong thing to do.
Okay, now let me make a suggestion.
Turn the MGT back over to ECH.
My reasons for this are fairly complex. Rant follows.
Would like Rog reinstated.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 03, 2008, 02:23:45 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 03, 2008, 01:02:58 AM
Quote from: Nigel on March 03, 2008, 12:57:12 AM
I certainly do not want to feel rushed or extorted into choosing an admin.
nor I.
and I think we shouldn't worry about it until ech has his say.
Roger has been reinstated because people agree it was the wrong thing to do.
Okay, now let me make a suggestion.
Turn the MGT back over to ECH.
My reasons for this are fairly complex. Rant follows.
hehe, this was unexpected and fun. *edge of seat*
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 03, 2008, 02:23:45 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 03, 2008, 01:02:58 AM
Quote from: Nigel on March 03, 2008, 12:57:12 AM
I certainly do not want to feel rushed or extorted into choosing an admin.
nor I.
and I think we shouldn't worry about it until ech has his say.
Roger has been reinstated because people agree it was the wrong thing to do.
Okay, now let me make a suggestion.
Turn the MGT back over to ECH.
My reasons for this are fairly complex. Rant follows.
I'm gonna duck and cover nao.
But welcome back (I hope) you glorious fucking spaggot.
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=15447.0
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=15447.0
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 04, 2008, 12:05:51 AM
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 02, 2008, 11:28:47 PMECH has stepped down
that's news to me, just FYI.
That was incorrect apparently. I was under the misapprehension that you'd stepped down, then slipped the word to a "secret Management" that Roger is a poor admin and can't be trusted when the reality turned out to be that you de-adminned him directly, had never stepped down, and had Faust back up your story.
But that's just what Faust told me on IRC, is that incorrect?
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 01, 2008, 01:34:56 PM
I abdicated and let someone else do my dirty work for me. Underhanded and Machiavellian, you say? Sure it was, but it allowed me to technically keep my word, which is important to me. Now that he's taken his voluntary leave of this site (his membership is still active and I believe he is still a mod, just not an admin), I'm gonna ask my long-time friend who was kind enough to take the reins for a bit if he'll turn the MGT account back over to me and there will be no more "secret mods" or whatever the fuck you wanna call it.
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 04, 2008, 12:05:51 AM
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 02, 2008, 11:28:47 PMECH has stepped down
that's news to me, just FYI.
Just Sayin'
Quote from: Paesior on March 04, 2008, 03:26:42 AM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 01, 2008, 01:34:56 PM
I abdicated and let someone else do my dirty work for me. Underhanded and Machiavellian, you say? Sure it was, but it allowed me to technically keep my word, which is important to me. Now that he's taken his voluntary leave of this site (his membership is still active and I believe he is still a mod, just not an admin), I'm gonna ask my long-time friend who was kind enough to take the reins for a bit if he'll turn the MGT account back over to me and there will be no more "secret mods" or whatever the fuck you wanna call it.
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 04, 2008, 12:05:51 AM
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 02, 2008, 11:28:47 PMECH has stepped down
that's news to me, just FYI.
Just Sayin'
Right, that wasn't true when he said it. Faust let me know about that on IRC, and he's out in the open about helping ECH's scheme.
I think Fred should be admin.
IAWTC.
Quote from: Hoopla on March 04, 2008, 12:26:05 PM
I think Fred should be admin.
She'd kill us all!
Um, wait...
fuck it... replace the whole cabinet :argh!:
Roger's leaving :aww: your rants are interesting and inspiring and have been but... maybe somebody else with some kind of creative ability will step up. But guess what, nobody steps up anything in this place. It all just amounts to trolling and handing out flyers. Whose mind is getting fucked? [sarcasm]We are really realigning peoples concept of reality now![/sarcasm]
Don't you have a family roger? Why do you spend so much time playing bullshit games on the internet? Why do you crave this admin power? Is it too much to ask you to be a regular poster? Of course it is. You fell into a groove here where people like you and you are comfortable and someone robbed you of it. Someone deprived you of the luxury of all the e-power and the e-cred and its a wRONGdoing... a travesty.
If anything, this "betrayal" or whatever you want to call this drama, is the closest thing i have seen to a MINDFUCK anywhere on this board. It has forced you, Roger, to re-evaluate many people you knew and trusted and took you way out of your "comfort zone." Cuz the deal that was made, the only thing
keeping you here was this deal that has been broken... your comfort bubble has burst. You have no reason to be here you claim... you just want to make things right... right.
What do i want to come as a result of this post? Good question. But when its over it will be over. Not resolved, just over.
Nothing like conspiracy and paranoia to make you take a closer look at things.
**its that purple not pretendo
Yesterday called, it wants its news back.
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 04, 2008, 03:12:03 AM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 04, 2008, 12:05:51 AM
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 02, 2008, 11:28:47 PMECH has stepped down
that's news to me, just FYI.
That was incorrect apparently. I was under the misapprehension that you'd stepped down, then slipped the word to a "secret Management" that Roger is a poor admin and can't be trusted when the reality turned out to be that you de-adminned him directly, had never stepped down, and had Faust back up your story.
But that's just what Faust told me on IRC, is that incorrect?
apologies. I thought you meant I had stepped down as an admin AFTER all this shit hit the fan, which was not the case.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 05, 2008, 07:06:37 AM
fuck it... replace the whole cabinet :argh!:
Roger's leaving :aww: your rants are interesting and inspiring and have been but... maybe somebody else with some kind of creative ability will step up. But guess what, nobody steps up anything in this place. It all just amounts to trolling and handing out flyers. Whose mind is getting fucked? [sarcasm]We are really realigning peoples concept of reality now![/sarcasm]
Don't you have a family roger? Why do you spend so much time playing bullshit games on the internet? Why do you crave this admin power? Is it too much to ask you to be a regular poster? Of course it is. You fell into a groove here where people like you and you are comfortable and someone robbed you of it. Someone deprived you of the luxury of all the e-power and the e-cred and its a wRONGdoing... a travesty.
If anything, this "betrayal" or whatever you want to call this drama, is the closest thing i have seen to a MINDFUCK anywhere on this board. It has forced you, Roger, to re-evaluate many people you knew and trusted and took you way out of your "comfort zone." Cuz the deal that was made, the only thing keeping you here was this deal that has been broken... your comfort bubble has burst. You have no reason to be here you claim... you just want to make things right... right.
What do i want to come as a result of this post? Good question. But when its over it will be over. Not resolved, just over.
Nothing like conspiracy and paranoia to make you take a closer look at things.
**its that purple not pretendo
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Quote from: Hoopla on March 05, 2008, 12:30:30 PM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 05, 2008, 07:06:37 AM
fuck it... replace the whole cabinet :argh!:
Roger's leaving :aww: your rants are interesting and inspiring and have been but... maybe somebody else with some kind of creative ability will step up. But guess what, nobody steps up anything in this place. It all just amounts to trolling and handing out flyers. Whose mind is getting fucked? [sarcasm]We are really realigning peoples concept of reality now![/sarcasm]
Don't you have a family roger? Why do you spend so much time playing bullshit games on the internet? Why do you crave this admin power? Is it too much to ask you to be a regular poster? Of course it is. You fell into a groove here where people like you and you are comfortable and someone robbed you of it. Someone deprived you of the luxury of all the e-power and the e-cred and its a wRONGdoing... a travesty.
If anything, this "betrayal" or whatever you want to call this drama, is the closest thing i have seen to a MINDFUCK anywhere on this board. It has forced you, Roger, to re-evaluate many people you knew and trusted and took you way out of your "comfort zone." Cuz the deal that was made, the only thing keeping you here was this deal that has been broken... your comfort bubble has burst. You have no reason to be here you claim... you just want to make things right... right.
What do i want to come as a result of this post? Good question. But when its over it will be over. Not resolved, just over.
Nothing like conspiracy and paranoia to make you take a closer look at things.
**its that purple not pretendo
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
lail
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 05, 2008, 12:10:33 PM
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 04, 2008, 03:12:03 AM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 04, 2008, 12:05:51 AM
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 02, 2008, 11:28:47 PMECH has stepped down
that's news to me, just FYI.
That was incorrect apparently. I was under the misapprehension that you'd stepped down, then slipped the word to a "secret Management" that Roger is a poor admin and can't be trusted when the reality turned out to be that you de-adminned him directly, had never stepped down, and had Faust back up your story.
But that's just what Faust told me on IRC, is that incorrect?
apologies. I thought you meant I had stepped down as an admin AFTER all this shit hit the fan, which was not the case.
Just checking. I had some bad intel to begin with and it's all been confusing.
I should also apologize to everyone I pissed off by getting so involved in this whole mess.
yeah, you did seem to be freaking out without anyone in charge...
There's nothing fun to do here, so sue me. :p
(ETA: The physical here, where I am.)
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 05, 2008, 07:06:37 AM
Don't you have a family roger? Why do you spend so much time playing bullshit games on the internet?
I don't see any reason to grace this with an answer.
Does anyone else?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 06, 2008, 03:23:26 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 05, 2008, 07:06:37 AM
Don't you have a family roger? Why do you spend so much time playing bullshit games on the internet?
I don't see any reason to grace this with an answer.
Does anyone else?
The way he worded that? Hellz no.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 06, 2008, 03:23:26 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 05, 2008, 07:06:37 AM
Don't you have a family roger? Why do you spend so much time playing bullshit games on the internet?
I don't see any reason to grace this with an answer.
Does anyone else?
Oh "I" think you should grace it with the sort of answer you are best at ;-)
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 06, 2008, 03:20:48 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 06, 2008, 03:23:26 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 05, 2008, 07:06:37 AM
Don't you have a family roger? Why do you spend so much time playing bullshit games on the internet?
I don't see any reason to grace this with an answer.
Does anyone else?
Oh "I" think you should grace it with the sort of answer you are best at ;-)
Ohhh, ohhh! Let me....
Lecherous: KYSFTB
So is this guy an alt or is that another teehee at the conspiracy stuff?
Not an alt. :roll:
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 05, 2008, 07:06:37 AM
fuck it... replace the whole cabinet :argh!:
Roger's leaving :aww: your rants are interesting and inspiring and have been but... maybe somebody else with some kind of creative ability will step up. But guess what, nobody steps up anything in this place. It all just amounts to trolling and handing out flyers. Whose mind is getting fucked? [sarcasm]We are really realigning peoples concept of reality now![/sarcasm]
Alright, this bit pissed me off. No doubt Roger offers some mega-mitten quality rants, and he has a stunning ability to be prolific without and degradation of quality whatsoever.
But, the rest of us are no chumps. I know I don't put out nearly as much but I think I've been able to offer an occassional worthy rant/sermon. Sepia is always bringing the thunder, MS has delivered, Cain, Silly, the list does on and on, etc., etc.,
Of course YOU could step up and offer that which you contend we are missing. No one's stopping you.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 06, 2008, 04:26:48 PM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 05, 2008, 07:06:37 AM
fuck it... replace the whole cabinet :argh!:
Roger's leaving :aww: your rants are interesting and inspiring and have been but... maybe somebody else with some kind of creative ability will step up. But guess what, nobody steps up anything in this place. It all just amounts to trolling and handing out flyers. Whose mind is getting fucked? [sarcasm]We are really realigning peoples concept of reality now![/sarcasm]
Alright, this bit pissed me off. No doubt Roger offers some mega-mitten quality rants, and he has a stunning ability to be prolific without and degradation of quality whatsoever.
But, the rest of us are no chumps. I know I don't put out nearly as much but I think I've been able to offer an occassional worthy rant/sermon. Sepia is always bringing the thunder, MS has delivered, Cain, Silly, the list does on and on, etc., etc.,
Of course YOU could step up and offer that which you contend we are missing. No one's stopping you.
I agree... Roger is one of many who contribute and honestly, Roger contributes a particular type of content, but not much other than his particular style of rant. (No offense to Roger meant!!!). Other people like Cain, Silly, Cram, Sepia, RHWN etc all produce other kinds of content... some of them with a rather interesting breadth to their material. Roger makes some great zingers and I missed him when he wasn't around... but I didn't think PD suffered for a lack of content.
I was going to ignore the irony of Pope Lech talking about people standing up when he has contributed exactly...how much in rants and similar content again?
Quote from: Cain on March 06, 2008, 04:39:27 PM
I was going to ignore the irony of Pope Lech talking about people standing up when he has contributed exactly...how much in rants and similar content again?
Oh oh! I know the answer to this one....
"Fuck all"
Quote from: Cain on March 06, 2008, 04:18:05 PM
Not an alt. :roll:
Pope Lech seems to know a lot of back history for someone with so few posts (not that I checked when he or she signed up, but . . .) What about a proxy?
Quote from: Hoopla on March 06, 2008, 06:13:55 PMQuote from: Cain on March 06, 2008, 04:18:05 PMNot an alt. :roll:
Pope Lech seems to know a lot of back history for someone with so few posts (not that I checked when he or she signed up, but . . .) What about a proxy?
no, he really has been around for quite some time, but is mostly lurking it seems.
I remember him now, (after doing a little archaeology), he totally misinterpreted something I wrote and it resulted in a few pages of fail. I think perhaps he is still carrying a grudge.
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=13673.0 (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=13673.0)
eta: his part starts at the bottom of the first page
Ok, I take the accusation back. He's just a douche.
I remember now. Pope Boldtype the Seoulja-Bwoy who thinks that we have no right to be annoyed at our "petty" tribulations, because there's a WAR OUT THAR AND OUR FREEDOM AND WAY OF LIFE HANGS IN THE BALANCE.
call me when he crawls his fat fucking ass back into his couch-fort and pretends to be in a foxhole in Iraq again.
Quote from: Mourning Star on March 06, 2008, 05:58:15 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 06, 2008, 04:39:27 PM
I was going to ignore the irony of Pope Lech talking about people standing up when he has contributed exactly...how much in rants and similar content again?
Oh oh! I know the answer to this one....
"Fuck all"
You are both right, i dont contribute shit to this website but my 10 cents. But i like this forum and i come back because of people like Cain, Silly, Cram, Sepia, RHWN and others who turn out interesting shit. But i am DAMN CONFIDENT that i produce more than handing out flyers and pamphlets... as important as it is to expose people to Discordia, this just aint enough. My doings are not online oh well. My rants are spoken and spontaneous. The things i say can mean the difference between life and death, why not take advantage of that position and use it to rant discordia?
You can call me whatever you want mourning star and imply that i am one of
those but i ain't. It's okay though, that flatulence you released in the form of a post shows great courage. It is easy for anyone to be as ignorant as you but it takes
courage to be as ignorant as you and to speak it so that everyone may recognize it. Maybe someone will correct you and wisdom will have been gained, or maybe not. Of course your idiocy inspired some others to shed their fear and jump on the bandwagon of talking shit and grouping up. :roll:
and i'm not fat by any means, and i havent done a couch-fort as recently as you probably have... you're closer to your childhood than i am, intellectually at least.
As far as conspiracy is concerned, didnt someone say faust was on board with this "betrayal"? Who else was? Who is so much of a pussy that they cant tell Roger they dont like him and want him gone? I dont want him gone. Some people do though.
You know just enough about the history of this board to be dangerous, and no where near enough to understand its social and cyclic dynamics.
Does that lack of knowledge of this board's relations imply that i could not be an effective troll here? Or does it imply that i'm not into trolling? Or are you trying to say something else?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 07, 2008, 01:05:14 AM
Does that lack of knowledge of this boards relations imply that i could not be an effective troll here?
Look around. You are surrounded by some of the greatest trolls of our generation.
but somehow i completely misunderstood rwhn's post.
Quote from: B_M_W on March 06, 2008, 05:10:40 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 06, 2008, 03:23:26 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 05, 2008, 07:06:37 AM
Don't you have a family roger? Why do you spend so much time playing bullshit games on the internet?
I don't see any reason to grace this with an answer.
Does anyone else?
The way he worded that? Hellz no.
Period, hellz no.
My personal life is my business. My internet usage is my business.
I don't feel any need to answer any questions about it. If I decide to talk about it, I will. I will not respond well to transparent attempts to humiliate, as in PL's post.
It's really that simple.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 06, 2008, 04:34:06 PM
I agree... Roger is one of many who contribute and honestly, Roger contributes a particular type of content, but not much other than his particular style of rant. (No offense to Roger meant!!!).
I am what I am.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 07, 2008, 12:12:46 AM
Quote from: Mourning Star on March 06, 2008, 05:58:15 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 06, 2008, 04:39:27 PM
I was going to ignore the irony of Pope Lech talking about people standing up when he has contributed exactly...how much in rants and similar content again?
Oh oh! I know the answer to this one....
"Fuck all"
You are both right, i dont contribute shit to this website but my 10 cents. But i like this forum and i come back because of people like Cain, Silly, Cram, Sepia, RHWN and others who turn out interesting shit. But i am DAMN CONFIDENT that i produce more than handing out flyers and pamphlets... as important as it is to expose people to Discordia, this just aint enough. My doings are not online oh well. My rants are spoken and spontaneous. The things i say can mean the difference between life and death, why not take advantage of that position and use it to rant discordia?
You can call me whatever you want mourning star and imply that i am one of those but i ain't. It's okay though, that flatulence you released in the form of a post shows great courage. It is easy for anyone to be as ignorant as you but it takes courage to be as ignorant as you and to speak it so that everyone may recognize it. Maybe someone will correct you and wisdom will have been gained, or maybe not. Of course your idiocy inspired some others to shed their fear and jump on the bandwagon of talking shit and grouping up. :roll:
and i'm not fat by any means, and i havent done a couch-fort as recently as you probably have... you're closer to your childhood than i am, intellectually at least.
As far as conspiracy is concerned, didnt someone say faust was on board with this "betrayal"? Who else was? Who is so much of a pussy that they cant tell Roger they dont like him and want him gone? I dont want him gone. Some people do though.
Making friends fast, eh, asshole?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 07, 2008, 01:17:03 AM
but somehow i completely misunderstood damn near everything, ever
Fixed that for you.
Also, it appears that you might be slightly delusional. At the very least, you're depressed and utterly wrought with negative emotions.
But this AMAZING book will help you to fix all that. It tells us how to deal with the reactive mind, the cause of all of our negative emotions. It was written by an absolute genius of a man. Perhaps you've heard of it?
(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/d/da/LRonHubbard-Dianetics-ISBN1403105464-cover.jpg)
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 07, 2008, 12:12:46 AM
Quote from: Mourning Star on March 06, 2008, 05:58:15 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 06, 2008, 04:39:27 PM
I was going to ignore the irony of Pope Lech talking about people standing up when he has contributed exactly...how much in rants and similar content again?
Oh oh! I know the answer to this one....
"Fuck all"
You are both right, i dont contribute shit to this website but my 10 cents. But i like this forum and i come back because of people like Cain, Silly, Cram, Sepia, RHWN and others who turn out interesting shit. But i am DAMN CONFIDENT that i produce more than handing out flyers and pamphlets... as important as it is to expose people to Discordia, this just aint enough. My doings are not online oh well. My rants are spoken and spontaneous. The things i say can mean the difference between life and death, why not take advantage of that position and use it to rant discordia?
Life and Death? Would you like to expound on Life saving rants... should make for an interesting discussion.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 07, 2008, 02:12:04 AM
Quote from: B_M_W on March 06, 2008, 05:10:40 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 06, 2008, 03:23:26 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 05, 2008, 07:06:37 AM
Don't you have a family roger? Why do you spend so much time playing bullshit games on the internet?
I don't see any reason to grace this with an answer.
Does anyone else?
The way he worded that? Hellz no.
Period, hellz no.
My personal life is my business. My internet usage is my business.
I don't feel any need to answer any questions about it. If I decide to talk about it, I will. I will not respond well to transparent attempts to humiliate, as in PL's post.
It's really that simple.
Thats basically what I meant. I understand.
Quote from: B_M_W on March 07, 2008, 03:57:40 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 07, 2008, 02:12:04 AM
Quote from: B_M_W on March 06, 2008, 05:10:40 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 06, 2008, 03:23:26 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 05, 2008, 07:06:37 AM
Don't you have a family roger? Why do you spend so much time playing bullshit games on the internet?
I don't see any reason to grace this with an answer.
Does anyone else?
The way he worded that? Hellz no.
Period, hellz no.
My personal life is my business. My internet usage is my business.
I don't feel any need to answer any questions about it. If I decide to talk about it, I will. I will not respond well to transparent attempts to humiliate, as in PL's post.
It's really that simple.
Thats basically what I meant. I understand.
I know. I was both agreeing with you, and using your post as a springboard for more hate.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 07, 2008, 03:18:06 AM
Life and Death? Would you like to expound on Life saving rants... should make for an interesting discussion.
I was talking about how the decisions and things i say during the course of work can mean life or death. Having that position, having those ears... i rant a lot. It usually comes in the form of an ass chewing to my Marines.
There was one life saving rant, though. A Marine was going to kill himself and i talked him back down to a level where he wasn't going to hurt himself, then i talked to him about BIP type stuff.
Also, there have been death inspiring rants.
Quote from: Mourning Star on March 07, 2008, 02:20:14 AM
Also, it appears that you might be slightly delusional. At the very least, you're depressed and utterly wrought with negative emotions.
But this AMAZING book will help you to fix all that. It tells us how to deal with the reactive mind, the cause of all of our negative emotions. It was written by an absolute genius of a man. Perhaps you've heard of it?
Delusional, maybe or maybe not. I am certainly not lying about my profession or what i do or do not do. That was a good... uhh... joke there about scientology. Really, how can you make me feel worse about myself? Your jokes are getting less funny and sounding more desperate... the scientology one only made me chuckle compared to your previous ones. Are you more hesitant now to showcase your ignorance? Don't let me be the one to rob you of your courage.
wtfs going on here ? whoa no need to hate monger! (moar than necessary) :|
(http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/11/03/22570311.jpg)
Ugh, I guess he still has a grudge. Sorry I dug it back up guys.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 07, 2008, 09:29:05 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 07, 2008, 03:18:06 AM
Life and Death? Would you like to expound on Life saving rants... should make for an interesting discussion.
I was talking about how the decisions and things i say during the course of work can mean life or death. Having that position, having those ears... i rant a lot. It usually comes in the form of an ass chewing to my Marines.
There was one life saving rant, though. A Marine was going to kill himself and i talked him back down to a level where he wasn't going to hurt himself, then i talked to him about BIP type stuff.
Also, there have been death inspiring rants.
Ah... don't mind me, I'm gonna go laugh my ass off in the corner... be right back.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 07, 2008, 03:10:14 PM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 07, 2008, 09:29:05 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 07, 2008, 03:18:06 AM
Life and Death? Would you like to expound on Life saving rants... should make for an interesting discussion.
I was talking about how the decisions and things i say during the course of work can mean life or death. Having that position, having those ears... i rant a lot. It usually comes in the form of an ass chewing to my Marines.
There was one life saving rant, though. A Marine was going to kill himself and i talked him back down to a level where he wasn't going to hurt himself, then i talked to him about BIP type stuff.
Also, there have been death inspiring rants.
Ah... don't mind me, I'm gonna go laugh my ass off in the corner... be right back.
Make sure you save someone along the way, or else you = fail. :lol:
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 07, 2008, 03:38:41 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 07, 2008, 03:10:14 PM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 07, 2008, 09:29:05 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 07, 2008, 03:18:06 AM
Life and Death? Would you like to expound on Life saving rants... should make for an interesting discussion.
I was talking about how the decisions and things i say during the course of work can mean life or death. Having that position, having those ears... i rant a lot. It usually comes in the form of an ass chewing to my Marines.
There was one life saving rant, though. A Marine was going to kill himself and i talked him back down to a level where he wasn't going to hurt himself, then i talked to him about BIP type stuff.
Also, there have been death inspiring rants.
Ah... don't mind me, I'm gonna go laugh my ass off in the corner... be right back.
Make sure you save someone along the way, or else you = fail. :lol:
Oh its OK, I saw a small tribe of Sand People caught in the current Ohio snowstorm outside. I ranted at them until they left, so I'm sure I saved them... those robes aren't any good in the snow.
Wait, wasn't the bit about talking a soldier down with BIP stuff one of Wolfpoet's routines?
Curious...
Quote from: LMNO on March 07, 2008, 04:26:52 PM
Wait, wasn't the bit about talking a soldier down with BIP stuff one of Wolfpoet's routines?
Curious...
LOL, I have several friends in Iraq currently... I wonder if they know PL?
If Pope L. really is a Marine, then, well. gosh that give him all sorts of street cred in my book.
American Marines are people who go somewhere and start killing the natives and, when the natives start shooting back, the Marines begin patting themselves on the back for "making life-or-death decisions" and "putting their lives on the line for freedom."
Just how does one who chooses to be a lethal tool of the System qualify to lecture anyone?
Ah well. Sing:
We are fighting for Halliburton,
we're fighting for Bush;
we don't care who we kill or whose face we beat to bloody mush.
We're American Marines, and we kill for the status quo;
and everyone's WEAL SCAWED of us, everywhere we go.
Chorus:
Fuck off! Fuck off! Fuck off! Fuck off!
----
What I've read of Roger's content I like. He's got a good tight prose style. In my philosophy forum mods and admins only exist to enable content creators. *shrugs* But that idea nearly always degrades in the harsh bitchiness of reality.
I hope all providers of good content stick around. I hope moderators stay out of their way, and smite idiots, spammers, and the useless, as is their job.
~~ Jack of Turnips
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 07, 2008, 09:29:05 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 07, 2008, 03:18:06 AM
Life and Death? Would you like to expound on Life saving rants... should make for an interesting discussion.
I was talking about how the decisions and things i say during the course of work can mean life or death. Having that position, having those ears... i rant a lot. It usually comes in the form of an ass chewing to my Marines.
There was one life saving rant, though. A Marine was going to kill himself and i talked him back down to a level where he wasn't going to hurt himself, then i talked to him about BIP type stuff.
Also, there have been death inspiring rants.
ZOMG! You have the power to SAVE or to DESTROY just by yammering! Hallelujah!
As if people aren't always talking-talking just to hear themselves make noise, now one's getting the idea that his incessant blather has the Power of Jesus. :roll:
wow.
I thought this thread couldn't possibly be any more full of FAIL than it already was, but then Pope Leecherous came through and proved me very wrong.
Quote from: Jack of Turnips on March 07, 2008, 04:49:31 PM
If Pope L. really is a Marine, then, well. gosh that give him all sorts of street cred in my book.
American Marines are people who go somewhere and start killing the natives and, when the natives start shooting back, the Marines begin patting themselves on the back for "making life-or-death decisions" and "putting their lives on the line for freedom."
Just how does one who chooses to be a lethal tool of the System qualify to lecture anyone?
I'm not in the infantry. My targets are enemy aircraft and missiles. Maybe it is not clear before what i said. My rants target Marines in my charge whose behavior needs modified. People listen to my rants because of my position. I have talked more than one of my friends out of suicide, the incident i mentioned was the first time that during the process, Discordianism came into play. Is that unclear? Is that too fantastic to believe?
I'm not in iraq right now, i'm doing something else in another theater. My rants are not mindfucks, my rants simply modify behavior. LMNO if you think i ripped off this story from somewhere it doesnt matter, cuz this shit really happened. What's up with all these haters anyway? Nothing i said is false, or hard to believe. Some people are on the verge of suicide all the time and it usually comes to a climax after a series of events of really shitty things happening. You think it would be hard to find a suicidal Marine, or a Marine who is depressed? NO NO that is CRAZY.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 07, 2008, 09:38:41 AM
Your jokes are getting less funny and sounding more desperate...
That's a matter of perspective.
I thought it was funny and appropriate.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 08, 2008, 01:10:44 AM
Maybe it is not clear before what i said. My rants target Marines in my charge whose behavior needs modified. People listen to my rants because of my position.
YOU PEOPLE DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF PSYCHIATRY. I UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF PSYCHIATRY.
(http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/05_01/Cruise180507_468x499.jpg)
Of course Marines are depressed and suicidal. They've been told they are fighting to "save American freedom" when it's plain fact that no Marine has fought for any such cause in 50 years or more. American freedom has not been seriously threatened since WWII. And it's arguable whether Japanese imperialism in the Pacific threatened the American homeland even then.
I've watched American military adventures for 50 years, and I can find no other explanation: every few years an American president gets an uncontrollable urge to jerk a wad of blood into his monogrammed silk handkerchief. Korea. Vietnam. Grenada. Lebanon. Somalia. Iraq. Even Afghanistan is a mostly masturbatory, mostly narcissistic power-orgasm without solid justification. Naturally it's always other peoples' blood that gets the president's dirty rocks off.
Of course military personnel are suicidal. They've been lied to, but their extensive mind-indoctrination demands that they believe the lie. Fight for the lie. Kill and die for it. In their hearts they know damn' well that American freedom is not threatened. They know that in theaters back home movies are playing, cars are cruising the streets, people are partying and raving and getting down, and American freedom is not threatened in the least.
They are overseas only so a few politicians can reach power-orgasm.
And that's it.
Drunk driving kills five times as many people every year as died in that never-repeated attack on September 11, 2001. The Marines would do America more good if they deployed on US highways instead of fucking around overseas. But presidents seem to need to use America's military as a surrogate penis now and then. Hundreds of thousands of people have died to satisfy American presidents' masturbatory military urges.
An enlightened and compassionate being would see these bloody spasms as crimes against humanity, plain and simple
Mindfuck? Sorry, the whole American notion of mass-murder-as-foreign-policy is a mindfuck. Get over it.
~~ Jack of Turnips
:mittens:
:mittens:
Quote from: barumunk on March 07, 2008, 09:51:08 AM
wtfs going on here ? whoa no need to hate monger! (moar than necessary) :|
PDcom used to have a rep for being supremely hateful. There is EVERY need to hate monger.
Quote from: Jack of Turnips on March 08, 2008, 04:30:05 AM
Mindfuck? Sorry, the whole American notion of mass-murder-as-foreign-policy is a mindfuck. Get over it.
I like it. My rants may or may have not had similar content. For whatever reason someone has chosen to join the military, especially the Marine Corps, we are not tools of the military. The military is a tool (a weapon), of the government. They give us a target and let us loose. They point us and shoot. You are one of the few people that has seemed to recognize this as you stated it in the course of your last post. The ones to be upset at would be the President or whichever oligarch the people elected.
We are Uncle Sam's Misguided Children after all. As far as a mindfuck is concerned, i never said my rants were mindfucks. This all came up because someone said I dont contribute anything to the site, I agreed with them and then said that my rants are spoken aloud. I use my position at work to get the message across more forcefully than a flyer or a pamphlet. Now a question. Is it you or others that consider a rant as a mindfuck?
edit** Sorry for the late modification
I know that i am not fighting for freedom in this certain battle. You've been lied to by the media and the government about why we are fighting. You recognize the lie and you know its a lie, so why do you keep fighting it? The reason we are fighting now are to protect the assets that make America a powerful nation. That's it. If you want to take it further, then yes. Technically we are fighting for freedom, but not really. If our standard of living could be considered freedom, than we are fighting to keep the assets that secure this standard of living against our enemies and others who wouldn't have us live this way. But as we are being employed now, we are trying to preserve our nation's power. The Marine Corps is an organization of killers. I'm not into politics, you are. Those Marines that violate the Law of War should be punished dearly. As for myself, I have never caused death to someone who was not attacking us or our assets. Hope that clears things up a little bit.
Quote from: Jack of Turnips on March 08, 2008, 04:30:05 AM
Of course Marines are depressed and suicidal. They've been told they are fighting to "save American freedom" when it's plain fact that no Marine has fought for any such cause in 50 years or more. American freedom has not been seriously threatened since WWII. And it's arguable whether Japanese imperialism in the Pacific threatened the American homeland even then.
I've watched American military adventures for 50 years, and I can find no other explanation: every few years an American president gets an uncontrollable urge to jerk a wad of blood into his monogrammed silk handkerchief. Korea. Vietnam. Grenada. Lebanon. Somalia. Iraq. Even Afghanistan is a mostly masturbatory, mostly narcissistic power-orgasm without solid justification. Naturally it's always other peoples' blood that gets the president's dirty rocks off.
Of course military personnel are suicidal. They've been lied to, but their extensive mind-indoctrination demands that they believe the lie. Fight for the lie. Kill and die for it. In their hearts they know damn' well that American freedom is not threatened. They know that in theaters back home movies are playing, cars are cruising the streets, people are partying and raving and getting down, and American freedom is not threatened in the least.
They are overseas only so a few politicians can reach power-orgasm.
And that's it.
Drunk driving kills five times as many people every year as died in that never-repeated attack on September 11, 2001. The Marines would do America more good if they deployed on US highways instead of fucking around overseas. But presidents seem to need to use America's military as a surrogate penis now and then. Hundreds of thousands of people have died to satisfy American presidents' masturbatory military urges.
An enlightened and compassionate being would see these bloody spasms as crimes against humanity, plain and simple
Mindfuck? Sorry, the whole American notion of mass-murder-as-foreign-policy is a mindfuck. Get over it.
~~ Jack of Turnips
:mittens:
You are my new SDPS.
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 08, 2008, 06:15:20 AM
Quote from: barumunk on March 07, 2008, 09:51:08 AM
wtfs going on here ? whoa no need to hate monger! (moar than necessary) :|
PDcom used to have a rep for being supremely hateful. There is EVERY need to hate monger.
We've been slacking. We should go stomp on a Pagan board or something.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 08, 2008, 11:26:54 AM
I use my position at work to get the message across more forcefully than a flyer or a pamphlet.
Well, that's fine...in your position. However, those of outside of the Marines have no captive audience, so we have to find other methods.
TGRR,
Thinks maybe your message is being "received" by men who secretly hate your guts.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 08, 2008, 02:37:53 PM
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 08, 2008, 06:15:20 AM
Quote from: barumunk on March 07, 2008, 09:51:08 AM
wtfs going on here ? whoa no need to hate monger! (moar than necessary) :|
PDcom used to have a rep for being supremely hateful. There is EVERY need to hate monger.
We've been slacking. We should go stomp on a Pagan board or something.
I am reliably informed PD.com stormtroopers are STILL causing trouble on TCC. Even better, they're making the new people that have shown up in the last couple of months doubt the benevolent nature of their "Council of Elders" overlords.
Quote from: Cain on March 08, 2008, 02:43:42 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 08, 2008, 02:37:53 PM
Quote from: Dr. Felix Mackay on March 08, 2008, 06:15:20 AM
Quote from: barumunk on March 07, 2008, 09:51:08 AM
wtfs going on here ? whoa no need to hate monger! (moar than necessary) :|
PDcom used to have a rep for being supremely hateful. There is EVERY need to hate monger.
We've been slacking. We should go stomp on a Pagan board or something.
I am reliably informed PD.com stormtroopers are STILL causing trouble on TCC. Even better, they're making the new people that have shown up in the last couple of months doubt the benevolent nature of their "Council of Elders" overlords.
Perhaps, but that's perceived as more of an EB&G thing.
We need to do something
grotesque.
Quote from: Jack of Turnips on March 08, 2008, 04:30:05 AM
Of course Marines are depressed and suicidal. They've been told they are fighting to "save American freedom" when it's plain fact that no Marine has fought for any such cause in 50 years or more. American freedom has not been seriously threatened since WWII. And it's arguable whether Japanese imperialism in the Pacific threatened the American homeland even then.
I've watched American military adventures for 50 years, and I can find no other explanation: every few years an American president gets an uncontrollable urge to jerk a wad of blood into his monogrammed silk handkerchief. Korea. Vietnam. Grenada. Lebanon. Somalia. Iraq. Even Afghanistan is a mostly masturbatory, mostly narcissistic power-orgasm without solid justification. Naturally it's always other peoples' blood that gets the president's dirty rocks off.
Of course military personnel are suicidal. They've been lied to, but their extensive mind-indoctrination demands that they believe the lie. Fight for the lie. Kill and die for it. In their hearts they know damn' well that American freedom is not threatened. They know that in theaters back home movies are playing, cars are cruising the streets, people are partying and raving and getting down, and American freedom is not threatened in the least.
They are overseas only so a few politicians can reach power-orgasm.
And that's it.
Drunk driving kills five times as many people every year as died in that never-repeated attack on September 11, 2001. The Marines would do America more good if they deployed on US highways instead of fucking around overseas. But presidents seem to need to use America's military as a surrogate penis now and then. Hundreds of thousands of people have died to satisfy American presidents' masturbatory military urges.
An enlightened and compassionate being would see these bloody spasms as crimes against humanity, plain and simple
Mindfuck? Sorry, the whole American notion of mass-murder-as-foreign-policy is a mindfuck. Get over it.
~~ Jack of Turnips
I too will throw some :mittens: to the pile.
ITT: New guy under 50 posts kicks it W S Burroughs style. Nice!
lmfao at "surrogate penis"
:mittens: to Jack
Thanks guys. But now I have performance anxiety.
:lulz:
~~ Jack of Turnips
i was guessing "Short Duration Personal Saviour", or something along those lines.
Quote from: triple zero on March 08, 2008, 11:37:03 PM
i was guessing "Short Duration Personal Saviour", or something along those lines.
Yeah, but I'm kinda buying into Felix's definition.
Thank you, Jack of Turnips, for that. :)
And as for you, Pope Lecherous -
Whether you like it or not, you are a tool of the military. You are a tool because you have forgotten that the person you shoot may just have more worth than that which your country tells you. You are a tool because you are content to value abstractions over humanity. You are a tool because even though you and me and everybody else realizes that what you fight for is a lie, you continue to without question.
Why?
Is it because you have a mortgage to pay? Or a family to raise? Or is it merely because you have forgotten how to Think for Yourself?
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 09, 2008, 09:21:15 PM
Thank you, Jack of Turnips, for that. :)
And as for you, Pope Lecherous -
Whether you like it or not, you are a tool of the military. You are a tool because you have forgotten that the person you shoot may just have more worth than that which your country tells you. You are a tool because you are content to value abstractions over humanity. You are a tool because even though you and me and everybody else realizes that what you fight for is a lie, you continue to without question.
Why?
Is it because you have a mortgage to pay? Or a family to raise? Or is it merely because you have forgotten how to Think for Yourself?
People serve for all sorts of reasons. I thought I was defending the republic.
I got better, of course.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 09, 2008, 10:55:06 PM
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 09, 2008, 09:21:15 PM
Thank you, Jack of Turnips, for that. :)
And as for you, Pope Lecherous -
Whether you like it or not, you are a tool of the military. You are a tool because you have forgotten that the person you shoot may just have more worth than that which your country tells you. You are a tool because you are content to value abstractions over humanity. You are a tool because even though you and me and everybody else realizes that what you fight for is a lie, you continue to without question.
Why?
Is it because you have a mortgage to pay? Or a family to raise? Or is it merely because you have forgotten how to Think for Yourself?
People serve for all sorts of reasons. I thought I was defending the republic.
I got better, of course.
You mean you got over it. You get worse with every day that passes.
I'm considering serving in the Australian army because
1) its the one place my degree is useful without having to join a political party, most of whom I disagree with
2) its Australia. Our national policy in times of war is to follow America and Britain, and liberate alcohol, then hide. Plus Rudd will likely not agree with any invasions of places like Iran, Syria etc
3) I like to make things go booom!
4) The way things are going, in the short term, knowing how to use firearms and being familiar with the security services of the state will be useful, even if I serve the minimum
5) In the long term, having had a job with an empahsis on physical fitness, firearms training and first aid will come in useful when I'm picking through the blasted remains of civilization
6) Something
7) I havent really thought this through in any detail, but it is a distant possibility
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 09, 2008, 09:21:15 PM
Whether you like it or not, you are a tool of the military.
I am a tool of the
government. I'm supposed to be the last tool they use, but oh well. As far as being a tool of the military, the military is comprised of many people, each with their own agenda. As a singular entity the military's only goal is to continue to exist, just like one of those memetic entity things you guys talk about.
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 09, 2008, 09:21:15 PM
You are a tool because you have forgotten that the person you shoot may just have more worth than that which your country tells you. You are a tool because you are content to value abstractions over humanity.
Yea you're right. I value ABSTRACTIONS over humanity. Like people who support capital punishment may value Justice or Revenge over the life (
humanity) of a murderer or rapist. The justice system isn't perfect and innocent people may be imprisoned for life or even executed. Military intelligence is even more fallible, yet we make the best with what we got. The majority of my targets with 100% certainty were the enemy and were guilty, as for the coordinates of targets on the ground that i may have passed to a pilot... well. I hope that man with the radio with eyes on target who told me they were bad guys, isn't a sick man. I protect assets that make America powerful, human and non-human. That is what i do.
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 09, 2008, 09:21:15 PM
You are a tool because even though you and me and everybody else realizes that what you fight for is a lie, you continue to without question.
I addressed what i fight for in a previous post and i restated it just now... our strength. If the government will use that strength i provide and secure and use it for unjust causes, take that up with the oligarch that YOU elected. If you didnt elect him, oh well, that's democracy for you.
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 09, 2008, 09:21:15 PM
Is it because you have a mortgage to pay? Or a family to raise? Or is it merely because you have forgotten how to Think for Yourself?
No, No, and I'm not sure... what do your fellow board members think?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 09, 2008, 11:24:55 PM
I addressed what i fight for in a previous post and i restated it just now... our strength. If the government will use that strength i provide and secure and use it for unjust causes, take that up with the oligarch that YOU elected. If you didnt elect him, oh well, that's democracy for you.
You're still the one who signed up for the job and keeps doing it.
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on March 09, 2008, 11:44:08 PM
You're still the one who signed up for the job and keeps doing it.
If the government employs or mis-employs the military to secure power for itself or power for the country, than that is fine. It is this power that maintains the American standard of living. If you and i cannot see what is necessary, you have already entrusted your vote to the candidate you THINK will do the right thing. Suppose GW is doing the right thing, to save America in the long run. I DONT KNOW AND NEITHER DO YOU. Often times these things are not written in the history books, even if he is hated and labeled by history as the ruiner of the American economy for many years, only the players involved in this game will ever know the truth. Reserve your judgement, because you are not involved in any of the decisions he has to make BASED ON INFORMATION YOU DO NOT KNOW.
Commitment and Honor. 2 more of my sillly abstractions. If i knew what George knew and what he didnt know, then maybe i could tell him what to do. Until then, i will do my job like i am supposed to. Like you do yours, where ever you work, for whoever you work for... and whoever he works for... and whoever he works for. Maybe he intends to use your labor and get rich and destroy America!
George has the gun. The man you elected will give him permission to pull the trigger or not. Whisper in this man's ear and tell him no, you want peace. Whisper in his ear and tell him you are scared, they must die cuz
they are gonna kill us. I am the gun. The man you are whispering to isnt listening to you. Deal with it. But i wont take away America's weapon.
Okay, really, why the hell are you here? I mean, forgetting for the moment that you willingly gave up your freedoms to serve a group a people who destroy lives for a moment, are you really so goddamned fucked in the head that you're willing to default to the wisdom of a politician? Or that the American standard of living (which is dropping drastically BTW) is the most important thing for the military to be securing? I mean, I thought my parents were fucked up as far as cabbages go, but it scares the ever loving piss out of me to think that there might be more people like you out there, let alone that they're allowed to have guns.
Quote from: Requiem on March 10, 2008, 12:32:39 AM
are you really so goddamned fucked in the head that you're willing to default to the wisdom of a politician? is [American power] the most important thing for the military to be securing?
List some other good reasons America should have a military, and i just might agree with you! This whole system is based on the premise that we elect someone who has our best interests at heart and will do what it takes to preserve our liberties. We should vote for people in accordance with that belief. If we can't, then apparently, we need to re-examine the way our government works and the way we govern ourselves. If i had it my way a clan of Discordians would run the whole show. I really don't know which system is the best.
Quote from: Requiem on March 10, 2008, 12:32:39 AM
I mean, forgetting for the moment that you willingly gave up your freedoms to serve a group...
...Or that the American standard of living (which is dropping drastically BTW)
If my quality of life and freedoms are of so little value, why is it hard to believe that i would give them up, if not to at least maintain what i have OR (more optimistically) so my successors will have a better life and enjoy more freedoms?
Quote from: Payne on March 09, 2008, 11:05:32 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 09, 2008, 10:55:06 PM
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 09, 2008, 09:21:15 PM
Thank you, Jack of Turnips, for that. :)
And as for you, Pope Lecherous -
Whether you like it or not, you are a tool of the military. You are a tool because you have forgotten that the person you shoot may just have more worth than that which your country tells you. You are a tool because you are content to value abstractions over humanity. You are a tool because even though you and me and everybody else realizes that what you fight for is a lie, you continue to without question.
Why?
Is it because you have a mortgage to pay? Or a family to raise? Or is it merely because you have forgotten how to Think for Yourself?
People serve for all sorts of reasons. I thought I was defending the republic.
I got better, of course.
You mean you got over it. You get worse with every day that passes.
You are simply jealous.
Why, there are entire societies that worship me as a figure of serenity and calm.
TGRR,
So close to the Buddha, he does my taxes.
PS: Plus, you're jealous that I'm alive and you aren't.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 12:02:14 AM
If the government employs or mis-employs the military to secure power for itself or power for the country, than that is fine. It is this power that maintains the American standard of living. If you and i cannot see what is necessary, you have already entrusted your vote to the candidate you THINK will do the right thing. Suppose GW is doing the right thing, to save America in the long run. I DONT KNOW AND NEITHER DO YOU. Often times these things are not written in the history books, even if he is hated and labeled by history as the ruiner of the American economy for many years, only the players involved in this game will ever know the truth. Reserve your judgement, because you are not involved in any of the decisions he has to make BASED ON INFORMATION YOU DO NOT KNOW.
Commitment and Honor. 2 more of my sillly abstractions. If i knew what George knew and what he didnt know, then maybe i could tell him what to do. Until then, i will do my job like i am supposed to. Like you do yours, where ever you work, for whoever you work for... and whoever he works for... and whoever he works for. Maybe he intends to use your labor and get rich and destroy America!
George has the gun. The man you elected will give him permission to pull the trigger or not. Whisper in this man's ear and tell him no, you want peace. Whisper in his ear and tell him you are scared, they must die cuz they are gonna kill us. I am the gun. The man you are whispering to isnt listening to you. Deal with it. But i wont take away America's weapon.
1. Your job is murder. "Doing your job like you're supposed to" involves very intentionally ending the lives of other people, or trying to get other people to kill for you. I have difficulty believing you honestly are willing to be uncertain about how necessary the killing is. I guess I'm just an idealist like that.
2. So at what point do you take responsibility for your actions and try to minimize your role as a tool of people who are probably not doing the right thing? I'm nobody to judge. I'm as complicit as anybody else (as you pointed out), but don't act like you're not because you've decided to be a gun instead of a human.
3. Fuck commitment, and fuck your idea of "honor". Using your god damn brain strikes me as a better idea.
4. :troll:
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 12:52:01 AM
List some other good reasons America should have a military, and i just might agree with you!
Easy.
To protect the republic against outside threats.
That hasn't been done since 1945.
Everything it has done since (and most of what it did before) WWII has been nothing more than providing muscle to corporations that get upset when their cheap foreign labor gets uppity.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 12:02:14 AM
But i wont take away America's weapon.
Let's put that through the bullshit filter, shall we?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 12:02:14 AM
But i wont take away a retarded child's revolver.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 12:02:14 AM
Commitment and Honor. 2 more of my sillly abstractions. If i knew what George knew and what he didnt know, then maybe i could tell him what to do. Until then, i will do my job like i am supposed to. Like you do yours, where ever you work, for whoever you work for... and whoever he works for... and whoever he works for. Maybe he intends to use your labor and get rich and destroy America!
Serving an evil man is not an honorable act.
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on March 10, 2008, 12:53:38 AM
1. Your job is murder. "Doing your job like you're supposed to" involves very intentionally ending the lives of other people, or trying to get other people to kill for you.
Just like the executioner, i got the thumbs up from the Authority. The Authority is the voice for the majority of America. If he isn't that's just a problem WE ALL HAVE TO SORT OUT. A problem in who we elected or how we should govern ourselves.
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on March 10, 2008, 12:53:38 AM
I have difficulty believing you honestly are willing to be uncertain about how necessary the killing is. I guess I'm just an idealist like that.
This is phrased kind of awkwardly. Do you mean that: you can't believe uncertainty does not come into my mind when I send missiles or bombs to intercept the enemy?
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on March 10, 2008, 12:53:38 AM
So at what point do you take responsibility for your actions and try to minimize your role as a tool of people who are probably not doing the right thing?
I never try to minimize my role. My job provides the MOST certainty one can have that when I am engaging an enemy, he is an enemy. I am lucky to be able to perform my job and have that peace of mind.
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on March 10, 2008, 12:53:38 AM
but don't act like you're not because you've decided to be a gun instead of a human.
I took on a different responsibility and so i have different world and thus, issues to worry about. I'm not necessarily worried about the same things you are.
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on March 10, 2008, 12:53:38 AM
Fuck commitment, and fuck your idea of "honor". Using your god damn brain strikes me as a better idea.
If we knew each other personally i think you would highly value my take on commitment and honor.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 12:56:37 AM
Serving an evil man is not an honorable act.
I agree with that. Do you think GW is evil? If so, "why" is a topic for a different thread maybe.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:21:37 AM
Just like the executioner, i got the thumbs up from the Authority.
So did Adolf Eichmann.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:21:37 AM
If we knew each other personally i think you would highly value my take on commitment and honor.
I doubt it. You're still a tool. I was too, once.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:23:52 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 12:56:37 AM
Serving an evil man is not an honorable act.
I agree with that. Do you think GW is evil? If so, "why" is a topic for a different thread maybe.
If you have to ask why, then you have a very weak grasp of both the constitution and human rights in general.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 01:34:28 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:21:37 AM
Just like the executioner, i got the thumbs up from the Authority.
So did Adolf Eichmann.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:21:37 AM
If we knew each other personally i think you would highly value my take on commitment and honor.
I doubt it. You're still a tool. I was too, once.
An ad hominem argument, (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.
I am a tool.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 01:35:09 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:23:52 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 12:56:37 AM
Serving an evil man is not an honorable act.
I agree with that. Do you think GW is evil? If so, "why" is a topic for a different thread maybe.
If you have to ask why, then you have a very weak grasp of both the constitution and human rights in general.
This really goes back to the problem of electing someone to represent you, he never quite actually does. His red tape cutting was allowed by MORE people that the Majority elected. Its a ridiculous never ending process in which my morality does not stem from. I cast my vote and thats as much an influence as i can have without a protest or running for office myself.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:40:15 AM
An ad hominem argument,
Nope. A statement of fact. You are a tool of a "government" which no longer serves the people.
Don't play stupid.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:21:37 AM
This really goes back to the problem of electing someone to represent you, he never quite actually does. His red tape cutting was allowed by MORE people that the Majority elected. Its a ridiculous never ending process in which my morality does not stem from. I cast my vote and thats as much an influence as i can have without a protest or running for office myself.
If you want an excuse, you'll find one.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:21:37 AM
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on March 10, 2008, 12:53:38 AM
I have difficulty believing you honestly are willing to be uncertain about how necessary the killing is. I guess I'm just an idealist like that.
This is phrased kind of awkwardly. Do you mean that: you can't believe uncertainty does not come into my mind when I send missiles or bombs to intercept the enemy?
No. I can't believe that you're
willing to be uncertain about KILLING PEOPLE.
Quote
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on March 10, 2008, 12:53:38 AM
Fuck commitment, and fuck your idea of "honor". Using your god damn brain strikes me as a better idea.
If we knew each other personally i think you would highly value my take on commitment and honor.
I'd probably think you're an asshole and wouldn't want to listen, even if it was less wrong than you've made it seem. I doubt that's the case though.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:40:15 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 01:35:09 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:23:52 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 12:56:37 AM
Serving an evil man is not an honorable act.
I agree with that. Do you think GW is evil? If so, "why" is a topic for a different thread maybe.
If you have to ask why, then you have a very weak grasp of both the constitution and human rights in general.
This really goes back to the problem of electing someone to represent you, he never quite actually does. His red tape cutting was allowed by MORE people that the Majority elected. Its a ridiculous never ending process in which my morality does not stem from. I cast my vote and thats as much an influence as i can have without a protest or running for office myself.
What the royal fuck do you think we're trying to do here?
We don't stage protests, and we don't try to get each other elected into offices (except for Prezitator Fred, but never mind), because those are OLD tricks. The Machine can deal with mass protests; there have been so many that it's gotten pretty good at marginalizing their influence. It can deal with a few loose screws getting put into powerful positions.
Don't let the enemy choose the battlefield.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 01:59:54 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:40:15 AM
An ad hominem argument,
Nope. A statement of fact. You are a tool of a "government" which no longer serves the people.
Don't play stupid.
An association fallacy is an inductive formal fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association.
I was referring to you comparing me to adolf eichmann. As far as being a tool is concerned i addressed that. As far as the government not serving the people, i addressed that also. Vote for the right people and hope for the best, or FIX politics.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 01:59:54 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 01:21:37 AM
This really goes back to the problem of electing someone to represent you, he never quite actually does. His red tape cutting was allowed by MORE people that the Majority elected. Its a ridiculous never ending process in which my morality does not stem from. I cast my vote and thats as much an influence as i can have without a protest or running for office myself.
If you want an excuse, you'll find one.
I'm pretty much consumed fighting a different battle and politics is not really my main concern at this point in time. You seem really unhappy with the state of politics, but like myself i bet you are engaged with more pressing issues. Thats how the Machine works, doesn't it? Wrong-doing and Injustice in the govt can't be fought cuz we're all too busy wrapped up trying to live. With what little time we do have to spare to consider these things, we instead put them into arguments on a forum on how to mindfuck a person into enlightment. Some invest more time than others.
Quote from: Cainad on March 10, 2008, 02:05:43 AM
What the royal fuck do you think we're trying to do here?
We don't stage protests, and we don't try to get each other elected into offices (except for Prezitator Fred, but never mind), because those are OLD tricks. The Machine can deal with mass protests; there have been so many that it's gotten pretty good at marginalizing their influence. It can deal with a few loose screws getting put into powerful positions.
Don't let the enemy choose the battlefield.
That's what i said! That's why I dont engage in such pointless acts of protest or running for office. :D
I'll think of something though.
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on March 10, 2008, 02:02:49 AM
No. I can't believe that you're willing to be uncertain about KILLING PEOPLE.
Faith and Trust are two of my most tragic character flaws. But i don't exactly trust the establishment, nor do i have faith in politicians, but in Democracy.
Quote from: The Littlest Ubermensch on March 10, 2008, 12:53:38 AM
I'd probably think you're an asshole and wouldn't want to listen, even if it was less wrong than you've made it seem. I doubt that's the case though.
I wasn't talking about me and you having a conversation. My life and yours interacting with eachother's in real life situations, everyday or life-and-death. I think you would put trust in me because of those values i hold and live.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:10:47 AM
An association fallacy is an inductive formal fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association.
I know that. Stop being a pedantic prick. Dumbass.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:10:47 AM
I was referring to you comparing me to adolf eichmann.
I did not compare you to Adolf Eichmann. I compared your excuse to his...they are the same.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:10:47 AM
As far as being a tool is concerned i addressed that.
If you continue to serve a "government" that does not serve the people, then you haven't addressed shit. You've just pussied up and made excuses.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:10:47 AM
I'm pretty much consumed fighting a different battle and politics is not really my main concern at this point in time.
Pleading ignorance and apathy does not help your cause.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:10:47 AM
You seem really unhappy with the state of politics, but like myself i bet you are engaged with more pressing issues.
Horseshit. You are simply helping our so-called "government" express the will of some corporations overseas. That IS politics, and politics of the scummiest sort.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:10:47 AM
Thats how the Machine works, doesn't it? Wrong-doing and Injustice in the govt can't be fought cuz we're all too busy wrapped up trying to live. With what little time we do have to spare to consider these things, we instead put them into arguments on a forum on how to mindfuck a person into enlightment. Some invest more time than others.
The Machine™ works because the cogs want it to.
Your idea of a "mindfuck" seems to be the perpetuation of The Machine™.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:13:32 AM
Quote from: Cainad on March 10, 2008, 02:05:43 AM
What the royal fuck do you think we're trying to do here?
We don't stage protests, and we don't try to get each other elected into offices (except for Prezitator Fred, but never mind), because those are OLD tricks. The Machine can deal with mass protests; there have been so many that it's gotten pretty good at marginalizing their influence. It can deal with a few loose screws getting put into powerful positions.
Don't let the enemy choose the battlefield.
That's what i said! That's why I dont engage in such pointless acts of protest or running for office. :D
I'll think of something though.
No you won't. You'll just continue to make excuses for doing the wrong thing, because it's the easy thing.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:19:33 AM
Faith and Trust are two of my most tragic character flaws. But i don't exactly trust the establishment, nor do i have faith in politicians, but in Democracy.
Democracy? Where?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:19:33 AM
I think you put trust in me because of those values i hold.
I think you're a fucking idiot, just for that statement.
Now I'm starting to feel as if this is getting silly.
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 10, 2008, 02:29:55 AM
Now I'm starting to feel as if this is getting silly.
*shrug*
I'm enjoying myself. It's not often on this board that a foaming neocon comes along to get happy-slapped.
Last one was VoT, IIRC.
Oh, I'm enjoying it too. :)
I'm referring to the density of our good friend Lecherous.
Explaining things to the poor man is so tedious, it's silly.
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 10, 2008, 02:41:59 AM
Oh, I'm enjoying it too. :)
I'm referring to the density of our good friend Lecherous.
Explaining things to the poor man is so tedious, it's silly.
I swear to "Bob", it's like wading through mud.
Thankless task #3432: Discussing ethics with a Bushie.
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 10, 2008, 02:41:59 AM
Oh, I'm enjoying it too. :)
I'm referring to the density of our good friend Lecherous.
Explaining things to the poor man is so tedious, it's silly.
Have you seriously really waited almost 2 pages so that you could speak again without reminding everyone that YOU NEVER REPLIED to the post that i addressed DIRECTLY to you?
It's okay though. Looks like things have been
explained to you thoroughly. But go ahead reply to this or the original question i asked you. Or do what you know and change the subject Pope Naughty Nasturtiums.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 02:22:08 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:19:33 AM
I think you put trust in me because of those values i hold.
I think you're a fucking idiot, just for that statement.
As far as that is concerned. I said WOULD trust. as in WOULD put trust. a typo. my bad roger.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:46:35 AM
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 10, 2008, 02:41:59 AM
Oh, I'm enjoying it too. :)
I'm referring to the density of our good friend Lecherous.
Explaining things to the poor man is so tedious, it's silly.
Have you seriously really waited almost 2 pages so that you could speak again without reminding everyone that YOU NEVER REPLIED to the post that i addressed DIRECTLY to you?
Uh huh. This, coming from the guy that deliberately misunderstood a comparison I made, so he could mis-use a logical fallacy...making sure to print the definition, of course, as instructed in the Rush Limbaugh playbook.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:48:27 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 02:22:08 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:19:33 AM
I think you put trust in me because of those values i hold.
I think you're a fucking idiot, just for that statement.
As far as that is concerned. I said WOULD trust. as in WOULD put trust. a typo. my bad roger.
Forgetting a word is not a typo.
But that wasn't what I was talking about. Why on Earth would we place trust in a man whose values involve doing the dirty work of a would-be Sulla like Bush, and then smugly bragging about it?
Why on Earth would we respect or admire that?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 02:20:02 AM
I know that. Stop being a pedantic prick. Dumbass.
Well, I know you know what these logical fallacies are SO STOP USING THEM. If you don't want to have a serious discussion then go for it, use the red herrings and the insults all day.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 02:20:02 AM
I did not compare you to Adolf Eichmann. I compared your excuse to his...they are the same.
But the entire SITUATION is different. I have not committed any war crimes and used a lame excuse as "following orders" to justify a violation of the Law of War. That was that situation, mine is nothing like it, so you want me to seem like a war criminal, when in fact... I AM NOT.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 02:20:02 AM
If you continue to serve a "government" that does not serve the people, then you haven't addressed shit. You've just pussied up and made excuses.
You serve the unjust evil doers by paying taxes. I serve them by fulfilling a contractual obligation. If you stop paying taxes or i break my contract we will both end up in jail. I guess now you are morally obligated to stop paying taxes? Go ahead and do that.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 02:20:02 AM
Pleading ignorance and apathy does not help your cause.
I know exactly what i'm doing right now in the task that i am performing and how it contributes to the benefit of America, my mission here in Korea is that simple. As far as being apathetic is concerned, this is just something i know i can't fight through traditional methods, like another poster said. Until i can find a better way i won't cry about it.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 02:20:02 AM
Horseshit. You are simply helping our so-called "government" express the will of some corporations overseas. That IS politics, and politics of the scummiest sort.
That is not politics, that is the will of an individual to make profit. One that has been elected, and i DID already address this.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 02:20:02 AM
The Machine™ works because the cogs want it to.
We're all the cogs. But you don't want it to work this way do you?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 02:20:02 AM
Your idea of a "mindfuck" seems to be the perpetuation of The Machine™.
You don't know my idea of a mindfuck.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 02:50:56 AM
Forgetting a word is not a typo.
I dont care what its called.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 02:50:56 AM
But that wasn't what I was talking about. Why on Earth would we place trust in a man whose values involve doing the dirty work of a would-be Sulla like Bush, and then smugly bragging about it?
I told ubermensch that My life and his interacting with eachother's in real life situations, everyday or life-and-death would lead to him putting trust in me. War is not an everyday real life situation. When i go to work i conduct myself as if i were at war, but not in my off time... that would not be beneficial to my neighbors.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 02:49:29 AM
Uh huh. This, coming from the guy that deliberately misunderstood a comparison I made, so he could mis-use a logical fallacy...making sure to print the definition, of course, as instructed in the Rush Limbaugh playbook.
You got called out on using a logical fallacy to advance your argument, and the dumbest kind red herring (changing the subject) Then you said you know what these logical fallacies are. But you did the same thing AGAIN. Guilt by association. Attempting to discredit me or my argument by comparing me to Rush Limbaugh! Are you fucking around to see if i notice this, or do you really want to have a discussion and do this shit unintentionally?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:51:55 AM
We're all the cogs. But you don't want it to work this way do you?
Perhaps, but some of us have crooked gear teeth and are coated in sand. You, on the other hand, seem to be all lubed up.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:51:55 AM
You don't know my idea of a mindfuck.
You described it. You line your guys up as a captive audience, and then harangue them with rants they are FORCED to listen to.
That's not a mindfuck, that's an ASSFUCK.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:05:53 AM
You got called out on using a logical fallacy to advance your argument,
Bullshit, you fucking liar. When you first presented the fallacy, it COULD have been argued that you misunderstood. Now I see that you were just lying.
Such a disappointment.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:05:53 AM
and the dumbest kind red herring (changing the subject) Then you said you know what these logical fallacies are. But you did the same thing AGAIN. Guilt by association. Attempting to discredit me or my argument by comparing me to Rush Limbaugh! Are you fucking around to see if i notice this, or do you really want to have a discussion and do this shit unintentionally?
I didn't compare you to Rush Limbaugh. I said you are following his playbook.
Do I really have to spell these things out?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 02:51:55 AM
But the entire SITUATION is different. I have not committed any war crimes and used a lame excuse as "following orders" to justify a violation of the Law of War. That was that situation, mine is nothing like it, so you want me to seem like a war criminal, when in fact... I AM NOT.
We hanged German and Japanese officers for "waging aggressive war".
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:05:53 AM
You serve the unjust evil doers by paying taxes.
Actually, I don't. See, with earned income credits for my kids, etc, I get back a couple thousand more than I pay in. I am a DRAIN on the system.
Nice try, though. It might have worked, if I was a Marine, and you could just order me to listen.
Oh, well I'm sorry for that. I'll respond to you posthaste.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 03:13:18 AM
Bullshit, you fucking liar. When you first presented the fallacy, it COULD have been argued that you misunderstood. Now I see that you were just lying.
No i really was trying to point out that you used a logical fallacy, which you did. I should have said it more directly.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 03:13:18 AM
I didn't compare you to Rush Limbaugh. I said you are following his playbook.
Do I really have to spell these things out?
You dropped his name. It has the exact same effect. You don't need to spell things out by trying to sneak the cheap shot by, just stop doing it if you want to have a real discussion. Continuing to use them suggests you dont want to discuss this seriously, you think your readers won't recognize them, or that i wont recognize them and give up arguing with you.
I know what you're up to Lecherous, you're making your argument unbelievably ridiculous in an attempt to replace me as the Pd.com clown.
Well it's not going to work.
Don't you have innocents to slaughter?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 03:15:50 AM
We hanged German and Japanese officers for "waging aggressive war".
This still has nothing to do with me.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:05:53 AM
You serve the unjust evil doers by paying taxes.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 03:15:50 AM
Actually, I don't. See, with earned income credits for my kids, etc, I get back a couple thousand more than I pay in. I am a DRAIN on the system.
If i could think of any other example how you are part of the Machine, i would use it. But we both already know you are, no need to prove it. How else have you managed to defeat the Man?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 03:15:50 AM
Nice try, though. It might have worked, if I was a Marine, and you could just order me to listen.
I'll have to do better next time.
I lost all interest in this when i remembered the us military is completely unnecessary
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:24:17 AM
No i really was trying to point out that you used a logical fallacy, which you did. I should have said it more directly.
No, I fucking didn't, you pathetic liar.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:24:17 AM
You dropped his name. It has the exact same effect.
But it is NOT the same fucking thing. Please try to be more honest.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:24:17 AM
You don't need to spell things out by trying to sneak the cheap shot by, just stop doing it if you want to have a real discussion.
Who says I want to have a real discussion? I'm just here to fuck with you nonstop for the ignorant fucking post you kicked this all off with. When I'm done fucking with you for that, I'll let you know. That should only take a couple of years.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:30:27 AM
This still has nothing to do with me.
Sure it does.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:05:53 AM
If i could think of any other example how you are part of the Machine, i would use it. But we both already know you are, no need to prove it.
How
convenient. :lulz:
Quote from: Faust on March 10, 2008, 03:31:05 AM
I lost all interest in this when i remembered the us military is completely unnecessary
Not totally unnecessary.
If there was no Marine Corps, how would PL ever force people to listen to his "rants" and "mindfucks"?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 09, 2008, 11:24:55 PM
I am a tool of the government. I'm supposed to be the last tool they use, but oh well. As far as being a tool of the military, the military is comprised of many people, each with their own agenda. As a singular entity the military's only goal is to continue to exist, just like one of those memetic entity things you guys talk about.
I'm glad that we've established that you're a tool of something.
Maybe we can work on it.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 09, 2008, 11:24:55 PM
Yea you're right. I value ABSTRACTIONS over humanity. Like people who support capital punishment may value Justice or Revenge over the life (humanity) of a murderer or rapist. The justice system isn't perfect and innocent people may be imprisoned for life or even executed. Military intelligence is even more fallible, yet we make the best with what we got. The majority of my targets with 100% certainty were the enemy and were guilty, as for the coordinates of targets on the ground that i may have passed to a pilot... well. I hope that man with the radio with eyes on target who told me they were bad guys, isn't a sick man. I protect assets that make America powerful, human and non-human. That is what i do.
Did I mention before that this was getting tedious?
So you kill people because you have a job to do, and that's more important than other people.
Great.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 09, 2008, 11:24:55 PM
I addressed what i fight for in a previous post and i restated it just now... our strength. If the government will use that strength i provide and secure and use it for unjust causes, take that up with the oligarch that YOU elected. If you didnt elect him, oh well, that's democracy for you.
I don't care what you fight for. I really,
really don't care. It's all the same, anyway.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 09, 2008, 11:24:55 PM
No, No, and I'm not sure... what do your fellow board members think?
I'm sure you know what they think by now.
Does that help? Because I didn't feel as if responding, because all of this seems dreadfully tedious to me.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 03:32:33 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:24:17 AM
No i really was trying to point out that you used a logical fallacy, which you did. I should have said it more directly.
No, I fucking didn't, you pathetic liar.
You used two different ones. Guilt by Association (an ad hominem) and red herrings, many times actually. A red herring is when you introduce something non-sequitur to distract from the argument instead of acknowledging or refuting it.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 03:32:33 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:24:17 AM
You dropped his name. It has the exact same effect.
But it is NOT the same fucking thing. Please try to be more honest.
Well then i guess thats more of a subject change if it doesn't try to associate me with the dumbass rush limbaugh.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:24:17 AM
You don't need to spell things out by trying to sneak the cheap shot by, just stop doing it if you want to have a real discussion.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 03:32:33 AM
Who says I want to have a real discussion? I'm just here to fuck with you nonstop for the ignorant fucking post you kicked this all off with. When I'm done fucking with you for that, I'll let you know. That should only take a couple of years.
We could have never had this level of debate had it not been for that. We wouldnt even be talking about this.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 03:35:32 AM
If there was no Marine Corps, how would PL ever force people to listen to his "rants" and "mindfucks"?
I couldn't. I would have to post up mysterious flyers and hand out pamphlets like anyother missionary.
It's kind of like when you see those people from third world countries, and there are so many flies around that they don't even bother shooing them away anymore.
It's like that, but instead of flies it's horrible circular logic.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:41:57 AM
You used two different ones. Guilt by Association (an ad hominem) and red herrings, many times actually. A red herring is when you introduce something non-sequitur to distract from the argument instead of acknowledging or refuting it.
Quit your lying, dittohead.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:24:17 AM
We could have never had this level of debate had it not been for that. We wouldnt even be talking about this.
It's more fun when I let you think we're actually gonna discuss something.
Fact is, you tried to kick me when you thought I was down. Problem was, I had just gotten up the day before.
Bad timing.
And then you tried to play it off like it wasn't a sleazy attack. Now, I was born in the dark, but it wasn't last night.
Then, of course, you decided to hit below the belt and try to involve my family, by implicating that I was ignoring them (without, of course, having any idea what my current situation is), as if it was any of your fucking business anyway.
Now I'm going to take all that out of your figurative hide. For about two years or so.
TGRR,
Invented the grudge.
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 10, 2008, 03:45:13 AM
It's like that, but instead of flies it's horrible circular logic.
It's turtles all the way down! :lulz:
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 10, 2008, 03:41:04 AM
So you kill people because you have a job to do, and that's more important than other people.
Great.
So on this point we have a fundamental disagreement in values. You said you value humans above abstract concepts. I think that if someone must die if good will be achieved than all is well. I used capital punishment as an example to back me up. You said great.
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 10, 2008, 03:41:04 AMI don't care what you fight for. I really, really don't care. It's all the same, anyway.
So you just don't want me to kill people i am certain are attacking America's assets, because you value human life above anything else? That is a product of the value set you introduced. Do you agree with this statement or disagree?
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 10, 2008, 03:41:04 AM
Does that help? Because I didn't feel as if responding, because all of this seems dreadfully tedious to me.
After all I can't tell you what to do, you are not in my charge, and you do not have to read this. Or did a
value you hold compel you to respond?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:51:15 AM
After all I can't tell you what to do, you are not in my charge, and you do not have to read this.
:lulz:
Good Lord, you're revolting.
:lulz:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 03:52:31 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:51:15 AM
After all I can't tell you what to do, you are not in my charge, and you do not have to read this.
:lulz:
Good Lord, you're revolting.
:lulz:
So is your pettiness. Enjoy your day, night or whatever time it is over there.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:55:55 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 03:52:31 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:51:15 AM
After all I can't tell you what to do, you are not in my charge, and you do not have to read this.
:lulz:
Good Lord, you're revolting.
:lulz:
So is your pettiness. Enjoy your day, night or whatever time it is over there.
Yeah, whatever. Fuck off.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:51:15 AM
So on this point we have a fundamental disagreement in values. You said you value humans above abstract concepts. I think that if someone must die if good will be achieved than all is well. I used capital punishment as an example to back me up. You said great.
I sure did. And I said it in a tone that was meant to be taken sarcastically.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:51:15 AM
So you just don't want me to kill people i am certain are attacking America's assets, because you value human life above anything else? That is a product of the value set you introduced. Do you agree with this statement or disagree?
Yes, I believe that people are more important than abstractions. I also believe that treating people like they're not people - like they're even lower than abstractions - is also wrong.
Pardon me if I hold values.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:51:15 AM
After all I can't tell you what to do, you are not in my charge, and you do not have to read this. Or did a value you hold compel you to respond?
It's more of a form of entertainment than any sort of obligation I feel towards you.
By all means, continue.
I too believe peoples lives are less important then The Greater Good. Lets kill everyone and see how much we can improve our precious abstract concepts.
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 10, 2008, 03:59:07 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:51:15 AM
So you just don't want me to kill people i am certain are attacking America's assets, because you value human life above anything else? That is a product of the value set you introduced. Do you agree with this statement or disagree?
Yes, I believe that people are more important than abstractions. I also believe that treating people like they're not people - like they're even lower than abstractions - is also wrong.
Pardon me if I hold values.
I value life as well, so if someone is trying to take it from an American during war, i could kill such a person. Than there is nothing here to debate. You hold human life above all, so you could not kill a murderer or rapist for the good of the community? How about in defense of your own life? That's a paradox.
Quote from: Faust on March 10, 2008, 04:02:26 AM
I too believe peoples lives are less important then The Greater Good. Lets kill everyone and see how much we can improve our precious abstract concepts.
He's all butthurt now.
Apparently, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity didn't tell him what to say if the dirty commies didn't fall for his faux patriotism and whimpering about logical fallacies.
Quote from: Faust on March 10, 2008, 04:02:26 AM
I too believe peoples lives are less important then The Greater Good. Lets kill everyone and see how much we can improve our precious abstract concepts.
What greater good would that accomplish? You don't believe some people would be better off dead? Not even me?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 04:05:21 AM
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 10, 2008, 03:59:07 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 03:51:15 AM
So you just don't want me to kill people i am certain are attacking America's assets, because you value human life above anything else? That is a product of the value set you introduced. Do you agree with this statement or disagree?
Yes, I believe that people are more important than abstractions. I also believe that treating people like they're not people - like they're even lower than abstractions - is also wrong.
Pardon me if I hold values.
I value life as well, so if someone is trying to take it from an American during war, i could kill such a person. Than there is nothing here to debate. You hold human life above all, so you could not kill a murderer or rapist for the good of the community? How about in defense of your own life? That's a paradox.
How are any of those examples "abstractions", fuckwit?
Are you now saying that PEOPLE are abstractions?
Are you
confused or something?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 04:06:46 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 10, 2008, 04:02:26 AM
I too believe peoples lives are less important then The Greater Good. Lets kill everyone and see how much we can improve our precious abstract concepts.
What greater good would that accomplish? You don't believe some people would be better off dead? Not even me?
Naw. You're better off the way you are.
A clown.
See?
I knew things were getting silly. :lulz:
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 04:06:46 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 10, 2008, 04:02:26 AM
I too believe peoples lives are less important then The Greater Good. Lets kill everyone and see how much we can improve our precious abstract concepts.
What greater good would that accomplish? You don't believe some people would be better off dead? Not even me?
not even you, annoying as you may be.
but it went beyond killing for whats right and whats wrong. Just over the page you went as far as to say you would kill to protect an american, as opposed to killing for a code of ethics, thats what makes you worse then anything i see labeled as a terrorist. they kill people and blow themselves up out of what is most definitely a passionate (if flawed) code of religious ethics. Saying you would kill to save americans, makes you nothing more then a blind guard dog.
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 10, 2008, 04:12:55 AM
See?
I knew things were getting silly. :lulz:
Hehe...I've been waiting for this since that fucktard posted that snipe at me, pages back.
I'm truly enjoying this.
Quote from: Faust on March 10, 2008, 04:13:10 AM
not even you, annoying as you may be.
but it went beyond killing for whats right and whats wrong. Just over the page you went as far as to say you would kill to protect an american, as opposed to killing for a code of ethics, thats what makes you worse then anything i see labeled as a terrorist. they kill people and blow themselves up out of what is most definitely a passionate (if flawed) code of religious ethics. Saying you would kill to save americans, makes you nothing more then a blind guard dog.
I stated previously that i would kill someone trying to destroy America's assets of power, human or non-human. That is a good point though. If that's the case, why would i be different from a terrorist, but supporting America's cause? Is a terrorist not just a blind guard dog?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 04:18:14 AM
I stated previously that i would kill someone trying to destroy America's assets of power, human or non-human.
"Assets of power"?
Like, what, Randy "Macho Man" Savage?
Or did you mean you'd kill for American hegemony?
If so...
(http://educate-yourself.org/cn/200px-Martin_Bormann_edit324h.jpg)
Don't do it in my name, you nasty little Martin Bormann clone.
Examine the format of this last post Carefully.
This is what you need to do if you wanna be as cool as this guy. Just post in that style:
quote
funny pic
well thought out sarcastic remark
This way instead of making yourself look more intelligent, you can make yourself seem more intelligent in comparison
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 05, 2008, 07:06:37 AM
fuck it... replace the whole cabinet :argh!:
Roger's leaving :aww: your rants are interesting and inspiring and have been but... maybe somebody else with some kind of creative ability will step up. But guess what, nobody steps up anything in this place. It all just amounts to trolling and handing out flyers. Whose mind is getting fucked? [sarcasm]We are really realigning peoples concept of reality now![/sarcasm]
Don't you have a family roger? Why do you spend so much time playing bullshit games on the internet? Why do you crave this admin power? Is it too much to ask you to be a regular poster? Of course it is. You fell into a groove here where people like you and you are comfortable and someone robbed you of it. Someone deprived you of the luxury of all the e-power and the e-cred and its a wRONGdoing... a travesty.
If anything, this "betrayal" or whatever you want to call this drama, is the closest thing i have seen to a MINDFUCK anywhere on this board. It has forced you, Roger, to re-evaluate many people you knew and trusted and took you way out of your "comfort zone." Cuz the deal that was made, the only thing keeping you here was this deal that has been broken... your comfort bubble has burst. You have no reason to be here you claim... you just want to make things right... right.
What do i want to come as a result of this post? Good question. But when its over it will be over. Not resolved, just over.
Nothing like conspiracy and paranoia to make you take a closer look at things.
**its that purple not pretendo
Reposted, just in case anyone is wondering why I am so gleefully fucking with PL.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 04:31:07 AM
Examine the format of this last post Carefully.
This is what you need to do if you wanna be as cool as this guy. Just post in that style:
quote
funny pic
well thought out sarcastic remark
This way instead of making yourself look more intelligent, you can make yourself seem more intelligent in comparison
I am supremely unconcerned with how I look to a Bushie, dittohead.
:lulz:
TGRR,
Wasn't aware Martin Bormann pics were funny, though.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 04:18:14 AM
I stated previously that i would kill someone trying to destroy America's assets of power, human or non-human.
national pride is disgusting to me far more so then any religious pride or zeal. Most religions don't change their ideologies at the drop of a hat. they are slow moving, frustratingly stoic. While fighting with pride for a nation, is fighting for the ideologies of the current cabinet.
They change over night, they are wishy washy, often serving of only the people in charge, and quite often, they are nigh on impossible to pin them down to any one answer on any subject they dont want to get associated with.
Its a pride in something that barely exists, that people blindly follow.
America™ is not defined, while religious asshole crusaders are entrenched in what they are.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 04:18:14 AM
That is a good point though. If that's the case, why would i be different from a terrorist, but supporting America's cause? Is a terrorist not just a blind guard dog?
being a guard dog to corrupt old mens assets is worse then being a blind guard dog to a faith.
Quote from: Faust on March 10, 2008, 04:33:05 AM
being a guard dog to corrupt old mens assets is worse then being a blind guard dog to a faith.
And it's not even very
funny, unlike the religious whackjobs.
:jihaad:
Even though it's not funny, we can still get a few yuks out of it.
And thus this thread. :)
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 10, 2008, 04:38:17 AM
Even though it's not funny, we can still get a few yuks out of it.
And thus this thread. :)
Well, I'm getting more yuks out of the Bushie himself, than out of any of the drivel he posts.
Fuck this.
Someone caption this pic.
(http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Make-A-Wish-R_0.jpg)
Quote from: Faust on March 10, 2008, 04:33:05 AM
national pride is disgusting to me far more so then any religious pride or zeal. Most religions don't change their ideologies at the drop of a hat. they are slow moving, frustratingly stoic. While fighting with pride for a nation, is fighting for the ideologies of the current cabinet.
They change over night, they are wishy washy, often serving of only the people in charge, and quite often, they are nigh on impossible to pin them down to any one answer on any subject they dont want to get associated with.
Its a pride in something that barely exists, that people blindly follow.
I have yet to kill someone in a manner inconsistent with my belief system. My belief system changes rather slowly, but it has not conflicted with the ever-changing political scene. If i had to i would have to re-examine continuing my services.
Quote from: Faust on March 10, 2008, 04:33:05 AM
America™ is not defined, while religious asshole crusaders are entrenched in what they are.
being a guard dog to corrupt old mens assets is worse then being a blind guard dog to a faith.
The government uses the military to retain its power. That is what i am doing now. The
reason i fight is so others do not have to bear something that is not a burden to me... taking a human life. Some people could not do it, even if others think it is justified. I fight so those people do not have to. Do you understand what i'm trying to say?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 04:50:11 AM
I fight so those people do not have to. Do you understand what i'm trying to say?
Don't do us any favors, fuckwad.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 04:50:11 AM
I have yet to kill someone in a manner inconsistent with my belief system.
And exactly how many people have you killed in Korea, anyfuckingway? :lulz:
I'd just like to say that Pope Lecherous has helped me achieve enlightenment, because he's gone from being scary to being fracking hilarious. I'm a new person-like sugar free substitute, and filled with hope that maybe the world isn't really doomed.
And if it is, my waffle iron doesn't need electricity, so any survivors are invited for waffles at my makeshift shack. :lulz:
Quote from: Requiem on March 10, 2008, 04:52:08 AM
And if it is, my waffle iron doesn't need electricity, so any survivors are invited for waffles at my makeshift shack. :lulz:
Shit yeah.
If you eat your vegetables you can grow up to be like me. If you don't, you'll end up like this kid.
\
(http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Make-A-Wish-R_0.jpg)
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 04:51:58 AM
Don't do us any favors, fuckwad.
I'll do it anyway Roger because i love you.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 04:51:58 AM
And exactly how many people have you killed in Korea, anyfuckingway? :lulz:
None, currently i'm just training, so i can kill better and more efficiently in the future. As far as killing i have done, THAT IS NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 05:04:36 AM
I'll do it anyway Roger because i love you.
I love you, too, Rand...HEY, you're not Randy "Macho Man" Savage.
You're just a petty tyrant in a Marine uniform.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 04:51:58 AM
None, currently i'm just training, so i can kill better and more efficiently in the future. As far as killing i have done, THAT IS NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS.
So you lied by omission?
And, actually, since you say you've killed FOR US, I think it IS our business. I mean, we have to carry the collective guilt for you dumping on the locals for the glory of Halliburton's bottom line, right?
I mean, you've gone on and on about how you KILL FOR US!!1111
And by your own admission, you're a tool, not even a real person.
Right?
If you've killed for us, then we hired a hitman. Does that not make us liable?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 05:11:35 AM
You're just a petty tyrant in a Marine uniform.
I'll KILL anyway Roger because i love you.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 04:51:58 AM
So you lied by omission?
You assumed i was killing people here in Korea? I never assumed you were using logical fallacies, i just pointed out when you did.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 04:51:58 AM
And, actually, since you say you've killed FOR US, I think it IS our business. I mean, we have to carry the collective guilt for you dumping on the locals for the glory of Halliburton's bottom line, right?
I mean, you've gone on and on about how you KILL FOR US!!1111
No i kill FOR the government. I joined and i serve, so that you do not have to. So that you don't have to bear the burden of killing, something you don't want to do or can't handle.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 04:51:58 AM
And by your own admission, you're a tool, not even a real person. Right?
Yes.
Quote from: Cainad on March 10, 2008, 05:33:20 AM
If you've killed for us, then we hired a hitman. Does that not make us liable?
Good question. Just think of it as me performing any number of services that are necessary but that you don't want to do. When i am at work and i'm about to push the big red button (it's not actually red), i imagine everyone i care about and people like faust and roger in my position wearing my uniform, covered in blood. Their tears flowing from guilt, or some other pain. After they cycle through my mind one by one, lastly, it's me. I press the button. The blood that was on me and my hands flows away like water and it is done, and all those people never had to go through all the pain I imagine a person like that would feel.
Does anyone besides me find that to be a bit, well...insane?
Too right. Someone forgot their meds.
I kill FOR the government. I joined and i serve, so that you do not have to. So that you don't have to bear the burden of killing, something you don't want to do or can't handle.
\
(http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Make-A-Wish-R_0.jpg)
People always talk about "Pushing the button" fine i will put it front of you. Go for it.
I'd say that someone has boarded the Crazy Train and has ended up in the caboose.
hahahahaha oh my fuck, i've just gone through the whole thread, and shit it get repetitive Fuck!
but what i really dont understand is, Pope L. given your obvious beliefs on the system and your loyalties to it, how do you possibly reconcile that with discordian views, i really cant see the compatability. :fnord:
seems to me (and squse me if im fucking wrong), but ye be had by the curse of the grayface, most heinously.
so how do you see yourself as a discordian pope, given your views on the machine?
Quote from: barumunk on March 10, 2008, 08:16:06 AM
hahahahaha oh my fuck, i've just gone through the whole thread, and shit it get repetitive Fuck!
but what i really dont understand is, Pope L. given your obvious beliefs on the system and your loyalties to it, how do you possibly reconcile that with discordian views, i really cant see the compatability. :fnord:
seems to me (and squse me if im fucking wrong), but ye be had by the curse of the grayface, most heinously.
so how do you see yourself as a discordian pope, given your views on the machine?
What have i said about the Machine except that it works? Being a shitty Cog is futile? Should i have said something else? My loyalties are not to the system, my loyalties tie me to the purpose of me joining in the first place and other
abstractions. In this way, i can perform my duties and get what i want without conflict of interest between myself and the "Machine." There certainly have been some problems with me adjusting to the Marine Corps lifestyle, but i've adapted enough to the point where i can stay out of trouble.
Let me know what my "obvious" beliefs are so we can talk about that. My loyalties do not extend far beyond those i care about and myself. If the Machine were to die a horrible death and be replaced by a system that works better, i will shed no tears. However, for me to accept a change like this, it must come from us. Started and facilitated by us. By us, i mean a group of Discordians that can take over. The only thing we need to do it is a great leader, certainly the rest of us combined have the know-how and connections to back up such a candidate. **GASP** That would require organization, dedication, commitment, and a
drive... things of that nature. Do you know why it can't happen? NO ONE has the DRIVE. Most are content to live the life we do in this country. Those who are not try pointless bullshit like becoming "sandy" and "bent cogs," which either amounts to taking FUTILE action or really amounts to handing out flyers and internet snobbery. So really? Who the fuck will take this seriously?
Don't blame me for not wanting to participate in this battle with you (your site). I am having so much fun being alive and enjoying the things i do and the people i meet. If a group can be formed that understands these things and they need help to accomplish something, i'll do what i can do.
Also, the system or the Machine or whatever you want to call it, gives me the means to make a happy life for myself. Would you hesistate to make a deal with the devil if the only price to pay was the unhappiness of others with you for making this deal? There is no other price to me. Things you think i'm losing, i don't want, need, or never had to begin with. Name some things i should be upset about losing and we could talk about how i never had or wanted these things to begin with. Some of the
abstract concepts hold little value to me in regard to others which i consider more important. Since we all know the only concept worth believing in is that human life is SO precious. haha
PROTIP for PL: Just because YUO don't see something happening doesn't mean it isn't happening.
And really you should know that.
You have no idea what the individuals on this board do in their personal lives. What happens on these forums, on an individual basis, is such a small percentage of the real people. It's rather disheartening that someone who supposedly embraces Discordian ideals and philosophies would generalize and assume much about people he does not know outside the internet. Seems very judgemental and assuming if you ask me.
Yet, you have reduced the PD.COM membership to trolling and handing out flyers. Yet, what you don't see is our interactions with IRL people. You don't hear our conversations with others. You know JACK SQUAT about what impact we may or may not have in our individual lives.
So seriously, you need to stop with the assumptions and generalizations. It's not very becoming, and, IMO, it certainly isn't a very Discordian thing to do.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 05:53:08 AM
Quote from: Cainad on March 10, 2008, 05:33:20 AM
If you've killed for us, then we hired a hitman. Does that not make us liable?
Good question. Just think of it as me performing any number of services that are necessary but that you don't want to do. When i am at work and i'm about to push the big red button (it's not actually red), i imagine everyone i care about and people like faust and roger in my position wearing my uniform, covered in blood. Their tears flowing from guilt, or some other pain. After they cycle through my mind one by one, lastly, it's me. I press the button. The blood that was on me and my hands flows away like water and it is done, and all those people never had to go through all the pain I imagine a person like that would feel.
So... At what point do you think about the flouride they're putting in the water, and what that does to the Purity of your Essence?
This thread is full of LAIL.
Well, Pope Lecherous may seem to write like a 5 year old afflicted with ADD. However, I see nothing inherently non-Discordian about the ideas that he appears to be trying to communicate. Sure he may be a Cosmic Schmuck for assuming that we exist only in this forum as some digital avatar of Discord, of course he may well be playing an idiot for not realizing that most of the 'stuff' we do IRL tend toward KYFMS level material. But, we all end up being "assuming, Cosmic Schmucks" from time to time.
If PL likes to kill people, well so be it. Eris often rode on the back of Aries chariot, delighting in the chaos of War. Of course, Eris didn't much consider the soldiers to be her darlings. She was much more interested in causing chaos at a much higher level with the soldiers as little toys of death. Her delight was in watching Man kill man. That was back in the day when a soldier faced death directly, there were no buttons. Eris loved to watch two men, both brave, both patriotic, both guarnteed by his commander that this act was Necessary, Justified and Moral. Both men, trying their best to end the life of one another. Hacking at one another with swords that were more bludgeoning than sharp and a fighting style they was as likely to end with two mortal wounds as simply one. As long as PL recognizes that his actions only appear ordered; that his virtue and validity exists only as a social meme propagated through his society; as long as he can come to terms with murder being murder and the death of innocent civilians as blood guilt, the same as if he'd slain the whole family in their beds, pinning little children to their mattress with a long knife... then he will make a fine Discordian. However, he walks a very difficult path for Eris... for if he once feels that his actions of murder are moral or that the 5 children that died in his button pushing to wipe out two 'terrorists', were justifiable... then he surely will fall victim to the same Aneristic Delusion that grips so much of the poor Citizens of Thud.
Indeed, let us help our dear fellow in Chaos by constantly reminding him that every drop of blood spilled, no matter how the Dept. of Murde.. err Defense may try to scrub it off, appears still there on his hands (if he ever actually kills anyone). Let's us keep forefront in his thoughts that the entire military system exists as nothing more than a false order placed over the chaotic and amoral act of mass murder. Let us remind him daily that his actions are not in our name, nor are they for those here who are unwilling to kill. They are to sate his own mind, his own homunculus sitting deep within his psyche. Sure, it hides behind the false memes of duty and patriotism, but as a Discordian, he is able to peel that veneer away and stare at the stark, bloodthirsty little man within and know, that in the end, his actions are his own and his alone.
If that is not truly Discordian, then I'll eat my hat.
Hail Eris, All Hail Discordia!
Ratatosk, Squirrel of Discord
Muncher of the ChaoAcorn
Chatterer of the Words of Eris
POEE of The Great Googlie Mooglie Cabal
Oh, I'm all for military and killing and stuff, hell, the military is way too busy cleaning up America's last major fuckup in the Middle East to do anything really bad anyway. My problem with PL is that he's willing to sign not only his body but his mind over to his superiors. If the military *was* busy engaging in mass murder right now, he wouldn't think even once about doing it.
That, and he seems to have actually interpreted 'defend the constitution and the people from enemies foreign and domestic' as 'preserve the pocketbooks of the rich'
Just so PL knows who he's REALLY killing for:
(http://adsoftheworld.com/files/images/DieburgerIwoJima.jpg)
Otherwise, this whole thread reminds me of that scene with Jack Nicholson in "A Few Good Men."
Quote from: Cain on March 09, 2008, 11:09:44 PM
I'm considering serving in the Australian army
that's funny, so am I!
:lulz:
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 10, 2008, 10:40:52 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 09, 2008, 11:09:44 PM
I'm considering serving in the Australian army
that's funny, so am I!
:lulz:
I might have to desert if it comes to real fighting.
I have no interest in dying for my country. I'm all about the fringe benefits.
And thats assuming I cant pull off what would be an incredible win this summer in the job stakes. I consider it my fallback position.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 05:53:08 AM
Quote from: Cainad on March 10, 2008, 05:33:20 AM
If you've killed for us, then we hired a hitman. Does that not make us liable?
Good question. Just think of it as me performing any number of services that are necessary but that you don't want to do. When i am at work and i'm about to push the big red button (it's not actually red), i imagine everyone i care about and people like faust and roger in my position wearing my uniform, covered in blood. Their tears flowing from guilt, or some other pain. After they cycle through my mind one by one, lastly, it's me. I press the button. The blood that was on me and my hands flows away like water and it is done, and all those people never had to go through all the pain I imagine a person like that would feel.
Mysticwicks called.
they want their sociopathic fake soldier back.
Quote from: Cain on March 10, 2008, 10:44:20 PM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 10, 2008, 10:40:52 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 09, 2008, 11:09:44 PM
I'm considering serving in the Australian army
that's funny, so am I!
:lulz:
I might have to desert if it comes to real fighting.
I have no interest in dying for my country. I'm all about the fringe benefits.
And thats assuming I cant pull off what would be an incredible win this summer in the job stakes. I consider it my fallback position.
I dunno. Fighting Timorese gas thieves sounds like a better deal than fighting angry Pashtuns.
and yeah, ditto. I figure if shit gets so bad here that rich people can't go out and eat overpriced food, then I'll need a fallback position, preferrably one that comes with guns and nice beaches.
Eating my own foot sounds better than fighting angry Pashtuns, truth be told. East Timor sounds alright though, they only seem to beat up people who cant fight back which presumably excludes people with guns in uniform. From what I hear, most of the South Pacific is considered Australia's remit for policing, but thats not too bad, really. Especially since half those places wont exist in 50 years, thanks to global warming.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 04:31:07 AM
funny pic
please to fuck off for thinking nazi pics are funny
(except for that one with hitler and the banjo)
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 09, 2008, 11:24:55 PM
The majority of my targets with 100% certainty were the enemy and were guilty,
Guilty of what? Of being The Enemy? Or guilty of protecting their country against invading forces?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 04:47:27 AM
Fuck this.
Someone caption this pic.
(http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Make-A-Wish-R_0.jpg)
You may be able to press this entire bed with me in it....but I'll
still have cancer.
(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/Deathbed-1.png)
Deaths new look was a real hit with the kids.
(http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Make-A-Wish-R_0.jpg)
What the hell? You're not Dog the Bounty Hunter!
Quote from: Cain on March 10, 2008, 11:26:36 PM
Eating my own foot sounds better than fighting angry Pashtuns, truth be told. East Timor sounds alright though, they only seem to beat up people who cant fight back which presumably excludes people with guns in uniform. From what I hear, most of the South Pacific is considered Australia's remit for policing, but thats not too bad, really. Especially since half those places wont exist in 50 years, thanks to global warming.
I can think of a lot of worse places to be stationed than Fiji, the Solomons, or Bougainville.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 05:46:52 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 05:11:35 AM
You're just a petty tyrant in a Marine uniform.
I'll KILL anyway Roger because i love you.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 04:51:58 AM
So you lied by omission?
You assumed i was killing people here in Korea? I never assumed you were using logical fallacies, i just pointed out when you did.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 04:51:58 AM
And, actually, since you say you've killed FOR US, I think it IS our business. I mean, we have to carry the collective guilt for you dumping on the locals for the glory of Halliburton's bottom line, right?
I mean, you've gone on and on about how you KILL FOR US!!1111
No i kill FOR the government. I joined and i serve, so that you do not have to. So that you don't have to bear the burden of killing, something you don't want to do or can't handle.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 10, 2008, 04:51:58 AM
And by your own admission, you're a tool, not even a real person. Right?
Yes.
:lulz:
Hey, here's a little hint, dumbshit: You are not the only person on this board who has served. There are a few others of us that have.
However, we are not self-admitted sociopaths.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 05:53:08 AM
Quote from: Cainad on March 10, 2008, 05:33:20 AM
If you've killed for us, then we hired a hitman. Does that not make us liable?
Good question. Just think of it as me performing any number of services that are necessary but that you don't want to do. When i am at work and i'm about to push the big red button (it's not actually red), i imagine everyone i care about and people like faust and roger in my position wearing my uniform, covered in blood. Their tears flowing from guilt, or some other pain. After they cycle through my mind one by one, lastly, it's me. I press the button. The blood that was on me and my hands flows away like water and it is done, and all those people never had to go through all the pain I imagine a person like that would feel.
You're basically everything that is wrong with this country, all wrapped up in one little neocon package.
So CUTE! :lulz:
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 11:35:50 AM
What have i said about the Machine except that it works?
Well, you also basically said that you are a willing and eager participant in it.
Seriously, you should go to http://freerepublic.com
They're your kind of people.
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on March 10, 2008, 11:14:20 PM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 05:53:08 AM
Quote from: Cainad on March 10, 2008, 05:33:20 AM
If you've killed for us, then we hired a hitman. Does that not make us liable?
Good question. Just think of it as me performing any number of services that are necessary but that you don't want to do. When i am at work and i'm about to push the big red button (it's not actually red), i imagine everyone i care about and people like faust and roger in my position wearing my uniform, covered in blood. Their tears flowing from guilt, or some other pain. After they cycle through my mind one by one, lastly, it's me. I press the button. The blood that was on me and my hands flows away like water and it is done, and all those people never had to go through all the pain I imagine a person like that would feel.
Mysticwicks called.
they want their sociopathic fake soldier back.
Oh, I bet he's a real soldier.
But I'm starting to think he's a cook with a very, very bad case of "I wish I was in special forces".
I LOVE YOU, LITTLE CARCINOMA BOY!
I LOVE YOU TOO, RANDY "MACHO MAN" SAVAGE!
(http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Make-A-Wish-R_0.jpg)
I DON'T CARE IF YOU HAVE CANCER, YOU'LL KEEP YOUR GODDAMN MOUTH SHUT, OR I'LL POUND IT UP YOUR ASS, BOY!
\
(http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Make-A-Wish-R_0.jpg)
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 12, 2008, 02:38:42 AM
I LOVE YOU, LITTLE CARCINOMA BOY!
I LOVE YOU TOO, RANDY "MACHO MAN" SAVAGE!
(http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Make-A-Wish-R_0.jpg)
AND I, TOO, LOVE YOU RANDY "MACHO MAN" SAVAGE!
~~~Payne: Was waiting for the inevitable caption.
(http://www.psywarrior.com/LBB8aC02.JPG)
PAYNE:
1. Do something with this.
2. I could not restrain myself. It was a classic.
SERIOUS FACE
(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/MARINETHOUGHT.png)
EVEN MORE SERIOUS. DEADLY, EVEN
(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/hammer.png)
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
:mittens:
and
:mittens::mittens:
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
Quote from: Payne on March 12, 2008, 04:15:02 AM
EVEN MORE SERIOUS. DEADLY, EVEN
(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/hammer.png)
Oh Christ, that was brilliant.
:mittens: :mittens: :mittens: :mittens: :mittens:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 12, 2008, 02:51:24 AM
(http://www.psywarrior.com/LBB8aC02.JPG)
Srsly though, if I saw this, I'd be bricking it. I just finished reading about the battle for Fallujah in Jeremy Scahill's book on Blackwater and, well...lets just say I'd be out of that area in record time, and it'd go badly for anyone trying to stop me.
Just imagine if it was YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
I did. And then I laughed at the idea of thousands of snotty students getting shot at and bombed by Marines.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 10, 2008, 02:02:32 PM
PROTIP for PL: Just because YUO don't see something happening doesn't mean it isn't happening.
And really you should know that.
You have no idea what the individuals on this board do in their personal lives. What happens on these forums, on an individual basis, is such a small percentage of the real people. It's rather disheartening that someone who supposedly embraces Discordian ideals and philosophies would generalize and assume much about people he does not know outside the internet. Seems very judgemental and assuming if you ask me.
Yet, you have reduced the PD.COM membership to trolling and handing out flyers. Yet, what you don't see is our interactions with IRL people. You don't hear our conversations with others. You know JACK SQUAT about what impact we may or may not have in our individual lives.
So seriously, you need to stop with the assumptions and generalizations. It's not very becoming, and, IMO, it certainly isn't a very Discordian thing to do.
Suppose GW is doing the right thing, to save America in the long run. I DONT KNOW AND NEITHER DO YOU. Often times these things are not written in the history books, even if he is hated and labeled by history as the ruiner of the American economy for many years, only the players involved in this game will ever know the truth.
Reserve your judgement, because you are not involved in any of the decisions he has to make BASED ON INFORMATION YOU DO NOT KNOW.Remember when i said that a little while ago? Now it's kind of ironic you say judging people you do not know is very Un-Discordian, because that's what most people posting in this thread have done. ADMIT IT. You only know the president through electronic means... the media. I wasn't defending him as a person or what you think he's doing "on the side" of being the commander in chief, i was defending his right not to be Declared Guilty by a forum of Judgemental Discordians who tell others not to be judgmental of THEM. Me being critical of the methods you use to mindfuck people have led you to tell me not to judge you, because i dont know you in real life. You are not part of GW's life and you do not understand what decisions he has to make and you dont know the information he uses to make these decisions. Think about that for a minute.
On this board there are people that are young and think they know everything. They are wrong. On this board there are old people that "know" they know everything, but they are also wrong. My image of the ideal Discordian is smart enough to recognize he does not know everything, and as a result doesnt not make judgements prematurely about people they don't know.... LIKE THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Can you just admit you don't know the whole situation the president has to deal with? Can you admit that you do not know him, and that you shold reserve Judgement?
No, in short.
Firstly because implies he is an impartial observer, which is so patently false as to be laughable. He has a view of how the world should be, and warps the facts to fit his ideological preconceptions. This is a pattern he has established over a lifetime, but especially in the last 8 years.
Secondly, its my right to second-guess people who "have the facts". I in fact did that as a job for several months, second-guessing the security services, oil contractors and government policy makers. What's more, I did a fairly damn decent job of it, because I approached it using new models that the people in question did not, and was not beholden to either government policy, the bottom line, or any other constraints except facts.
Pope Naughty Nasturtiums,
You do value something more than human life, you just didnt realize it or don't have a name for it. I can demonstrate to you that you value something higher than human life.
Quote from: Cain on March 12, 2008, 04:18:15 PM
No, in short.
Firstly because implies he is an impartial observer, which is so patently false as to be laughable. He has a view of how the world should be, and warps the facts to fit his ideological preconceptions. This is a pattern he has established over a lifetime, but especially in the last 8 years.
Secondly, its my right to second-guess people who "have the facts". I in fact did that as a job for several months, second-guessing the security services, oil contractors and government policy makers. What's more, I did a fairly damn decent job of it, because I approached it using new models that the people in question did not, and was not beholden to either government policy, the bottom line, or any other constraints except facts.
Cain, what you have done is not exactly judgement as we were referring to. What you have done is the moral obligation of a responsible citizen. Judgement is what other people have done when they say George Bush is evil. That's the kind of judgement that others should reserve until after all is said and done. What you are doing is putting him on trial and that is good. That is exactly what needs to be done. You are acting similar to a Judge in an American court room weighing the facts, except you have gathered the evidence yourself. The rest of the board is acting as the prosecutor and Judge, without "gathering facts" but by listening to the media and people like Michael Moore. Still though, what RWHN said holds true. Judgement should be reserved until the trial is over, because we don't know what's happening behind the scenes. I'm saying everyone that has been bashing the president does not need to take his back, but should reserve Judgement until the trial is over. People like yourself Cain, are starting the trial and asking him the tough questions to see if he really is guilty of something. Whether you "know" he's guilty or not, judgement should be reserved until the trial has been concluded.
Dude...you DIDN'T just say you think Bush is in the right...
Wow.
WMD's, Axis of Evil, pandering to Saudis, creating a headless Iraq, leaving Afghanistan to the wolves, etc etc...none of this gets through to you?
Damn. That's some powerful KoolAid they serve in the military these days.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 04:11:18 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 10, 2008, 02:02:32 PM
PROTIP for PL: Just because YUO don't see something happening doesn't mean it isn't happening.
And really you should know that.
You have no idea what the individuals on this board do in their personal lives. What happens on these forums, on an individual basis, is such a small percentage of the real people. It's rather disheartening that someone who supposedly embraces Discordian ideals and philosophies would generalize and assume much about people he does not know outside the internet. Seems very judgemental and assuming if you ask me.
Yet, you have reduced the PD.COM membership to trolling and handing out flyers. Yet, what you don't see is our interactions with IRL people. You don't hear our conversations with others. You know JACK SQUAT about what impact we may or may not have in our individual lives.
So seriously, you need to stop with the assumptions and generalizations. It's not very becoming, and, IMO, it certainly isn't a very Discordian thing to do.
Suppose GW is doing the right thing, to save America in the long run. I DONT KNOW AND NEITHER DO YOU. Often times these things are not written in the history books, even if he is hated and labeled by history as the ruiner of the American economy for many years, only the players involved in this game will ever know the truth. Reserve your judgement, because you are not involved in any of the decisions he has to make BASED ON INFORMATION YOU DO NOT KNOW.
Remember when i said that a little while ago? Now it's kind of ironic you say judging people you do not know is very Un-Discordian, because that's what most people posting in this thread have done. ADMIT IT. You only know the president through electronic means... the media. I wasn't defending him as a person or what you think he's doing "on the side" of being the commander in chief, i was defending his right not to be Declared Guilty by a forum of Judgemental Discordians who tell others not to be judgmental of THEM. Me being critical of the methods you use to mindfuck people have led you to tell me not to judge you, because i dont know you in real life. You are not part of GW's life and you do not understand what decisions he has to make and you dont know the information he uses to make these decisions. Think about that for a minute.
On this board there are people that are young and think they know everything. They are wrong. On this board there are old people that "know" they know everything, but they are also wrong. My image of the ideal Discordian is smart enough to recognize he does not know everything, and as a result doesnt not make judgements prematurely about people they don't know.... LIKE THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Can you just admit you don't know the whole situation the president has to deal with? Can you admit that you do not know him, and that you shold reserve Judgement?
Umm, I haven't been a part of the whole George Bush/War arc of this thread so keep me the fuck out of it. I was responding to your assumption about what people on this board do or don't do in their individual lives. So have your little tete-a-tete with the others about The War on Terra, but if you are going to respond to me, please respond to me about what I say, not what others have said.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 04:11:18 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 10, 2008, 02:02:32 PM
PROTIP for PL: Just because YUO don't see something happening doesn't mean it isn't happening.
And really you should know that.
You have no idea what the individuals on this board do in their personal lives. What happens on these forums, on an individual basis, is such a small percentage of the real people. It's rather disheartening that someone who supposedly embraces Discordian ideals and philosophies would generalize and assume much about people he does not know outside the internet. Seems very judgemental and assuming if you ask me.
Yet, you have reduced the PD.COM membership to trolling and handing out flyers. Yet, what you don't see is our interactions with IRL people. You don't hear our conversations with others. You know JACK SQUAT about what impact we may or may not have in our individual lives.
So seriously, you need to stop with the assumptions and generalizations. It's not very becoming, and, IMO, it certainly isn't a very Discordian thing to do.
Suppose GW is doing the right thing, to save America in the long run. I DONT KNOW AND NEITHER DO YOU. Often times these things are not written in the history books, even if he is hated and labeled by history as the ruiner of the American economy for many years, only the players involved in this game will ever know the truth. Reserve your judgement, because you are not involved in any of the decisions he has to make BASED ON INFORMATION YOU DO NOT KNOW.
Remember when i said that a little while ago? Now it's kind of ironic you say judging people you do not know is very Un-Discordian, because that's what most people posting in this thread have done. ADMIT IT. You only know the president through electronic means... the media. I wasn't defending him as a person or what you think he's doing "on the side" of being the commander in chief, i was defending his right not to be Declared Guilty by a forum of Judgemental Discordians who tell others not to be judgmental of THEM. Me being critical of the methods you use to mindfuck people have led you to tell me not to judge you, because i dont know you in real life. You are not part of GW's life and you do not understand what decisions he has to make and you dont know the information he uses to make these decisions. Think about that for a minute.
On this board there are people that are young and think they know everything. They are wrong. On this board there are old people that "know" they know everything, but they are also wrong. My image of the ideal Discordian is smart enough to recognize he does not know everything, and as a result doesnt not make judgements prematurely about people they don't know.... LIKE THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Can you just admit you don't know the whole situation the president has to deal with? Can you admit that you do not know him, and that you shold reserve Judgement?
Enough data is available at this point, that we can justly question the credibility of the Administration. We now KNOW that the Administration cherry picked intelligence, we know that they ignored intel which didn't fit their narrative. We KNOW that the military had run through the war games and recommended a very different approach to any potential Iraqi invasion. We now KNOW that there was no Al Queda in Iraq before the invasion. We now KNOW that Saddam had nothing to do with Bin Laden. We now KNOW that Saddam had no WMD's nor any programs actively working to get them.
GWB may believe he's doing the right thing... but there is, by far, enough publicly available information to call into question his credibility, judgment and honesty. When the administration has screwed up in dealing with EVERYTHING we have knowledge about, trying to play the "Well, you don't know everything" card is a canard. The war in Iraq has no direct correlation with 9/11, Bin Laden or terrorism. There was no threat, there was a crazy dictator, locked in his own country and who posed no real risk. The real risk comes from the crazy, dangerous terrorists, whom we've let wander off into Pakistan while we completely fucked a random country that had no real value to us.
Sorry, that baby shit doesn't fly.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 12, 2008, 04:37:14 PM
Umm, I haven't been a part of the whole George Bush/War arc of this thread so keep me the fuck out of it. I was responding to your assumption about what people on this board do or don't do in their individual lives. So have your little tete-a-tete with the others about The War on Terra, but if you are going to respond to me, please respond to me about what I say, not what others have said.
That's right. You also said i was being judgemental and that's Un-Discordian. You're also right about that. However, this applies to everyone else that was being judgemental of GW. You had the courage to call me out when i was pointing the finger of judgement at the posters, why didnt you call them out for doing the same shit? If you disapprove of people being judgemental, but you do not challenge them because they agree with your own personal judgements, then this is something that strikes me as VERY UN-Discordian. You brought yourself into it when you exposed the contradiction. I wont Judge you as not a good discordian though, because #1 there may be some other reason you didnt call them out and #2 It hasn't been defined what a good Discordian is.
I can say, though, that if you didnt challenge them because you were scared to... that is not a good thing. That is why i want to know why you didnt challenge them.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 12, 2008, 05:01:24 PM
Enough data is available at this point, that we can justly question the credibility of the Administration. We now KNOW that the Administration cherry picked intelligence, we know that they ignored intel which didn't fit their narrative. We KNOW that the military had run through the war games and recommended a very different approach to any potential Iraqi invasion. We now KNOW that there was no Al Queda in Iraq before the invasion. We now KNOW that Saddam had nothing to do with Bin Laden. We now KNOW that Saddam had no WMD's nor any programs actively working to get them.
GWB may believe he's doing the right thing... but there is, by far, enough publicly available information to call into question his credibility, judgment and honesty. When the administration has screwed up in dealing with EVERYTHING we have knowledge about, trying to play the "Well, you don't know everything" card is a canard. The war in Iraq has no direct correlation with 9/11, Bin Laden or terrorism. There was no threat, there was a crazy dictator, locked in his own country and who posed no real risk. The real risk comes from the crazy, dangerous terrorists, whom we've let wander off into Pakistan while we completely fucked a random country that had no real value to us.
So then why did he do it? That's what we don't know. Save your judgement and put him on trial... THEN call him a bad guy if it's for his personal agenda. That's all i said.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 05:02:03 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? link=topic=15434.msg493515#msg493515
Umm, I haven't been a part of the whole George Bush/War arc of this thread so keep me the fuck out of it. I was responding to your assumption about what people on this board do or don't do in their individual lives. So have your little tete-a-tete with the others about The War on Terra, but if you are going to respond to me, please respond to me about what I say, not what others have said.
That's right. You also said i was being judgemental and that's Un-Discordian. You're also right about that. However, this applies to everyone else that was being judgemental of GW. You had the courage to call me out when i was pointing the finger of judgement at the posters, why didnt you call them out for doing the same shit? If you disapprove of people being judgemental, but you do not challenge them because they agree with your own personal judgements, then this is something that strikes me as VERY UN-Discordian. You brought yourself into it when you exposed the contradiction. I wont Judge you as not a good discordian though, because #1 there may be some other reason you didnt call them out and #2 It hasn't been defined what a good Discordian is.
I can say, though, that if you didnt challenge them because you were scared to... that is not a good thing. That is why i want to know why you didnt challenge them.
Because I've kept out of that part of the thread because I don't give a fuck about it. My involvement in this thread has to do with YOU calling out US based on limited information. About you making judgements on what we are doing in our personal lives. About you casting aspersions on someone like TGRR, assuming his life revolves around posting on the internet. To me that's low-class, low-life bullshit.
I'm not in the business of discussing what a good Discordian IS. But I sure as hell know that making assumptions about other Discordians, (or anyone for that matter) based on only what they see (on the internet) is bunk and is NOT open-minded thought.
I really don't want to get entrenched in this thread however, as a long time member of PD.com (and if my memory serves me correctly), past history has shown that making declarations as to what is and is not 'REALLY DISCORDIAN' is the slipperiest of slippery slopes and, as such, not generally advised.
But everyone may post as they wilt (of course).
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 05:06:08 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 12, 2008, 05:01:24 PM
Enough data is available at this point, that we can justly question the credibility of the Administration. We now KNOW that the Administration cherry picked intelligence, we know that they ignored intel which didn't fit their narrative. We KNOW that the military had run through the war games and recommended a very different approach to any potential Iraqi invasion. We now KNOW that there was no Al Queda in Iraq before the invasion. We now KNOW that Saddam had nothing to do with Bin Laden. We now KNOW that Saddam had no WMD's nor any programs actively working to get them.
GWB may believe he's doing the right thing... but there is, by far, enough publicly available information to call into question his credibility, judgment and honesty. When the administration has screwed up in dealing with EVERYTHING we have knowledge about, trying to play the "Well, you don't know everything" card is a canard. The war in Iraq has no direct correlation with 9/11, Bin Laden or terrorism. There was no threat, there was a crazy dictator, locked in his own country and who posed no real risk. The real risk comes from the crazy, dangerous terrorists, whom we've let wander off into Pakistan while we completely fucked a random country that had no real value to us.
So then why did he do it? That's what we don't know. Save your judgement and put him on trial... THEN call him a bad guy if it's for his personal agenda. That's all i said.
You have got to be kidding me. Are you really that incapable in critical thinking skills? We don't need to know why he made bad decisions, to know that the decisions were bad ones. We have more than enough data to know that they were well aware that Saddam posed no direct threat. We also have enough data to KNOW that the neo-con think tanks had a "magical horsie" theory that if we invaded Iraq we could magically put a democracy there that would make the ME a much better place. We can put those two things together and come up with some tentative conclusions about our Dear President and his reasons.
At the end of the day, his intentions don't matter nearly as much as his decisions and the implementation of those decisions. In that, this Administration gets an 'F'. They didn't plan the invasion well (even though folks like Gen Zinni and others had lots of data and recommendations) and they passed on 'intel' that they KNEW to be false. Barring any other idiotic decisions made... those two KNOWN points alone provide plenty of data to indicate that Mr. Bush will not go into history as a savior. You're an idiot to buy into his "history will judge" BS. when History judges, it usually finds things to be worse, not better.
Lincoln's actions of suspending HC, in historical context, has been judged unconstitutional and wrong.
History has judged that we sat on our ass while good men died in Pearl Harbor.
History has judged that the sitting President was informend that the Japanese were likely to surrender, and he still dropped the bomb.
Now, when in history has a discredited president been vindicated? I can't think of a single instance.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 05:06:08 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 12, 2008, 05:01:24 PM
Enough data is available at this point, that we can justly question the credibility of the Administration. We now KNOW that the Administration cherry picked intelligence, we know that they ignored intel which didn't fit their narrative. We KNOW that the military had run through the war games and recommended a very different approach to any potential Iraqi invasion. We now KNOW that there was no Al Queda in Iraq before the invasion. We now KNOW that Saddam had nothing to do with Bin Laden. We now KNOW that Saddam had no WMD's nor any programs actively working to get them.
GWB may believe he's doing the right thing... but there is, by far, enough publicly available information to call into question his credibility, judgment and honesty. When the administration has screwed up in dealing with EVERYTHING we have knowledge about, trying to play the "Well, you don't know everything" card is a canard. The war in Iraq has no direct correlation with 9/11, Bin Laden or terrorism. There was no threat, there was a crazy dictator, locked in his own country and who posed no real risk. The real risk comes from the crazy, dangerous terrorists, whom we've let wander off into Pakistan while we completely fucked a random country that had no real value to us.
So then why did he do it? That's what we don't know. Save your judgement and put him on trial... THEN call him a bad guy if it's for his personal agenda. That's all i said.
And in the meantime if he's a real nasty piece of work, we have no right to say anything about it? We have towait till an election comes round?
No, constant criticsim and judgement is neccessary. These aren't bad things in and of themselves.
They only become "bad" when applied dogmatically.
Bush (or anyone else) shouldn't have us bowing to their will just because they MIGHT know something we don't, making them immune to criticism. Our "Democratic" leaders are there to serve
US. "Government for the People, By the People"?
Personally, I think Democracy is in large part a fuckin mess. I want to be able to call MY leaders on bullshit as and when they bullshit me. Not every election time when I get a Black or White, Yes or No, 50/50 choice on whether I'm going to swallow someones BS untill the next election.
If this means that they have to tell us what they know in advance of acting on it, so be it. Perhaps a more open Government wouldn't be hated as much by the Terrists we Fear-Oh-So-Much? I don't know, but it could be a worthwhile experiment.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 12, 2008, 05:15:50 PM
Because I've kept out of that part of the thread because I don't give a fuck about it. My involvement in this thread has to do with YOU calling out US based on limited information. About you making judgements on what we are doing in our personal lives. About you casting aspersions on someone like TGRR, assuming his life revolves around posting on the internet. To me that's low-class, low-life bullshit.
I am not one who cares about politics and that is what determines if the military gets employed correctly or incorrectly, justly or injustly. In this case, the military is being used correctly... as a tool to preserve American power. It may or may not be justified, but that's of no consequence because i don't care about politics. As for talking shit about tgrr, i did that out of spite to demonstrate something he brings to the site that is destructive, despite the quality he brings to the table in rants. Low-class, low-life that is accurate about the method i used to illustrate my point.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 12, 2008, 05:15:50 PM
I'm not in the business of discussing what a good Discordian IS. But I sure as hell know that making assumptions about other Discordians, (or anyone for that matter) based on only what they see (on the internet) is bunk and is NOT open-minded thought.
I made many assumptions about Roger that were baseless. As far as making assumptions about Discordians goes I DON'T doubt that you guys accomplish shit in real life, but it had to be said to draw out the contradiction.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 05:47:12 PM
I am not one who cares about politics and that is what determines if the military gets employed correctly or incorrectly, justly or injustly. In this case, the military is being used correctly... as a tool to preserve American power. It may or may not be justified, but that's of no consequence...
You sir, are a goldmine of trolling material.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 05:47:12 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 12, 2008, 05:15:50 PM
Because I've kept out of that part of the thread because I don't give a fuck about it. My involvement in this thread has to do with YOU calling out US based on limited information. About you making judgements on what we are doing in our personal lives. About you casting aspersions on someone like TGRR, assuming his life revolves around posting on the internet. To me that's low-class, low-life bullshit.
I am not one who cares about politics and that is what determines if the military gets employed correctly or incorrectly, justly or injustly. In this case, the military is being used correctly... as a tool to preserve American power. It may or may not be justified, but that's of no consequence because i don't care about politics. As for talking shit about tgrr, i did that out of spite to demonstrate something he brings to the site that is destructive, despite the quality he brings to the table in rants. Low-class, low-life that is accurate about the method i used to illustrate my point.
If TGRR was so destructive to these boards, and he's been around for a majority of the board's existence, don't you think it would've been destroyed by now? Or do you think the rest of us are that insignificant and robotic in our thought that we'd allow one person to destroy the forum?
QuoteQuote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 12, 2008, 05:15:50 PM
I'm not in the business of discussing what a good Discordian IS. But I sure as hell know that making assumptions about other Discordians, (or anyone for that matter) based on only what they see (on the internet) is bunk and is NOT open-minded thought.
I made many assumptions about Roger that were baseless. As far as making assumptions about Discordians goes I DON'T doubt that you guys accomplish shit in real life, but it had to be said to draw out the contradiction.
Sometimes asking nicely works too.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 12, 2008, 06:20:12 PM
If TGRR was so destructive to these boards, and he's been around for a majority of the board's existence, don't you think it would've been destroyed by now? Or do you think the rest of us are that insignificant and robotic in our thought that we'd allow one person to destroy the forum?
The board's
existence was never in danger.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 12, 2008, 06:20:12 PM
Sometimes asking nicely works too.
Showing people that they have contradicted themselves is far easier than telling someone they are wrong. For example, i told Pope Naughty Nasturtiums that he was wrong about something and he doesn't believe me. When he responds, i will make him contradict himself since he refuses to believe me. In this case, i can do it nicely and without antagonizing. Hopefully others will realize also, that they value things higher than human life... whatever it may be.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 07:40:03 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 12, 2008, 06:20:12 PM
If TGRR was so destructive to these boards, and he's been around for a majority of the board's existence, don't you think it would've been destroyed by now? Or do you think the rest of us are that insignificant and robotic in our thought that we'd allow one person to destroy the forum?
The board's existence was never in danger.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 12, 2008, 06:20:12 PM
Sometimes asking nicely works too.
Showing people that they have contradicted themselves is far easier than telling someone they are wrong. For example, i told Pope Naughty Nasturtiums that he was wrong about something and he doesn't believe me. When he responds, i will make him contradict himself since he refuses to believe me. In this case, i can do it nicely and without antagonizing. Hopefully others will realize also, that they value things higher than human life... whatever it may be.
What sort of Discordian thinks that contradictions mean something must be wrong?
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 12, 2008, 05:24:29 PM
You have got to be kidding me. Are you really that incapable in critical thinking skills? We don't need to know why he made bad decisions, to know that the decisions were bad ones. We have more than enough data to know that they were well aware that Saddam posed no direct threat. We also have enough data to KNOW that the neo-con think tanks had a "magical horsie" theory that if we invaded Iraq we could magically put a democracy there that would make the ME a much better place. We can put those two things together and come up with some tentative conclusions about our Dear President and his reasons.
The shitty reasons for doing shitty things that they feed the public, along with fear set the stage for them to take action. If they knew these things would not lead to what they told the public then why were they done? Something else is at stake that we don't know anything about. If you want to challenge him on shit that he is doing, and he is guilty of then condemn him for those things. How can you say you know there is no bigger plan at work here, when things are so obviously strange? Trying to put a democracy in the ME would be a waste of effort, it doesnt quite suit their culture, but we ended up over there. There has been something else going on.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 12, 2008, 05:24:29 PM
At the end of the day, his intentions don't matter nearly as much as his decisions and the implementation of those decisions. In that, this Administration gets an 'F'. They didn't plan the invasion well (even though folks like Gen Zinni and others had lots of data and recommendations) and they passed on 'intel' that they KNEW to be false. Barring any other idiotic decisions made... those two KNOWN points alone provide plenty of data to indicate that Mr. Bush will not go into history as a savior. You're an idiot to buy into his "history will judge" BS. when History judges, it usually finds things to be worse, not better.
Lincoln's actions of suspending HC, in historical context, has been judged unconstitutional and wrong.
History has judged that we sat on our ass while good men died in Pearl Harbor.
History has judged that the sitting President was informend that the Japanese were likely to surrender, and he still dropped the bomb.
Now, when in history has a discredited president been vindicated? I can't think of a single instance.
The things Lincoln was doing were judged unconstitutional and wrong at the time. The democratic party of the era didnt make it easy for him to use "war time" powers that had never been used before, including detainment which had been considered unlawful and spending money without congressional approval. After all was said and done, congress supported his actions retroactively.
Of course contradictions mean something is wrong, but only logical ones. Alogical contradictions can still be right.
(Av(B^C)) -> ((AvB)^(AvC)) and all that good stuff.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 12, 2008, 07:53:57 PM
What sort of Discordian thinks that contradictions mean something must be wrong?
A piece of information
can be correct or incorrect, if not something else. He made a claim that is incorrect and i can demonstrate exactly why, by making him contradict himself. The contradiction cannot prove him correct, it can only prove his claim incorrect.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 08:12:36 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 12, 2008, 05:24:29 PM
You have got to be kidding me. Are you really that incapable in critical thinking skills? We don't need to know why he made bad decisions, to know that the decisions were bad ones. We have more than enough data to know that they were well aware that Saddam posed no direct threat. We also have enough data to KNOW that the neo-con think tanks had a "magical horsie" theory that if we invaded Iraq we could magically put a democracy there that would make the ME a much better place. We can put those two things together and come up with some tentative conclusions about our Dear President and his reasons.
The shitty reasons for doing shitty things that they feed the public, along with fear set the stage for them to take action. If they knew these things would not lead to what they told the public then why were they done? Something else is at stake that we don't know anything about. If you want to challenge him on shit that he is doing, and he is guilty of then condemn him for those things. How can you say you know there is no bigger plan at work here, when things are so obviously strange? Trying to put a democracy in the ME would be a waste of effort, it doesnt quite suit their culture, but we ended up over there. There has been something else going on.
*blink*
You must be trolling right? Are you actually arguing "Everything is a clusterfuck, so obviously they have some more important issues here"? I am close to speechless.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 12, 2008, 05:24:29 PM
At the end of the day, his intentions don't matter nearly as much as his decisions and the implementation of those decisions. In that, this Administration gets an 'F'. They didn't plan the invasion well (even though folks like Gen Zinni and others had lots of data and recommendations) and they passed on 'intel' that they KNEW to be false. Barring any other idiotic decisions made... those two KNOWN points alone provide plenty of data to indicate that Mr. Bush will not go into history as a savior. You're an idiot to buy into his "history will judge" BS. when History judges, it usually finds things to be worse, not better.
Lincoln's actions of suspending HC, in historical context, has been judged unconstitutional and wrong.
History has judged that we sat on our ass while good men died in Pearl Harbor.
History has judged that the sitting President was informend that the Japanese were likely to surrender, and he still dropped the bomb.
Now, when in history has a discredited president been vindicated? I can't think of a single instance.
The things Lincoln was doing were judged unconstitutional and wrong at the time. The democratic party of the era didnt make it easy for him to use "war time" powers that had never been used before, including detainment which had been considered unlawful and spending money without congressional approval. After all was said and done, congress supported his actions retroactively.
[/quote]
None of which has anything to do with the fact that history didn't say "Oh well, he really wanted to save the Union, so its OK", nor has that happened with any of our Presidents.... it seems highly unlikely to happen with Bush. Though if you would like to provide me with some reason, other than blind faith to support your presumption, then I'm all ears.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 08:18:14 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 12, 2008, 07:53:57 PM
What sort of Discordian thinks that contradictions mean something must be wrong?
A piece of information can be correct or incorrect, if not something else. He made a claim that is incorrect and i can demonstrate exactly why, by making him contradict himself. The contradiction cannot prove him correct, it can only prove his claim incorrect.
Alright, let's do the contradiction game. You propose that a country has the right to attack other nations in order to maintain it's power and standard of living, with no other justification.
I then propose that under that idea, the terrorists have a right to blow us up in order to preserve *their* way of life, with no other justification than that it helps them.
Blasphemer! Support Our Troops, who I now call the Centurions for obvious reasons. Vote for me or Die!!!!!!
:mccain:
Not the puppy-hurlers though, we still have to have standards.
Quote from: Requiem on March 12, 2008, 08:31:10 PM
Alright, let's do the contradiction game. You propose that a country has the right to attack other nations in order to maintain it's power and standard of living, with no other justification.
I then propose that under that idea, the terrorists have a right to blow us up in order to preserve *their* way of life, with no other justification than that it helps them.
There is no contradiction here. All countries have the right to be powerful and independent nations. It's a biological imperative to survive and enhance your own probability of surviving. The right to self defense is always in place. Attacking others is a result of them attempting to reduce the probability of our survival and prosperity as a nation. It's a struggle to live and a struggle to live fat and happy. If someone would take that away they can die, because i WILL defend myself. If someone cuts my hand off, my life may or may not have been in danger, but my probability of survival in the long term has been decreased.
There are terrorist organizations all over the world that have no conflicts with America or our allies, and are therefore free to grow and expand as long as they don't attack us or our allies. If they wanted to live they shouldnt have attacked us.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 09:01:23 PM
Quote from: Requiem on March 12, 2008, 08:31:10 PM
Alright, let's do the contradiction game. You propose that a country has the right to attack other nations in order to maintain it's power and standard of living, with no other justification.
I then propose that under that idea, the terrorists have a right to blow us up in order to preserve *their* way of life, with no other justification than that it helps them.
There is no contradiction here. All countries have the right to be powerful and independent nations. It's a biological imperative to survive and enhance your own probability of surviving. The right to self defense is always in place. Attacking others is a result of them attempting to reduce the probability of our survival and prosperity as a nation. It's a struggle to live and a struggle to live fat and happy. If someone would take that away they can die, because i WILL defend myself. If someone cuts my hand off, my life may or may not have been in danger, but my probability of survival in the long term has been decreased.
There are terrorist organizations all over the world that have no conflicts with America or our allies, and are therefore free to grow and expand as long as they don't attack us or our allies. If they wanted to live they shouldnt have attacked us.
So ummm, what did Iraq do that threatened our standing as a nation?
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 12, 2008, 09:10:05 PM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 09:01:23 PM
Quote from: Requiem on March 12, 2008, 08:31:10 PM
Alright, let's do the contradiction game. You propose that a country has the right to attack other nations in order to maintain it's power and standard of living, with no other justification.
I then propose that under that idea, the terrorists have a right to blow us up in order to preserve *their* way of life, with no other justification than that it helps them.
There is no contradiction here. All countries have the right to be powerful and independent nations. It's a biological imperative to survive and enhance your own probability of surviving. The right to self defense is always in place. Attacking others is a result of them attempting to reduce the probability of our survival and prosperity as a nation. It's a struggle to live and a struggle to live fat and happy. If someone would take that away they can die, because i WILL defend myself. If someone cuts my hand off, my life may or may not have been in danger, but my probability of survival in the long term has been decreased.
There are terrorist organizations all over the world that have no conflicts with America or our allies, and are therefore free to grow and expand as long as they don't attack us or our allies. If they wanted to live they shouldnt have attacked us.
So ummm, what did Iraq do that threatened our standing as a nation?
Only GWBush knows. Thats why we can't just condemn him out of hand. Or something.
I forget exactly where this stopped sounding like some kind of troll to everyone, and ya'll started taking PL seriously.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 09:01:23 PM
Quote from: Requiem on March 12, 2008, 08:31:10 PM
Alright, let's do the contradiction game. You propose that a country has the right to attack other nations in order to maintain it's power and standard of living, with no other justification.
I then propose that under that idea, the terrorists have a right to blow us up in order to preserve *their* way of life, with no other justification than that it helps them.
There is no contradiction here. All countries have the right to be powerful and independent nations. It's a biological imperative to survive and enhance your own probability of surviving. The right to self defense is always in place. Attacking others is a result of them attempting to reduce the probability of our survival and prosperity as a nation. It's a struggle to live and a struggle to live fat and happy. If someone would take that away they can die, because i WILL defend myself. If someone cuts my hand off, my life may or may not have been in danger, but my probability of survival in the long term has been decreased.
There are terrorist organizations all over the world that have no conflicts with America or our allies, and are therefore free to grow and expand as long as they don't attack us or our allies. If they wanted to live they shouldnt have attacked us.
You win points here, you may be a fascist, but at least you're intellectually honest.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 07:40:03 PM
Showing people that they have contradicted themselves is far easier than telling someone they are wrong. For example, i told Pope Naughty Nasturtiums that he was wrong about something and he doesn't believe me. When he responds, i will make him contradict himself since he refuses to believe me. In this case, i can do it nicely and without antagonizing. Hopefully others will realize also, that they value things higher than human life... whatever it may be.
All right, have it at me.
He still hasn't named anything he values more than life. Plz to be providing examples.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 09:01:23 PM
There are terrorist organizations all over the world that have no conflicts with America or our allies, and are therefore free to grow and expand as long as they don't attack us or our allies. If they wanted to live they shouldnt have attacked us.
This is a dumb troll now that everyone knows Iraq didnt attack or threaten us in any way. Right now all we have to go on is the "But Saddam was a bad man!" pretense.
But him being a bad man threatens my way of life! :x :argh!:
And the only way to solve it is through unchecked, no questions-ask killing! So that you won't have to do the same.
Plus he threatens our way of life!
And it's the government's fault anyway, so blame them.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 04:11:18 PM
Suppose GW is doing the right thing, to save America in the long run. I DONT KNOW AND NEITHER DO YOU.
The ends do not justify the means.
That is all.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 05:47:12 PM
I am not one who cares about politics and that is what determines if the military gets employed correctly or incorrectly, justly or injustly.
So you have no moral sense.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 05:47:12 PM
In this case, the military is being used correctly... as a tool to preserve American power.
That is not the correct function of the military. Please review your oath of service, and then punch yourself in the balls.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 05:47:12 PM
As for talking shit about tgrr, i did that out of spite to demonstrate something he brings to the site that is destructive,
Oh, crap. There goes another irony meter. :lulz:
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 05:47:12 PM
I made many assumptions about Roger that were baseless.
Yes. Your first one was that your opinion would count, rather than simply attracting the ridicule you so richly deserve.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 09:01:23 PM
There are terrorist organizations all over the world that have no conflicts with America or our allies, and are therefore free to grow and expand as long as they don't attack us or our allies. If they wanted to live they shouldnt have attacked us.
So, exactly when did Iraq attack us?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 13, 2008, 02:57:58 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 09:01:23 PM
There are terrorist organizations all over the world that have no conflicts with America or our allies, and are therefore free to grow and expand as long as they don't attack us or our allies. If they wanted to live they shouldnt have attacked us.
So, exactly when did Iraq attack us?
Well, according to a Pentagon report to be released....today I think, maybe tomorrow, whatever...never is the answer. This is an "exhaustive analysis" of documents seized from Hussein era of leadership, over 300,000 of them, which show Saddam supported terrorists that targeted Shi'ite dissidents, Kurds and exile groups such as that headed by Ahmed Chalabi, in which case killing them probably would have been a favour for the USA. At least then the Pentagon wouldn't have paid Chalabi $400,000 a year to listen to him tell lies invented by his other paymasters in Tehran, lies that ended up giving Iranian hegemony to the region at the cost of none of their soldiers, and about 4000 US ones.
It also showed no operational links with Al-Qai'da. I am shocked, SHOCKED I TELL YOU!
Quote from: Cain on March 13, 2008, 08:48:36 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 13, 2008, 02:57:58 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 12, 2008, 09:01:23 PM
There are terrorist organizations all over the world that have no conflicts with America or our allies, and are therefore free to grow and expand as long as they don't attack us or our allies. If they wanted to live they shouldnt have attacked us.
So, exactly when did Iraq attack us?
Well, according to a Pentagon report to be released....today I think, maybe tomorrow, whatever...never is the answer. This is an "exhaustive analysis" of documents seized from Hussein era of leadership, over 300,000 of them, which show Saddam supported terrorists that targeted Shi'ite dissidents, Kurds and exile groups such as that headed by Ahmed Chalabi, in which case killing them probably would have been a favour for the USA. At least then the Pentagon wouldn't have paid Chalabi $400,000 a year to listen to him tell lies invented by his other paymasters in Tehran, lies that ended up giving Iranian hegemony to the region at the cost of none of their soldiers, and about 4000 US ones.
It also showed no operational links with Al-Qai'da. I am shocked, SHOCKED I TELL YOU!
Its all Liberal Lies!!!!! What next? Are you gonna tell us that there is no proof for WMD's in all that documentation?
Iraq attacked us a shortly after we invaded them.
So obviously, we had to defend ourselves.
LMNO
-running for office in 2012.
The real irony is that we executed Hussein for human rights violations which occurred in the name of his regime being "tough on terror". I guess it's OK when WE do it, though.
I'm not sure that is a valid comparison. Saddam purposefully killed his own people. The U.S. entered a war it should not have entered. But it hasn't purposefully, targetted innocent Iraqis.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 13, 2008, 08:31:02 PM
I'm not sure that is a valid comparison. Saddam purposefully killed his own people. The U.S. entered a war it should not have entered. But it hasn't purposefully, targetted innocent Iraqis.
Wanna bet? I can trace purposeful, willful and excessive use of force against Iraqi citizens as the direct responsibility of the government and occupation authorities. Sure, they probably didn't have direct orders to go pop a few innocent Iraqis in the head, but consider the choice of Blackwater for defence of US installations and Proconsul Bremner. They know if they let Bremner die, or the insurgents take control of an installation, they can kiss their contracts goodbye. So they have 'rules' of engagement to reflect that, where an Iraqi can be shot in the head for not stopping his car half a street away from a checkpoint, for example. What's more, Bremner made such people immune to prosection in Iraq, while Republicans on the Hill have bought the line that they cannot be tried under the UCMJ either.
Sounds to me exactly like the sort of policy that is targeting innocent Iraqi civilians.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 13, 2008, 08:31:02 PM
I'm not sure that is a valid comparison. Saddam purposefully killed his own people. The U.S. entered a war it should not have entered. But it hasn't purposefully, targetted innocent Iraqis.
He tortured and killed his own people when they were SUSPECTED OF BEING TERRORISTS.
We invaded his country and have killed millions more because they were under the rule of a man who was suspected (wrongly, as it happens) to be associated with terrorists.
Our own government is rapidly working on eroding civil rights laws that protect us from being imprisoned, interrogated, tortured, and even killed if they suspect us of being terrorists.
Huh. Go figure.
Of course you can find examples of members of the U.S. Military who went too far. I won't argue that point. And yes, the U.S. has contracted with some Mercenaries who have gone over the line as well. However, I don't think you can equate the misdeeds of some, generalize it to the whole of the U.S. Military and then equate that with what Saddam did to his people.
I know there's a lot of mocking of the "Support The Troops" thing, but I think it is equally as mockable to go for the polar opposite and generalize the U.S. Military force as a bunch of barbarians. There are some, no doubt, but I don't think it's fair to cast their petulant shadow across those who are trying to just do the job handed to them by their commanders.
As far as I'm concerned, that portion of irresponsibility does not equate to a Dictator enacting some paranoid-driven revenge upon a portion of his population. If Bush starts stuffing U.S. citizens in gas chambers, and has roving death squads in the U.S., then the comparison will be valid. He's a dope, no doubt, and has enacted bad, bad, bad policy, but it's still not on the same level of vileness that was Saddam.
Hang on a minute.
I was equating US policy in regard to Saddam's policy. The troops didn't even come into the equation. The US government has willfully pursued a policy where innocent Iraqis are going to die, in very large numbers, and instead of taking steps to mimimize those casualties, has instead decided to cover its own ass and those of the people it lets kill Iraqis with abandon. It has taken steps either to torture Iraqis, or allow their torture at the hands of the secret police. I see no moral difference between that and Saddam whatsoever.
I didn't comment on the morality of the US army at all, in the same way as I did not comment on the morality of the Iraqi army. It was irrelevant to my critique of government policy. Goddamnit. :x
Cain is correct.
There is no moral difference between the policies we have created, and the policy of just deliberately killing random Iraqis.
Alright, let me back up to my entry into this discussion. What I disagree with is Nigel's statement:
The real irony is that we executed Hussein for human rights violations which occurred in the name of his regime being "tough on terror". I guess it's OK when WE do it, though.
How I read this, and correct me if I am wrong, is that if what Hussein did rose to the level where he deserved execution so does the U.S. policy that lead to the invasion of Iraq.
I don't argue that innocent Iraqis have died as a result of the U.S. invasion. I don't argue that some in the military (I believe a very small minority) and some of the contracted Mercenaries (Blackwater being the obvious example) have overstepped their mission and purposefully killed those it should not kill.
Saddam Hussein had 150 people from Dujail executed, including some young teenagers. He had over 1000 other residents, including women and children, imprisoned and tortured. Women and children are not military targets.
Yes, the Bush policy to invade Iraq, I believe, was morally wrong. What I'm saying is the motivation wasn't the same, and in my mind, doesn't rise to the same level of vile of Saddam Hussein. So we'll have to agree to disagree.
But, if one really thinks someone from the U.S. should hang for the Iraq invasion, who do we hang?
Rumsfeld.
Quote from: LMNO on March 14, 2008, 03:38:51 PM
Rumsfeld.
Maybe... though Bush is ultimately responsible as Commander In Chief. He had to say Yes to all of this Bullshit.
Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bremner, some other people involved in the CPA (especially those involved in the selling off of Iraqi assets), those who the Abu Ghraib orders originated with, probably a few Pentagon personnel as well.
You'll never get to hang Cheney or Rumsfeild for the Iraq war while I'm around, I'll be too busy hanging them for Vietnam.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 14, 2008, 12:41:44 PM
But, if one really thinks someone from the U.S. should hang for the Iraq invasion, who do we hang?
The President.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 14, 2008, 12:41:44 PM
Alright, let me back up to my entry into this discussion. What I disagree with is Nigel's statement:
The real irony is that we executed Hussein for human rights violations which occurred in the name of his regime being "tough on terror". I guess it's OK when WE do it, though.
How I read this, and correct me if I am wrong, is that if what Hussein did rose to the level where he deserved execution so does the U.S. policy that lead to the invasion of Iraq.
I don't argue that innocent Iraqis have died as a result of the U.S. invasion. I don't argue that some in the military (I believe a very small minority) and some of the contracted Mercenaries (Blackwater being the obvious example) have overstepped their mission and purposefully killed those it should not kill.
Saddam Hussein had 150 people from Dujail executed, including some young teenagers. He had over 1000 other residents, including women and children, imprisoned and tortured. Women and children are not military targets.
Yes, the Bush policy to invade Iraq, I believe, was morally wrong. What I'm saying is the motivation wasn't the same, and in my mind, doesn't rise to the same level of vile of Saddam Hussein. So we'll have to agree to disagree.
But, if one really thinks someone from the U.S. should hang for the Iraq invasion, who do we hang?
I'd start with Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and George W Bush.
"He had over 1000 other residents, including women and children, imprisoned and tortured."
*shrugs* The USA put more than that through Abu Ghraib. Not many women, but plenty of young boys and men.
"Beginning in 2004, accounts of abuse, torture, sodomy and homicide of prisoners held in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq (also known as Baghdad Correctional Facility) came to public attention. The acts were committed by some personnel of the 372nd Military Police Company of the United States, and possibly additional American governmental agencies."
Afghanistan too.
"Two inmates [at Bagram] in December 2002 were tortured and beaten to death in cells down the hall from [Captain Carolyn Wood's] office. Hung by their arms from the ceiling and beaten so severely that, according to a report by Army investigators later leaked to the Baltimore Sun, their legs would have needed to be amputated had they lived."
Imprisonment, torture, and murder. Best of intentions, sure. Right. Beaten so severely their legs would have needed to be amputated had they lived. Best of intentions. Right. Sorry about that, guys.
Extrapolations from pre- and post-war mortality rates suggest that the destruction of public services infrastructure in Iraq probably resulted in 600,000 more deaths than would have occurred if Saddam Hussein had been left in power. (By 2006, I believe. The figure is probably larger now.)
*shrugs again* A disinterested but compassionate Being would probably see no moral difference between President Bush and Saddam Hussein. I don't.
With regards to Iraq itself, the greatest difference is that before the American invasion Hussein had been rendered mostly powerless to commit the kinds of genocidal murders that won him infamy in the 1980s. One effect of the Bush invasion was to re-introduce those horrors without the mitigation of preserving an orderly society with a survivable infrastructure.
Interestingly, if Saddam had been asked why he did what he did I bet he would have said, "I did it for the good of my country, for the good of my people."
Same as George Bush.
Best of intentions. Right. Sure. Sorry about that, guys.
~~ Jack of Turnips
So do we also execute all of the Congresspeople, like Hillary Clintin, John Kerry, etc., who voted and gave Bush the authority/go-ahead to go into Iraq?
No, the war itself is not the problem per se, even the action of a few nutjob soldiers and officers aren't the problem, the problem is administrrative policies that encourage and protect this behavior. If soldiers, and more importantly, officers, knew they would face consequences for torture and shooting civilians, it wouldn't happen nearly as often.
if you ever think of laying a finger on hillary again, i'll go on STRIKE you hear me????
Every member of the Senate or Congress who voted for the authorization of force should be ejected from government office in disgrace. Before the war I read the CIA assessments of Iraq's strategic capabilities, and only a sludge-brained political herd-animal could have read the facts and believed Iraq posed any threat at all to the USA.
Not ONE of them should be left in office.
(I wrote a lot of letters in that era. Several to Colin Powell, as he seemed the one most likely to have the sense to see what madness was being proposed and be able to do something about it. After Robert Byrd's speech in the Senate I wrote him one, too. Something like "If I may say so, Senator, you have balls. And you have my undying respect.")
Sadly, I have no way to force the political herd-animals from office. And you can't pry off leeches if you have no way to force them...
The only time people are executed for war crimes is if they lose the war. And fall into the hands of their enemies. So Bush is safe as houses.
Should he be prosecuted for war crimes? In a perfect world?
In a perfect world aggressive war would be universally prosecutable. Would Bush the First have invaded Panama if he knew he would spend hard time in the federal pen for it? Probably not. Would LBJ and Nixon have pursued Vietnam to the horrible ends they did if they had to keep the war going from a prison cell? Probably not.
So hell yes, Bush and every other son of a bitch who invades and kills should be prosecuted and sentenced and hove into a small cell for many years. That would be a good thing.
A good thing, but as realistic as turning turds to gold.
~~ Jack of Turnips
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 16, 2008, 04:22:01 PM
So do we also execute all of the Congresspeople, like Hillary Clintin, John Kerry, etc., who voted and gave Bush the authority/go-ahead to go into Iraq?
No, impeachment and imprisonment would suffice for them.
Quote from: Jack of Turnips on March 17, 2008, 01:55:48 AM
Every member of the Senate or Congress who voted for the authorization of force should be ejected from government office in disgrace.
This is the correct motorcycle.
They willfully accepted a pack of lies that fooled nobody.
Quote from: Jack of Turnips on March 17, 2008, 01:55:48 AM
Every member of the Senate or Congress who voted for the authorization of force should be ejected from government office in disgrace. Before the war I read the CIA assessments of Iraq's strategic capabilities, and only a sludge-brained political herd-animal could have read the facts and believed Iraq posed any threat at all to the USA.
Not ONE of them should be left in office.
(I wrote a lot of letters in that era. Several to Colin Powell, as he seemed the one most likely to have the sense to see what madness was being proposed and be able to do something about it. After Robert Byrd's speech in the Senate I wrote him one, too. Something like "If I may say so, Senator, you have balls. And you have my undying respect.")
Sadly, I have no way to force the political herd-animals from office. And you can't pry off leeches if you have no way to force them...
The only time people are executed for war crimes is if they lose the war. And fall into the hands of their enemies. So Bush is safe as houses.
Should he be prosecuted for war crimes? In a perfect world?
In a perfect world aggressive war would be universally prosecutable. Would Bush the First have invaded Panama if he knew he would spend hard time in the federal pen for it? Probably not. Would LBJ and Nixon have pursued Vietnam to the horrible ends they did if they had to keep the war going from a prison cell? Probably not.
So hell yes, Bush and every other son of a bitch who invades and kills should be prosecuted and sentenced and hove into a small cell for many years. That would be a good thing.
A good thing, but as realistic as turning turds to gold.
~~ Jack of Turnips
:mittens:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 13, 2008, 02:57:08 AM
So you have no moral sense.
I have a moral sense. (as it relates to killing) As far as the performance of my duties goes, only those that pose a threat to the things i am supposed to protect die. As far as me walking around on the street on my off-time, i don't start fights and i only fight to protect myself or the people i am with who can't defend themselves. I don't try to fuck people over or hurt them, but it might happen for revenge if someone ruined my life. As far as politics are concerned, a lot of my values are conservative however, i tend to vote liberal. As far as the economy is concerned i lean more towards the right. The ends justify the means in many cases, because after all it takes pain to truly learn most things, but not where human lives are at stake.
Quote from: Jack of Turnips on March 17, 2008, 01:55:48 AM
Every member of the Senate or Congress who voted for the authorization of force should be ejected from government office in disgrace. Before the war I read the CIA assessments of Iraq's strategic capabilities, and only a sludge-brained political herd-animal could have read the facts and believed Iraq posed any threat at all to the USA.
Not ONE of them should be left in office.
Most definitely, if not for deliberately telling lies, then for dereliction of duty.
Quote from: Cain on March 13, 2008, 11:55:24 PM
Hang on a minute.
The US government has willfully pursued a policy where innocent Iraqis are going to die, in very large numbers, and instead of taking steps to mimimize those casualties, has instead decided to cover its own ass and those of the people it lets kill Iraqis with abandon.
I like the majority of that post but this statement. Innocent people always die in war and it really is a tragedy (no sarcasm), but the govt lets the military create policies in battle which minimize civilian casualties as well as ensuring that people who violate the Law of War are investigated and punished accordingly. The curfews in fallujah for example, did cause a lot of inconvenience to the locals but the locals certainly knew about it. A friend of mine highly disagreed with imposing the curfew and saw an old lady violate it one night and let her slide... the shitty thing about that was she was giving intel to terrorists about his unit's equipment and movements and he had to kill her personally. It does suck royally he told me to kill an old lady, but people gathering intelligence most of the time get the LEAST amount of mercy once discovered. War sucks.
Of course, in this case "terrorist" = "patriotic resistance against illegally invading forces" , which leads us right back to the ethical can of worms.
Regardless of ethical or moral considerations the lesson learned from the northern irish occupation and others like it should have been - whether you like it or not terrorism appears to be the only means of defense available to these people. Whether it's right or wrong they will practice it and if they practice for long enough they'll get really good at it, eventually the fight will land on your shores.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 17, 2008, 01:06:34 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 13, 2008, 02:57:08 AM
So you have no moral sense.
I have a moral sense. (as it relates to killing)
At this point, I'm going to dismiss you as a wannabe, and assume that you're a cook or a typist.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 17, 2008, 01:26:21 PM
I like the majority of that post but this statement. Innocent people always die in war and it really is a tragedy (no sarcasm), but the govt lets the military create policies in battle which minimize civilian casualties as well as ensuring that people who violate the Law of War are investigated and punished accordingly. The curfews in fallujah for example, did cause a lot of inconvenience to the locals but the locals certainly knew about it.
What war? There was never a declaration of war, and your hero has already told us "mission accomplished".
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 17, 2008, 01:26:21 PM
A friend of mine highly disagreed with imposing the curfew and saw an old lady violate it one night and let her slide... the shitty thing about that was she was giving intel to terrorists about his unit's equipment and movements and he had to kill her personally.
What a steaming load of shit. :lulz:
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 17, 2008, 01:11:35 PM
Quote from: Jack of Turnips on March 17, 2008, 01:55:48 AM
Every member of the Senate or Congress who voted for the authorization of force should be ejected from government office in disgrace. Before the war I read the CIA assessments of Iraq's strategic capabilities, and only a sludge-brained political herd-animal could have read the facts and believed Iraq posed any threat at all to the USA.
Not ONE of them should be left in office.
Most definitely, if not for deliberately telling lies, then for dereliction of duty.
Wait. What?
Weren't you just defending Bush a few pages back. :lulz:
Quote from: Nigel on March 17, 2008, 04:23:13 PM
Of course, in this case "terrorist" = "patriotic resistance against illegally invading forces" , which leads us right back to the ethical can of worms.
Well, no, that *was* the case, now the people the government wants you to beleive are terrorists are patriotic resistance bravely kidnapping/executing/blowing up their fellow cuntrymen.
Edit: I see the typo, and refuse to change it.
Quote from: Requiem on March 17, 2008, 10:01:47 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 17, 2008, 04:23:13 PM
Of course, in this case "terrorist" = "patriotic resistance against illegally invading forces" , which leads us right back to the ethical can of worms.
Well, no, that *was* the case, now the people the government wants you to beleive are terrorists are patriotic resistance bravely kidnapping/executing/blowing up their fellow cuntrymen.
Say what, Junior?
Quote from: Requiem on March 17, 2008, 10:01:47 PM
Edit: I see the typo, and refuse to change it.
Because you hate America, and love terrorists.
For the first year of occupation the situation was as you described, Iraqis attacking US soldiers trying to force them out (some of them just wanted us gone, some of them were trying to restore the old regime).
After about a year, we started seeing actually terrorism, with soldiers and civilian contractors being kidnapped, held for ransom, and then executed. We also saw an upshot in IEDs, and attacks against Iraqi's who voted or accepted aid from coalition forces. The actual terrorists also attacked the insurgents in a number of cases. The insurgents eventually either quit, started working with the coalition, or were absorbed by Al Qaida in Mesopotamia.
Eventually, someone decided to blow up a church. The sect who had their church destroyed responded with violence against members of sect number 2 and things went downhill from there. The end result was that most of the violence in Iraq over the last 2 and a half years has been sectarian in nature, that is, directed as Sunni against Shi'ite and Shi'ite against Sunni, rather than Iraqi against coalition.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 17, 2008, 10:21:15 PM
Quote from: Requiem on March 17, 2008, 10:01:47 PM
Edit: I see the typo, and refuse to change it.
Because you hate America, and love terrorists.
I only love american terrorists.
I'm still waiting for someone to point out my character flaws and crippling paradoxes in my world view! :argh!:
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 17, 2008, 11:05:16 PM
I'm still waiting for someone to point out my character flaws and crippling paradoxes in my world view! :argh!:
JELLUS? :lulz:
Quote from: Requiem on March 17, 2008, 10:51:27 PM
For the first year of occupation the situation was as you described, Iraqis attacking US soldiers trying to force them out (some of them just wanted us gone, some of them were trying to restore the old regime).
After about a year, we started seeing actually terrorism, with soldiers and civilian contractors being kidnapped, held for ransom, and then executed. We also saw an upshot in IEDs, and attacks against Iraqi's who voted or accepted aid from coalition forces. The actual terrorists also attacked the insurgents in a number of cases. The insurgents eventually either quit, started working with the coalition, or were absorbed by Al Qaida in Mesopotamia.
Eventually, someone decided to blow up a church. The sect who had their church destroyed responded with violence against members of sect number 2 and things went downhill from there. The end result was that most of the violence in Iraq over the last 2 and a half years has been sectarian in nature, that is, directed as Sunni against Shi'ite and Shi'ite against Sunni, rather than Iraqi against coalition.
:lulz: Imagine that, an attempted escalation in Order led to a catastrophic escalation in Disorder. :lulz:
(http://theinvisiblecollege.com/images/eris_motorcycle.png)
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 18, 2008, 03:09:35 AM
Quote from: Requiem on March 17, 2008, 10:51:27 PM
For the first year of occupation the situation was as you described, Iraqis attacking US soldiers trying to force them out (some of them just wanted us gone, some of them were trying to restore the old regime).
After about a year, we started seeing actually terrorism, with soldiers and civilian contractors being kidnapped, held for ransom, and then executed. We also saw an upshot in IEDs, and attacks against Iraqi's who voted or accepted aid from coalition forces. The actual terrorists also attacked the insurgents in a number of cases. The insurgents eventually either quit, started working with the coalition, or were absorbed by Al Qaida in Mesopotamia.
Eventually, someone decided to blow up a church. The sect who had their church destroyed responded with violence against members of sect number 2 and things went downhill from there. The end result was that most of the violence in Iraq over the last 2 and a half years has been sectarian in nature, that is, directed as Sunni against Shi'ite and Shi'ite against Sunni, rather than Iraqi against coalition.
:lulz: Imagine that, an attempted escalation in Order led to a catastrophic escalation in Disorder. :lulz:
(http://theinvisiblecollege.com/images/eris_motorcycle.png)
WOOOWWWWWWWW
Hold on. "Actually fighting" in the first year, and "terrorism" in the following years?
You don't think that, possibly, it became extremely obvious that they didn't have a chance of surviving if they played by our rules of war?
I understand the rise in sectarianism, but I still see quite a lot of "actual fighting."
Sectarianism is the trump card of any occupying force.
Divide and conquer ftw
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 18, 2008, 03:09:35 AM
(http://theinvisiblecollege.com/images/eris_motorcycle.png)
I just want to say that this shoop is amazing. :fap:
Quote from: LMNO on March 18, 2008, 01:15:41 PM
Hold on. "Actually fighting" in the first year, and "terrorism" in the following years?
You don't think that, possibly, it became extremely obvious that they didn't have a chance of surviving if they played by our rules of war?
I understand the rise in sectarianism, but I still see quite a lot of "actual fighting."
They weren't playing by our rules from very early on. The violence was just actually directed at soldiers. (No uniforms is enough to get you labeled a war criminal). I changed my label to terrorist based on deliberate assault on Iraqi civilians. (Which serves no purpose if you want to free Iraq from American oppression). There's also an important factor that the terrorists were different people than the insurgents.
Some of the grunts were probably the same, but all of the organization of terrorist activity (defined for my purposes as deliberate assault of civilians, and kidnapping/ransom/torture/execution of civilians, US troops, and insurgent troops), was led by foreigners. Even at the peak of violence against Coalition forces, we only lost ~2000 soldiers, which sounds like a lot, but isn't near as bad as people made it out to be. (Something a soldier friend told me before he shipped out, we lose ~2000 men a year in Iraq to nonviolent deaths anyway, his chances of living were only marginally better on a base in the US).
By concentrating on the methods of terrorism, we're not looking at the root causes of terrorism.
Orthodox terrorism discourse is so 2003. Instead of viewing terrorism in terms of security threat/illegitimate violence/Wesphalian system, its a far better idea, in the long term, to try and find out what is causing it and stop that chain of events from perpetuating.
I know this isn't a very popular idea with our government, who recently recalled two diplomats from Afghanistan who tried to open communication channels with the Taliban (ironically this is the same government who also DID hold direct, face to face talks with the IRA's ruling council), but funnily enough, dialogues and the possibility of a say in policy work FAR better than bombing the shit out of people repeatedly.
In fact, before 9/11, lots of peace initiatives were working in places like Nepal or Sri Lanka, precisely because the roots of terrorism were being debated and those groups were being included in those dialogues. Then suddenly, post 9/11, many of these states felt they had carte blanche to mobilize the forces of the state to wipe out terrorist groups. Which has worked out so well.... :roll:
Quote from: Cain on March 18, 2008, 03:53:05 PM
...dialogues and the possibility of a say in policy work FAR better than bombing the shit out of people repeatedly.
Bombing the shit makes for much better teevee thos.
The population aint gonna be quite as scared and angry watching a bunch of people talking now are they?
Quote from: SillyCybin on March 18, 2008, 04:06:00 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 18, 2008, 03:53:05 PM
...dialogues and the possibility of a say in policy work FAR better than bombing the shit out of people repeatedly.
Bombing the shit makes for much better teevee thos.
The population aint gonna be quite as scared and angry watching a bunch of people talking now are they?
Depends if they can get Rev Paisley involved, I suppose...
fuck yeah - ian paisley v's gerry adams - mudwrestle to the death - winner takes ireland :lulz:
Paisley and Adams should be made Peace Ambassadors.
Think of the possibilities - they get sent to warzones and argue incessantly over boring Irish shit no-one cares about until all sides reach a negotiated settlement, or assassinate them both to shut them up. Its win win, really.
Quote from: Cain on March 18, 2008, 03:53:05 PM
By concentrating on the methods of terrorism, we're not looking at the root causes of terrorism.
Orthodox terrorism discourse is so 2003. Instead of viewing terrorism in terms of security threat/illegitimate violence/Wesphalian system, its a far better idea, in the long term, to try and find out what is causing it and stop that chain of events from perpetuating.
I know this isn't a very popular idea with our government, who recently recalled two diplomats from Afghanistan who tried to open communication channels with the Taliban (ironically this is the same government who also DID hold direct, face to face talks with the IRA's ruling council), but funnily enough, dialogues and the possibility of a say in policy work FAR better than bombing the shit out of people repeatedly.
In fact, before 9/11, lots of peace initiatives were working in places like Nepal or Sri Lanka, precisely because the roots of terrorism were being debated and those groups were being included in those dialogues. Then suddenly, post 9/11, many of these states felt they had carte blanche to mobilize the forces of the state to wipe out terrorist groups. Which has worked out so well.... :roll:
Agreed, I don't honestly think it would do jack shit to dissuade Al Qaida (or any group that's based on a theory of 'everyone must do and think exactly like us'), but most terrorsit groups would respond semi well to it, and at the very least it makes the terrorists look more irrational in the eyes of potential recruits.
Also, I point out that talks did what 500 years of fighting couldn't, got the IRA to stop fighting.
Only real catch is that when you dissuade the group as a whole, the more unreasonable members tend to splinter/be the only ones left (see the Real IRA or the FARK).
Quote from: Cain on March 18, 2008, 04:12:56 PM
Paisley and Adams should be made Peace Ambassadors.
Think of the possibilities - they get sent to warzones and argue incessantly over boring Irish shit no-one cares about until all sides reach a negotiated settlement, or assassinate them both to shut them up. Its win win, really.
If we told them that Osama said he would only talk to them, then air dropped them into the mountains of northern Pakistan... do you think anyone would notice that we didn't give them parachutes?
Just a thought.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 17, 2008, 06:22:09 PM
At this point, I'm going to dismiss you as a wannabe, and assume that you're a cook or a typist.
I already told you i'm not in the infantry, but people die when i see a target and give the order... my targets being missiles and aircraft. That's a big part of what i do.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 17, 2008, 06:21:23 PM
What war? There was never a declaration of war, and your hero has already told us "mission accomplished".
Vietnam wasn't called a war, but everyone knows it was.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 17, 2008, 06:22:09 PM
What a steaming load of ####. :lulz:
Innocent people probably died because of the curfew on fallujah, but the curfew (among other things) definitely did minimize the death of non-combatants. Someone tipping off the terrorists... what an
unrealistic story roger :roll:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 17, 2008, 06:22:09 PM
Wait. What? Weren't you just defending Bush a few pages back. :lulz:
If people knowingly supported his poor decision why should they not be on trial? We don't know why exactly he made the decisions he made, but you can sure make him pay for the immediate consequences if you are so inclined.
Hey there Lecher. Good to see you made it back in one piece.
Lemme take a SWAG here, but are you a missile tech or part of a Hawk battery?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 20, 2008, 05:13:47 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 17, 2008, 06:22:09 PM
At this point, I'm going to dismiss you as a wannabe, and assume that you're a cook or a typist.
I already told you i'm not in the infantry, but people die when i see a target and give the order... my targets being missiles and aircraft. That's a big part of what i do.
People die when you undercook the porkchops.
Give it up.
Quote from: Random Probability on March 21, 2008, 12:41:06 AM
Hey there Lecher. Good to see you made it back in one piece.
Lemme take a SWAG here, but are you a missile tech or part of a Hawk battery?
He shoots down Iraqi insurgents in their jet fighters. :lulz:
Quote from: Requiem on March 18, 2008, 05:06:23 PM
Agreed, I don't honestly think it would do jack shit to dissuade Al Qaida (or any group that's based on a theory of 'everyone must do and think exactly like us'), but most terrorsit groups would respond semi well to it, and at the very least it makes the terrorists look more irrational in the eyes of potential recruits.
I see exactly where you're coming from here and it makes sense when you apply it to most organizations that recruit, just not in this case. Potential recruits for Al Qaida are targeted because they fit a certain psychological profile and/or they come from a harsh situation and Al Qaida offers them hope. Most of the suicide bombers come from out of country because they have a hard time recruiting Iraqis to kill themselves... the Iraqi culture is opposed to suicide socially and religiously.
Most of the Iraqi suicide bombers that have been captured or have surrendered claim that their families would be compensated with big bucks or that they were coerced by threats to their family.
Quote from: Random Probability on March 21, 2008, 12:41:06 AM
Hey there Lecher. Good to see you made it back in one piece.
Lemme take a SWAG here, but are you a missile tech or part of a Hawk battery?
Thanks. Close, but i'm Air Defense/surveillance/ATC/other. We interface with ground based air defense to control missiles but we usually take control of air assets to get the job done.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 21, 2008, 02:11:42 AM
He shoots down Iraqi insurgents in their jet fighters. :lulz:
You
already know my location computer expert :lulz: just watch the news like everyone else and you can put the pieces together about whats going on here... HINT HINT I'M NOT USING A PROXY
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 21, 2008, 06:33:56 AM
Thanks. Close, but i'm Air Defense/surveillance/ATC/other. We interface with ground based air defense to control missiles but we usually take control of air assets to get the job done.
So you basically play missile command, for real, for a living??? :eek:
You fucking lucky bastard :argh!:
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 21, 2008, 06:33:56 AM
You already know my location computer expert :lulz: just watch the news like everyone else and you can put the pieces together about whats going on here... HINT HINT I'M NOT USING A PROXY
Oh, wait. You are claiming to have shot North Koreans down?
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
Pull the other one, retard, it has bells.
Quote from: SillyCybin on March 21, 2008, 08:00:33 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 21, 2008, 06:33:56 AM
Thanks. Close, but i'm Air Defense/surveillance/ATC/other. We interface with ground based air defense to control missiles but we usually take control of air assets to get the job done.
So you basically play missile command, for real, for a living??? :eek:
You fucking lucky bastard :argh!:
He claims to have shot people down. :lulz:
In Korea. :lulz:
Quote from: SillyCybin on March 21, 2008, 08:00:33 AM
So you basically play missile command, for real, for a living??? :eek:
You fucking lucky bastard :argh!:
Pretty much, but i've only used pilots not missiles as of yet... missiles might come into play given my current situation.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 22, 2008, 05:01:52 AM
He claims to have shot people down. :lulz:
In Korea. :lulz:
No, I haven't done that or claimed to have done that. I have assigned aircraft to destroy targets on the ground in Iraq, providing Close Air Support, Deep AS, and recon type missions. I haven't had any conflict in Korea, i told you i'm just here training.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 22, 2008, 05:31:09 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 22, 2008, 05:01:52 AM
He claims to have shot people down. :lulz:
In Korea. :lulz:
No, I haven't done that or claimed to have done that. I have assigned aircraft to destroy targets on the ground in Iraq, providing Close Air Support, Deep AS, and recon type missions. I haven't had any conflict in Korea, i told you i'm just here training.
Then what was this about:
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 21, 2008, 06:33:56 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 21, 2008, 02:11:42 AM
He shoots down Iraqi insurgents in their jet fighters. :lulz:
You already know my location computer expert :lulz: just watch the news like everyone else and you can put the pieces together about whats going on here... HINT HINT I'M NOT USING A PROXY
?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 22, 2008, 05:31:09 AM
Quote from: SillyCybin on March 21, 2008, 08:00:33 AM
So you basically play missile command, for real, for a living??? :eek:
You fucking lucky bastard :argh!:
Pretty much, but i've only used pilots not missiles as of yet... missiles might come into play given my current situation.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 22, 2008, 05:01:52 AM
He claims to have shot people down. :lulz:
In Korea. :lulz:
No, I haven't done that or claimed to have done that. I have assigned aircraft to destroy targets on the ground in Iraq, providing Close Air Support, Deep AS, and recon type missions. I haven't had any conflict in Korea, i told you i'm just here training.
Wait. A minute ago, you said you attacked aircraft and inbound missiles.
Now you're an FA?
Make up your mind, Rambo. :lulz:
Quote from: davedim on March 22, 2008, 05:54:28 AM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 22, 2008, 05:31:09 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 22, 2008, 05:01:52 AM
He claims to have shot people down. :lulz:
In Korea. :lulz:
No, I haven't done that or claimed to have done that. I have assigned aircraft to destroy targets on the ground in Iraq, providing Close Air Support, Deep AS, and recon type missions. I haven't had any conflict in Korea, i told you i'm just here training.
Then what was this about:
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 21, 2008, 06:33:56 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 21, 2008, 02:11:42 AM
He shoots down Iraqi insurgents in their jet fighters. :lulz:
You already know my location computer expert :lulz: just watch the news like everyone else and you can put the pieces together about whats going on here... HINT HINT I'M NOT USING A PROXY
?
He's a sooper secrut ninja.
:jihaad:
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 22, 2008, 06:25:54 AM
Wait. A minute ago, you said you attacked aircraft and inbound missiles.
Now you're an FA?
Make up your mind, Rambo. :lulz:
Defense against aircraft and missiles is my job, also providing itinerant air traffic control, tasking aircraft and ground-based air defense batteries, establishing and managing data links with other units regarding the air picture, providing surveillance info to whom it may concern, and other shit. That's part of my job description. I
have tasked aircraft to take out targets on the ground. I'm in Korea training. Nothing secret going on here, but paying attention to the news and linking events together might give you a general idea of what
may be happening in this theater.
The US is going to invade Japan
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 22, 2008, 08:09:34 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 22, 2008, 06:25:54 AM
Wait. A minute ago, you said you attacked aircraft and inbound missiles.
Now you're an FA?
Make up your mind, Rambo. :lulz:
Defense against aircraft and missiles is my job, also providing itinerant air traffic control, tasking aircraft and ground-based air defense batteries, establishing and managing data links with other units regarding the air picture, providing surveillance info to whom it may concern, and other shit. That's part of my job description. I have tasked aircraft to take out targets on the ground. I'm in Korea training. Nothing secret going on here, but paying attention to the news and linking events together might give you a general idea of what may be happening in this theater.
A cook in the Marines may try for the crown of King of the Bullshitters?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 22, 2008, 07:38:31 PM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 22, 2008, 08:09:34 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 22, 2008, 06:25:54 AM
Wait. A minute ago, you said you attacked aircraft and inbound missiles.
Now you're an FA?
Make up your mind, Rambo. :lulz:
Defense against aircraft and missiles is my job, also providing itinerant air traffic control, tasking aircraft and ground-based air defense batteries, establishing and managing data links with other units regarding the air picture, providing surveillance info to whom it may concern, and other shit. That's part of my job description. I have tasked aircraft to take out targets on the ground. I'm in Korea training. Nothing secret going on here, but paying attention to the news and linking events together might give you a general idea of what may be happening in this theater.
A cook in the Marines may try for the crown of King of the Bullshitters?
That and this:
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 24, 2008, 02:34:30 AM
Hitler's genocide was a more aggressive method of achieving something similar. My value comes into place when i choose targets not based on the survival of an economy or just for the sake of someone's opinion of the "general welfare" - hitler - but from values which were outlined in the Constitution... Life, Liberty, pursuit of happiness and property. I believe strongly that these are rights man is inherently entitled to. I feel like rules designed to protect these should be enforced and if one were to infringe upon these goddess given rights, that they should be dealt with accordingly. Those are the only rules that we should put upon ourselves, and they lead to a general state of "Good Quality of Life" for a society.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 24, 2008, 02:34:30 AM
Unlike most animals, humans have the capacity for high level thought. Committing myself as a weapon is the least human way to bring about the good of the people around me, which is my desire. Often times my desire is just a desire though, and my actions often benefit others only by coincidence. I act to enhance my survival and i act to bring about my own pleasure... as an animal would. Recently, i've been making attempts to do good for the sake of good, but i find more and more that if i do not benefit, i'm not really interested. Trying to defeat this natural (animal) instinct would make me more human. Despite the good i do for the sake of other people and not myself, the only things that come from it are the good deeds and nothing else. No personal growth, no good feelings, no pride in doing good, nothing. I feel like these good deeds are just hollow. Because they are hollow and do not inspire in me the feelings they should, I'm not reaching my goal. Become Human. If you look around you, you will see these people around you that are not Human. Some are Cabbages and Greyfaces, but even among "Discordians" there are still those who just are not quite right. They think they are human and they claim to be Human, but there is something intangible that they don't have. I've been trying to develop that in myself and define it. No luck yet, but i think it is a Conscience.
Hmm...where have I heard the idea that killing certain people is okay because there's a distinct division between "Human" and "Subhuman"?
Oh yeah. The Fuhrer. :|
Not only did you take my statement out of the original context, but you also took it out a PM. Why?
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 24, 2008, 05:50:18 AM
Hmm...where have I heard the idea that killing certain people is okay because there's a distinct division between "Human" and "Subhuman"?
Oh yeah. The Fuhrer. :|
Not human and sub-human. "People," "Good People," and "Bad People."
And what's Bullshit about my job description Pope Naughty Nasturtiums?
And who the fuck are you to judge who is more human?
You seem to be blaming everyone else for your failure at life.
I HATE EVERYONE. WHY CAN'T THEY UNDERSTAND ME HURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.
All of those people you hate are as human as you are.
The fact that you can't relate to them is your problem alone.
Seriously, you're like an overgrown emo kid.
I won't post what you said to me here, but seriously, if you have something to say, do it in this thread, instead of talking about people behind their backs.
Ever watch Star Wars: Return of the Jedi, PL?
You know how when he's dying, Lord Vader becomes good again?
I have this funny belief, that whether you live as a cabbage, a human or a monster, we all die human. And nothing can justify killing a human.
Your job is your job, and I actually respect that. But the moment you try to justify killing humans, you lost me.
Lots of things justify killing humans. Self defense, following orders, boredom, lulz, fucker stole my pencil sharpener... lighten up - killing humans is the only way to stay sane sometimes.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 24, 2008, 09:28:37 AM
Not only did you take my statement out of the original context, but you also took it out a PM. Why?
gotta agree with that, PNN, quoting PMs without permission is kinda bad form.
i'd rather have had that PL dug the "not quite Human" hole here publicly so we could all make fun of him for it.
Quote from: SillyCybin on March 24, 2008, 12:31:20 PM
Lots of things justify killing humans. Self defense, following orders, boredom, lulz, fucker stole my pencil sharpener... lighten up - killing humans is the only way to stay sane sometimes.
TITCM.
But it applies to all humans equally.
I KILL BAD PEOPLE
/
(http://www.jes-studios.com/DBZ/Images/nappa.jpg)
I'm ALSO training in Korea
because it's got DOUBLE GRAVITY!!
/
(http://www.gransito.com/Immagini/Immagini%20Gallery/goku.jpg)
Quote from: Professor Cramulus on March 24, 2008, 06:14:11 PM
I KILL BAD PEOPLE
/
(http://www.jes-studios.com/DBZ/Images/nappa.jpg)
That's discrimination :argh!:
yeah, some of my best friends have been killed by that guy.
Hmmm...
First, from talking to Pope Lecher before, he claims that he swings with the wing (1st MAW based at Camp Futenma, Okinawa).
Second, the job he described is pretty much the general catch-all for the 7200 field (not a specific job, but everything in the ATC/AAD category). Which means that he's probably a 6062 (hydraulic mechanic) or something equally glamorous, dangerous, and deadly.
Third, (and this is pointed in St. Verbatim's direction) not all human life is valuable. However, humans have the amazing ability to maintain two mutually exclusive and contradictory beliefs at the same time.
Fourth, ????
Fifth, Profit?
Quote from: Random Probability link=topic=15434.msg496717#msg496717
Third... not all human life is valuable to me
fixed
"What the hell does any of this have to do with Arizona!?!?!?!?"
/
:mccain:
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 24, 2008, 08:49:17 PM
"What the hell does any of this have to do with Arizona!?!?!?!?"
/
:mccain:
They found human life there
Quote from: SillyCybin on March 24, 2008, 09:16:41 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 24, 2008, 08:49:17 PM
"What the hell does any of this have to do with Arizona!?!?!?!?"
/
:mccain:
They found human life there
You can't prove that!
:lulz:
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 24, 2008, 09:28:37 AM
Not only did you take my statement out of the original context, but you also took it out a PM. Why?
Quote from: Pope Naughty Nasturtiums on March 24, 2008, 05:50:18 AM
Hmm...where have I heard the idea that killing certain people is okay because there's a distinct division between "Human" and "Subhuman"?
Oh yeah. The Fuhrer. :|
Not human and sub-human. "People," "Good People," and "Bad People."
And what's Bullshit about my job description Pope Naughty Nasturtiums?
1. You said they weren't human. That they thought they were, but there was something they lacked. Quit lying, psycho-boy.
2. It should read: Cook.
Quote from: Random Probability on March 24, 2008, 08:25:05 PM
not all human life is valuable.
That's beside the point,
to me. I just find it deeply distasteful to kill a human being.
Quote from: st.verbatim on March 24, 2008, 11:52:58 PM
Quote from: Random Probability on March 24, 2008, 08:25:05 PM
not all human life is valuable.
That's beside the point, to me. I just find it deeply distasteful to kill a human being.
But that is entirely the point. Certainly it is extremely distasteful to have to kill a human. No argument about that, but at times it is necessary no matter how distasteful it may be.
Why?
Certainly, one can envision courses of action that render killing completely uneccesary. Especially considering current technological and pharmecutical advances.
Actually, the strategic advance of the now is working towards mass wounding of enemies forces as a way to fight wars.
Think about it.
You have to pay a lot more to look after a trooper than a corpse.
good point.
4,000 (american) dead in Iraq, but an estimated 30,000 (american) seriously wounded.
Quote from: LMNO on March 25, 2008, 06:02:31 PM
Why?
Certainly, one can envision courses of action that render killing completely uneccesary. Especially considering current technological and pharmecutical advances.
1. Why what?
2. How can "technology" and drugs be universally applied to all situations 100% of the time? And isn't a firearm an example of "technology" used to bring about a peaceful resolution to certain contested points of interest? ("peaceful" meaning: no one left alive to offer violent opposition).
Quote from: Random Probability on March 25, 2008, 06:17:11 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 25, 2008, 06:02:31 PM
Why?
Certainly, one can envision courses of action that render killing completely uneccesary. Especially considering current technological and pharmecutical advances.
1. Why what?
2. How can "technology" and drugs be universally applied to all situations 100% of the time? And isn't a firearm an example of "technology" used to bring about a peaceful resolution to certain contested points of interest? ("peaceful" meaning: no one left alive to offer violent opposition).
1. Why, "at times it is necessary no matter how distasteful it may be."
2. Give me an example. I can find a way to either avoid killing someone through previous and current choices, or theough the use of currently existing technology.
Quote from: LMNO on March 25, 2008, 06:25:28 PM
Quote from: Random Probability on March 25, 2008, 06:17:11 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 25, 2008, 06:02:31 PM
Why?
Certainly, one can envision courses of action that render killing completely uneccesary. Especially considering current technological and pharmecutical advances.
1. Why what?
2. How can "technology" and drugs be universally applied to all situations 100% of the time? And isn't a firearm an example of "technology" used to bring about a peaceful resolution to certain contested points of interest? ("peaceful" meaning: no one left alive to offer violent opposition).
1. Why, "at times it is necessary no matter how distasteful it may be."
It is necessary because some people won't take no for an answer. Some people are of the variety of "stupid" that requires weapons and extreme pain for them to learn anything at all. Such individuals make a hobby out of putting more functional human beings in the position of having to decide if they wish to continue living or not.
Quote
2. Give me an example. I can find a way to either avoid killing someone through previous and current choices, or theough the use of currently existing technology.
The guy who makes car bombs.
The guy who plants car bombs.
The schmucks who make and plant IEDs.
The people who attack markets with mortars.
The guy who has a knife and really wants your shoes.
The guy who straps ten kilos of gelignite to his ass and lights it off on a crowded street.
The fifteen screaming idiots who rape a twelve-year-old girl to death on a street corner.
I've got more examples if you want them. Let's see how you do with these ones, first.
So, uh... explain to my why I have to kill any of them?
So far, I don't see it.
Quote from: Cain on March 25, 2008, 06:07:24 PMActually, the strategic advance of the now is working towards mass wounding of enemies forces as a way to fight wars.
Think about it.
You have to pay a lot more to look after a trooper than a corpse.
ah check.
now i understand it, RP said in the puppy thread that some soldiers were trying to put a dog out of its misery, but found out that their guns were only good for wounding, not killing.
:horrormirth:
Quote from: LMNO on March 25, 2008, 07:07:17 PM
So, uh... explain to my why I have to kill any of them?
So far, I don't see it.
Ah. I see where you're coming from, now.
You will never really have to kill anyone in this day and age, but there probably are some people that are better off dead, on both sides of the spectrum.
Some people SHOULD die . . . that's just unconscious knowledge.
Killing terrorists is horribly ineffective. It makes it much easier for the recruiters behind them to replace them.
"Never give your enemy a martyr" - isn't that basic strategic doctrine or something? And yet it seem the War on Terror operates by always making sure to ignore that maxim.
Quote from: LMNO on March 25, 2008, 07:07:17 PM
So, uh... explain to my why I have to kill any of them?
So far, I don't see it.
The guy with the knife that really wants your shoes followed you into an alley with a dead end. You tried to run from him so you didnt
have to kill him, but now you have nowhere left to run and you are facing him. You or him? Who will die? If you have to make a choice you're attributing a higher value to one person's life, Your own life or his life.
People's lives have different levels of value, that is a given. When i was talking to PNN in our PMs i was hoping a value would come out. Living for the sake of life is pointless. Having a mission, goal, or anything... any
value makes life worth living. Whether your mission is getting to heaven or protecting others.
I put
myself in a position where i have to kill them, because it is my duty #1 and because they are coming at me and my people or important things that should not get blown up. I'm fine with it and I
can justify killing people in that situation on those clauses alone. I don't need to say they are sub-human to be okay with killing them. They are upstanding people in their nations fighting for just causes-maybe...
Quote from: st.verbatim on March 26, 2008, 01:36:01 AM
Killing terrorists is horribly ineffective. It makes it much easier for the recruiters behind them to replace them.
"Never give your enemy a martyr" - isn't that basic strategic doctrine or something? And yet it seem the War on Terror operates by always making sure to ignore that maxim.
That's like saying it's pointless to engage a foreign military because more soldiers will enlist, or that each military will keep recruiting. The terrorists, extremists, insurgents or whatever label just have a more appealing righteous/religious sales pitch to enlist its fighters.
You are right though about not creating martyrs, but everyone that dies thinks he is sacrificing himself for the greater good so that cannot be avoided. Each individual fighter on each side may be dying for a worthy cause, but that is a matter of grids.
One of the major problems that the western powers face in the middle east is a complete ignorance of the history of our foreign policies.
Our cack-handed treatment of the remnants of the Ottoman Empire has engendered deep distrust in our abilities to actually DO any good for the muslim world.
This has led to extremism.
Our cack-handed treatment of the extremists has engendered hatred.
And so forth.
This isn't about "Grids" this is about trying to create some kind of dialogue, something that is notoriously hard to do down the barrel of a gun.
The last 20 years have dug us ever deeper into ideological trenches, and the more we try to do our talking with the military, the greater that problem is going to get.
This isn't about it being pointless killing "terrorists" (I refuse to label Muslim Extremists as terrorists), it's about the western powers realising that the old imperialist style foreign policies will NOT work in the middle east.
Quote from: Payne on March 26, 2008, 02:35:37 AM
it's about the western powers realising that the old imperialist style foreign policies will NOT work in the middle east.
Hear hear!
Quote from: Payne on March 26, 2008, 02:35:37 AM
One of the major problems that the western powers face in the middle east is a complete ignorance of the history of our foreign policies. Our cack-handed treatment of the remnants of the Ottoman Empire has engendered deep distrust in our abilities to actually DO any good for the muslim world. This has led to extremism. Our cack-handed treatment of the extremists has engendered hatred. And so forth.
This isn't about "Grids" this is about trying to create some kind of dialogue, something that is notoriously hard to do down the barrel of a gun. The last 20 years have dug us ever deeper into ideological trenches, and the more we try to do our talking with the military, the greater that problem is going to get.
This isn't about it being pointless killing "terrorists" (I refuse to label Muslim Extremists as terrorists), it's about the western powers realising that the old imperialist style foreign policies will NOT work in the middle east.
You are absolutely right when you say it's not about "grids." It
was about
bridging these very different realities/grids together through Diplomacy and Talks and Treaties. Diplomacy had failed, however, because as you mentioned the groups we have been trying to negotiate with have entrenched themselves far deep into their positions with their egos and cultural identity and religious views. When it was made a White Man VS. Muslim/Islam thing of course they could never back down, because the leaders on their side of the table made themselves the victim and they had been. That's the moment when diplomacy was doomed for the time being. Each side had to save face and those White VS. Brown hostilities became the issue, instead of the real issues at hand... like, avoiding war.
With diplomacy "exhausted" the military was the only answer the negotiators saw left. It was their best alternative to a negotiated agreement, because negotiations could not make any progress when the underlying SAVE FACE MODE came on. 'Don't let the White man fuck our people over' and, ' We can't let the dirty so-and-so's get away with this' That type of conflict can never be resolved through negotiation because the goal of a negotiation is for both sides to reach agreement that is mutually beneficial... like not having a war and being able to trade openly.
No NO. Conceding in a negotiation where racial/theological pride is at stake IS defeat, so losing with these stakes was unthinkable. There
had to be a victor and there can only be a victor in war.
FIGHT, FLIGHT, SUBMIT, or POSTURE. These are the possible reactions to a conflict. Each side fanned out their feathers and puffed up their chests during the talks, thus introducing the ego and pride. With pride in the game submission was therefore ruled out and FLIGHT was never a fucking choice, cuz running from the problem would never resolve it. War is the only thing that remained and these fuckers caused it because of shitty negotiating skills and PRIDE.
Quote from: triple zero on March 24, 2008, 02:53:21 PM
gotta agree with that, PNN, quoting PMs without permission is kinda bad form.
i'd rather have had that PL dug the "not quite Human" hole here publicly so we could all make fun of him for it.
In hindsight, I agree. I was being pissy the day that I posted that (I had a bunch of medical tests, and was stressed), and at the time I didn't realize what I was doing was underhanded.
So, I apologize for taking things where they shouldn't and abusing trust. I won't do it again in the future.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 26, 2008, 02:59:04 AM
You are absolutely right when you say it's not about "grids." It was about bridging these very different realities/grids together through Diplomacy and Talks and Treaties. Diplomacy had failed, however, because as you mentioned the groups we have been trying to negotiate with have entrenched themselves far deep into their positions with their egos and cultural identity and religious views. When it was made a White Man VS. Muslim/Islam thing of course they could never back down, because the leaders on their side of the table made themselves the victim and they had been. That's the moment when diplomacy was doomed for the time being. Each side had to save face and those White VS. Brown hostilities became the issue, instead of the real issues at hand... like, avoiding war.
It has NEVER been about bridging gaps. It has been about political capital and expediency at home and, in the light of first the cold war, then the reconsolidation afterwards, in international relations.
Diplomacy never took place. We have treated the middle east as a defeated enemy since the end of WWI and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Diplomacy has never taken place in the middle east and never will so long as all that lovely oil and trade routes and (militarily) strategically important land is there.
It's not about race or history or ideology for us, it's about money and power. For them it's self defense of culture; their own money and their own power. Let us not forget that Islamic countries, particularly in that area, have a long and proud tradition of wealth, prestige, knowledge and military might. Why should they NOT want to protect that?
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 26, 2008, 02:59:04 AM
With diplomacy "exhausted" the military was the only answer the negotiators saw left. It was their best alternative to a negotiated agreement, because negotiations could not make any progress when the underlying SAVE FACE MODE came on. 'Don't let the White man fuck our people over' and, ' We can't let the dirty so-and-so's get away with this' That type of conflict can never be resolved through negotiation because the goal of a negotiation is for both sides to reach agreement that is mutually beneficial... like not having a war and being able to trade openly.
I don't recall any middle eastern nation declaring war on "the white man" or any western government. Sure they don't like us, but they're ALLOWED to not like us, and they have good reason too.
Ostensibly war was forced on them because of the actions (apparently) of an Ex-Pat Saud, living in Afghanistan. Who acted as he did because American (and British) foreign policies have denigrated his culture for decades. While many Muslims, let alone Westerners, cannot agree with his interpretation of his Gods word, he has some sympathy if only because he took the fight to the Great Satan itself. This says more about us than it does Islam.
What I can see looking at the recent history of the area is that war was forced on the middle east because it is expedient for us to do so (see above). You know the phrase "Once bitten, twice shy"? Try living in an area that gets mauled every 10 years or so.
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 26, 2008, 02:59:04 AM
No NO. Conceding in a negotiation where racial/theological pride is at stake IS defeat, so losing with these stakes was unthinkable. There had to be a victor and there can only be a victor in war.
FIGHT, FLIGHT, SUBMIT, or POSTURE. These are the possible reactions to a conflict. Each side fanned out their feathers and puffed up their chests during the talks, thus introducing the ego and pride. With pride in the game submission was therefore ruled out and FLIGHT was never a fucking choice, cuz running from the problem would never resolve it. War is the only thing that remained and these fuckers caused it because of shitty negotiating skills and PRIDE.
There had to be a PROFIT. Not a victor. Not neccesarily monetary profit, political or military capital would do nicely too.
I saw little posturing in the run up to war in the Middle East. All I saw was political manuvering to make the inevitable military invasion less of a jagged, bitter, pill to swallow. A military timetable was aleady in place before ANY resolution was put in place by the U.N. prior to the Iraq war.
Flight was never an option for the Western Powers because of that timetable, and because of the political capital expended terrorising the populations of our respective countries, and flight was never an option for the Iraqis or any other Middle Easterners because they knew their lands were about to be invaded,
War was the only option that remained on the table because that was the only option that our administrations thought was there, same as it ever was, same as it will ever be.
One day, someone may actually try negotiating with the Middle Easterners, in a fair and balanced manner, and with full awareness of the effect the history of our foreign policies has had on the region. Some day we may begin to realise that war in that region, either home grown, or brought there by us, will never resolve ANYthing (this is a lesson we should have learned scores of times over since the Crusades). And until we realise this, we are doomed to repeat the same mistake over and over and over.
Thing is - it's not a mistake. War is our natural way of behaving. Doesn't matter what the circumstances we'll find a reason to go to war over it. This problem will nevar be solved so instead of trying to work out why, why don't you just turn on cnn and enjoy it. There's people dying out there ffs :lulz:
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 26, 2008, 02:13:48 AM
Quote from: LMNO on March 25, 2008, 07:07:17 PM
So, uh... explain to my why I have to kill any of them?
So far, I don't see it.
The guy with the knife that really wants your shoes followed you into an alley with a dead end. You tried to run from him so you didnt have to kill him, but now you have nowhere left to run and you are facing him. You or him? Who will die?
For fuck's sake, man... they're
shoes. I've got 8 more pairs at home. If he wants them so badly, he can have them.
THE TERRORISTS HATE OUR SHOES, AND WILL TAKE THEM FROM US, UNLESS WE FIGHT THEM ABROAD SO WE DONT HAVE TO FIGHT THEM HERE!
But if we just give them our shoes, won't they migrate to the areas where all the hungry people are?
Yes!
And thats the problem.
Shoeless orphans are the mainstay of the Iraqi insurgency. If we give the terrorists shoes, they may end up giving them to the orphans, who will turn out to be even deadlier.
:omg:
YOU CAN HAVE MY SHOES WHEN YOU PRY THEM OFF MY COLD, DEAD FEET!
\
:argh!:
WE MUST SUPPLY THE IRAQI INSURGENTS WITH SHOES LACED WITH ESTROGEN!
Quote from: SillyCybin on March 26, 2008, 07:49:11 AM
Thing is - it's not a mistake. War is our natural way of behaving. Doesn't matter what the circumstances we'll find a reason to go to war over it. This problem will nevar be solved so instead of trying to work out why, why don't you just turn on cnn and enjoy it. There's people dying out there ffs :lulz:
Yeah, I'm in last essay for History class mode, you see.
Telling the examiners that you enjoy watching people die doesn't guarantee you a decent grade :(
[pun involving the word sole]
Quote from: Payne on March 26, 2008, 02:34:06 PM
Quote from: SillyCybin on March 26, 2008, 07:49:11 AM
Thing is - it's not a mistake. War is our natural way of behaving. Doesn't matter what the circumstances we'll find a reason to go to war over it. This problem will nevar be solved so instead of trying to work out why, why don't you just turn on cnn and enjoy it. There's people dying out there ffs :lulz:
Yeah, I'm in last essay for History class mode, you see.
Telling the examiners that you enjoy watching people die doesn't guarantee you a decent grade :(
Unless your examiner is the only NeoCon in the faculty, in which case coming up with excuses to kill people all over the world (as I did in my last exam) will get you at least a 2:1
Quote from: Cain on March 26, 2008, 02:50:05 PM
Quote from: Payne on March 26, 2008, 02:34:06 PM
Quote from: SillyCybin on March 26, 2008, 07:49:11 AM
Thing is - it's not a mistake. War is our natural way of behaving. Doesn't matter what the circumstances we'll find a reason to go to war over it. This problem will nevar be solved so instead of trying to work out why, why don't you just turn on cnn and enjoy it. There's people dying out there ffs :lulz:
Yeah, I'm in last essay for History class mode, you see.
Telling the examiners that you enjoy watching people die doesn't guarantee you a decent grade :(
Unless your examiner is the only NeoCon in the faculty, in which case coming up with excuses to kill people all over the world (as I did in my last exam) will get you at least a 2:1
While this is undoubtedly true, I scored so well with my hippy utopian history essay, that I feel my examiners were not actually NeoCons.
Fuck the system!
I argued sovereignty was linked to the human rights record and upholding the social contract, instead of de jure having internal control of your country, as defined by international law.
Which basically means everywhere except the Scandanavian countries could plausibly be invaded, as part of humanitarian interventionism.
Quote from: Cain on March 26, 2008, 02:57:46 PM
I argued sovereignty was linked to the human rights record and upholding the social contract, instead of de jure having internal control of your country, as defined by international law.
Which basically means everywhere except the Scandanavian countries could plausibly be invaded, as part of humanitarian interventionism.
ROFLCAKES
I hate you Cain. You make ALL the best fun in an academic environment.
Quote from: LMNO on March 26, 2008, 02:08:01 PM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 26, 2008, 02:13:48 AM
Quote from: LMNO on March 25, 2008, 07:07:17 PM
So, uh... explain to my why I have to kill any of them?
So far, I don't see it.
The guy with the knife that really wants your shoes followed you into an alley with a dead end. You tried to run from him so you didnt have to kill him, but now you have nowhere left to run and you are facing him. You or him? Who will die?
For fuck's sake, man... they're shoes. I've got 8 more pairs at home. If he wants them so badly, he can have them.
Where do you live? I'd like to drop by and take your car. You have more than one, right?
Maybe he just kicks you in the junk and drives off.
Quote from: Random Probability on March 26, 2008, 04:08:29 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 26, 2008, 02:08:01 PM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 26, 2008, 02:13:48 AM
Quote from: LMNO on March 25, 2008, 07:07:17 PM
So, uh... explain to my why I have to kill any of them?
So far, I don't see it.
The guy with the knife that really wants your shoes followed you into an alley with a dead end. You tried to run from him so you didnt have to kill him, but now you have nowhere left to run and you are facing him. You or him? Who will die?
For fuck's sake, man... they're shoes. I've got 8 more pairs at home. If he wants them so badly, he can have them.
Where do you live? I'd like to drop by and take your car. You have more than one, right?
So, we've turned this into a "how materialistic are you" thread?
Quote from: LMNO on March 26, 2008, 06:40:18 PM
Quote from: Random Probability on March 26, 2008, 04:08:29 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 26, 2008, 02:08:01 PM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 26, 2008, 02:13:48 AM
Quote from: LMNO on March 25, 2008, 07:07:17 PM
So, uh... explain to my why I have to kill any of them?
So far, I don't see it.
The guy with the knife that really wants your shoes followed you into an alley with a dead end. You tried to run from him so you didnt have to kill him, but now you have nowhere left to run and you are facing him. You or him? Who will die?
For fuck's sake, man... they're shoes. I've got 8 more pairs at home. If he wants them so badly, he can have them.
Where do you live? I'd like to drop by and take your car. You have more than one, right?
So, we've turned this into a "how materialistic are you" thread?
I still don't buy that Pope Lamer is really a soldier anywhere but in his overactive imagination, but I believe this has now turned into a thread in which he justifies the taking of human lives.
If he'd just admit that he was doing it for the dolphins, at least then I'd respect him.
I declare this the dumbest thread on PD.com.
Nigel, you are DOING IT WRONG.
Here is how you do it:
(http://www.farmgps.com/images/la400b_main_lg.jpg)
also, still not dumber than "taboo soup" or "BIP - just call me nigger to my face".
or any thread ever started by EvT.
...Yet.
It will. Most assuredly, it will.
(http://prisonpackages.biz/packstore/images/dak.jpg)
Holy fuckballs!
That is the most glorious toolbox I've ever seen!
It's been a long time, but I do still pride myself on excellent toolboxery.
Does anyone still have the pic of the "thread full of tools"? Been looking in my (nearly) bottomless pic folder, but apparently it fell out...
Also, I agree with Mourning Star's theory.
Check the earliest posts of Pics- The Rebirth.
Quote from: Payne on March 27, 2008, 05:26:13 PM
Check the earliest posts of Pics- The Rebirth.
Found it! Thanks.
(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g115/vexati0n/toolbox1.jpg)
Quote from: Random Probability on March 27, 2008, 07:34:34 PM
Quote from: Payne on March 27, 2008, 05:26:13 PM
Check the earliest posts of Pics- The Rebirth.
Found it! Thanks.
I know many secrets concerning pics and where they can be found.
I'm kinda like a pic guru.
It comes from trawling through all the pics on this site over and over again to build up the Faces of Posters Poster, for WOMP.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 26, 2008, 02:46:05 PM
[pun involving the word sole]
GIVING THE TERRAISTS OUR SHOES WOULDN'T SAVE OUR SOLES!
/best I could do, not enough rum yet
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 04:18:14 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 10, 2008, 04:13:10 AM
not even you, annoying as you may be.
but it went beyond killing for whats right and whats wrong. Just over the page you went as far as to say you would kill to protect an american, as opposed to killing for a code of ethics, thats what makes you worse then anything i see labeled as a terrorist. they kill people and blow themselves up out of what is most definitely a passionate (if flawed) code of religious ethics. Saying you would kill to save americans, makes you nothing more then a blind guard dog.
I stated previously that i would kill someone trying to destroy America's assets of power, human or non-human. That is a good point though. If that's the case, why would i be different from a terrorist, but supporting America's cause? Is a terrorist not just a blind guard dog?
Ok, I know I'm in way too late, but the smell of sheep shit is just something that usually isn't found around here. BAAAAAA BAAAAAA BAAAAAA.
Rush called, he wants his housekeeper back.
Quote from: Hawk on March 28, 2008, 12:29:18 PM
Quote from: Pope Lecherous on March 10, 2008, 04:18:14 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 10, 2008, 04:13:10 AM
not even you, annoying as you may be.
but it went beyond killing for whats right and whats wrong. Just over the page you went as far as to say you would kill to protect an american, as opposed to killing for a code of ethics, thats what makes you worse then anything i see labeled as a terrorist. they kill people and blow themselves up out of what is most definitely a passionate (if flawed) code of religious ethics. Saying you would kill to save americans, makes you nothing more then a blind guard dog.
I stated previously that i would kill someone trying to destroy America's assets of power, human or non-human. That is a good point though. If that's the case, why would i be different from a terrorist, but supporting America's cause? Is a terrorist not just a blind guard dog?
Ok, I know I'm in way too late, but the smell of sheep shit is just something that usually isn't found around here. BAAAAAA BAAAAAA BAAAAAA.
Rush called, he wants his housekeeper back.
:mittens: