I hardly think Andrew is justifying the September 11th attacks. I quote: "Yes obviosly what Bin Laden did was horrific and unprecendented, and he had no right to do it". 2. Do you, Ben, honestly think that no innocent civilians have been killed in the war on terrorism? The killing of unarmed men, women and children simply because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time seems fairly random to me.
However, I've said it once, and I'll say it again: a war for the sake of retribution (or retribution behind the thin mask that "matters of national security" provides, as it may be) is not necessary at all. Innocent civilians need not forfeit their lives because of hatred they did not begin and do not intend to propagate. What is necessary is to round up members of Al-Qaeda and, with the help of an impartial jury, decide what (morally founded) action most benefits the world as a whole. I do not endorse killing anyone. Killing is immoral, as regardless of the scale or ends of murder, it is still murder. However, I believe in destroying Al-Qaeda. And there you have it.
I didn't hate your personal attacks, so much as the fact that you did not address anything that I had written previously. If you do not address my arguments, you are not really arguing against me, are you? Because you gave me a question, I will give you several. 1) Are you justifying September 11 attacks? If so, why is it better than any of the 'horrible things' that you say America is so evil for? Do you have a double standard between for America and Bin Laden? If so is 9/11 morally the same as America targeting known terrorists, who have been trained in Al Qaeda camps with precision guided weapons? 2) When has America, ever, "randomly sluaghtering Arabs"? If you could tell me when, it would be quite helpful. (Bombing an Al-Qaeda terrorist camp does not count as 'randomly slaughtering Arabs' because bombing a specific military target and is not random at all.) I guess if your definition of a patriot is 'randomly slaughtering arabs', consider me Jane Fonda! 3) WHEN DO YOU TAKE A STAND GROSS? "I will never support killing someone because who they are or where they live or killing some one at all." What if someone wants to kill you? Would you just say we can't hurt them for who they are? What would you have done with the Nazis? Given them a hug?
Finally to answer your question...It doesn't matter why Osama attacked America! (Sorry to be such an arrogant, ugly American Bastard) He may have had a perfectly good reason! The only thing that matters is that he did and will do it again. The fact is that if you do not get that bastard's organization out of business, it will affect you, me and everyone. Do you deny that Al Qaeda is seeking nukes and other very powerful weapons, or would that just make you an "arrogant patriot?" Your rejection of becoming your definition of a "patriot" is quite noble, but you have a very narrow perspective of the world. Your extreme ideology blinds you of very real threats. But maybe, all the media is just being "manipulated" by the evil government. Sure, everyone is criticizing me, but I will still stand by my positions. I will not conform to the society of the A-Times! You are the one who is being manipulated and who is the conformist.
P.S. Gross is a paranoid bastard.
Franny, you dont say much, but when you do its sure to be grand. Good work
AMEN BROTHER!
Yes, I relearned how to type. Now then, morality. It's true that what Osama bin Laden planned and executed on September 11th was, by most moral standards, very wrong indeed. However, is it not also true that if we kill a similar number of people in the name of retribution, we become no better than the people who murdered over two thousand innocent civilians in one day? Honestly, do you think that we can end the pain inflicted upon the United States by bloodying our own hands? Do we end hatred by crippling a nation with a sample of our own? Look at Germany, post World War One. The Treaty of Versailles crippled the German economy, and as 2.5 million German soldiers lay dead on the battlefields, hatred for the old enemies of Germany rose. As a direct result of the harsh treatment of Germany post-World War One, World War Two claimed the lives of 61 million soldiers and civilians. The initial act of terrorism to set World War One in motion, the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand and his wife, claimed the lives of two. Just another angle.
I am going to ask one you simple question Ben, why did Osama Bin Laden attack America, why didn't he attack one of the other thousand nations that populate this Earth with as such supreme prejuidice he attacked America? In that answer, Ben lies the reason that I believe that we can't go killing the arabs and say that we were attacked first. We are not in the right, we have done things that have been terrible to that country and now we shouldn't go around murdering their people. Yes obviosly what Bin Laden did was horrific and unprecendented, and he had no right to do it, but because we the United States of America did instigate some sort of retalition from the Arab people then retaltion was therefore deserved. And yes Ben i have no backbone to say to myself that an American's life is any more important than any one else on the face of the earth, I am not a patriot and I am not arrogant, I will never support killing someone because who they are or where they live or killing some one at all. And if that makes me spineless so be it, but I would rather be spineless then to be a blind patriot randomlly sluaghtering Arabs. - Oh and Ben this forum has been typically focusing on mocking and ranting about other people that write on this forum.
Gross, when I first read your piece, I thought it was civil and intellectual, but then I reread it and realized that it was a bunch of rhetoric and quite unintelligent. All you do is say what you believe I think without carefully reading what I have written. I suggest you read what I write much more carefully. What you wrote is roughly the equivilent to, 'you are wrong, I am right, you are stupid, now I will make up a bunch of crazy stuff about what I think you believe.' Gross, we can not possibly have a meaningful conversation if you resort to such immature responses and arguments. You would be a great politician with this kind of attack. It does not respond to anything I have written. Maybe I am being manipulated by U.S. government propaganda. Maybe I haven't 'grown up' yet, but at least I am here to discuss very important philisophical issues, not to call other people names. What about you?
Andrew, where do you draw the line? When do you say that someone is wrong? That is what I am getting at. If you are unwilling to do that in all circumstances, then you literally have no backbone. By the way, if I thought that all arabs were terrorists, why would I believe that freedom of speech and universal suffrage would benefit the middle east? If I thought that all Chinese were communists, why would I be an advocate of free trade with China and believe that China had an important role in the future of world capitalism (which I made clear to you in previous conversations). I do not care about what other people believe, but I do care about their actions. Unfortunately, you apply your moral relativism to the actions. Maybe rape and murder should be legal? I mean, "we don't have the right to tell someone if they are right and wrong." Never, not once, do I advocate doing anything against people who do not share my opinion. Actions are what the only thing I am concerned about. You never address what to do if a nation attacks another. You dismiss with it with "America has made plenty of mistakes." Because America has made plenty of mistakes, we should not ever defend it? Wonderful idea Andrew! I know that America has made mistakes, I am not an uneducated hillbillie, but you, as an educated person, should also know that America, for all its faults, is not evil, and definitely one of the better places in the world to live. I will not get into romaniticizing about how great it is, but I will say that if my Grandfather did not immigrate here with his family, he would be a bar of soap.
Ben you are manipulated by the fact that you think America is so wonderful, I mean hell you would rather kill off half the world then to see one American die. And you are only seing things through how your government is and has been telling you to see them for your entire life. You have a veil over your eyes and since it has been on their you entire life you don't even notice it when you are talking, and that is what everyone is criticizing you about, your egocentric view point. It seems Ben that you think every single person in the Middle East is a terrorist and everyone in China is a communist . . .there are people in those countries that merely live there because their parents did and they don't go around killing Americans. Oh and also you are definitely trying to enforce your morality on other people, you are a typical republican in this regard, you believe in a small government until it comes to your moral opinion than you want rules, legislation, and war to enforce your moral viewpoint - grow up America isn't infalliable and it has made plent of mistakes.
"'everyone is right, no one is wrong' bullshit!" What? I think it would be the "No one is right, no one is wrong" bullshit. Donat seemed to be ranting about how people "have no right to tell someone else what is right and wrong" (which in itself is contradictory. What makes it wrong to tell someone what is right and wrong? Why are you telling them that they have no right to do that? Is that not what you are against? heh) I agree with him in some sense. Countries should not impose their believes on other countries. They should not interfere with what countries are doing to other countries, because "Who is to say if that is right or wrong?". I totally agree with that. BUT I then take a look at what Ben was talking about. You know, the bar of soap thing. If what one country is doing to another has even a slight chance of possibly effecting the freedoms we enjoy so much, either now or in the future. We have to kick their ass. That's all I can say about that....we have to draw the line somewhere. Why not draw it right there?
