Text 17882, 208 rader
Skriven 2005-12-05 11:53:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
  Kommentar till text 17749 av FRANK SCHEIDT (1:123/140)
Ärende: Sociopaths!
===================
 MVDV>>> Terrorist or freedom fighter, it is all a matter of perspective.
 MVDV>>> Just as "murder" or "collateral damage". In the end it is those
 MVDV>>> who write the history books that say which is what.

 >> Not so.  A terrorist is one who is trying to terrorize a mass
 >> of people through his terrible actions.

 MVDV>> That is how it looks in the eyes of the enemy of his people.

 > But, viewed *objectively* the terrorist is an evil person
 > doing evil deeds ...

100% objectivity exist only in mathematics. And even there only up to a point.
When it comes to "good" and "evil" there is no objectivity.

 > I presume you object to murder

Of course I do. I strongly object to murder!

 > ... maybe I'm mistaken in that belief ...

Possibly because you and I seem to have different opinions when it come to
judge if a specific case qualifies as murder or not.

 >> A freedom fighter, OTOH, is fighting an *enemy* to achieve
 >> freedom for his people.

 MVDV>> That is how it looks in the eyes of his people.

 > See above, re "objectively"

See avbove, objectivity is a fiction.

 MVDV>> All a matter of perspective.

 > Not really -- if the observer is *objective*.

There is no such thing as an objective observer.

 > For example I can *easily* see the terrorists are evil incarnate ...

So can I.

 > and *I* am objective.

No, you are not. Nobody is.

 >> There's no way one could look upon the murderers who killed
 >> three thousand innocent people that way!

 MVDV>> Of course there is a way. Just look at it from their point of view.

 > But that's an *insane* point-of-view.

In your eyes it is. In their's it probably is not.

 > Do you support insanity?

That depends. I do not reject insanity per se. I do reject criminal acts
performed by insane people though. I also reject criminal acts by sane people.

 >> It was done *deliberately*

 MVDV>> And the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were an accident?

 > We were talking about *terrorists*!  Stay focussed!

Mow you are getting it! Indeed we were talking about terrorists.

Dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was an evil and insane deed. Those
who did it fit your definition of *terrorist*.

 >> for no adequate reason which makes it murder.

 MVDV>> For them the reason was adequate: they wanted to teach the US a
 MVDV>> lessen. Unfortunateley it didn't take.

 > They were all insane.

Only as seen from your perspective.

 > Insane men cannot teach anyone a "lesson"

It is the other way around. Insane man can not be taught a lesson. That is why
the lesson of 9/11 did not take.

 >> So you are admitting the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
 >> *were* guilty!

 MVDV>> You are getting too predictable Frank, I knew you were going to say
 MVDV>> that. Now read again: "in a true democracy" I wrote. Was Japan a true
 MVDV>> democracy in 1945? Don't think so.

 > Now you ask me a question then answer it without letting me
 > respond ... [sigh] ...

How so? I just gave *my* answer to the question. Nothing stops you from putting
*your* answer next to it.

Except of course if you have no answer....

 >> I had never looked upon it that way, considering only
 >> the military objectives of the bombing.

 MVDV>> Military objectives my foot! The obvious objective was to
 MVDV>> "teach them a lesson". To scare the shit out of them by
 MVDV>> killing as many people as possible.

 > The rail marshalling yards were the target ...

Could easely have been taken in a conventional raid. No need to kill 300.000
people just to hit those targets.

 MVDV>> It perfectly fits your definition of "terrorist".

 > No way!

You refuse to see it, but there is no way around it. The objective of the bombs
was to kill a *LOT* of people in order to terrorise Japan into surrender. Any
military targets in the area were just an excuse.

Killing a lot of people to terrorise is the mark of the terrorist.

 MVDV>>> 9/11 is something that the USA brought onto itself. The
 MVDV>>> people of the USA were not innocent bystanders in the
 MVDV>>> chain of events that led up to it.
 >
 >> What was the "chain of events" as you see it?

 MVDV>> For one: the unconditional support of Israel, thereby committing
 MVDV>> a grave injustice against the people of Palestine.

 > While I  have long opposed the support of Israel by many American
 > politicians (in fact I oppose supporting *any* foreign gummint)

It does not really matter, see below...

 > if the powers-to-be here decide to support Israel they have
 > the right to do so.

And you support those peowers that be. That makes you part responsible for
their acts.

 > I have *long* proposed a 100% hands-off policy WRT the
 > Israel/Palestine conflict.  Let them fight it out and let
 > the best men win (grammatically the "better men")  So that was
 > no excuse for the murderers.

I didn't say it was an excuse. I said the attitude of unconditional support for
Israel is one of the things in the chain of events that led up to 9/11.

 >> Merely "believing" something doesn't make it *true*!

 MVDV>> You guys should have thought of that before attacking Irak on the
 MVDV>> pretext that there were WMD's.

 > There was no "pretext".  Intelligence sources of *five*
 > nations had assured us there were.

All based on old and false information and debunked long before the invasion
started.

 > Since they haven't been found, obviously Saddam managed to move them.

Since they were not found, they obviously were not there in the first place.
GWB's own weapon inspectors said so.

 MVDV>>> Throwing a weapon of mass destruction from the safety of an aircraft
 MVDV>>> at altitude and speed is not an act of heroism.
 >
 >> It was an act of heroism because they didn't know if the bomb
 >> would explode in such a way as to kill the plane's crew!

 MVDV>> There was the test of the first bomb, they had a fair idea of there
 MVDV>> chances.

 > "Fair idea" isn't good enough when one is facing death.

There was a war going on remember. Risking their lives in war is what soldiers
do. The risk of the people in the plane was nothing compared to those on the
ground.

 MVDV>> Mohammed Atta had the certainty that he would not survive.
 MVDV>> Does that make him a super here now?

 > He was insane!

All hereos are. No sane person would willingly and knowingly choose to become a
hero.

 MVDV>>> Military targets my foot! The vast majority of the people in
 MVDV>>> Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilians that had done nothing
 MVDV>>> to deserve to be brutally murdered and maimed by a weapon
 MVDV>>> of mass destruction.

 >> They were collateral damage -- unlucky to be in the wrong
 >> place at the wrong time!

 MVDV>> Then so were the people in the twin towers.

 > Not so.  We weren't at war with Saudi Arabia.

The Atta gang was at war with the US though....

Cheers, Michiel

---
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)