Text 20895, 148 rader
Skriven 2006-01-04 08:40:32 av Peter Knapper (3:772/1.0)
  Kommentar till text 20866 av Frank Scheidt (1:123/140)
Ärende: [1/2] Lack of Gratitude
===============================
Hi Frank,

 PK> The USA is defending itself by "attacking" a supposed enemy, EXACTLY
 PK> the same as the "Terrorists" are defending 
 PK> thjemselves by attacking  PK>
 PK> the USA. 

 FS> A "supposed" enemy?  Don't you consider the murderous 
 FS> "insurgents" in Iraq to be a real enemy?  

I consider people who are residents of a country and defending their country
from invaders to not be insurgents. So far, over 90% of those killed in Iraq
were citizens of that country. Those people were NOT insurgents, and there is
no way I would accept that they are simply "collateral damage".


 FS> But it's in your own interest that we *act* by trying to save the 
 FS> world from the terrorists ...

 PK> So are you suggesting that the rest of the world should submit to
 PK> Uncle Sam  determining what is right and wrong for the rest of the
 PK> world? Surely the "results" from Iraq are enough to show that almost
 PK> no-one has any trust in what the USA says any more, GWB has destroyed
 PK> USA credibilty... 

 FS> That's merely your opinion ...

Thankfully, you do "allow" people to hold opinions, however that it also
another bypass of the original question by you.


 PK> I am not sure how you want me to read that reply, either its a
 PK> non-reply to the original question, or its an admission that you are
 PK> not a logical thinker. Either is not good...

 FS> You have set up two straw-men.  That's no more effective than 
 FS> *one* straw-man. 

But it still results in you avoiding the question.


 FS> So what was your *point*.  The Hiroshima attack was clearly 
 FS> justified while the WTC attack was merely large-scale murder.

And that WAS exactly my point, that you are completely unable to rationalise
one of the 2 events. 

You seem to being living a life with nothing but coins in yor pocket with a
head, but no tail, and that is a pretty consistant one eyed view to me. 

I actually hold respect for people that take up firm positions opposite to me
on something, provided they are able to demonstrate their thinking is balanced.
I may not agree with their conclusions, but I respect the fact that they have
rationalised their stance, and contrary to your continunous statements about
your "rational thinking", so far you seem (to me) to be almost completely
missing that sort of balance. 

Initially I looked for it as a simple issue of how you were stating your case,
and the fact that we may have agreed on the criteria for the decision, but
disagreed on the decision itself. But other than a few minor points where you
did show true understanding, the bulk of your arguments can only lead me to one
conclusion, that something (and I have no idea what it might be), is preventng
you from forming a true balanced opinion. 

Somehow I can't see our discussion objectively heading any place from
here.......;-(


 FS> Huh?  There *is* no such thing as a "holy war".  That's pure 
 FS> nonsense! 

 PK> Its not nonsense to those that declared it!
 FS>  
 FS> It's nonsense to the rest of us!  

I see, if your oponents beliefs do not fit into Frank's view of the world, then
they must be terrorists. Just how more one-eyed can you get Frank?


 FS> BTW, do *you* believe in the concept of a "holy war"??

I have to, because over the centuries there have been so MANY wars, all fought
in the name of religion. If you do not believe in a Holy war, then you do not
believe in Religion. Note that I say "Religion", NOT "A specific Religion".


 FS> *Nothing* the US has done justified the murders of 3,000 
 FS> innocent people -- especially during peacetime!
 FS> Hence you should reassess your thinking. 

 PK> Pot... kettle...

 FS> You're mumbling again ... [sigh] ...

 PK> Damn, I must be catching that from you........;-)

 FS> I try to avoid mumbling ...

Perhaps you need to practise that a bit more......;-)


 FS> Hiroshima bombing:  Wartime ... done to save a million lives
 FS> WTC bombing:  Peacetime ... done out of insane (fanatic) 
 FS> viciousness by murderers ...
 FS>  
 FS> See the difference now?

 PK> Nope, in BOTH situations, War had been declared. See the similarity
 PK> now Frank? 

 FS> Since no war has been declared since December 1941 there *is* no 
 FS> similarity ...

That is simply denial by omission.


 PK> Your statement is simply a denial of the fact that a "Holy War" was
 PK> declared. Do you not remember it being broadcast all over the world by
 PK> American TV stations?

 FS> Do you believe everything you see on TV?

Not everything, but I recall 2 specific events that certainly carried some
weight regarding this situation -
  1. International News teams (including American) showed footages supposedly
from your "insurgents" stating there was a "Holy War",
  2. And then GWB is shown standing in front of a room full of news reporters
and makes a public statement regarding the "Holy war", 

then ergo - There really IS a Holy war Frank. Those events carry quite a bit
more credibility than that presented by a single person in a Fidonet Echo.


 PK> The bottom line is that there must be 2 "sides" to any conflict. Now
 PK> that you have stated the USA "side" to this many 
 PK> times over, then what
 PK> does the USA consider to be the "other side" of this conflict? 

 FS> The "other side" is obviously based on irrationality hence cannot 
 FS> be explained properly.

QED, you cannot even acknowledge that there is another perspective.

Cheers..........pk.


--- Maximus/2 3.01
 * Origin: === Maxie BBS.  Ak, NZ +64 9 444-0989 === (3:772/1)