Let me get this straight now Orn, you are saying that Don Johnson's
kids most likely will be working for 3 cents a day in Chinese owned
factories in Galveston??

Have you completely lost it?

This thread is unraveling in the cul de sac of bad dreams.

On Jun 15, 11:51 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
> "...Your kids most likely won't be fashioning bombs or IES's to
> kill....." - sd
>
> Most likely, they will be working, child labor, for 3 cents a day in
> Chinese owned factories in Galveston!
>
> On Jun 15, 5:14 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Your softening Don. The pacifists view is ideal and one that you and I
> > espouse but that is, in truth, only ideal if that is the path we are
> > undertaking.  Point being and reiterated IS.........
> > "IF we are going to talk war let's HAVE war and IF we are going to
> > talk peace let's HAVE peace."
>
> > We can't send out soldiers to do bloody battle while bullshit artists
> > sit around smoking peace pipes!
>
> > Your kids most likely won't be fashioning bombs or IED's to kill
> > someone they don't know for something they know nothing about but
> > "their" kids most likely will.
>
> > On Jun 15, 6:11 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Fair enough.  I understand the pacifist view even if I don't think it
> > > solves problems or makes us safer.  I guess it comes down to me
> > > feeling my kids are worth more then their kids.  It sounds callous but
> > > its how I feel.  If I had the choice pushing the proverbial button
> > > that kills 100 jihad radicalized foreign born children who's parents I
> > > don't know and saving my son's life I doubt I would even hesitate.
> > > Morally despicable but intellectually honest.
>
> > > dj
>
> > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Tinker<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > The enemy hides behind children when a bomb is dropped?
> > > > There is no just cause for the US to be there, yes, give up and leave.
>
> > > > peace & Love
>
> > > > On Jun 15, 5:12 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> Show me some evidence, Tink.  I'd wager we feed and house many more
> > > >> children then are killed as collateral damage.  We put our soldiers at
> > > >> great risk to avoid it but it does happen.  Where is this evidence of
> > > >> 'daily' killings?  When the enemy hides behind children and kills our
> > > >> soldiers what are we to do?  Give up and leave?
>
> > > >> dj
>
> > > >> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Tinker<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > >> > Don,
> > > >> > How is it that you can be so condemning of 'them' and gloss over the
> > > >> > fact that 'US forces' are killing innocent children daily?
>
> > > >> > peace & Love
>
> > > >> > On Jun 15, 3:35 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> >> From what I've read, most 'martyrs' are mentally disturbed people.
> > > >> >> Recruited and used for the political ends of terrorist leaders.
> > > >> >> Blowing ones self up in a crowded bus stop or popular cafe is 
> > > >> >> insane.
> > > >> >> And inhuman.  I see no heroism here.  Our disagreement on this issue
> > > >> >> alone infects all others.  One has only to read the objectives of
> > > >> >> Jihadists and compare them with the objectives of Western military
> > > >> >> efforts to see who has the more noble goal.  If your response is to
> > > >> >> say the terrorists rhetoric is exaggerated and ours(Western) all 
> > > >> >> lies
> > > >> >> or propaganda then there is nothing else to discuss.  I tend to base
> > > >> >> my opinion on people and countries on what they say as well as what
> > > >> >> they do.  By their words and actions terrorists of all kinds prove 
> > > >> >> to
> > > >> >> me almost every day the dehumanizing and destructive nature of 
> > > >> >> radical
> > > >> >> Islam.  I'd be happier if we were more honest about this.
>
> > > >> >> There can be no political solution because the enemy isn't organized
> > > >> >> like a state.  Someone recently posted something about Palestine not
> > > >> >> even being an actual country.  It's a collection of refugees from
> > > >> >> other countries used as a buffer against Israel.  I see Israel again
> > > >> >> and again bending over backwards for a solution with Palestine.  It
> > > >> >> will never happen politically.
>
> > > >> >> dj
>
> > > >> >> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 5:21 AM, 
> > > >> >> Justintruth<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > >> >> > The answer is simple. We do not kill them because it will 
> > > >> >> > negatively
> > > >> >> > affect our efforts on the battlefield to achieve superiority. It
> > > >> >> > motivates the enemy, hardens and destroys our own morale, and all 
> > > >> >> > for
> > > >> >> > no strategic purpose. Ultimately, it is a political objective 
> > > >> >> > that we
> > > >> >> > are trying to reach. Moving it farther out of our hands make no 
> > > >> >> > sense.
>
> > > >> >> > On Jun 14, 11:14 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> I think you are losing the context of the thread.  Perhaps 
> > > >> >> >> lining them
> > > >> >> >> up for a firing squad veers the thread intent off track.   I 
> > > >> >> >> thought
> > > >> >> >> there would be a psychological discussion but instead it is 
> > > >> >> >> turning
> > > >> >> >> out to be everything else but.
>
> > > >> >> >> The "civilians" and the "combatants"... the "guilty" and the 
> > > >> >> >> "innocent
> > > >> >> >> bystander" are co-located. <JT
>
> > > >> >> >> Sure they are, no kidding?   I'm not suggesting now nor did I 
> > > >> >> >> suggest
> > > >> >> >> at any time that we bomb the whole place, killing innocent 
> > > >> >> >> people in
> > > >> >> >> the process.  My only suggestion was that we just eliminate the 
> > > >> >> >> enemy
> > > >> >> >> combatants during ground wars of any kind.
> > > >> >> >> The context of the thread is pertaining to all wars, any wars,
> > > >> >> >> fighting over anything.  Like the civil war!
> > > >> >> >> Again!!
> > > >> >> >> There is a change that takes place.   Soldier A is shooting at 
> > > >> >> >> soldier
> > > >> >> >> B with all the intention of killing him.  Soldier B for whatever
> > > >> >> >> reason gets caught by soldier A.  Soldier B, who killed several 
> > > >> >> >> of
> > > >> >> >> soldier A's friends and claims he will kill more if given the
> > > >> >> >> opportunity, is taken by soldier A and treated very well.  Why?
>
> > > >> >> >> SO!!  I am simply saying that If I were soldier A, I would just 
> > > >> >> >> kill
> > > >> >> >> soldier B (the enemy) instead of wasting my time catering to his
> > > >> >> >> needs.
>
> > > >> >> >> If we are going to kill then lets kill otherwise let's put out a 
> > > >> >> >> huge
> > > >> >> >> picnic table and have Soldiers A and Soldiers B sit down and 
> > > >> >> >> treat
> > > >> >> >> each other nicely while they eat!!
>
> > > >> >> >> On Jun 14, 12:25 pm, Justintruth <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > >> >> >> > You seem to have no awareness of the context of what is 
> > > >> >> >> > happening. You
> > > >> >> >> > seem not to see the context at all.
>
> > > >> >> >> > First, the term "war". If we are in a war then we are in a 
> > > >> >> >> > severely
> > > >> >> >> > asymetrical one. There is no government that has "declared" 
> > > >> >> >> > war on us
> > > >> >> >> > in this thing. Nor is there a society, working together in an
> > > >> >> >> > organized manner behind a defended perimeter.
>
> > > >> >> >> > The "civilians" and the "combatants"... the "guilty" and the 
> > > >> >> >> > "innocent
> > > >> >> >> > bystander" are co-located.
>
> > > >> >> >> > What is the technical objective of a terrorist strike? What 
> > > >> >> >> > was Osama
> > > >> >> >> > bin Laden's objective for 9/11? Do you think he was "trying to 
> > > >> >> >> > destroy
> > > >> >> >> > us"?  No he was not. If he was trying to destroy us he needed a
> > > >> >> >> > significant increment in the tonnage of his explosives. Don't 
> > > >> >> >> > you not
> > > >> >> >> > realize that he KNEW that 9/11 would not destroy us and that 
> > > >> >> >> > the
> > > >> >> >> > function of the mission was to draw us into the kind of 
> > > >> >> >> > conflict that
> > > >> >> >> > the Russians got into so that he could use the same techniques 
> > > >> >> >> > on us
> > > >> >> >> > as he did on them and then DISCREDIT us. Not DESTROY us. 
> > > >> >> >> > DISCREDIT us.
> > > >> >> >> > If he can de-ligitamize our actions and our society then he can
> > > >> >> >> > legitemize his own struggle and through that process gain the
> > > >> >> >> > political strength that he would need to actually destroy us. 
> > > >> >> >> > When
> > > >> >> >> > that happens his ideas win. Preventing his ideas from taking 
> > > >> >> >> > hold is
> > > >> >> >> > the whole enchilada.
>
> > > >> >> >> > Your idea of "just killing" those in Guatanamo is wrong on 
> > > >> >> >> > several
> > > >> >> >> > levels not the least of which is strategic. You would play 
> > > >> >> >> > right into
> > > >> >> >> > their hands. At the beginning of the war that eliminated the 
> > > >> >> >> > Taliban
> > > >> >> >> > we had the opportunity to reconfigure the entire political 
> > > >> >> >> > dialogue on
> > > >> >> >> > which international relations is based. We should have seen our
> > > >> >> >> > primary objective as the need to de-legitimize that kind of 
> > > >> >> >> > action and
> > > >> >> >> > those kind of people and kept our hands "extra" clean taking
> > > >> >> >> > extraordinary measures to prevent casualties among the 
> > > >> >> >> > innocent and
> > > >> >> >> > drawing a clear distinction between "us" those that would not 
> > > >> >> >> > use
> > > >> >> >> > those techniques and "them" those that do. The political 
> > > >> >> >> > fallout would
> > > >> >> >> > have been the collapse of Jihadist movement. (I am not saying 
> > > >> >> >> > that we
> > > >> >> >> > should not have disarmed the Taliban- so don't strawman me.)
>
> > > >> >> >> > I suspect that the number of children, not just innocents, but
> > > >> >> >> > innocent children, that we have "slaughtered" or "maimed" 
> > > >> >> >> > -words that
> > > >> >> >> > take thinking about to realize their meaning - is now greater 
> > > >> >> >> > than we
> > > >> >> >> > lost in NYC. And still we have the - well I am sorry to use 
> > > >> >> >> > the word
> > > >> >> >> > but I must - imbecilic - ideas like you are proposing floating 
> > > >> >> >> > around.
>
> > > >> >> >> > The real tragedy of the Obama victory was that it was so close 
> > > >> >> >> > and so
> > > >> >> >> > many of you just have no clue strategically. You have 
> > > >> >> >> > witnessed and
> > > >> >> >> > are witnessing the collapse of American power which would not 
> > > >> >> >> > be a
> > > >> >> >> > problem except that we "were" the "best hope" of taking the 
> > > >> >> >> > world into
> > > >> >> >> > a happy future. Ah well, perhaps we should just wait for the 
> > > >> >> >> > Chinese
> > > >> >> >> > to rise to the occasion and lead us there.
>
> > > >> >> >> > Where is your common sense man?
>
> > > >> >> >> > On Jun 14, 11:36 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to