Originally posted by Falcon Horus
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The Political Discussion Thread
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Saw a wonderful tweet this morning:
"Trump is like a YouTube comment section running for president."Heightmeyer's Lemming -- still the coolest Lemming of the forum
Proper Stargate Rewatch -- season 10 of SG-1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Womble View PostFascism isn't Nazism. The two are related but distinct, let's not mix them.
"Aryan race" was used to denote the Nordic "race" in the German discourse since the 1800-s or so. The idea of describing prehistoric Germanic peoples as "Aryan" and the superiority of the Nordic peoples as racially unmixed "true Aryans" crystallized in Germany around the 1850-s.
I know what you are saying, but "white superiority" is hardly a new, nor exclusive concept.
I want you to learn to follow a coherent line of thought. Get a manual if you need to.
My point is that Hitler invented nothing. He created Nazism by fusing together elements of German tradition and identity with the fashionable science-worshipping turn-of-century zeitgeist.
Evil ideas always draw on something good, otherwise they fail early. An idea does not become genuinely popular and does not win mass appeal unless it taps into something with tremendous appeal AND unless it has something behind it that people feel is "authentic". And it's never just the push factor of frustration, wounded pride and economic hardship. There has to be a strong pull factor as well. Fascism, Nazism and other revolutionary movements (just like modern "progressive" movement, on which I'll elaborate if necessary) proved so popular because they drew upon lots of good and positive things.
Fascism's very name has roots in the "fascis" - the Roman symbol of collective power, a bundle of rods. It signified strength through unity. It was a revolutionary movement of protest, in Mussolini's words, against the backwardness of the Right and the destructiveness of the Left. It sought to embrace modernity while preventing wholesale destruction of much-loved traditional social structures. People standing together for things they love and believe in- what's not to like?
Nazism drew on -anything- it could.
Pagans have much more to answer for, my friend. They ruled the earth longer and killed more brutally, they just didn't leave as detailed a written record.
As for leaving records, well, it's hard to leave records when your storehouses of knowledge get burned, and your religion is systematically annihilated, especially those who would hold the Oral traditions of a people.
But sure, they left no records...............
And don't get me started at the few societies who incorporated atheism into their founding ideas; their body count in a single century rivals that of Monotheism's complete body count over thousands of years.
I did not realise you could spell Atheism as Totalitarian.
You might need to check a dictionary.
Lack of belief in a divine being in no way forces anyone to kill anything. Fear of the existing power of a church structure (no matter the structure) drove people to do things, like any fear of having your power challenged. I am yet to see ANYTHING that would indicate that a lack of belief could cause a damn thing. Totalitarian regimes do not fear God, why would they fear something they do not believe in, They feared the power of the Church, not the power of God.
Talk about needing to have a rational thought.............
Ain't it fun to paint with broad brushes?
Well gee, if I have no right to judge good from bad then let's just toss morality into the dust bin, shall we?
I suggest a simple litmus test: "How do you feel about killing those who disagree with you?"
May I suggest another one?
"How does your Religion feel about killing those who break religious law"
Not your interpretation, not Apologetics, not Rabbinical law but -the ACTUAL BOOK-.
Why yes. Again, disease analogy. You live with germs all the time, but you only take antibiotics when they make you sick.
I hate to break it to you, but if images and stories aren't information, what is?
Reductio ad absurdum is not a fallacy, it's a very useful form of argument. It demonstrates that should one accept your reasoning, untenable results follow.
ISIS has plenty that can be bombed right now. They couldn't fight major battles if they didn't.
The goal isn't to kill X number of them, but to deny them any form of territory control. ISIS' strength - decentralization - becomes their weakness if they are prevented from coalescing into a coherent force and denied control of resources that enable them to fight on a large scale. Strip them of territory and oil fields, and they're just another Middle Eastern militia. Keep them from making gains for a few years, and they will disintegrate into a bunch of rival gangs. They might still wave the black flag from the fringes after that, but as a small-scale local threat without territory or financial clout, they'll be manageable.
I don't care a whole lot whether or not you include your own country into the general West-blaming. I will simply point out that a hands-off approach is not a realistic option. As Europe has recently found out, you can bend over backwards to not be involved in the Middle East, but the Middle East will come right over and get you involved.
So how come it worked in Sri Lanka?
Like I said, it's not the point to exterminate any and all germs. Some of them are even beneficial until you develop an auto-immune disorder. All you need to do is manage the ones that make you sick, and only until they stop.
I get your correlation, I am not sure about your definition of what is a "good" or "bad" germ.sigpicALL THANKS TO THE WONDERFUL CREATOR OF THIS SIG GO TO R.I.G.A lie is just a truth that hasn't gone through conversion therapy yetThe truth isn't the truth
Comment
-
Originally posted by Falcon Horus View PostThere, finally something that is less conjecture:
San Bernardino shooter supported ISIS, was 'fixated' on Israel, father says
A reliable source with a name attached to it - father of the male shooter.
From the article:
Over the weekend, Farook's father told an Italian newspaper that his son supported ISIS' ideology of establishing an Islamic caliphate.
"He said he shared the ideology of (ISIS leader Abu Bakr) al-Baghdadi to create an Islamic state, and he was fixated on Israel," the elder Farook told La Stampa newspaper...
Jew-hating is the favorite bigotry of pretty much every terrorist out there. They're all fixated on Israel because Israel represents that feared modernity that makes Islamic supremacy impossible.If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.- Abba Eban.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Gatefan1976 View PostI don't care, Aryan did not come from Germany, and certainly not from then.
I want you to think outside the staid little box you live in.
And Indian, and Roman, but lets ignore them..........
I agree with you, I merely apply your logic to a somewhat longer timeframe than you seem to be willing to do.
How long do you want me to wait for a Pagan to deny your charge?
As for leaving records, well, it's hard to leave records when your storehouses of knowledge get burned, and your religion is systematically annihilated, especially those who would hold the Oral traditions of a people.
But sure, they left no records...............
LOL!!!
I did not realise you could spell Atheism as Totalitarian.
You might need to check a dictionary.
Lack of belief in a divine being in no way forces anyone to kill anything.
You can judge it for yourself, you cannot judge it for anyone else. To Judge for everyone else is to employ secular law, something that -should- apply to all equally, regardless of belief.
It's pretty bad.
May I suggest another one?
"How does your Religion feel about killing those who break religious law"
Not your interpretation, not Apologetics, not Rabbinical law but -the ACTUAL BOOK-.
Religion's practice is what matters, nothing else. The way it is applied is what does or doesn't make it a threat. A man who speaks nicely while committing murder is a villain; a man who curses everyone but harms no one is a harmless curiosity.
You're not qualified to judge "the actual book" if your concept of reading is too infantile to understand the simple fact that an act of reading is inherently an act of interpretation, and "the actual book" is interaction between the text and the reader. What you bring with you when reading the book - your prior knowledge base, your particular associative ties, your prejudices - determines how you understand it. The "rabbinical interpretation" is centuries worth of accumulated interpretative work, and you want to dismiss it because your deficient knowledge of subject matter produces a reading more favorable to your prejudices?
Tell you what. If you think you can read and not interprete, go get your Nobel Prize. If they don't give you one, go back to school to learn some basics.
No, it is making the assumption that your version of the extension of someone's thoughts are accurate, and then arguing it as if it was fact.
The Tamil Tigers had no religious impetus?
Yeah, still not seeing your point here.
I get your correlation, I am not sure about your definition of what is a "good" or "bad" germ.If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.- Abba Eban.
Comment
-
Panel casts doubt on U.S. propaganda efforts against ISIS
The State Department is considering scaling back its direct involvement in online campaigns to discredit the Islamic State after a review by outside experts cast new doubt on the U.S. government’s ability to serve as a credible voice against the terrorist group’s propaganda, current and former U.S. officials said.
...he review group, which included veterans of Google, Twitter and other technology companies, endorsed State Department initiatives to enlist Middle Eastern allies in the propaganda war as well as a campaign that called attention to often-harrowing accounts from Islamic State defectors.
But the team “had serious questions about whether the U.S. government should be involved in overt messaging at all,” said a U.S. official briefed on the group’s findings. The group’s skepticism reflected concern about U.S. credibility with Muslim audiences overseas as well as the scant evidence that the State program has diminished the flow of recruits to the Islamic State, also known as ISIS and ISIL.
...The U.S. counter-messaging operation “is in disarray,” said Will McCants, an expert on the Islamic State at the Brookings Institution and a former adviser to the State Department. Among those involved in messaging efforts, McCants said, “morale is low, and they’re not getting any clarity from the top about what they’re supposed to be doing.”
The fight against ISIS by non-military means isn't going any better than the fight by military means, because the current US government is just as inept at soft power as they are at hard power.
I'm really dreading the 2016 American elections. No matter who wins this time round, the world loses. Clinton might actually turn out to be the lesser evil if Trump really comes out on top as the Republican candidate.If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.- Abba Eban.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LtColCarter View PostWhy do I feel like I'm reading a transcript of the republicant debates?If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.- Abba Eban.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Womble View PostHey Gatefan, we're both Republicans now! How do you feel about that?
W: I'm right
GF: No, I'm right!
W: No, I'm right. You're infantile!Last edited by LtColCarter; 08 December 2015, 11:33 AM.sigpic
Comment
-
Originally posted by Womble View PostThe fight against ISIS by non-military means isn't going any better than the fight by military means, because the current US government is just as inept at soft power as they are at hard power.
Originally posted by Womble View PostI'm really dreading the 2016 American elections. No matter who wins this time round, the world loses. Clinton might actually turn out to be the lesser evil if Trump really comes out on top as the Republican candidate.
And Trump's incredible popularity clearly indicate that his message is resonating with a lot of voters.
ISIS just might end up handing Trump the keys to the White House.
Comment
-
If Trump becomes rhe next president, America will be lost and Putin will cheer.Heightmeyer's Lemming -- still the coolest Lemming of the forum
Proper Stargate Rewatch -- season 10 of SG-1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Annoyed View PostWhat do you expect with a "community organizer in chief" calling the shots?
ISIS could turn out to be the best thing for the Republicans, and Trump in particular. If they maintain or increase their activity level, it's going to make it damned near impossible for the Democrats to win, no matter who they run. Historically, Republicans have been perceived as being stronger on national defense than the Democrats.
And Trump's incredible popularity clearly indicate that his message is resonating with a lot of voters.
ISIS just might end up handing Trump the keys to the White House.
Originally posted by Falcon Horus View PostIf Trump becomes rhe next president, America will be lost and Putin will cheer.
Comment
Comment