but he'd give in state tuition to illegals! he's such a kind heartFatherTed wrote:
i suppose being raped is irresponsibility or selfishness.
Being raped isn't your fault, but killing the kid is selfish. Just because you got raped and have an unwanted pregnancy doesn't excuse you from murdering a kid. Put the kid up for adoption.
As far as "The mother will die because of x, y, or z" whatever happened to selflessness? The child has yet to live.
As far as "The mother will die because of x, y, or z" whatever happened to selflessness? The child has yet to live.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
What if the child grows up to be gay?
Too bad...keep the kid. *Love the sinner, hate the sin.
Last edited by -Sh1fty- (2011-12-13 22:00:07)
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
Dude that is such bullshit. Loving someone is about accepting someone for who they are, it is not about excusing and justifying people who are immoral, or evil.
What is most disgusting about you family values people is how you are in fact the exact opposite -- just ask the gay kids who have been disowned because they are different -- but are perceived as immoral.
What is most disgusting about you family values people is how you are in fact the exact opposite -- just ask the gay kids who have been disowned because they are different -- but are perceived as immoral.
^Sanity
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I'm sorry but that is just insane. So a husband who has found his true love and decided to have a child is supposed to stand there and watch his wife die because the doctor says its "immoral"?-Sh1fty- wrote:
As far as "The mother will die because of x, y, or z" whatever happened to selflessness? The child has yet to live.
Last edited by Spearhead (2011-12-13 23:47:07)
This is not only a very dangerous view but an immoral one.Shocking wrote:
stopping Saddam from taking over Kuwait kept the oil price from skyrocketing while at the same time you held at bay a power hungry dictator.
Africa and the Middle East are so fucked because European globalists were allowed to dictate foreign policy.
They never fought for their land or developed a strong national identity (hence the tribalism) and they are still shaking off the remaining influence of the colonists. Their societies have been dominated by either military rule or religion not because they are evil people who want to kill us but because that is how societies form -- first you organize and kill the tigers who want to eat you, then you develop tradition and culture, and out of that creativity comes an identity tied to ideals -- freedom, tolerance, law, etc.
God and country is all the political power that exists in these places-- they do not have lobbyists fighting for reforms, they do not have even a 20th century criminal justice system, and they cannot even defend themselves against their own neighbors, let alone the great caucasion sky god-man who is constantly fucking with them in their own global neighborhood. All that exists are small pockets, of highly centralized power, who all hate eachother.
Is this really too hard for you people to understand? This is how you get groups like al-qaeda. They do not have bombs, they had to spend months infiltrating us, just to strike at the right moment, which happened to involve killing themselves. Meanwhile, we can destroy the entire world within an hour yet some of us still insist on making war. Get your filthy fucking hands off MY freedom, MY government, and THEIR rights! I have never killed anyone, let alone seriously hurt, another human being in my life -- yet you guys seem to want to speak for me, other Americans, who are then targeted and killed because you are conformist, uncreative dumbfucks who apologize left and right for everything that is wrong with a system that does not work and is EVIL AND IMMORAL, yet still want to expand it and drag the rest of the world down with you.
Last edited by Spearhead (2011-12-14 00:29:59)
I remember the Middle East having huge kingdoms before hand, and lots of it ruled by various people from the Persians to the Ottomans. How is it Europe's fault? Euro's didn't colonize the Middle East till after WW1 when the Ottoman Empire lost the war along with Germany and Austria.Spearhead wrote:
Africa and the Middle East are so fucked because European globalists were allowed to dictate foreign policy.Shocking wrote:
stopping Saddam from taking over Kuwait kept the oil price from skyrocketing while at the same time you held at bay a power hungry dictator.
They never fought for their land or developed a strong national identity (hence the tribalism) and they are still shaking off the remaining influence of the colonists. .
According to my Muslim professor it began with the French invasion Egypt. In an effort to catch up to the West's power the Islamic world tried to imitate the West and failed.
That and Aramco.Spearhead wrote:
This is not only a very dangerous view but an immoral one.Shocking wrote:
stopping Saddam from taking over Kuwait kept the oil price from skyrocketing while at the same time you held at bay a power hungry dictator.
Africa and the Middle East are so fucked because European globalists were allowed to dictate foreign policy.
They never fought for their land or developed a strong national identity (hence the tribalism) and they are still shaking off the remaining influence of the colonists. Their societies have been dominated by either military rule or religion not because they are evil people who want to kill us but because that is how societies form -- first you organize and kill the tigers who want to eat you, then you develop tradition and culture, and out of that creativity comes an identity tied to ideals -- freedom, tolerance, law, etc.
God and country is all the political power that exists in these places-- they do not have lobbyists fighting for reforms, they do not have even a 20th century criminal justice system, and they cannot even defend themselves against their own neighbors, let alone the great caucasion sky god-man who is constantly fucking with them in their own global neighborhood. All that exists are small pockets, of highly centralized power, who all hate eachother.
Is this really too hard for you people to understand? This is how you get groups like al-qaeda. They do not have bombs, they had to spend months infiltrating us, just to strike at the right moment, which happened to involve killing themselves. Meanwhile, we can destroy the entire world within an hour yet some of us still insist on making war. Get your filthy fucking hands off MY freedom, MY government, and THEIR rights! I have never killed anyone, let alone seriously hurt, another human being in my life -- yet you guys seem to want to speak for me, other Americans, who are then targeted and killed because you are conformist, uncreative dumbfucks who apologize left and right for everything that is wrong with a system that does not work and is EVIL AND IMMORAL, yet still want to expand it and drag the rest of the world down with you.
Fuck Israel
Spearhead wrote:
I'm sorry but that is just insane. So a husband who has found his true love and decided to have a child is supposed to stand there and watch his wife die because the doctor says its "immoral"?-Sh1fty- wrote:
As far as "The mother will die because of x, y, or z" whatever happened to selflessness? The child has yet to live.
You're right in the case of Africa but the middle east already had well defined cultures long before we colonised it. Many of these social groups and regions still exist today, the differences are minor.Spearhead wrote:
This is not only a very dangerous view but an immoral one.Shocking wrote:
stopping Saddam from taking over Kuwait kept the oil price from skyrocketing while at the same time you held at bay a power hungry dictator.
Africa and the Middle East are so fucked because European globalists were allowed to dictate foreign policy.
They never stopped fighting for land and power actually, and strong national identities do exist in the ME. Look at the Egyptians, Persians, Saudis... these identities existed LONG before we arrived in the ME and we did nothing to destroy these. Your mistake is in assuming that the shape of our civilisation is the one which every other has to adopt sooner or later, that's not true. The ME isn't socially 'less developed' than we are. Many of the tribalists take great pride in their tribal roots and want it to stay the same, ask the Afghans. Social evolution doesn't follow a set path of sorts.Spearhead wrote:
They never fought for their land or developed a strong national identity (hence the tribalism) and they are still shaking off the remaining influence of the colonists. Their societies have been dominated by either military rule or religion not because they are evil people who want to kill us but because that is how societies form -- first you organize and kill the tigers who want to eat you, then you develop tradition and culture, and out of that creativity comes an identity tied to ideals -- freedom, tolerance, law, etc.
They have lobbyists, they have their own justice systems, they do fight among themselves though direct confrontation is not the preferred method of getting stuff done (Afghanistan was a playground for proxywars in the 90s-2001 period and many of the nations actively support all sorts of dissident groups in other countries). Anyone can see that a lot has to change in the ME and our presence in the region is (at present) admittedly not helping. Though that was not the case in my reference to the first gulf war which you originally quoted.God and country is all the political power that exists in these places-- they do not have lobbyists fighting for reforms, they do not have even a 20th century criminal justice system, and they cannot even defend themselves against their own neighbors, let alone the great caucasion sky god-man who is constantly fucking with them in their own global neighborhood. All that exists are small pockets, of highly centralized power, who all hate eachother.
Is this really too hard for you people to understand? This is how you get groups like al-qaeda.
Groups like AQ manifested themselves in a time where the consequences of the foreign interventions weren't clear or even thought about. The cold war created these and now that they've directed their anger towards us, we have no choice but to do something about it. You can argue that the way in which we responded was wrong, but the action itself was necessary.
rantThey do not have bombs, they had to spend months infiltrating us, just to strike at the right moment, which happened to involve killing themselves. Meanwhile, we can destroy the entire world within an hour yet some of us still insist on making war. Get your filthy fucking hands off MY freedom, MY government, and THEIR rights! I have never killed anyone, let alone seriously hurt, another human being in my life -- yet you guys seem to want to speak for me, other Americans, who are then targeted and killed because you are conformist, uncreative dumbfucks who apologize left and right for everything that is wrong with a system that does not work and is EVIL AND IMMORAL, yet still want to expand it and drag the rest of the world down with you.
inane little opines
2014 will be the 100th anniversary since the start of world war 1. A 100 year old in 1950 would have witnessed the invention of the factory, the photograph, automatic rifles, telephones, radios, televisions, and nuclear weapons, etc. etc.Cybargs wrote:
I remember the Middle East having huge kingdoms before hand, and lots of it ruled by various people from the Persians to the Ottomans. How is it Europe's fault? Euro's didn't colonize the Middle East till after WW1 when the Ottoman Empire lost the war along with Germany and Austria.Spearhead wrote:
Africa and the Middle East are so fucked because European globalists were allowed to dictate foreign policy.Shocking wrote:
stopping Saddam from taking over Kuwait kept the oil price from skyrocketing while at the same time you held at bay a power hungry dictator.
They never fought for their land or developed a strong national identity (hence the tribalism) and they are still shaking off the remaining influence of the colonists. .
Would any of that have been possible without a functioning government? This is not even a hypothetical question, because we know the answer : no. If it had, the third world would not have to be buying all that shit from us, and producing it for us.
Of course this does not mean technological progress = a better way of life.
Last edited by Spearhead (2011-12-14 01:44:46)
-Sh1fty- wrote:
Being raped isn't your fault, but killing the kid is selfish. Just because you got raped and have an unwanted pregnancy doesn't excuse you from murdering a kid. Put the kid up for adoption.
As far as "The mother will die because of x, y, or z" whatever happened to selflessness? The child has yet to live.
ffs just stop.-Sh1fty- wrote:
Too bad...keep the kid. *Love the sinner, hate the sin.
inane little opines
Culture is not and cannot be more refined anywhere in the world, culture encompasses the way people live their lives, not just political/economic characteristics. Our Americans consumer culture absorbs and assimilates others, that is why we have Taco Bell (mexican food) and burger joints (named after Hamburg, Germany) There are others of course but that is the most obvious example I thought of.Shocking wrote:
You're right in the case of Africa but the middle east already had well defined cultures long before we colonised it. Many of these social groups and regions still exist today, the differences are minor.
A "traditional" way of life and a "socially progressive" way of life are in no way mutually exclusive. People like shifty make the mistake of assuming their political identity is their religious identity and that if they sever this connection, it will take away their culture. The three are all interconnected but resisting assimilation is what they have always done and will always do. This is an uncomfortable but necessary step, and upon close inspection can be seen when you see Shifty using words like "true Christians" -- implying that there is such a thing as a "false" Christian. Why? Because of different political beliefs. Politics then begins to supercede religion.
It is impossible to "know" the path of social evolution, because social evolution never stops. It is a natural process which never with no end point, and the only action you can take towards it is to suppress it. I am not saying there are not nationalists in these countries but the fact that the Shiite and Sunni fought a civil war goes directly against what you are saying. They fought because they have not yet established a strong enough national identity which includes both groups and is tolerant of the other, despite the past. (I do not hate British people because I descended from Irish Catholics).They never stopped fighting for land and power actually, and strong national identities do exist in the ME. Look at the Egyptians, Persians, Saudis... these identities existed LONG before we arrived in the ME and we did nothing to destroy these. Your mistake is in assuming that the shape of our civilisation is the one which every other has to adopt sooner or later, that's not true. The ME isn't socially 'less developed' than we are. Many of the tribalists take great pride in their tribal roots and want it to stay the same, ask the Afghans. Social evolution doesn't follow a set path of sorts.
The tribal mindset is not limited to ones "tribe", human progress began with human beings started living together in groups larger than their extended family (no blood relation) but still considered them "one of us". We are incredibly tribal about our country, our region, etc. That tribalism is transferred from the family (they killed my family so I'll kill theirs) to culture (these people live the way we do, lets join up), then to religion (Catholic church) then to politics. This is precisely what we would call social progress : the idea that none of us chose our family or the situation we were born into, and that if you go back in biological history we are all blood relatives. If you look closely this slowly unravels the very same network of identity extremists everywhere use to oppress others. Trying to force one over or in replacement of others is futile : you cannot unite one tribe with another which it does not consider the same and expect tangible results. We tried it in Iraq until we had to pay them to stop fighting (replaced Saddam Hussein with money), and we're trying it now in Afghanistan, which yields short term results but is utterly insane.
Also, Afghanistan absolutely is a tribal society. All I have to do is tell you to look up the Haqqani network, a family/clan/mafia tribe which is involved with the Taliban, at very high levels. It contributes to the shadow government and carries out high-profile terrorist attacks.
I am well aware of the geopolitics here. To say the Cold War "created" all of this is a dangerous and simplistic view of the world. That would be like saying that we are all born from our fathers ballsacks, and calling it a worthy substitute for biology. Did it play an important role? Well, duh. Does it explain in anyway complex and largely invisible socio-economic-political factors at play here?They have lobbyists, they have their own justice systems, they do fight among themselves though direct confrontation is not the preferred method of getting stuff done (Afghanistan was a playground for proxywars in the 90s-2001 period and many of the nations actively support all sorts of dissident groups in other countries). Anyone can see that a lot has to change in the ME and our presence in the region is (at present) admittedly not helping. Though that was not the case in my reference to the first gulf war which you originally quoted.
Groups like AQ manifested themselves in a time where the consequences of the foreign interventions weren't clear or even thought about. The cold war created these and now that they've directed their anger towards us, we have no choice but to do something about it. You can argue that the way in which we responded was wrong, but the action itself was necessary.
As far as I am concerned we lost the war the second OBL entered Pakistan after Tora Bora, it was a symbolic victory in every sense of the word. It proved we are not omnipotent and omnipresent, even when we try very hard to be.
I should clarify and say that I do not think people in the military are immoral or evil. That would be akin to me saying, the indian gas station guy or the truck driver is responsible for Exxonmobile or BP. Its a ridiculous assertion, but one in which hawks love to jump on because my opinion flies in the face of their world view.rant
What is perhaps most chilling is how the reasons you guys use for intervening in Iran is the precise reason why Iran is such a horrible place. It has its all the ingredients for progress and open society, yet is still ruled by a puppet government, held in place by religion. Even today, if you guys took the time to look, you'd see the women in Iran are better off than women in Saudi Arabia. Living, breathing evidence of social progress in the past, and the potential for it in the future.
So why is it in its current state? The CIA intervened when it was on the threshold of this progress-- because it was "against our interests", as if British oil policy in the middle east somehow warranted our involvement. This is not controversial, it is not a conspiracy theory, it is a documented fact. Yet what happened? We interrupted this process, sent their political and social order into a downward spiral and made the mistake of thinking the asshole we provided them could stay in power : their religious leaders ended up leading the revolution in 1979, because their politicians could not.
Last edited by Spearhead (2011-12-14 06:29:58)
What did government have to do with any of it besides automatic rifles and nuclear weapons? Nothing.Spearhead wrote:
2014 will be the 100th anniversary since the start of world war 1. A 100 year old in 1950 would have witnessed the invention of the factory, the photograph, automatic rifles, telephones, radios, televisions, and nuclear weapons, etc. etc.Cybargs wrote:
I remember the Middle East having huge kingdoms before hand, and lots of it ruled by various people from the Persians to the Ottomans. How is it Europe's fault? Euro's didn't colonize the Middle East till after WW1 when the Ottoman Empire lost the war along with Germany and Austria.Spearhead wrote:
Africa and the Middle East are so fucked because European globalists were allowed to dictate foreign policy.
They never fought for their land or developed a strong national identity (hence the tribalism) and they are still shaking off the remaining influence of the colonists. .
Would any of that have been possible without a functioning government? This is not even a hypothetical question, because we know the answer : no. If it had, the third world would not have to be buying all that shit from us, and producing it for us.
Of course this does not mean technological progress = a better way of life.
Photographs and telephones were 19th century inventions btw.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Whenever people try to invoke history to make claims or justify modern practices or events I can feel my brain beginning to bleed. 9 times out of 10 they get a lot of things just plain wrong. It's annoying.
a few corrections without taking a position to on the ongoing debate:
Please, national identities are fairly new concepts that haven't thoroughly established themselves into those places. The lines on the maps are pointless and can't be used to determine national identities.
a few corrections without taking a position to on the ongoing debate:
The Europeans of the past have a lot of blood on their hands but they are not the cause of all the worlds issues. The middle east was already beginning to fall behind the west before the Euros started their colonization spree. It's not that they got worse off, it's that we got a lot better off. We "advanced" quicker for a multitude of reasons. They can't play victims/blame the Euro's for all their issues.Africa and the Middle East are so fucked because European globalists were allowed to dictate foreign policy.
They never fought for their land or developed a strong national identity (hence the tribalism) and they are still shaking off the remaining influence of the colonists.
Egypt and Saudi? Nope. Saudi Arabia gets it's name from the guy who united it around the time of WW1. Before then it was a bunch of different tribes who cared little for each other or anyone else. Egypt has been shifting from different governments with different influences for the last three thousand years. Modern issues are just a continuation of the constant flux that area is in.They never stopped fighting for land and power actually, and strong national identities do exist in the ME. Look at the Egyptians, Persians, Saudis... these identities existed LONG before we arrived in the ME and we did nothing to destroy these.
Please, national identities are fairly new concepts that haven't thoroughly established themselves into those places. The lines on the maps are pointless and can't be used to determine national identities.
Last edited by Macbeth (2011-12-14 07:26:38)
probably been posted already
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Too bad a bundle of cells is not a kid, just like an acorn is not a tree, an egg is not a chicken, and a tadpole is not a frog.-Sh1fty- wrote:
Being raped isn't your fault, but killing the kid is selfish. Just because you got raped and have an unwanted pregnancy doesn't excuse you from murdering a kid. Put the kid up for adoption.
As far as "The mother will die because of x, y, or z" whatever happened to selflessness? The child has yet to live.
How many cells does it need to become a human Wreck? That 22 weeks bullshit doesn't mean a thing. Unlike any other cells, human cells turn into...drum roll...humans! therefore they are human from conception. You can't take human cells and turn them into something else.
Abortion is killing a human in it's earliest stage.
Abortion is killing a human in it's earliest stage.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
* Wreck, btw, you're a bundle of cells too.-Sh1fty- wrote:
How many cells does it need to become a human Wreck? That 22 weeks bullshit doesn't mean a thing. Unlike any other cells, human cells turn into...drum roll...humans! therefore they are human from conception. You can't take human cells and turn them into something else.
Abortion is killing a human in it's earliest stage.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
He's 78% water too. Maybe we shouldn't step in puddles.
Fuck Israel
Perhaps you didn't hear about this then?-Sh1fty- wrote:
You can't take human cells and turn them into something else.
