"Explosion" in Manchester

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Ancient civilisations tended to enslave children, not slaughter them. Even when slaughters occurred, such as in a sack, killing children wasn't regarded as brave. You certainly didn't have people sitting half a world away saying that such actions were brave. Brave involves facing off against other men. That's why cultures celebrate manhood and coming of age. It's another brave (note the word) to the collection.

---

I'm speaking particularly of individual interpersonal violence, rather than the policies or behaviors of martial congregations. Impunity was the rule of cultures up to the 20th century, and men killed whomever they pleased as long as they could get away with it.

But again, this isn't relevant to the subject of bravery.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

I'm speaking particularly of individual interpersonal violence, rather than the policies or behaviors of martial congregations. Impunity was the rule of cultures up to the 20th century, and men killed whomever they pleased as long as they could get away with it.

But again, this isn't relevant to the subject of bravery.

---

Evidence of bravery is usually preceded by someone more important than you shouting "shieldwall" or "present arms" or even just "brace for impact."

Bravery requires an opponent, even if the opponent is Mother Nature herself and not another human being.

This "man" had no opponent except his own conscience.

There's a sick irony in an ideology that facilitated assimilation, removing the need for the extermination of children, is now inspiring such barbarity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Emphasis added.

I would think 'double silver' experience chevrons a bit hard to come by...

---

Was a joke. Sarcasm not at Husar level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

Evidence of bravery is usually preceded by someone more important than you shouting "shieldwall" or "present arms" or even just "brace for impact."

Bravery requires an opponent, even if the opponent is Mother Nature herself and not another human being.

This "man" had no opponent except his own conscience.

---

I would disagree that he had no opponent, and I'm unsure about tying bravery to opposition. But ultimately I'm not interesting in delving into virtue ethics.

My main point is that we should avoid settling into the Platonic position that bravery is equivalent to, or derives from, "correct opinion".

So you agree that it is a radical opinion of bravery then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Raids with the purpose of killing women and children don't rate the term "civilisation". From agriculture onwards, having additional hands, especially non-threatening ones, helps whatever the equivalent is of the economy. Even nomadic cultures adopt captive children into their tribe. The only logical example might be a hunter gatherer tribe scratching out an existence in hard circumstances. Tell me, in which way does the UK resemble these?

If we go by your arguments and look for the most primitive cultures around that practice killing women and children, then the reciprocal answer would be to eliminate the threat to us in the same way. Not that you'd really condone that of course, except to snipe at us from a distance like you always do.

---

Primitive cultures do not wage total war. As you rightly point up, economic demands mitigate strongly against this.

Civilized cultures wage total war. In part, this is because the surfeit of resources allow it. In part, this is because war is not just for economic gain, but also for political intimidation and pride. Primitive cultures do not have the spare resources to kill in job lots to appear badass. For that you need kultur.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

HITLER!

---

Hitler was a warrior?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Raids with the purpose of killing women and children don't rate the term "civilisation". From agriculture onwards, having additional hands, especially non-threatening ones, helps whatever the equivalent is of the economy. Even nomadic cultures adopt captive children into their tribe. The only logical example might be a hunter gatherer tribe scratching out an existence in hard circumstances. Tell me, in which way does the UK resemble these?

If we go by your arguments and look for the most primitive cultures around that practice killing women and children, then the reciprocal answer would be to eliminate the threat to us in the same way. Not that you'd really condone that of course, except to snipe at us from a distance like you always do.

---

Moving goalposts, where is the civilization coming from after you just talked about traditional warrior ethos? I also wouldn't say your idea of warrior culture fits with "civilization", but at that point it just becomes a matter of opinion/definition.
Not sure why you mention agriculture, did the Nazis not have any or was there no civilization in Germany at the time? :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Moving goalposts, where is the civilization coming from after you just talked about traditional warrior ethos? I also wouldn't say your idea of warrior culture fits with "civilization", but at that point it just becomes a matter of opinion/definition.
Not sure why you mention agriculture, did the Nazis not have any or was there no civilization in Germany at the time? :rolleyes:

---

Since when have we used Nazi Germany as the touchstone of civilisation? Does anyone worthwhile hold that up as an exemplar of human civilisation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Since when have we used Nazi Germany as the touchstone of civilisation? Does anyone worthwhile hold that up as an exemplar of human civilisation?

---

The scary thing is that you actually could in a twisted way if you think of it. With some clever wording you can probably get away with calling nazi-Germany exemplar of human civilisation. If you just forget all the horrible things that were done just for argument's sake, why wouldn't it be

not an opinion, just a musing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

The scary thing is that you actually could in a twisted way if you think of it. With some clever wording you can probably get away with calling nazi-Germany exemplar of human civilisation. If you just forget all the horrible things that were done just for argument's sake, why wouldn't it be

not an opinion, just a musing

---

If you are Husar or his ilk, Nazi Germany is the exemplar that proves that Britain and America are in the wrong and therefore deserve everything bad that can happen to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

Here we go more whataboutery from someone who should know better.

Which part of two wrongs don't make a right don't you understand?

Anyway lets stoke up flames a bit more...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rket4xvu_ac

---

Tommy Robinson? Jesus. You've scraped clean through the bottom of the barrel and into the dirt floor beneath. The man is an unspeakable racist piece of ****.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

The scary thing is that you actually could in a twisted way if you think of it. With some clever wording you can probably get away with calling nazi-Germany exemplar of human civilisation. If you just forget all the horrible things that were done just for argument's sake, why wouldn't it be

not an opinion, just a musing

---

The 'musings' of the people like Tommy Robinson become the musings of people like the Nazis. And they organised a final solution (in the words of Katie Hopkins) to all the problems of society.

75 odd years ago the letters from the half of my family still in Poland stopped.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Since when have we used Nazi Germany as the touchstone of civilisation? Does anyone worthwhile hold that up as an exemplar of human civilisation?

---

I'm not the one saying the goal of our civilization should be to cleanse us of muslims.
And one doesn't have to be the touchstone of civilization in order to have it, you keep moving the goalposts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

If you are Husar or his ilk, Nazi Germany is the exemplar that proves that Britain and America are in the wrong and therefore deserve everything bad that can happen to them.

---

Exactly, if I were on cocaine, I'd intereprete my posts like that, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

If you are Husar or his ilk, Nazi Germany is the exemplar that proves that Britain and America are in the wrong and therefore deserve everything bad that can happen to them.

---

Husar isn't like that. As for me, I see it as an example of how bad things can go very very fast. War was inevitable but I find the cleansings puzzling. I wish I could say I am not capable of doing something that horrble but am probably stupid thinking that. Thing is, a very advanced society like Germany (and many more) did something truly horrific. So scaringly calculating, it scares me because I don't understand, how can rational people do that, how can they explain it to themselves. Advanced societies? People just don't understand themselve no matter what where and when

I say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Bravery has traditionally been associated with the warrior ethos. At what time in history has it been considered reasonable for a warrior to target victims such as these?

---

Husar says I say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

I'm not the one saying the goal of our civilization should be to cleanse us of muslims.
And one doesn't have to be the touchstone of civilization in order to have it, you keep moving the goalposts.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Husar isn't like that. As for me, I see it as an example of how bad things can go very very fast. War was inevitable but I find the cleansings puzzling. I wish I could say I am not capable of doing something that horrble but am probably stupid thinking that. Thing is, a very advanced society like Germany (and many more) did something truly horrific. So scaringly calculating, it scares me because I don't understand it

---

And I deem Nazi Germany, and certainly those parts that participated in the Final Solution, to be murderers and barbarians. Whatever else they may have had, they crossed the line when they deliberately killed women and children. I'm not alone in thinking that either, as the Einsatzgruppen had high suicide rates and the higher ups had to dream up ways of further dehumanising the victims.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

And I deem Nazi Germany, and certainly those parts that participated in the Final Solution, to be murderers and barbarians. Whatever else they may have had, they crossed the line when they deliberately killed women and children. I'm not alone in thinking that either, as the Einsatzgruppen had high suicide rates and the higher ups had to dream up ways of further dehumanising the victims.

---

I think certain mechanics can can come into play, they call it diffusion of responsibility. When told what to do it's simply not about you anymore, you are not really responsible for horrible things you do, bit of a shield. Can you honestly say you wouldn't kill women and children because I can't say I wouldn't if I would be in the firing-squad with the task of doing it. Sure it would haunt me but I think I would do it, secretly hoping I wouldn't but I expect that is bullshit and would shoot them. Knowing that I could probably do incredibly horrible things I find it really hard to condemn those that do. Manchester attack is a different matter for me, that I really don't get there was no need at all to do that, loose from comments

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

The scary thing is that you actually could in a twisted way if you think of it. With some clever wording you can probably get away with calling nazi-Germany exemplar of human civilisation. If you just forget all the horrible things that were done just for argument's sake, why wouldn't it be

not an opinion, just a musing

---

Hell, if you revert to the morality of the pre enlightenment you could easily call nazi germany an exemplar of human civilization without any fancy wordplay or having a selective memory at all!

Would certainly explain why Mein Kampf is a best seller in the middle east.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

Hitler was a warrior?

---

He was a soldier. Served in front line combat in WW1 as a "runner." This was easy duty between things as you hung around the regimental headquarters bunker in the 2nd or 3rd line. However, the job was to run messages and orders forward during attacks etc. in case wired communication broke down, as it often did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

Hell, if you revert to the morality of the pre enlightenment you could easily call nazi germany an exemplar of human civilization without any fancy wordplay or having a selective memory at all!

Would certainly explain why Mein Kampf is a best seller in the middle east.

---

I am saying that an exemplar civilisation can go completily wrong, no matter what

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

I say.

Husar says I say.

---

I can only assume then, that the Pannonian posting in the UK election thread is your second personality or somesuch:

Quote:

---

I see no point in fighting an ideological war with bombs and bullets, or with ideology. I see no point in fighting the war at all, or engaging with these barbarians in any way beyond what is necessary. I think their ideology is barbaric, but they're free to have it in their own country. They use the argument of self determination (despite your trying to weasel out of that principle when I pressed you on it), but their claim is reciprocal. They want us out of their country, the reciprocation is that they should get out of our country. Since we can't get them out due to international laws, we should keep them out instead, which is within our rights as a state.

---

emphasis mine

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

I can only assume then, that the Pannonian posting in the UK election thread is your second personality or somesuch:

emphasis mine

---

Carefully bolded to miss the point. I'll quote the two relevant sentences again, and explain them to you.

1. They want us out of their country, the reciprocation is that they should get out of our country.
The first part is what they want. Followed by what the reciprocal would mean.

2. Since we can't get them out due to international laws, we should keep them out instead, which is within our rights as a state.
Here, I explain that the reciprocal is not possible. I then forward something which is within our rights as a state.

Earlier this week the press begrudgingly gave president Trump kudos for referring to the terrorists as losers. There is a feeling among the media class (perhaps the public at large) that the best way to describe these people is with belittling, dismissive language. As if not giving them "honor" of an even footing. I can't say for certain, but I don't think a man who plants nail bombs at a teeny booper concert is overly concerned with what the western media thinks of him.

These men are very committed and the western media parsing the meaning of the words brave and cowardly doesn't really sway that level of commitment. It is a pointless, navel gazing exercise.

Europe needs to figure out if they really want immigrants or not. It's one thing to say you do, praise all the kebab shops, and then fuck up the end game. France is something like 20% non-French and you would never know it by looking at their media or politicians. Combine that with their tyrannical policy of laicite, a sluggish economy, and you got yourself a discontentment stew brewing.

The French will of course never admit this. They are all Frenchmen, eyeroll.jpg. Their problems are the problems of Europe as a whole however. They are told they need immigrants to infuse life into the welfare state, they bring in the immigrants, the immigrants use the welfare state because they can not find a job, faith in the welfare state erodes because of perceived unfairness. So who benefits from this? It's certainly not the immigrants or the natives.

I would venture to say its the capitalists who strive to keep wages stagnate and the working class divided. The same thing happens here in America. Mexicans are paid a half sum in cash with no benefits and then when the work is done, they conveniently get caught in an ICE raid. Nothing ever happens to the businesses or farms that use the labor. How strange. This of course is another topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Earlier this week the press begrudgingly gave president Trump kudos for referring to the terrorists as losers. There is a feeling among the media class (perhaps the public at large) that the best way to describe these people is with belittling, dismissive language. As if not giving them "honor" of an even footing. I can't say for certain, but I don't think a man who plants nail bombs at a teeny booper concert is overly concerned with what the western media thinks of him.

These men are very committed and the western media parsing the meaning of the words brave and cowardly doesn't really sway that level of commitment. It is a pointless, navel gazing exercise.

Europe needs to figure out if they really want immigrants or not. It's one thing to say you do, praise all the kebab shops, and then fuck up the end game. France is something like 20% non-French and you would never know it by looking at their media or politicians. Combine that with their tyrannical policy of laicite, a sluggish economy, and you got yourself a discontentment stew brewing.

The French will of course never admit this. They are all Frenchmen, eyeroll.jpg. Their problems are the problems of Europe as a whole however. They are told they need immigrants to infuse life into the welfare state, they bring in the immigrants, the immigrants use the welfare state because they can not find a job, faith in the welfare state erodes because of perceived unfairness. So who benefits from this? It's certainly not the immigrants or the natives.

I would venture to say its the capitalists who strive to keep wages stagnate and the working class divided. The same thing happens here in America. Mexicans are paid a half sum in cash with no benefits and then when the work is done, they conveniently get caught in an ICE raid. Nothing ever happens to the businesses or farms that use the labor. How strange. This of course is another topic.

---

For the UK at least, there was a potential soft landing solution to economic problems, giving us some leeway to ease in some longer lasting solutions. If we need young workers from abroad, there was a plentiful supply from eastern Europe, who are pretty close to us in outlook. Post-Brexit, that's no longer open, and as the government has indicated, we still need young workers from abroad. The talk is about the Commonwealth, but in practice this doesn't mean the secular dominions like Australia and Canada (the "white" colonies), but the increasingly religious subcontinent. We're going to be importing young Indians and Pakistanis, which wouldn't have been a problem in past decades, but at a time when younger generations are increasingly turning to religious radicalism. Not clever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

Hell, if you revert to the morality of the pre enlightenment you could easily call nazi germany an exemplar of human civilization without any fancy wordplay or having a selective memory at all!

Would certainly explain why Mein Kampf is a best seller in the middle east.

---

My morals are my own and I think I am a really nice person, even if I did some bad things myself but that was my job. The job was protecting the girls, and I am no idiot I knew fully well that it's shady. I beat people up, even used a knive a few times, even pretty badly open faces and all that. I also worked for something I really dispise, as a muscle for hire I still did it and ignored what I knew was wrong. I even participated sometimes in orgies. Yet I always knew something was of, even if it all looked good. I knew it sometimes wasn't, fully. You get into a sort of denial on what is happening right in front of you, you hurt people and it makes total sense to do that at the moment. Because I know my own flaws I give others some slack. Even if you are a really nice person you can become horrible. I don't feel sorry for the beatings or the stabbings, morality is strange, at the time it felt right. Right now I feel that I was always wrong getting in that business. I wouldn't lie saying that it destroyed a part of me

Civilisation, think again. It doesn't matter how civilised a cisilision is, cruelty will exist,as will indifferdnce to it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

For the UK at least, there was a potential soft landing solution to economic problems, giving us some leeway to ease in some longer lasting solutions. If we need young workers from abroad, there was a plentiful supply from eastern Europe, who are pretty close to us in outlook. Post-Brexit, that's no longer open, and as the government has indicated, we still need young workers from abroad. The talk is about the Commonwealth, but in practice this doesn't mean the secular dominions like Australia and Canada (the "white" colonies), but the increasingly religious subcontinent. We're going to be importing young Indians and Pakistanis, which wouldn't have been a problem in past decades, but at a time when younger generations are increasingly turning to religious radicalism. Not clever.

---

I question the idea that we need to import foreign workers at all when we have such an issue with unemployment and idle labour on zero hours. If anything we should be retraining our own people to fulfill the needed roles and only importing labour in temporary placeholders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Carefully bolded to miss the point. I'll quote the two relevant sentences again, and explain them to you.

1. They want us out of their country, the reciprocation is that they should get out of our country.
The first part is what they want. Followed by what the reciprocal would mean.

---

That's the reciprocal you want, it's not an unalterable given or a law of physics that it has to be this way.
There is no misunderstanding here.
That you can't have your wish due to international law is irrelevant to the fact that you wish you could.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greyblades

I question the idea that we need to import foreign workers at all when we have such an issue with unemployment and idle labour on zero hours. If anything we should be retraining our own people to fulfill the needed roles and only importing labour in temporary placeholders.

---

Think again https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich...enhove-Kalergi

Merkel won the Kalergi price for her birdcall. This is not just an immigration-crisis it's policy. Germany even insisted that we need new blood to prevent inbreeding, feel free to look it up 'Schlaube' said it, minister of foreign afairs, you will know that I'm not kidding. Odd. the people who they are hauling in are inbred mostly.

Whatever the fuck is the intention, I don't know. Germany fucks everything up again.

Be glad that you left in time before it gets worse