Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 61 to 74 of 74

Thread: Christchurch massacre

  1. #61
    Ni dieu ni maître! Senior Member a completely inoffensive name's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    I live on the org, feeding off of what few thanks are tossed at my posts. It is up to you to make sure I don't starve.
    Posts
    8,360
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Damn, I can't really build anything of value on what Monty already said. I guess I should just enjoy the discussion my original reply has generated...
    In all these papers we see a love of honest work, an aversion to shams, a caution in the enunciation of conclusions, a distrust of rash generalizations and speculations based on uncertain premises. He was never anxious to add one more guess on doubtful matters in the hope of hitting the truth, or what might pass as such for a time, but was always ready to take infinite pains in the most careful testing of every theory. With these qualities was united a modesty which forbade the pushing of his own claims and desired no reputation except the unsought tribute of competent judges.

  2. #62
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,003

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
    Was this meant for the Brexit thread?
    Yes, sorry.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  3. #63

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    Not the "Ancient World", the Roman Empire. If you want to know how strong that sense of identity is just look at how long it lasts after central authority collapses. Many cities continued to consider themselves "Roman" and operate along Roman legal and cultural lines well into the 10th and 11th Century, even in parts of Germany.

    In some ways that sense of identity persists today, it is one of the things that is supposed to help hold the U together.
    I acknowledge that Roman institutions and culture have had a lasting impact on European and Mediterranean aristocracies, but what is the evidence for a "centralized sense of self"?

    I don't believe the vestiges of Romanitas are what underlie the political activities of contemporary Europe, any more than a contemporary Mongolian PM signs mineral rights deals in the name of the Хаант улс

    Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
    It will serve, I hope, as a good test case for the preferred mantra of anti-gun activists here in the USA. NZ has enacted a law banning semi-automatic weapons, banning magazines holding more than 5 rounds, and requiring the owners of such weapons to turn them in (with compensation) to remove all such weaponry from non-government hands. This is, more or less, everything the US anti-gun movement is seeking regarding weapons in the USA. I am not sure if there was a measurable degree of gun violence in NZ prior to this catastrophe, but perhaps we can test this approach's efficacy.

    Issues surrounding mental health and firearms, white supremacy idiocies, and terror threats are also important strains of thought. I will be interested to see what NZ is doing on those issues.
    I predict it will do fine, but ultimately the execution of the concrete policy can't hold too many lessons for the United States. We are of course a special case for gun proliferation, but New Zealand is in many ways the opposite. It is a small island nation in the ass end of global trade routes, making imports easy to monitor and interdict. The civilian market for semi-automatic guns was always miniscule, despite the otherwise-robust gun-ownership profile. The NZ government will have to confiscate a few thousand guns basically.

    It's not that the US is too big for gun control, but we need to be more comprehensive and supply-sided. Per my revelation after the Parkland shooting a year ago, we are too focused on "preventing guns from getting into the wrong hands". A whole suite of measures on the demand side, especially if systematically implemented across the states, would by all evidence save at least hundreds of lives every year. If we were really aggressive and the SCOTUS threw out the Federalist jurisprudence on guns, I wouldn't be surprised if gun deaths could be cut by a third or more over time. But the fact still remains that gun manufacturers are pushing millions of units into the market every year, and by the laws of supply and demand these units, along with pre-existing ones, circulate. We need "arms control", not mere gun control.

    American gun violence does an order of magnitude more damage outside the US than within. Mexico, Latin America, warlords and insurgents around the world: powered by US guns. Sure, Russia has a significant share of the grey/black market, and China would probably like more, but just as with climate change we have to take responsibility for ourselves and recognize the global dimensions of the problem.

    So what does that mean? A moratorium on most new firearm manufacturing (really military too, the DOD can't escape accountability). Price controls or other onerous restrictions on ammunition. A long-term multilateral commitment to reduce the number of serviceable firearms in the world every year, just like with carbon emissions or landmines or missiles or whatever. That's a start. How do we get to that point? By confronting gun ideology, inextricable from reactionary revanchism, the other side - the "cultural" side - of our gun problem.

    Basically never stop beating the Right, all their ideas are Bad. Good luck.
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  4. #64
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,003

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    I acknowledge that Roman institutions and culture have had a lasting impact on European and Mediterranean aristocracies, but what is the evidence for a "centralized sense of self"?

    I don't believe the vestiges of Romanitas are what underlie the political activities of contemporary Europe, any more than a contemporary Mongolian PM signs mineral rights deals in the name of the Хаант улс
    The point, Monty, is that we are so heavily Romanised that we mostly don't notice it, what we call "Western Democracy" is really an outgrowth of the Roman concept of "mixed" government that is neither Despotic, nor Oligarchic, nor Democratic. The US is one of the most heavily Romanised societies on Earth, from its obsession with personal armaments to its oligarchic wealth-based class system where the plebs depend on the largess of Patricians to survive.

    The US is also the nation most obviously experiencing strain due to massive wealth inequality and the rise of populism. This is exactly the issue which toppled the Republican Government in Rome, starting with the Populism of the Grachii.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  5. #65
    Hǫrðar Member Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Hordaland, Norway
    Posts
    6,327

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
    The former two are good in distinguishing totalitarianism (dictatorship) from authoritarianism, but not the degree of the latter.
    The spectrum of the degree of force a government is willing to use against its own citizens to achieve goals is what I am looking at. It may be common to use 'totalitarianism' as something distinct from 'authoritarianism', but I don't see that there could exist a massive discontinuity between totalitarian regimes and other non-/not-so-democratic regimes on a spectrum, or that totalitarian regimes and other non-democratic regimes could not even lie on the same spectrum.

    The third criterion is pretty much equal for the USSR and modern Russia, since elections are/were held in both, but were/are they true elections?
    In Russia, you have parties like Yabloko and PARNAS that actually manage to get in representatives at different levels, and a political agitator like Navalny that managed to get a big share of the vote in the Moscow mayoral election in 2013.
    Runes for good luck:

    [1 - exp(i*2π)]^-1

  6. #66
    Member Member Gilrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    3,778

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Quote Originally Posted by Viking View Post
    In Russia, you have parties like Yabloko and PARNAS that actually manage to get in representatives at different levels, and a political agitator like Navalny that managed to get a big share of the vote in the Moscow mayoral election in 2013.
    That is true, yet both in the USSR and in Russia there was/is no doubt as to the outcome of the elections.
    Quote Originally Posted by Suraknar View Post
    The article exists for a reason yes, I did not write it...

  7. #67
    Member Member Greyblades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,140
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    The impression I get, from listening to those who have read the manifesto, is that the shooter intended to cause a moral panic that would trigger a massive overreaction by the government who would curb civil liberties ala the patriot act and socially suppress the right wing.

    Thus he would kick start social conflict between right and left, increase tension between secular society and the islamic minority, and accelerate New Zealand down the path of right wing populism that nations in europe and the americas have previously travelled.

    I can imagine he would have been able to predict the enforcement of gun laws, or the inevitably futile suppresion of white nationalist discussion. Perhaps he even forsaw the labor Prime Minister would denounce capitalism.

    I have to question if he had predicted the Prime Minister would go so far as to don a hijab and broadcast a call to prayer.

    Bit of a odd move that.
    Being better than the worst does not inherently make you good. But being better than the rest lets you brag.


    Quote Originally Posted by Strike For The South View Post
    Don't be scared that you don't freak out. Be scared when you don't care about freaking out
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  8. #68
    Backordered Member CrossLOPER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Brass heart.
    Posts
    2,288

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Quote Originally Posted by Greyblades View Post
    I have to question if he had predicted the Prime Minister would go so far as to don a hijab and broadcast a call to prayer.

    Bit of a odd move that.
    So donning a kipa and taking a pilgrimage to the Western Wall is fine, but showing solidarity with a local population that experienced a massacre is odd?

    I also fail to understand the reasoning of these particular terrorists.

    "Hmm, I feel like my right to have heavy arms is going to be infringed upon. Let me do everything in my power to show why having easy access to these weapons is a bad idea. That'll show the libtards why my white seed is superior."
    Requesting suggestions for new sig.

    -><- GOGOGO GOGOGO WINLAND WINLAND ALL HAIL TECHNOVIKING!SCHUMACHER!
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    WHY AM I NOT BEING PAID FOR THIS???

  9. #69
    Member Member Greyblades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,140
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Quote Originally Posted by CrossLOPER View Post
    So donning a kipa and taking a pilgrimage to the Western Wall is fine, but showing solidarity with a local population that experienced a massacre is odd?
    Both is odd when you are not of the relevant faith.

    I also fail to understand the reasoning of these particular terrorists.

    "Hmm, I feel like my right to have heavy arms is going to be infringed upon. Let me do everything in my power to show why having easy access to these weapons is a bad idea. That'll show the libtards why my white seed is superior."
    The logic is that they will intice the left to panic and ditch the tried and true salami slicing, bit-by-bit erosion of civil rights. Best case scenario for the terrorist is that the authorities overreach such that it inflames the opposition and accelerates the pendulum effect.
    Being better than the worst does not inherently make you good. But being better than the rest lets you brag.


    Quote Originally Posted by Strike For The South View Post
    Don't be scared that you don't freak out. Be scared when you don't care about freaking out
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  10. #70
    Backordered Member CrossLOPER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Brass heart.
    Posts
    2,288

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Quote Originally Posted by Greyblades View Post
    Both is odd when you are not of the relevant faith.
    It isn't when your politics are based on centuries of diplomacy and civil rule, and not something a handful of underachieving incel neckbeards pulled out of their ass.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...ious_pluralism

    It's something that the politically incorrect, and to some extent the politically correct, have difficulty understanding; namely on how not to be self-centered assholes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Greyblades View Post
    The logic is that they will intice the left to panic and ditch the tried and true salami slicing, bit-by-bit erosion of civil rights. Best case scenario for the terrorist is that the authorities overreach such that it inflames the opposition and accelerates the pendulum effect.
    The problem is that rabid gun-clinging has resulted in an extremely unregulated market where anyone can buy a gun at anytime and go out and depopulate a populated area of their choice, while livestreaming it for likes and dislikes. If you see nothing remotely wrong with this situation, you are a total sociopath.

    But let's not get off-topic. Remember, this manifesto was written by a man who is a foreigner, who murdered people who were born locally, on an island where most of the native population has been driven to the brink and "civilized", to prove that someone with a superiority complex fueled by racism and entitlement is a much greater threat than some brown people praying together. He did a great job. No amount of conversations about toxic masculinity and rape jokes are going to top what he did. He is truly a hero for the left.

    Just to be clear, I am not calling YOU a sociopath, nor am I saying that gun ownership should be banned. I do think that there are such things as limits to what society has to find acceptable, and I believe we have long reached that point, especially where a man can end his manifesto justifying wanton murder with a phrase like "subscribe to pewdiepie", where the latter man merely responds by posting a single message on twitter, then pretending that everything is OK. I don't like Forbes, but I think this article does a good job of exploring this:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/danidip.../#708ace4642d5
    Last edited by CrossLOPER; 04-06-2019 at 23:35.
    Requesting suggestions for new sig.

    -><- GOGOGO GOGOGO WINLAND WINLAND ALL HAIL TECHNOVIKING!SCHUMACHER!
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    WHY AM I NOT BEING PAID FOR THIS???

    Member thankful for this post:

    Husar 


  11. #71
    Member Member Greyblades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,140
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Quote Originally Posted by CrossLOPER View Post
    It isn't when your politics are based on centuries of diplomacy and civil rule.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor...ious_pluralism
    I am confused, your wikipedia page seems to be lacking this centuries of pluralistic rulers playing dress up with the religion at the center of heightened societal tension in the aftermath of great tragedy.
    Perhaps the philosophy you are looking for is Trudeauism, or more specifically the somewhat more modern sect of justin-trudeausim; a tad more superficial philosophy of rulership?


    The problem is that rabid gun-clinging has resulted in an extremely unregulated market where anyone can buy a gun at anytime and go out and depopulate a populated area of their choice, while livestreaming it for likes and dislikes.
    New Zealand didnt have that lax gun laws before the shooting, in fact I was under the impression of somewhat the opposite:

    "Gun licenses are issued at the discretion of the police in New Zealand provided the police consider the person to be of good standing[3][4][citation needed] and without criminal, psychiatric or drug issues as well as meeting other conditions such as having suitable storage facilities."

    I have come to believe, and the various truck attacks over the years have proven, that the most dangerous weapon is the one thing you cant restrict: the human brain.

    To restrict the means often serves just to hurt the law abiding. Prohibition never truly works and is often an excuse to ignore the core problems that lie behind it: the will to kill another.

    But let's not get off-topic. Remember, this manifesto was written by a man who is a foreigner, who murdered people who were born locally, on an island where most of the native population has been driven to the brink and "civilized", to prove that someone with a superiority complex fueled by racism and entitlement is a much greater threat than some brown people praying together. He did a great job. No amount of conversations about toxic masculinity and rape jokes are going to top what he did. He is truly a hero for the left.

    Just to be clear, I am not calling YOU a sociopath, nor am I saying that gun ownership should be banned. I do think that there are such things as limits to what society has to find acceptable, and I believe we have long reached that point, especially where a man can end his manifesto justifying wanton murder with a phrase like "subscribe to pewdiepie", where the latter man merely responds by posting a single message on twitter, then pretending that everything is OK. I don't like Forbes, but I think this article does a good job of exploring this:

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/danidip.../#708ace4642d5
    The largest youtube channel was a hotspot of controversy long before christchurch, it had survived multiple pushes for censorship by less than reputable media outlets and was one of the most visible voices on the "against" side of internet censorship debates accross multiple western countries. By associating Pewdiepie with the incident the shooter gave ammunition to those wishing to extend corporate and governmental control over the internet to "fight the evil nazis". By associating meme culture with the shooting he directs much of that attention against those who partake; which the last few years have shown is quite a wide field indeed, including much more of the population than just that "handful of underachieving incel neckbeards".

    The modern NZ left being diametrically opposed to the shooter's politics will see a rise in support and, being the (marginally) more censorious wing of politics, it will be empowered to enact a major uptick in internet censorship. As with all moves to censor media it will inevitably fail to really hurt those targeted and much will be hit as collateral; as time goes resentment against the censor will grow, leaving the ground fertile for eventual pushback.

    If the summary of the manifesto i've been described is to be believed this is one of the intended outcomes of the shooting, so far has been a depressingly accurate prediction.

    Quite what will be left for that pushback to save after however many years of an unrestrained left wing resurgeance running roughshod over New Zealand society is anyones guess. This btw is why accelerationism is a goddamn stupid idea, even without this one's prerequisite mass murder putting a bullet through basic morality.

    It is in essence giving the other side the keys to the castle and hoping the free reign drives them them detroy themselves before they do something irreperable. And that is not even going into the uncertainty over whether that pushback will manifest as something even worse.
    Last edited by Greyblades; 04-07-2019 at 11:21.
    Being better than the worst does not inherently make you good. But being better than the rest lets you brag.


    Quote Originally Posted by Strike For The South View Post
    Don't be scared that you don't freak out. Be scared when you don't care about freaking out
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  12. #72
    Backordered Member CrossLOPER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Brass heart.
    Posts
    2,288

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Quote Originally Posted by Greyblades View Post
    I am confused, your wikipedia page seems to be lacking this centuries of pluralistic rulers playing dress up with the religion at the center of heightened societal tension in the aftermath of great tragedy.
    Perhaps the philosophy you are looking for is Trudeauism, or more specifically the somewhat more modern sect of justin-trudeausim; a tad more superficial philosophy of rulership?
    It's a clear indication to the opposite side that the person in charge does not in any way share the views of the killer, tryhards notwithstanding.


    Quote Originally Posted by Greyblades View Post
    New Zealand didnt have that lax gun laws before the shooting, in fact I was under the impression of somewhat the opposite:

    "Gun licenses are issued at the discretion of the police in New Zealand provided the police consider the person to be of good standing[3][4][citation needed] and without criminal, psychiatric or drug issues as well as meeting other conditions such as having suitable storage facilities."
    It's not remotely restrictive if no one even knows how many weapons are about.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47584603

    Quote Originally Posted by Greyblades View Post
    I have come to believe, and the various truck attacks over the years have proven, that the most dangerous weapon is the one thing you cant restrict: the human brain.

    To restrict the means often serves just to hurt the law abiding. Prohibition never truly works and is often an excuse to ignore the core problems that lie behind it: the will to kill another.
    And the reason there is a will:

    Quote Originally Posted by Greyblades View Post
    The largest youtube channel was a hotspot of controversy long before christchurch, it had survived multiple pushes for censorship by less than reputable media outlets and was one of the most visible voices on the "against" side of internet censorship debates accross multiple western countries. By associating Pewdiepie with the incident the shooter gave ammunition to those wishing to extend corporate and governmental control over the internet to "fight the evil nazis". By associating meme culture with the shooting he directs much of that attention against those who partake; which the last few years have shown is quite a wide field indeed, including much more of the population than just that "handful of underachieving incel neckbeards".
    There are a large amount of social media channels that propagate "white replacement" and other white supremacist nonsense. They do so in a specific way that incites violence, or associates with philosophies that see violence as an immediate solution to a perceived threat.

    Quote Originally Posted by Greyblades View Post
    The modern NZ left being diametrically opposed to the shooter's politics will see a rise in support and, being the (marginally) more censorious wing of politics, it will be empowered to enact a major uptick in internet censorship. As with all moves to censor media it will inevitably fail to really hurt those targeted and much will be hit as collateral; as time goes resentment against the censor will grow, leaving the ground fertile for eventual pushback.
    You think allowing for innumerable sources of white supremacist content to exist freely with no regulation is perfectly acceptable? You think that having such a thing be thoroughly disseminated isn't going to influence someone? I also find this "the government can't do anything right" logic to be puzzling. What is the solution? Not have the government do anything at all? Not have a government? Feudalism? If the only issue is that the "government dun did it wrung", why not push for a method that you feel would be more effectual? Unless you are just opposed to it because you are opposed to the policies?

    Quote Originally Posted by Greyblades View Post
    If the summary of the manifesto i've been described is to be believed this is one of the intended outcomes of the shooting, so far has been a depressingly accurate prediction.

    Quite what will be left for that pushback to save after however many years of an unrestrained left wing resurgeance running roughshod over New Zealand society is anyones guess. This btw is why accelerationism is a goddamn stupid idea, even without this one's prerequisite mass murder putting a bullet through basic morality.

    It is in essence giving the other side the keys to the castle and hoping the free reign drives them them detroy themselves before they do something irreperable. And that is not even going into the uncertainty over whether that pushback will manifest as something even worse.
    It's interesting that you seem to be far more interested in nazi Nostradamus's predictions, rather than everything else in the manifesto:

    https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/...acism-language

    "White genocide". "I'm just a regular white bloke trying to remove kebab". Guns aside, these tactics and words have a history, and it's a very nazi history, and they clearly provoke politically motivated violence.

    Tell me this: what is the public benefit of allowing white supremacist/racist/sexist media channels to operate unrestricted? You yourself frequently chirp the sentiments and messages of some of these channels. "The left". "Pushback". Anti-government. Vague enemies for specific objectives of destabilizing the current regimes to make place for more right-wing white supremacist regimes. You can't possibly think that any administration run by people who tacitly support acts of violence to be remotely democratic?

    Forget about white supremacists for a minute. What about gun lobbiests? What if one of them showed up to your house to ask you why you don't want more guns?

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...led-gun-rights

    Unrelated: Tell me what is the public benefit of allowing media channels that push antivaxxer propoganda to operate unrestricted?
    Requesting suggestions for new sig.

    -><- GOGOGO GOGOGO WINLAND WINLAND ALL HAIL TECHNOVIKING!SCHUMACHER!
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    WHY AM I NOT BEING PAID FOR THIS???

    Member thankful for this post:

    Husar 


  13. #73
    Ni dieu ni maître! Senior Member a completely inoffensive name's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    I live on the org, feeding off of what few thanks are tossed at my posts. It is up to you to make sure I don't starve.
    Posts
    8,360
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Meme's are just co-opted codes for the alt-right to lure frustrated young white men into Nazi ideology.

    First you find some fun video game/anime/cartoon/comic community. You enjoy the jokes and start talking to people on the regular. Turns out some of those frequent posters are alt-righters and invite you into their private chat/discord.
    Once you are in their bubble, they push the memes hard and try to simultaneously make you feel welcome but only if you continue to speak in the common manner of the "group", because hey, it's still all memes right?
    That's the hook, and from there its a slow burn in the bubble where your frustrations turn towards the objects of ridicule (the memes like "remove kabab'), the irony and humor are slowly stripped away. The smart ones think that by keeping this incrementalist approach they can 'red-pill' the world given enough time.

    Then you have the reality that violent Nazi ideology that de-humanizes others and amplifies frustrations of the youth will bring about meme spouting terrorists. These are coyly rejected publicly by the alt-right on the most superficial levels since their disagreement isn't the motive nor the end goal but the speed at which the action was taken, which they believe hurts their credibility to those not yet red pilled.
    One day if they, god forbid, get enough sucked into this hate cult, they will move from fake condemnation to silent operation to making it public policy.
    In all these papers we see a love of honest work, an aversion to shams, a caution in the enunciation of conclusions, a distrust of rash generalizations and speculations based on uncertain premises. He was never anxious to add one more guess on doubtful matters in the hope of hitting the truth, or what might pass as such for a time, but was always ready to take infinite pains in the most careful testing of every theory. With these qualities was united a modesty which forbade the pushing of his own claims and desired no reputation except the unsought tribute of competent judges.

    Member thankful for this post:

    Husar 


  14. #74
    Old Town Road Senior Member Strike For The South's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Between Louis' sheets
    Posts
    10,344

    Default Re: Christchurch massacre

    Meme's are just co-opted codes for the alt-right to lure frustrated young white men into Nazi ideology.
    Insert "he's right know" .jpg.

    The policing and regulating of the internet was coming either way. It's really not worth dying on meme mountain with a bunch of "race realists" and people JAQing off. These massive companies are content to milk whatever racist/anti-science/meme out there until the bad press or government comes in. They then use the whole "free speech" thing as a cudgel in order to escape tighter regulation.
    Last edited by Strike For The South; 04-08-2019 at 15:51.
    There, but for the grace of God, goes John Bradford

    My aim, then, was to whip the rebels, to humble their pride, to follow them to their inmost recesses, and make them fear and dread us. Fear is the beginning of wisdom.

    I am tired and sick of war. Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO