Israel: Murdering scientists?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Then you disagree with slick willie? I agree with you, I'm just saying.

Completely. It was vital to Pres. Clinton to characterize the action as "terrorism" so that it could be pursued/addressed as a criminal action by individuals and not as an act of war. I disagree completely with that attitude. Regrettably, it only takes one side to "declare" a war. Refusing to deal with military aggression as such is inaccurate at best.

Which was why I first posted here. So if Iran killed Israeli scientist who were working on say tanks you would have no problem with it? What if Iran gave a DOW?

I never said I wouldn't have a problem with it. I said it wasn't terrorism. I actually dislike a lot of the stuff that gets done. I'm an old-fashioned enough type to wish they'd declare war and deal with it on the up-and-up, though I am well aware that it won't happen. Nobody declares war anymore, they just shoot and spin it in the media after shooting.

I do find Hobbes interesting, "Might makes right" is the historical truth isn't it?

All too often. I prefer Locke's approach to the Social Contract, though anyone who dismisses Hobbes outright is missing the boat.


Hax:

Who in this thread has been arguing about the USA having the right to dictate policy to other nations? I thought this was about Israel?

[lenin96]

I did not say i know, i said i am convinced.

So people are being killed because they are suspected but not proven of doing something "wrong".

i repeat:
you cannot leave something like this up to chance. fanaticism can make you do nonsensical things.

By that logic I can't leave America's foreign policy to chance.

The USA has used nuclear bombs in anger what, twice? When they were first developed, and arguably out of complete necessity. It sat through one of the most delicate situations in history without ever firing.

So it was necessary for all of those thousands of inoccent people had to die () for America?

It is a functioning democracy, not a fundamentalist regime. I would trust the USA with nuclear bombs more than any other country in the world - it is unfeasible that America would fire at anyone, whereas I can understand Israel being very scared of Iran.

Under Bush America seemed like a fudamentalist regime, and I would certainly not trust the one of the biggest inoccent killers in the world to have nuclear weopns.

It is a functioning democracy

And I assume America doesn't have a big difference between the upper and lower class.

[Furunculus]

So people are being killed because they are suspected but not proven of doing something "wrong".

yup, its a tough world, not every one gets their day in court before judgment is passed. sad.

[lenin96]

yup, its a tough world, not every one gets their day in court before judgment is passed. sad.

What a great reason for killing someone.

[Furunculus]

"yup, its a tough world, not every one gets their day in court before judgment is passed. sad."

What a great reason for killing someone.

ok, airstrikes it is then...................

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

So it was necessary for all of those thousands of inoccent people had to die () for America?

The necessity of Hiroshima has been debated in the Monastery.

Under Bush America seemed like a fudamentalist regime, and I would certainly not trust the one of the biggest inoccent killers in the world to have nuclear weopns.

I think Lenin has killed more than Bush. And a fundamentalist regime?

And I assume America doesn't have a big difference between the upper and lower class.

Which is an irrelevant statement whether it is true or not.

EDIT:

There are are two beautiful equations we must consider:

Iran = Not A Democracy
America = A Democracy

[LittleGrizzly]

There are are two beautiful equations we must consider:

Iran = Not A Democracy
America = A Democracy

If only it were so simple, its not an on off switch. Iran has a partail democracy and whilst not great its a damn sight better than anything we installed in the region

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

If only it were so simple, its not an on off switch. Iran has a partail democracy and whilst not great its a damn sight better than anything we installed in the region

Refer to Furunculus' post.

[CrossLOPER]

Refer to Furunculus' post.

Circular arguments leading back to the causes do not provide any new type of insight.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Circular arguments leading back to the causes do not provide any new type of insight.

It isn't a circular argument. I'm referring to his post containing the comparison of democracies - America is one, Iran is not. End.

[Furunculus]

Circular arguments leading back to the causes do not provide any new type of insight.

Refer to Crossloper's post.

individuals that blindly ignore evidence that does not suit their argument rarely add anything of worth to a debate.

[LittleGrizzly]

Refer to Furunculus' post.

Refer to Crossloper's post.

[lenin96]

The necessity of Hiroshima has been debated in the Monastery.

In this thread someone mentioned the killing of thousands, do I say nothing for over 170 000 people dead?

I think Lenin has killed more than Bush. And a fundamentalist regime?

America has mudered hundreds and thousands of inoccent people, I have a better reason for dropping bombs on America than America had for Japan. Although I wouldn't drop nuclear weopons on America because I wouldn't kill so many millions of inoccent people, although I wouldn't be suprised if america would do that to other people.

Which is an irrelevant statement whether it is true or not.

So all of those poor people are irrelavent? They're nothing? They deserve nothing?

There are are two beautiful equations we must consider:

Iran = Not A Democracy
America = A Democracy

As a person who supports the U.S.S.R and Authoritarian-Socialism do you think I care about Democracy?

[Hooahguy]

you really think that bush was worse than lenin or stalin?


wow

[LittleGrizzly]

you really think that bush was worse than lenin or stalin?

In terms of political ability or intelligence ...

Though of course in terms of badness Stalin was far worse... i now less of Lenin...

[Hooahguy]

well, Lenin96 was saying that bush was badder than lenin or stalin.
from what i know of lenin he purged russia of royalists, and stalin, everyone knows he murdered millions...

[Fragony]

Though of course in terms of badness Stalin was far worse... i now less of Lenin...

Very smart, very cynical

[lenin96]

you really think that bush was worse than lenin or stalin?

If you read my post you would see that I meant Lenin not Stalin.

[Strike For The South]

In this thread someone mentioned the killing of thousands, do I say nothing for over 170 000 people dead?



America has mudered hundreds and thousands of inoccent people, I have a better reason for dropping bombs on America than America had for Japan. Although I wouldn't drop nuclear weopons on America because I wouldn't kill so many millions of inoccent people, although I wouldn't be suprised if america would do that to other people.



So all of those poor people are irrelavent? They're nothing? They deserve nothing?



As a person who supports the U.S.S.R and Authoritarian-Socialism do you think I care about Democracy?

God you're cute.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

In this thread someone mentioned the killing of thousands, do I say nothing for over 170 000 people dead?

America has mudered hundreds and thousands of inoccent people, I have a better reason for dropping bombs on America than America had for Japan. Although I wouldn't drop nuclear weopons on America because I wouldn't kill so many millions of inoccent people, although I wouldn't be suprised if america would do that to other people.

See SFTS's post...

So all of those poor people are irrelavent? They're nothing? They deserve nothing?

It is completely irrelevant to the argument, and would require a new thread.

As a person who supports the U.S.S.R and Authoritarian-Socialism do you think I care about Democracy?

From this post I can see you have no idea what living under that sort of regime is like. In a few years and with a bit of research, I hope that you will figure it out.

[lenin96]

From this post I can see you have no idea what living under that sort of regime is like. In a few years and with a bit of research, I hope that you will figure it out.

I would live under an authoritarian government (one that supports my ideology) because I should, not because I would like it or it would be nice.

[Mooks]

I would live under an authoritarian government (one that supports my ideology) because I should, not because I would like it or it would be nice.

errr what? I cant be the only one that doesnt understand the reasoning behind this.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I would live under an authoritarian government (one that supports my ideology) because I should, not because I would like it or it would be nice.

[Furunculus]

I would live under an authoritarian government (one that supports my ideology) because I should, not because I would like it or it would be nice.

when you try it, and a friend of the family is dumped on their family doorstep in a tabacco sack you may think differently.

what would really get you is the callous statement from the delivery 'agent' that if your children want an education you won't make a fuss about the event.

[Strike For The South]

Completely. It was vital to Pres. Clinton to characterize the action as "terrorism" so that it could be pursued/addressed as a criminal action by individuals and not as an act of war. I disagree completely with that attitude. Regrettably, it only takes one side to "declare" a war. Refusing to deal with military aggression as such is inaccurate at best.

Agreed

I never said I wouldn't have a problem with it. I said it wasn't terrorism. I actually dislike a lot of the stuff that gets done. I'm an old-fashioned enough type to wish they'd declare war and deal with it on the up-and-up, though I am well aware that it won't happen. Nobody declares war anymore, they just shoot and spin it in the media after shooting.

These kind of things have been going on forever though. All out war isn't always your best option. I would argue that killing scientists is an act of terrorism. I would be scared if tommorow I found my chem professor killed by Costa Ricans

All too often. I prefer Locke's approach to the Social Contract, though anyone who dismisses Hobbes outright is missing the boat.

The one who sees thing from afar can always afford to be an idealist.