I'm confused....(no comments from the peanut gallery either! lol:p ;) ) does that mean 1. military personel are held to a higher standard than civilians, thus making their lives worth less 2. there is a double standard as to the worthiness of life?
Printable View
I'm confused....(no comments from the peanut gallery either! lol:p ;) ) does that mean 1. military personel are held to a higher standard than civilians, thus making their lives worth less 2. there is a double standard as to the worthiness of life?
Neither really. Just re-read my post and I'm sure you'll understand what I meant. And JSYK, I have the firm belief that all lives are worth equally much.Quote:
Originally posted by mugsy
I'm confused....does that mean 1. military personel are held to a higher standard than civilians, thus making their lives worth less 2. there is a double standard as to the worthiness of life?
i said that leaflets were dropped before the bombs so people could get out of dodge. my mistake, leaflets were dropped before the bomb. there happy? ( i just dropped the 's' from bombs....by the way how long did you research the leaflet angle so you couldQuote:
Originally posted by Soledad
You might want to address the leaflet comment while you're at it.
take that one away from me???? oh the nuclear liberal.org is the end all be all of info!)
oh, i can admit to my mistakes by the way....it's not beneath me
no, because you are a 'citizen' you are not denied the safety of the country that come to rescue you when the natives are restless.
chances are there are no terrorists in the MAORI tribes in NZ.
(any time there are u.s. citizens in an area where they are threatened)
as far as generalizations go, you tossed out the adult diaper reference and no other facts when i challenged you to defend your points of view. get rid of the links and facts and try your arguements with a little passion as opposed to the closed minded
pointed little barbs about how people do not have the facts. a lrge generalization out of my head????? shoot maybe a brainwashing is what i need!
i guess that's what make the internet fun. all the people who
have lived and experienced the world...cat spit.
you have scored one point and and that makes you the world champion!
;)
now if your were going for an 'a' in your debate class you'd try a bit harder as opposed to saying that i have no facts......
part of debating is passion, presentation, and putting it out there.
and since you are probably closer to hi and jr. school you have a the edge over my stupid rants. a political background and years of college beats and empty head 9 times out of ten 10. (aren't politicians the real problem in the world these days? talk about getting a bad rap....)
as my dad said, (i have no problem bring my parents into the conversation, i sat at their knees and learned about the world before i went out into it)
NO VOTE NO VOICE.
colin powell just finished his statement to the U.N. council and
i think that it's probably a given that we are going to war.
there, that's a fact...........chew on that one.
NZ safer than the US? hmmmmmm, ask the people in bali..
YES I AM IGNORANT BUT MY POINT WAS THAT THE AUSSIES THAT WENT TO BALI THOUGHT THEY WERE SAFE THERE.......YOU HAVE SUCH A LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF WHAT I SAY YOUR MAKE ME CHUCKLE MY EFFING ARSE OFF. HAVE YOU BEEN TO THE U.S.? OR DID YOU DRIVE THRU AND HAVE THE PARANOIA THAT MAKES YOU LOCK YOUR DOORS OF YOUR CAR AND BE SO CONSUMED WITH YOUR PERSONAL SAFETY.Quote:
Originally posted by popcornbird
Richard, you just proved your ignorance again. Bali is in Indonesia. :rolleyes: And YES, in terms of violence, gangs, etc. the US is not a safe country. We live in an upper class safe area, however there have still been times when strange people knocked on the door or tried to break in. My parents never feel safe to let me out alone late at night, and neither do I. If you've ever been to the gulf states like UAE, or Bahrain, etc. people don't even lock their house doors ever. The crime rate there is practically 0. I'm not saying that they are safe in every way, but at a living/letting your kids out at night/leaving your doors open/crime rate, they are extrememly safe.
THE REASON THE CRIME RATE IN THE GULF STATES IS SO LOW IS BECAUSE OF THE BARBARIC LAWS AND PENALTIES THAT EXIST IN THE AREA.......WHAT'S UP WITH THE PEOPLE WITH ONLY THEIR LEFT HANDS? YEAH THEY WERE STEALING AND WERE SUBJECTED TO AMPUTATION OF THAT LIMB , THEREFORE THEY LIVE LIFE USING THEIR LEFT HAND, WHICH IS "ONLY" USED FOR PERSONAL HYGIENE, TO FEED THEMSELVES......
WHAT ABOUT THE PENALTIES FOR INFIDELITY, STONING A WOMAN TO DEATH? YOU TALK ABOUT THE EFFED UP AMERICAN WAY BUT IF YOU PUT THE MICROSCOPE TO THE MIDDLE EAST AREA I WOULD FIGURE YOU WOULD HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE LAWS THAT PREVENT WOMEN FROM BEING TREATED LIKE GARBAGE.
TRY AGAIN.
Main Entry: in·fi·del·i·ty
Pronunciation: "in-f&-'de-l&-tE, -(")fI-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
Date: 15th century
1 : lack of belief in a religion
2 a : unfaithfulness to a moral obligation : DISLOYALTY b : marital unfaithfulness or an instance of it
i went with # 2b i figured you'd have some imagination and flexiblilty.
and since you asked me to SHUT UP....i won't...
i worked with some philipino women who worked in the UAE and
from the stories, no thanks, I'll stay right where i'm at.....in the armpit of the U.S., the beautiful city of Los Angeles, warts and all.....
learn to type in a civilized way??????????
jk,lk,jlkji,kui,llkji,u- that's uncivilized typing, smashing my fist in the keyboard....
the united states gets challenged for our death penalty, we are uncivilized for putting to death a person who kills, but it's o.k. to
disfigure a person for stealing?
you forgot to mention Iran....there seems to be some 'judicial'
injustices going on over there.....
remember you promised not to post here again (for reals).
So if Bahrain is so much more desirable then why don't you move there and leave that terrible awful city you live in? Also, I would like to know where Muslim women in the Middle East are treated with respect and honor.
Ann, I still don't get where you think that all life is equally worthy. I even read it to my school roomie to see what I missed in the translation and she said the same thing, that you ARE putting civilian life ahead of a military life by how you worded your post. I do agree that in the military you do go in willing to give your life in defense of your country, but, that you should EXPECT to die isn't realistic, yes, you go in with your eyes wide open realizing that the possibility exsists, but not expecting it.
When my father was in WWII, he was a B-17 pilot stationed out of Knettishall, England. His missions were bombing raids on railroad stations and bridges. He knows that some of the bombs missed their intended targets and that there were probably innocent civilians killed. Now, does that make my father a murderer because he had a job to do and he did it to the best of his ability? Do you honestly think that the men on the Enola Gay WANTED to drop that bomb? I have seen the men interviewed, and NO they didn't want to, but understood why they were there. The government saw no other way to quickly end the war, and rather than stretch the war out any longer with even more loss of life, they chose what they viewed as the path of least resistance. I don't believe that Truman made the decision lightly. I'm sure he agonized over it and I'm sure he paid for that decision for the rest of his life. You know politicians aren't my favorite bunch of people, but I don't think that they are totally heartless, even if they appear to be on the surface. They are like anyone else, they have feelings and no one but themselves knows exactly what those feelings are.
Ok then, I'll try to explain it again.Quote:
Originally posted by mugsy
Ann, I still don't get where you think that all life is equally worthy. I even read it to my school roomie to see what I missed in the translation and she said the same thing, that you ARE putting civilian life ahead of a military life by how you worded your post.
I respect all life and feel they are equally worth. However, when you enlist into the military you know damn well that there is a possibility that you might die. You know that risk and you only have yourself to suit and blame if that does happen. The civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki had nothing to do with the war and were unsuspecting.
Do you get what I mean now?
Ok, yes, I understand, but the way you worded it made it sound that you put civilians ahead of military. Much better. Although I will say that I don't agree totally with you, but then we don't agree on much! lol;)
I'm not forcing anyone to discuss anything they don't want to discuss. If you don't want to answer it then don't...it won't hurt my feelings.
you will answer my posts, you will answer my posts....Quote:
Originally posted by mugsy
I'm not forcing anyone to discuss anything they don't want to discuss. If you don't want to answer it then don't...it won't hurt my feelings.
type an answer, reply, reply........:eek:
(old jedi mind trick....)
OH I see how it is....brainwashing me into answering you eh?? lol
I am truly interested in how you are in California and have such a conservative outlook on life.
Geography does not define one's political view solely, Mugsy. I grew up mostly in the Midwest.
Also, I thought that you might be interested in the political spectrum. From what I've seen on here, you tend to be a centrist, Mugsy. But I think, and don't take offense to this as I'm fully aware that I'm making an assumption, that for the most part you are mistaking liberal for centrist. It is widely accepted that Clinton was a centrist. However, the American right has tried to portray him as some sort of leftist revolutionary.
Radical: Seen as being on the far left of the political spectrum, radicals call for wide-sweeping rapid change in the basic structure of the political, social, or economic system. They may be willing to resort to extreme methods to bring about change, including the use of violence and revolution.
Liberal: Liberals believe that the government should be actively involved in the promotion of social welfare of a nation’s citizens. Liberals usually call for peaceful, gradual change within the existing political system. They reject violent revolution as a way of changing the way things are, often called the status quo.
Moderate: Moderates may share viewpoints with both liberals and conservatives. They are seen as tolerant of other people’s views, and they do not hold extreme views of their own. They advocate a “go-slow” or “wait-and-see” approach to social or political change.
Conservative: People who hold conservative ideals favor keeping things the way they are or maintaining the status quo if it is what they desire. Conservatives are usually hesitant or cautious about adopting new policies, especially if they involve government activism in some way. They feel that the less government there is, the better. They agree with Jefferson’s view that “the best government governs least.”
Reactionary: Sitting on the far right of the ideological spectrum, reactionaries want to go back to the way things were—the “good ol’ days.” Often reactionaries are willing to use extreme methods, such as repressive use of government power, to achieve their goals.
I kind of disagree, I think that Clinton was as liberal as liberal can be short of being a Socialist and Hillary is even worse, and I see myself more as a moderate than anything else with the exception that I have very strong opinions (but you NEVER would have guessed that! lol) My parents think I'm a conservative! hehehee and Mike thinks I'm a bleeding heart liberal....I just can't win! I would agree with the assessment of the definitions though.
If you study some of Clinton's stands, you will see that he is not very far left at all. He is one of the core members of the "third way" which is a rebranding of center-leftists. He is far from a socialist. You may FEEL that he is far left, but the reality is something different.
The political spectrum in America is different from most Westernized countries. We are far more to the right than the rest of them.
Now THAT I would agree with. A lot of western European countries seem to be leaning somewhat toward Socialism, so yes, I would say the U.S. is lots more conservative than that. But, do you agree that Hillary (the QUEEN of the liars and deceitfulness) leans way toward socialism?