I remember I had doubts at first, but after reading Scott Ritter's small book in late 2002 I understood that it was a hoax with the mushroom clouds... and it turned out to be so. And then for years there were even in the PF these "watchdogs" that attacked anybody questioning anything about the decision to go into Iraq. At least now the truth has come out, as it's basically just history now.I. Marched. Against. The. War. Before it started. In London. — Baden
What I find odd or let's say missing in the after shock of this event is that no Islamic leader or representative has said anything whatsoever to state that this event was something worthy of condemnation or any sympathy for the victims. Rather, I have heard 3 (selfish) statements from the Islamic community making a claim (defense) that this is not Islam.
You seem to have implied that you would be open to military action were proper planning in place. Is that correct? — Thorongil
I am open to whatever causes the minimum loss of innocent life both in the short and long term. That will require a combination of alliance-making, diplomacy and possibly some form of military action. I am against any knee-jerk military response. — Baden
Russia economy has been garbage for a long time. Russians are used to that. They aren't the French, who would of drop of a hat man the barricades.The Russian economy is garbage, remember. — Thorongil
Well, Putin has Russian Air Force jets and helicopters operating from Syrian army bases. The same bases that Assad's forces operate from. So what are you as the West going to do to them? You think you can attack only the Syrians on the military base, but not the Russians?What do you have in mind? Do you honestly think Putin would declare war on Western Europe and the US merely on account of the latter's invasion of ISIS and Assad? — Thorongil
I think you are talking about Al-Nusra front (the al-Qaeda like terrorist group) and then the Free Syrian Army, the poster child of the West.Well, to my knowledge, there are primarily four groups in Syria: ISIS, Assad's forces, an al-Qaeda like terrorist group (I forget their name), and the Syrian opposition. I call them secular since they are the allies of the secular Western powers and would presumably want to establish democratic rule in Syria when the fighting is over. — Thorongil
I just wonder if the knowledge that the audience could be armed, might likely be armed, would have changed the appearance of these events being 'soft targets'. — ArguingWAristotleTiff
The problem here is that the fight in Syria isn't so much about democracy, but religion. — ssu
So Thorongil, will you want to go to WW3 because of Syria? That could affect even your own life, you know. — ssu
Well, the problem with your thinking is that you are basically attacking both sides in a conflict. Add the Al Nusfra front and basically bomb everybody! But it could really work: all the Syrian factions could call it a temporary armstice and continue together fighting the Americans. What a wonderfull way to unite the country.And do not forget that ISIS, Assad, and even Russia (in light of the annexation of Crimea) are the aggressors here. There is no good reason not to stamp out ISIS and Assad except for the fear that it will turn into another Iraq/Afghan quagmire. That's a legitimate fear, but not good enough to convince me that no serious military action should be taken. — Thorongil
Egypt’s government describes its Islamist adversaries as terrorists and portrays U.S. attempts to dictate terms or impose conditions related to Egypt’s internal affairs as naïve, malign or both. As an alternative, Egypt’s rulers have welcomed the support of like-minded Arab governments in the Gulf region that view political Islam as an existential threat. -
Well, the problem with your thinking is that you are basically attacking both sides in a conflict. Add the Al Nusfra front and basically bomb everybody! — ssu
Liberal democracies went through centuries of struggle before such principles as the right of free speech, freedom of assembly and conscience, the practice of government with a 'principled opposition' became established. Along with these was the principle of pluralism, which is that it is possible for people with very different points of view to actually co-exist.
But I don't know if there is any inherent recognition of these principles in Islamic political systems. — Wayfarer
Outrages like the mob murder of a Moslem in India for allegedly eating meat from a sacred cow shouldn't be swept under the cultural relativity rug. India should investigate and punish the mob. There are religious outrages in America instigated by fundamentalists that shouldn't be tolerated either -- like teaching creationism in schools (secular or religious schools).
Nonsense. If I claim that it is a scientific fact that you won't get burned if you set yourself on fire, I'm making false claims as to whether that is a scientific fact. — Πετροκότσυφας
As long as certain versions of creationism willfully distort established scientific facts, then it might be seen as the duty of a state to protect its citizens from fraud, the same way it ought to do it for products, such as power balance bracelets, which make fraudulent claims. — Πετροκότσυφας
What you are here forgetting is that democracy, something that may have it's roots in the West, is now something universal. I don't think that South Korea or Japan share at all a history of going through centuries a similar history as in the West, but they are democracies.Liberal democracies went through centuries of struggle before such principles as the right of free speech, freedom of assembly and conscience, the practice of government with a 'principled opposition' became established. Along with these was the principle of pluralism, which is that it is possible for people with very different points of view to actually co-exist.
But I don't know if there is any inherent recognition of these principles in Islamic political systems. — Wayfarer
If a country is democratic and has a somewhat functioning justice system and electoral system, that doesn't mean the people have similar liberal thoughts as you might have. Above all, a democratic system doesn't mold the people to be permissive liberals. There might be that university grad who studied philosophy who thinks the same way as you do. Yet this idea, that democracy will inherently make people Western liberals, to make them think like we do or whatever we have in mind as the objective is an unrealistic idea filled with hubris and self-centered egotism.So the question is, should 'the principle of tolerance' accommodate political ideologies that don't actually recognize tolerance themselves? Ought not that be part of the deal? What if the principle of tolerance were extended by a liberal society, towards a totalitarian ideology, with the result that the totalitarian ideology was able to abolish the principle of tolerance? — Wayfarer
I am thrilled that you can see my skepticism because it took a lot of years, a lot of layers to peel back and a LOT of heavy lifting by international friends like Benkei and Tobias to get to the point I am yet I recognize I have a long way to go.I do see your skepticism, Tiff. You believe that your government is out to exploit you or something, I guess that's why you want Americans to own guns.
I have another good one about hard-wired national qualities. My ex Prime minister once said that the Greeks have anti-racist DNA. — Πετροκότσυφας
I didn't want to have to shift the context and I will tell you why I did. It is a point of clarification to make sure that those who do not live in a right to carry a concealed weapon state, understand that even though it is YOUR right to legally carry a firearm, carrying a firearm onto private property (Concert Venues/Movie Theaters/Starbucks/Bars) or into a Federal/State government building (Airports/Military Installations/Court Houses/Police Stations/Motor Vehicle Departments,ect) is still strictly forbidden.Now you shifted the context Tiff.
There is a difference between qualified security being armed and non-qualified audience members being armed.
The main point is, you simply do not attend a concert and expect an attack by terrorists out of the blue. This sort of attack can happen anywhere at any time, so is the solution to have everyone out of fear armed with firearms in the event that something might happen? To live as such is to gives into the desire to create a life of fear allowing the terrorists to win. — Mayor of Simpleton
Muhammad cartoon drawing contest in Texas — ArguingWAristotleTiff
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.