Surge or Surrender by Hero

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Surge or Surrender

POSTED BY: HERO
UPDATED: Saturday, January 20, 2007 07:03
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 9607
PAGE 5 of 5

Friday, January 19, 2007 9:40 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Now yer just bein an ass.

Your opinion is just that, your opinion.
But when you vote for something like this...

How can you morally justify sending people off to die for something you only vaguely give a shit about ?

Your moral position sucks, and you know it, and all the lame excuses in the world just do not cut it with me.

Your Mileage May Vary.

-F

I thought he was AGAINST the war? Isn't that what he said, you know, a couple of dozen times? ALL he has done is to protest the emotional blackmail and dubious logic of your "question."

In my experience NO government or political party represents exactly my viewpoint. Every time anybody votes they either compromise on something or vote for the fringe whacko party as a show of "principle." Most mentally normal people understand that and can actually disagree with a government they voted for on a number of issues. In addition as you yourself said part of the price of living in a society is that your taxes end up supporting government spending that you yourself down't agree with. For example the taxes for new schools is just picking your pocket if your kids don't go there but then again the parents of the kids taht do probably pay something towards fixing the street outside your house, something that doesnt benefit them.

So who sent your friend to die? I did, he did YOU did, because it was a decision (or indecision) made by the form of government you accepted when you decided to live in this society. You may or may not have voted for the administration, but what soldiers do or don't do they do in your name and nominally in teh interests of the American people. Can you get mad at this? Can you say "not in my name" damn straight you can but if you have an argument about this war then it's with your elected leaders, not with your neighbor no matter what his opinion or who he voted for. Anthony is not the Commander in Chief of the US of A, that guy lives in Washington. If you have a beef it's with him.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 19, 2007 5:09 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

"when you vote to loot my pocket and my family for it, it is at that point I want YOU to put an equal ante on the table, or face some well deserved scorn and vitriol for being hypocritical, thieving, murderous scum.

-Frem"

"Now yer just bein an ass.

Look, lemme put it in such a simple form as to get it through your pin head."

************************************

This is my problem, Frem: We live in a real-life world.

I know that you believe that you get personally and physically involved with every vote you make. Since I'm not God, and I'm not Omniscient, I can't disprove that theory.

But let me promise you that not everyone CAN get personally and physically involved with every vote they make. Unless they vote incredibly rarely, their day-to-day situation will not allow them to support a vote with more than a vote, and perhaps some money. (Usually in the form of taxes.)

There may be certain causes that people feel passionate about, and also capable of helping out on. But they generally can't help out on them all, and certainly not to the degree that you are suggesting.

Take me, for instance. If I had been asked, I would absolutely 100% have voted to send troops to Afghanistan. To me, that was an unambiguous enemy that needed to be taken out. I'd have voted for this, even though I'd have had ZERO intention of serving in the military. Now, I've sent care packages to troops, but I've never shot an assault rifle at Afghanis, nor risked life and limb in the field of battle. My paltry contribution really isn't up to snuff, if you're going to compare it to what soldiers are doing.

Your contention is that if I was going to vote to send troops to Afghanistan, then I needed to quit my job and join the military and participate in that action.

I don't believe the United States can survive based on that kind of thinking. The US Citizenry would have to rarely vote on anything at all, if they were going to be required to take personal involvement in all acts voted for.

I don't believe that I am a bad human being for behaving this way. I don't believe that people who would vote to continue this disaster in Iraq are bad human beings either. They may simply need to re-examine the facts. Thoughtful discussion might help.

But a question like "If you want this war so much, why don't you fight it?" is inherently antagonistic. It suggests that anyone who might vote for the war, but isn't interested in military service, is bad. I know this is what the question is meant to invoke, because of your follow-up statement:

"when you vote to loot my pocket and my family for it, it is at that point I want YOU to put an equal ante on the table, or face some well deserved scorn and vitriol for being hypocritical, thieving, murderous scum."

Hypocritical! Thieving! Murderous! Scum!

Frem, you might feel strongly about your position, but who is being the ass? You are advocating a form of existence which people in general aren't capable of.

I've tried every way possible to explain it to you. Maybe this time I'll get it right.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 20, 2007 7:03 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Finn,

I owe you an apology. My last post here was really kind of a mish-mash of a whole bunch of ideas that got crammed together into a too short post. I was having a whole crowd of thoughts and I felt I had some insight into some folk's obsession with a question which amounts to nothing more than emotional blackmail. I was trying to say that if you feel the need to resort to that kind of thing, and we all do from time to time, whatever you're trying to say won't get heard because the gulf between you and the people you're arguing with is too wide.

At the same time I was feeling like you and the other pro-surge folks were completely off your rockers for backing the thing. So the two issues (dumb-ass inflamatory argumentation, my own dismay over communication with the folks who support the surge) got mixed up and I ended up pretty much siding with the folks I was trying to critique. I'm no stranger to self-critique or to paradox so as I wrote the post it seemed reasonable enough to me. My bad.

Thank you for your explanation. Now that you point out what you meant, your original post seems clear to me. I think I did overreact.

I’m not sure that I can give you an explanation that would be mutually acceptable for my support for this war, since I think we have different notions about what support means, but if it means anything to you, along with my support, I’ve never been without my reservations.

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Appologies for my knee-jerk reaction. I can take things a bit literally at times.

It’s all good.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE