French bomb ISIS
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
leggedstruggle  Croydon 01 Oct 15 4.18pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Oct 2015 4.05pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 01 Oct 2015 2.02pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Oct 2015 1.29pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 01 Oct 2015 11.43am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Oct 2015 11.18am
Quote topcat at 01 Oct 2015 10.46am
Quote oldcodger at 30 Sep 2015 9.50pm
Indeed. It is one of those conflicts that is easy to see who the bad guys are, but hard to who the good guys are.
Its the Mitchell and Webb SS sketch.... Nonsense. There were and are plenty of 'bad guys', Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung, Pol Pot, Sadam, Mugabe, to name a few. Pretty sure that the people who followed them didn't regard themselves as bad guys though, is the point. Obviously I agree with that list, but everyone thinks they 'doing the right thing and are good guys'. Usually until its no longer in their best interests. White hats and black hats, are for movies and childrens stories. But in reality, its the kind of mentality that ends up justifying things like the holocaust or Year Zero. And your attitude of giving them the benefit of the doubt leads to their rise in the first place. Does it really? I was thinking it was down the rise of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and the movement of the Sunni insurgency in Iraq switching its attentions to Syria, following the uprisings of the Arab Spring there. So I am quite surprised that actually understanding a very basic truth about human psychology, was responsible for the rise of ISIL, ISIS and its metamorphosis into IS. But then of course as far back as 2003 I was commenting that overthrowing the Saddam regime would result in a rise in Islamic fundamentalism, and then during the Arab spring, that ultimately Islamist factions would benefit, and again with Libya and the civil war in Syria. But yeah, my fault. Definitely. As you probably already know, I am referring to 'appeasement' - in the past, that towards Hitler, that towards communism by the European left and currently that towards the inherent evil in Islam.
mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
  Hrolf The Ganger 01 Oct 15 4.29pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Quote leggedstruggle at 01 Oct 2015 3.42pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 01 Oct 2015 3.21pm
To Legged's post. Hitler might have said that about the Jews or Gay people. Nothing wrong with trying to be objective. Most people on here don't seem to have the ability. Unfortunately, in an us against them situation, we can't afford too much objectivity. It's about self preservation against an enemy who doesn't give a hoot about us. Life is just not that simple. Leave your desks tidy..... Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (01 Oct 2015 3.23pm) Of course it is not simple. There are no absolute goods and no absolute bads, there are degrees. No person is absolutely good or absolutely evil. But it is quite justifiable to judge someone as principally evil - say Ian Brady. The bombing of Japan and the bombing of Germany were part of an effort to destroy evil movements. To argue that those actions themselves were intrinsically evil is like saying it is evil to amputate a gangrene limb. I don't think it is evil that the state of Israel exists. Yes, Stalin helped to defeat Hitler - only because he had been attacked, he would have been quite happy to have sat back and watch us defeated and the Jews exterminated - one of the most evil b******s who ever lived. In the end we defend what we consider to be right or in our own self interest. Obviously that is a matter of perspective. Good, bad and evil are just human constructs.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| jamiemartin721 Reading 01 Oct 15 4.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote leggedstruggle at 01 Oct 2015 4.18pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Oct 2015 4.05pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 01 Oct 2015 2.02pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Oct 2015 1.29pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 01 Oct 2015 11.43am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 01 Oct 2015 11.18am
Quote topcat at 01 Oct 2015 10.46am
Quote oldcodger at 30 Sep 2015 9.50pm
Indeed. It is one of those conflicts that is easy to see who the bad guys are, but hard to who the good guys are.
Its the Mitchell and Webb SS sketch.... Nonsense. There were and are plenty of 'bad guys', Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung, Pol Pot, Sadam, Mugabe, to name a few. Pretty sure that the people who followed them didn't regard themselves as bad guys though, is the point. Obviously I agree with that list, but everyone thinks they 'doing the right thing and are good guys'. Usually until its no longer in their best interests. White hats and black hats, are for movies and childrens stories. But in reality, its the kind of mentality that ends up justifying things like the holocaust or Year Zero. And your attitude of giving them the benefit of the doubt leads to their rise in the first place. Does it really? I was thinking it was down the rise of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and the movement of the Sunni insurgency in Iraq switching its attentions to Syria, following the uprisings of the Arab Spring there. So I am quite surprised that actually understanding a very basic truth about human psychology, was responsible for the rise of ISIL, ISIS and its metamorphosis into IS. But then of course as far back as 2003 I was commenting that overthrowing the Saddam regime would result in a rise in Islamic fundamentalism, and then during the Arab spring, that ultimately Islamist factions would benefit, and again with Libya and the civil war in Syria. But yeah, my fault. Definitely. As you probably already know, I am referring to 'appeasement' - in the past, that towards Hitler, that towards communism by the European left and currently that towards the inherent evil in Islam. Never been one for appeasement. I don't say it often, but Thatcher was right over the Falklands, once British Citizens were under occupation, there was no option but to liberate those people. Similarly with IS, we just need to be certain that we're actually making things better by our intervention. The German Blitz for example had the opposite effect on those targeted than the German command desired, it consolidated their will to fight and for the most part created a spirit of resistance and increased the desire to fight. Obviously, we don't actually want to do the same thing in Syria.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| leggedstruggle Croydon 01 Oct 15 4.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 01 Oct 2015 4.29pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 01 Oct 2015 3.42pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 01 Oct 2015 3.21pm
To Legged's post. Hitler might have said that about the Jews or Gay people. Nothing wrong with trying to be objective. Most people on here don't seem to have the ability. Unfortunately, in an us against them situation, we can't afford too much objectivity. It's about self preservation against an enemy who doesn't give a hoot about us. Life is just not that simple. Leave your desks tidy..... Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (01 Oct 2015 3.23pm) Of course it is not simple. There are no absolute goods and no absolute bads, there are degrees. No person is absolutely good or absolutely evil. But it is quite justifiable to judge someone as principally evil - say Ian Brady. The bombing of Japan and the bombing of Germany were part of an effort to destroy evil movements. To argue that those actions themselves were intrinsically evil is like saying it is evil to amputate a gangrene limb. I don't think it is evil that the state of Israel exists. Yes, Stalin helped to defeat Hitler - only because he had been attacked, he would have been quite happy to have sat back and watch us defeated and the Jews exterminated - one of the most evil b******s who ever lived. In the end we defend what we consider to be right or in our own self interest. Obviously that is a matter of perspective. Good, bad and evil are just human constructs. It is half the problem today that malevolent evil is not acknowledged.
mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 01 Oct 15 4.44pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote leggedstruggle at 01 Oct 2015 4.39pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 01 Oct 2015 4.29pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 01 Oct 2015 3.42pm
Quote Hrolf The Ganger at 01 Oct 2015 3.21pm
To Legged's post. Hitler might have said that about the Jews or Gay people. Nothing wrong with trying to be objective. Most people on here don't seem to have the ability. Unfortunately, in an us against them situation, we can't afford too much objectivity. It's about self preservation against an enemy who doesn't give a hoot about us. Life is just not that simple. Leave your desks tidy..... Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (01 Oct 2015 3.23pm) Of course it is not simple. There are no absolute goods and no absolute bads, there are degrees. No person is absolutely good or absolutely evil. But it is quite justifiable to judge someone as principally evil - say Ian Brady. The bombing of Japan and the bombing of Germany were part of an effort to destroy evil movements. To argue that those actions themselves were intrinsically evil is like saying it is evil to amputate a gangrene limb. I don't think it is evil that the state of Israel exists. Yes, Stalin helped to defeat Hitler - only because he had been attacked, he would have been quite happy to have sat back and watch us defeated and the Jews exterminated - one of the most evil b******s who ever lived. In the end we defend what we consider to be right or in our own self interest. Obviously that is a matter of perspective. Good, bad and evil are just human constructs. It is half the problem today that malevolent evil is not acknowledged.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.