Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » World Watch » Shine on, you crazy internet diamond (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Shine on, you crazy internet diamond
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
President Bush is a genuinely awful speaker. Wouldn't it be a shame if we lost a war for the survival of western civilization because we had a President who reads his speeches in a dispassionate drone?
With an opening like that, you know Card's found his crazy-bastard groove again. Easy platitudes in easy essays about easy topics like the importance of doing right for your kids is all well and good, but Card's got a quota to maintain here [Smile]
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LeftyPatriot
Member
Member # 3584

 - posted      Profile for LeftyPatriot   Email LeftyPatriot       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This essay is really off the wall.
Posts: 136 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Big C
Member
Member # 3404

 - posted      Profile for Big C     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rallan:

I know you have a right to your views, but in my heart of hearts, I wish those that believe as you do would congregate in North Dakota, and those that feel differently might congregate in say.. South Dakota, and then the two groups could have it out once and for all.

Fighting there would minimize damage to the rest of the country, the locals could evacuate in advance, and the victors would have to pledge to compensate the citizens of North and South Dakota for property damage--perhaps from proceeds garnered from the sale of the estates of the vanquished?

I'm betting, all of you and your co-believers with the nerve to show up would be quickly dispatched.

I wouldn't expect your side to take prisoners. And I can guaran-damn-tee you that I wouldn't.

I know I have a long way to go on the evolutionary scale to attain your level of enlightenment. I only wish those that wished America harm were as enlightened as you.

Have a nice day.

Posts: 171 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LeftyPatriot
Member
Member # 3584

 - posted      Profile for LeftyPatriot   Email LeftyPatriot       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So a twisted appeal to violence? Want to kill thoe who disagree with you and dont revere your Dear LEader?
Posts: 136 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Big C
Member
Member # 3404

 - posted      Profile for Big C     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Not really Lefty.

I don't feel particularly twisted, and I was careful not to make any gratuitous or personal attacks on Rallan.

I don't particularly care whether Rallan (I think it's) revers (without the extra "e") any particular leader.

As with those Card described in Empire, I'm simply getting tired of looking for common ground amongst those who differ from me. I certainly don't sense any attempts at understanding from you, Lefty, and those who share your views.

So, perhaps it might be time for violence.. After all, if your side gets lucky or skillfull, those like me get the peace of the grave and you can go about establishing a kinder gentler America. The opposite also holds true.

Occassionally, (in moments of weakness?), I've tried to find common ground with you and others who--at least in my opinion--share similar views. I've met with no success.

So, why should we continue this byte consuming kabuki dance? Let's put aside all pretense of civilization and let our baser instincts prevail. Who knows, the brutality we show each other might even horrify Muslims?

Posts: 171 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LeftyPatriot
Member
Member # 3584

 - posted      Profile for LeftyPatriot   Email LeftyPatriot       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Your advocating murder of people who disagree with you.

And pushing for civil war-which even OSC sees as a bad thing.

If you don't want to talk, or be exposed to opposing views, the answer is easy. Click the "close window" button and go to whatever site you prefer that wont strain your limits.

As to your desire for violence...

"Albert Einstein
Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."

But I still love you Big. Hatred need not win the day, nor your desire to murder those who dare disagree with you and spark a massvie civil war.

You can come to peace. You just need to find love. Turn from violence and you will be on the way. Murder not your brother.

Gandhi pointed out that victory through violence is always fleeting and unrewarding.

As to baser instincts-it is through overcomming these that we become human. Listen to the better angels of your nature, not the enragd monkey inside. Reaso, love, not surrender to the urge to murder.

I feel sad thinking of you, and hope your posts here are parody.

Posts: 136 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Hannibal
Member
Member # 1339

 - posted      Profile for Hannibal   Email Hannibal   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If you are gooooooooooooooooiiiiiiiiiiiiiing to saaaaaaaan fraaaaansisco, be sure to ware some flowers in your hair
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LeftyPatriot
Member
Member # 3584

 - posted      Profile for LeftyPatriot   Email LeftyPatriot       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
War, what is it good for.......


UNHHHH

NOTHING

Posts: 136 | Registered: Jan 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Big C:
Rallan:

I know you have a right to your views, but in my heart of hearts, I wish those that believe as you do would congregate in North Dakota, and those that feel differently might congregate in say.. South Dakota, and then the two groups could have it out once and for all.

Fighting there would minimize damage to the rest of the country, the locals could evacuate in advance, and the victors would have to pledge to compensate the citizens of North and South Dakota for property damage--perhaps from proceeds garnered from the sale of the estates of the vanquished?

I'm betting, all of you and your co-believers with the nerve to show up would be quickly dispatched.

I wouldn't expect your side to take prisoners. And I can guaran-damn-tee you that I wouldn't.

I know I have a long way to go on the evolutionary scale to attain your level of enlightenment. I only wish those that wished America harm were as enlightened as you.

Have a nice day.

A bluh bluh bluh, u guys are all wusses and we should settle this in a fight to the death in Dakota because u r cheating pansy cowards and we would kick ur ass and that would make us right because beating a guy in a fight means he was wrong and I was totally right cos I'm MACHO! RAHR!

I'm impressed Big C. You've managed in less words than ever before to not only look like a super genius, but completely convince everyone that you've got the moral high ground. You really are precious [Smile]

Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Omega M.
Member
Member # 1392

 - posted      Profile for Omega M.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LeftyPatriot:

War, what is it good for.......

UNHHHH

NOTHING

What do you suppose would have happened if the French had tried to resist Hitler simply by sitting in the streets?
Posts: 1966 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Adam Masterman
Member
Member # 1142

 - posted      Profile for Adam Masterman   Email Adam Masterman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Uhh, they would have lasted a week instead of a month? France lost that fight, remember.


What do you suppose would have happened if Ghandi had tried to resist the Brittish by killing people?

Adam

Posts: 4823 | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Omega M.
Member
Member # 1392

 - posted      Profile for Omega M.     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But they kept fighting guerrilla-style after that.
Posts: 1966 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Blayne Bradley
Member
Member # 2550

 - posted      Profile for Blayne Bradley   Email Blayne Bradley   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LeftyPatriot:
War, what is it good for.......


UNHHHH

NOTHING

*Notes Civilization IV reference*
Posts: 389 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ljohnson
Member
Member # 1810

 - posted      Profile for ljohnson   Email ljohnson       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So the theme here is that we actually have nothing to fear if we retreat to Fortress America, the islamo-fascists will leave us alone?

I am skeptical, and since the worst-case for doing nothing is so much more costly, the current course seems like a better bet.

RE: Gandhi: he suggested Jews do non-violent resistance against the Germans. What an idiot. The only reason it worked in India is because the Blokes are basically decent. Some countries are truely evil and can only be resisted with force and violence. And frankly, he was doubly an idiot because India had a better government with the Blokes than they had on their own. Gandhi is highly overrated.

What would have happened to the Blokes if Chamberlain (and, worse, Stanley Baldwin, a horrible man) had been running England 1939 onward? What would have happened if they hadn't mobilized, fought? If we hadn't been manipulated into joining a war that wasn't really ours? I suspect only Churchill could have brought the US in as he did. An indispensible man.

My suspicion - based on trying to read what Bin Laden et al. have said - is that we are in a fight for our survival. Historical analogies are dangerous, but mine would be Britain 1933-37. I am reasonably sure than my grandchildren will live in a hellish world if we don't contain our current enemy, a 1984 run by the worst of the mullahs.

Why do you doubt what they have said?

Posts: 92 | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TheDeamon
Member
Member # 551

 - posted      Profile for TheDeamon   Email TheDeamon   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LeftyPatriot:
Gandhi pointed out that victory through violence is always fleeting and unrewarding.

As to baser instincts-it is through overcomming these that we become human. Listen to the better angels of your nature, not the enragd monkey inside. Reaso, love, not surrender to the urge to murder.

I feel sad thinking of you, and hope your posts here are parody.

Ghandi had it about right when it came to dealing with the Brittish. As has already been pointed out, the Brittish do have at least some sense of "fair play." To the point where the majority of them will take exception to unarmed, non-violent, non-life-threatening individuals being brutalized or otherwise being brought to harm.

There are however, human's out there that have no problem brutalizing the weak and the seemingly powerless. You only need to look at domestic abuse and armed robbery numbers for that.

Heck, you can even goto something that is an even better indication of "base" human behavior: The ever popular schoolyard bully for the guys, or the backstabbing socialite behaviors many of the gals subject themselves to(though admitedly, the female side of the house doesn't tend to get physical as often as the male side).

Non-violent resistance only works against foes who find the use of violence to be undersireable.

There are, however, people out there who have no problem using violence as a means to an end, or even as an end unto itself.

For those people, all non-violent resistance provides is an easy victim for them to brutalize or otherwise take advantage of. The only thing that can break their power at that point is outside (3rd party) force coming in to intervene, and often times that means the 3rd party(the previous group of people who finds the use of force to be undesireable) using force(violence) to correct the situation.

Posts: 505 | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TheDeamon
Member
Member # 551

 - posted      Profile for TheDeamon   Email TheDeamon   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LeftyPatriot:
Gandhi pointed out that victory through violence is always fleeting and unrewarding.

And just kicks, lets roleplay this logic out.

We're going to make very large assumption in this scenario to start out though: That while you don't approve of the use of violence, you have trained yourself in self-defense, to the point you are at least a black-belt in one of the Martial Arts, or some other comparable school of fighting(this may have happened before your "conversion" to non-violence for this situation).

So for you, dropping another(untrained) person, even one significantly bigger than you, isn't too much of a problem.

Onto the scenario:

You are at a bar hanging out with some friends. You notice that two people at the counter are having a loud and heated argument with each other. You think about intervening, but before you make a decision, one of the offending parties storms off.

A couple minutes later you notice the party who stormed off earlier has returned. He still looks quite angry, and you notice he has a small club in his posssesion. You look over to the counter and see the other party to the argument is chatting away with another patron completely oblivious to the others return. The Bouncer isn't anywhere in sight, and you know you can get to the returning party before he returns to the counter.

Now, because you currently believe that "victory through violence is always fleeting and unrewarding" what do you do?

Posts: 505 | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Have another beer and watch the guy with the club beat the **** out of the guy at the bar?

Did y'all see how many Indians were killed during their peaceful resistance? Screw that! Maybe I'm too American but if I'm going down I'm going down fighting!

Not to mentiont that it didn't work out all that well for Ghandi.

KE

[ January 26, 2007, 05:26 PM: Message edited by: KnightEnder ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Big C
Member
Member # 3404

 - posted      Profile for Big C     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ghandi, what a tool!

Several years ago(20?) Jerry Pournelle or Larry Niven , sorry I can't remember, compiled a series of books of science fiction short stories about different aspects of warfare. I think the overall title was something like "There Will Be War," or something like that.

One of my favorite short stories was an alternate history piece chronicling Nazi Germany's advance into India and their meeting with Mohandes Ghandi and his peaceful followers....

[ January 26, 2007, 08:35 PM: Message edited by: Big C ]

Posts: 171 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Big C
Member
Member # 3404

 - posted      Profile for Big C     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"A bluh bluh bluh, u guys are all wusses and we should settle this in a fight to the death in Dakota because u r cheating pansy cowards and we would kick ur ass and that would make us right because beating a guy in a fight means he was wrong and I was totally right cos I'm MACHO! RAHR!

I'm impressed Big C. You've managed in less words than ever before to not only look like a super genius, but completely convince everyone that you've got the moral high ground. You really are precious"

Rallan:

You're much too kind to me.

By the way, I've just discovered the silverware drawer in my kitchen. Which one should I use to eat my peas? The one with Mickey that has four points, the one with Minnie that is indented and round, or the one with Donald that is long and is kind of sharp on one side?

Posts: 171 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So Ghandi's a tool for what? For succesfully gaining Indian independence? For sitting around unarmed and basically saying "Go on, I double dare ya!" to a colonial government that could've killed him without even noticing? For being canny enough to manipulate the public opinion of the world's most powerful empire into letting his people go? For keeping the carnage and bloodshed to a reasonable minimum in the process?

Or is it because he didn't start a nice big shiny war that would've meshed nicely with your ridiculously over-simplified view of right and wrong and smiting bad guys? For not having a big violent civil war that you could romanticize and glorify and get a boner about?

Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Big C
Member
Member # 3404

 - posted      Profile for Big C     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Your advocating murder of people who disagree with you.

And pushing for civil war-which even OSC sees as a bad thing."

Lefty:

After all my trials and tribulations, this is something on which we can agree!!!!

Maybe I was having a bad hair day, maybe the 'roids were inflamed from spicy food, maybe I'm tired of trying to conduct discussions with folks who seem unwilling to concede anything? Who knows?

I'm for trying all sorts of non-violent ways to settle disputes. I really dislike being punched in the nose. But sometimes, there are folks that are pretty up front about how willing they are to do pretty much what they want with or to me and mine.

There are people like this in the world, I would contend they're Islamo-facists, Islamists, or Al Qaeda-ites--or some term along this continuum. I believe the US represents a force for good to counter these bastards.

If you cannot see a difference between these sides, either morally or politically, I'd just as soon be rid of you before we have to confront these folks.

Posts: 171 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TheDeamon
Member
Member # 551

 - posted      Profile for TheDeamon   Email TheDeamon   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rallan:
So Ghandi's a tool for what? For succesfully gaining Indian independence? For sitting around unarmed and basically saying "Go on, I double dare ya!" to a colonial government that could've killed him without even noticing? For being canny enough to manipulate the public opinion of the world's most powerful empire into letting his people go? For keeping the carnage and bloodshed to a reasonable minimum in the process?

Ghandi was very smart, and very cagey person. He said and did many remarkable things. However, that doesn't mean that everything he said 100% applicable 100% of the time.

What he did worked because of the enemy he was up against, and I don't attirbute that to luck. I attribute his success on that front to his understanding how his enemy worked, and using their "weakness" (a sense of "fair play") against them.

However, what he did would not have worked against a very long list of other nations past and present(though mostly past). Nazi Germany during World War 2 is a very good and reasonably recent example of this which others have already brought up. Though I'd just as soon not use them as a basis of comparison considering where discussions involving Nazi's tend to go.

So while he should be lauded for accomplishing a largely bloodless transition to independence for India. It doesn't mean he provided any breathtakingly new insights into human nature that are exceedingly world-altering. All he did was point out to the World that when Assertive people are seeing Passive people being agressively assaulted, they will eventually step in to try to do something about it.

As that is the underlying objective of his kind of protests. It forces the "other side" into the position of either having to result to physical force to acheive its objectives, or simply give up.

If they use physical force, they then provide the imagery(because you know, "cameras can never lie," though cameras can fail to tell "the rest of the story" as context is important to nearly everything that goes on in life) needed to make any casual observer(who doesn't have, and isn't likely to seek out, the "rest of the story") decide the "aggressive" side "isn't playing nice" and that something needs to be done about them. They may acheive their objective, but they just lost ground with a number of people in the PR department.

If they do nothing, they don't accomplish what they need to do, and things eventually reach the point where it isn't financially viable for them to remain in the area.

Which goes back to claims I recall making on these boards before. All Pacifisim does is defer responsibility for fixing agressive behavior to sombody else.

It works remarkably well too. If are walking down the street and see two other parties in the street, what is going to be your reaction when either:

1) One person is being overly beligerent/violent to the other, who is being passive in taking what they're receiving.

vs

2) Two people being overly beligerent/wiolent towards each other.

---

At least for me, if it is the first one, I'll probably determine wether or not I can provide assistance to the victim, and act accordingly. (Passive party "Gains an ally to assist him" as the aggressive one is in the wrong in the view of the passerby)

Whereas if it is the second one. I'm probably going to determine how bad I think the outcome of the fight could be, and more than likely seek out a means to break up the fight. (neither party "gains an ally" as they're both wrong in the view of the passerby)

quote:
Or is it because he didn't start a nice big shiny war that would've meshed nicely with your ridiculously over-simplified view of right and wrong and smiting bad guys? For not having a big violent civil war that you could romanticize and glorify and get a boner about?
I think you do everyone a disservice when you assume that because we don't think Ghandi is applicable to everything. That we must therefore believe violence is the solution to everything.
Posts: 505 | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
moodi
Member
Member # 3020

 - posted      Profile for moodi   Email moodi   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Comrade Big C,

Your speech about the necessity of war and the riddance of your fellow Americans who disagree with you reminds me a lot with a nice German/Austrian guy who lived in the thirties and forties and had some serious mood problems (and a weird mustache).

Kicking the bad guy's ass might be for the good of the neighborhood, but we surely shouldn't be glorifying the act as if it's what we do best. This kind of.... arrogance not only robs you the world's sympathy after a cheapshot terrorattack, it also drives people to cheer (and act) for the wrong guy.

Posts: 134 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Don't make me call the internet police and have you arrested for breaking Godwin's Law moodi [Smile]
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
moodi
Member
Member # 3020

 - posted      Profile for moodi   Email moodi   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Good one Rallan. lol
Posts: 134 | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Big C
Member
Member # 3404

 - posted      Profile for Big C     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Gosh Moodi:

To what do I attribute my fascist tendancies? My Germanic heritage or my not fully treated mood disorder? I even have a mustache, like kids, and have a dog named Blondi.

I guess I can live with the comparison.

One wonders how many pacifist villages, individuals, communities, ethnicities, nations fared that may have found themselves in the way as the likes of Ghenghis Khan rumbled across the Eurasian landmass thoughout history?


One wonders if being a successful pacifist is contingent upon being lucky enough to find the right enemies?

Let me try to say this again... Ideally, it would be best if all men (ok, people) were pacifists. When truly evil (and I know I'm wishing for the impossible hoping that some of you might concede that anyone is truly evil, except for GW Bush, of course) forces are stirring, pacifism is not a viable option. In my opinion, those who chose to face evil with pacifism are of a negative value to those in a society willing to recognize and fight the evil.

[ January 27, 2007, 12:35 AM: Message edited by: Big C ]

Posts: 171 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
WeAreAllJust LooseChange
Member
Member # 3411

 - posted      Profile for WeAreAllJust LooseChange         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
And I thought, that humankind has evolved (or was pretending to) since Ghenghis Khan, Big C.

With the discussion of all the "war on the islamo-fascist-terrorists-who-only-want-to-destroy-American-freedom" we are forgetting the "war on the socialists-fascists-who-only-want-to-destroy-american-freedom".
It was mere 16 - 17 years ago since we placed that war on hold, wasn't it?
Enough for the memory to fade out? We are not scared that the socialists will come and take all our private property?
Or we need to be affraid?
That the islamo-pacifists will actually rise up, unite, create their Chaliphate and send the price of oil up through the roof?

Who's your favorite boogeyman?

Mine was called Ronald Reagan. He was shown every week in the Friday's newspaper carricatures, preparing his nuclear missiles and soldiers to destroy us.
But you know - somehow I grew over it. I found out that not all that was shown in the media is true. That government can try to persuade you with many different means of their truth, but eventually the individual will reach their own
conclusions of what's right and what's wrong in the world.

So again - who's your (latest?) boogeyman?
Iran? Syria? Indonesia? North Korea? China?

Nah - China won't do - that's the war we won't even plan to start, because we know that we will loose.

Posts: 174 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I resent the idea that Liberals are weak, or all pacifist. I'm a Liberal and I'm more violent than you ever dreamed of being. And I've got the record to prove it. Fortunately I found Prozac and Ornery. See you in South Carolina.

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Big C
Member
Member # 3404

 - posted      Profile for Big C     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
KnightEnder:

Pleased to meet you.

Prozac never worked for me. I find Lexapro somewhat helpful.

So, you wanna fight in the Carolinas as opposed to the Dakotas? That's interesting. See, I was thinking of the Dakotas because there's less natural cover. Therefore, we could get about killing one another more quickly and efficiently. I was trying to avoid protracted conflict.

I'd certainly be interested in hearing your reasons for preferring the Carolinas. I'll certainly have to concede that the beaches in the Carolinas are much nicer.

And since you've opened up discussion about different geographic areas, we may want to address weather considerations, as well. Personally, I'd prefer the fall--especially after the first frost. I really have negative feelings about insects--which is another reason why I'd not prefer the Carolinas. Of course, with my reputation as being reasonable at stake, I want you to know that I'll certainly weigh your arguments fairly. You wouldn't be on South Carolina's Chamber of Commerce, would you?

Thanks for the thought-provoking response.

Posts: 171 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
LOL

I live in Texas. Just confused. Sometimes I forget the Dakotas even exist. Sorry. Try Zoloft. Keeps you out of jail.

KE

[ January 27, 2007, 04:38 PM: Message edited by: KnightEnder ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Big C
Member
Member # 3404

 - posted      Profile for Big C     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
KnightEnder:

Despite our political differences, it's reassuring to see we can share a laugh.

I live in Colorado, but I've never been to the Dakotas. I sort of want to visit Deadwood sometime, if for no other reason than my liking the show on HBO.

All the best...

Posts: 171 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Have I stopped letting you know what a special dude you are Big C? Because like, even though there's a special dude on the main forum who's being ever so precious, I don't want you to think that your own distinct brand of crazy-ass hilariousness is being overlooked here.
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Big C
Member
Member # 3404

 - posted      Profile for Big C     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rallan, I too harbor special feelings toward you.

I'm knda new to the "forum on the web scene." To date, I've generally tried to see value in others' arguments, tried to state my differences, and wait forlornly for responses that possibly recognized some value in mine.

Of course, this has not been the case. So, this leaves me confronted with the possibility I'm an idiot or that on web forums, everybody pretends they're Fox/CNN talking heads who never find any common ground and disagree on everything from the color of the sky to the time of day. (I gotta confess that I'm having trouble with the idiot thing, but if this was a democracy I think I can read the polls).

So, generally, my responses have been reflexive and in kind. As you're well aware this seldom moves the ball forward, but it does allow one the opportunity to vent.

This leaves me with humor. I must tell you, humor is harder to come up with than righteous indignation, but I'm working at it.

In the meantime, please know that I do appreciate the momentary truce, it's nice to see we can all laugh at some things, and if I find that I disagree with you in the future (imagine that!), I'll try to remember you took time out to say something "nice."

Posts: 171 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Viking_Longship
Member
Member # 3358

 - posted      Profile for Viking_Longship   Email Viking_Longship       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What is this business about the British being 'good blokes" with a sense of "fair play"? The British invented the concentration camp in the Boer war. A couple hundred years earlier the British under Oliver Cromwell fought a war of extinction against the Irish for being Catholic. (Which was even worse than the malignant neglect of the better known potato famine)

Britain was no longer economically capable of fighting India. They'd lost the power of superior arms since the Indians were talking to the soviets and India had the advantage in numbers. THat's why it worked.

Posts: 5765 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TheDeamon
Member
Member # 551

 - posted      Profile for TheDeamon   Email TheDeamon   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There was significant movement within Britain, on moral grounds for India to be given its independence. A fair bit of it was related to how the Indians were resisting the Brittish Empire.

It also didn't hurt that it was also the same time frame that they were still economicaly staggered from World War 2, and had come to the realization that they were not able to compete with/maintain parity with "the big boys" who had emerged after World War 2. Namely the US and Russia. So rather than wear themselves out economicaly trying to maintain an empire that neither one of the two superpowers was willing to help support(which was their other warning sign, that they'd need external support to maintain their empire). In particular since they were more closely aligned with the Americans instead of the Soviets.

The Brittish had a decent enough number of people with a sense of "fair play" even if they were willing to set it aside in the name of the Empire. Factoring the American's into the picture after World War 2 just further drove home the point that there were certain lines they couldn't cross without considerable cost.

But it still goes back to the point that the reason Ghandi's pacifist movement was successful was because the occupation force he was leading a revolution against was unwilling to deal with the "heat" they would take if they did anything to counter it with force. If he had been dealing with a force that didn't care about human rights, or the heat they'd take for ignoring them, the results would have been catastrophic for him.

Posts: 505 | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scouser1
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
TO ALL AT AMERICAN ORNERY!!!
Yes, thats right, im back!!! Aww did u guys miss me???
And before I go any further: to the person who sent me a little "threat" in an email: How petty!!
You have excelled yourself, to go to ALL that trouble to email me a threat without being traced is just.....sad.....very very sad.
Going to all that effort just to try and "scare" me?? I dont think so!!
Whoever you are you don't scare me, far from it. All you did was give me a good laugh..thanks [LOL]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Viking_Longship:
What is this business about the British being 'good blokes" with a sense of "fair play"? The British invented the concentration camp in the Boer war.

I know this is the height of pedantry since, but the English actually borrowed it from the Spanish, who'd already hit on the idea while trying to deal with an uprising in Cuba a few years earlier. The only innovation the brits came up with was coining the term "concentration camp" because they wanted a nice detached, values-neutral whitewash of a name that wouldn't encourage the general public to think of what was going on. Sort of an early example of the same sort of bureaucratic linguistic trickiness that gave the world phrases like collateral damage.
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Uh...yeah...that invention actually belongs to us. We used it on the Navajo, for starters.
Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
libdisemboweler
Member
Member # 3887

 - posted      Profile for libdisemboweler     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm just curious about how non-violent resistance is working out for the peaceful Buddhists in Tibet?

Is China almost done raping Tibet's putrid, decomposing corpse yet?

Posts: 44 | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Libdisemboweler, that's relevant to anything on this thread... how?
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1