| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Tom Tancredo on Bombing Mecca | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 5 2007, 09:20 AM (2,056 Views) | |
| ivorythumper | Aug 5 2007, 09:30 PM Post #76 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
It's not like we hadn't done it before.
|
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Aug 5 2007, 09:40 PM Post #77 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
You make a lot of assumptions: 1. You assume that these "luminaries" care about "winning" at all 2. You assume that these "luminaries" care about "winning unconditionally" 3. You assume that these "luminaries" is "intelligent" 4. You assume that these "luminaries" is "logical" 5. You equate "intelligence" with "being logical" 6. You assume that I think (or care) that these "luminaries" care about "winning" at all, much less "winning unconditionally." 7. You assume that I think (or care) that these "luminaries" is "intelligent" and/or "logical." 8. You assume that one simply must be more brutal than one's enemy to win [unconditionally]. (I do not believe this to be an established fact. Think about WW II - we, the US of A, "won," but were we "more brutal" than all who fought on the opposite side? Perhaps one can argue that dropping the A-bombs was indeed the "most brutal" of all acts of war in WW II. What do you think?) If you have the time, kindly share any action and/or teaching by any of these "luminaries" that would lead one to believe that (a) any of them care about winning [unconditionally], (b) consistently exhibited "intelligence" in the form of "logical consistency." (BTW, if "logical consistency" is of paramount concern -- how could any one argue for any act [of war or otherwise, brutal or not] that lead to killing given "Thou Shalt Not Kill"? Should a person who believes in "Thou Shalt Not Kill" gives ample warning about wanting to bomb Mecca so the site can be evacuated before the actual bombing as to "not kill"? Should a person who believes in "Thou Shalt Not Kill" stay the execution of actually bombing Mecca as long as there is one person, say, a liberal hippy peace nick, stays in Mecca as a "human shield"?) |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Aug 5 2007, 10:07 PM Post #78 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
I only made one assumption, Ax. You are entirely missing the point. 1. I specifically said that is not important. 2. See above 3. Yes, that is an assumption. Perhaps you think they are not intelligent, in which case what does it matter what they think? Why mention them at all if they are not intelligent? 4. See 3. 5. For the purpose of this discussion I did clarify that intelligence referred to syllogistic logic. There are many types of intelligence, so I wanted to define that point. It is not an assumption. 6. No, quite the opposite. 7. See 3 above. 8. Give me an example of a country that unconditionally and totally defeated an enemy without being as brutal as their opponent.
a) Again, that is not germane to the question. They might not care about mathematics either, but still be able to appreciate that 2+2=4. b) That is not germane either. If you think that their positions are irrational or illogical, then why would you hold them up as examples of people who might disagree with Dewey's statement? There are thousands of people with sub par intelligence who can't even figure out basic addition who might also disagree with Dewey's statement. Why not use people with postanoxic brain injury rather than Confucius if that was your point? |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| jon-nyc | Aug 6 2007, 12:45 AM Post #79 |
|
Cheers
|
I couldn't agree more. (welcome back, Jeffrey) |
| In my defense, I was left unsupervised. | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Aug 6 2007, 03:35 AM Post #80 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Frank - I was off-duty yesterday, no sermon. I was able to visit my own home church, for probably the last Sunday in a long time. Lots of comments to reply to, but not until later this evening...
|
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| Copper | Aug 6 2007, 05:54 AM Post #81 |
|
Shortstop
|
I think you may have confused Congressman Tancredo with the current administration. I don't think anyone in the Bush administration wants to bomb Mecca. The State department has denounced Mr. Tancredo's statements. In fact I believe the administration is doing exactly what you said they aren't doing. |
|
The Confederate soldier was peculiar in that he was ever ready to fight, but never ready to submit to the routine duty and discipline of the camp or the march. The soldiers were determined to be soldiers after their own notions, and do their duty, for the love of it, as they thought best. Carlton McCarthy | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Aug 6 2007, 08:44 AM Post #82 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
I am not sure if I agree or not, especially if Jeff is opaquely referring to AQ. It seems this administration has had quite a bit of specific action against that paramilitary organization. * Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (killed 2006) * Abu Ayyub al-Masri (possibly killed 2007) * Hamid Juma Faris Jouri al-Saeedi (captured 2006) * Sheik Abd-Al-Rahman (killed 2006) * Abu Azzam (killed 2005) * Muharib Abdul Latif al-Jubouri (killed 2007) |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Aug 6 2007, 12:37 PM Post #83 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Given the fact that I'm a Christian; and Lao Tzu was a Taoist; and Ghandi was a Hindu; by definition we start with extremely different beliefs about The nature of God, The significance of that nature, The nature of the human/divine relationship, if there is one at all, and The manner in which God works in time and space within creation. So I'm not at all surprised that we may disagree on this issue. In fact, I'm sure there are many even more important differences between their beliefs and mine. But I feel no obligation to justify my beliefs against theirs, or for my beliefs to coincide with those of every other theist. As to Mother Teresa, I'm sure that she and I would have differred on many issues. She was a person specifically called to make her life a witness to her faith by working with, and for, the poor and downtrodden - and, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, she did so admirably. But regardless of what her beliefs about war may have been, her call to work with the poor in no way makes her any more of an expert on the theology of peacemaking, pacifism, and just war, than I am myself. No, of that list, I am far mor concerned - scratch that; I am ONLY concerned - with Jesus' thoughts regarding the matter. And on that score, I believe as I said earlier: that Jesus would have no war whatsoever. However, in light of our free will and our continual turning away from God's ideal, we find ourselves in a creation that has seriously, irretrievably deviated from its original intent. Now, we are faced with a situation where even our best of attempts at understanding, and living, God's will, will be flawed and imperfect. No attempt will be completely godly, noble, or just. Every option available to us has a coating of crap attached to it. Therefore, the best we can do is the best we can do; and by that standard, any strategy or tactic of warfare that will serve to ultimately shorten the war, and cause a net decrease in human death and misery, and which will ultimately achieve a more lasting and just peace, is the one that Jesus would opt for. Some people feel the need to only discuss matters in the crystalline - which means, of course, that the subsequent opinions are totally meaningless. My driving issue is to tell the truth to ourselves, and to acknowledge the crap-coating that all of our options come wrapped in. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Aug 6 2007, 01:01 PM Post #84 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Is that a Calvinist view of things? Reminds me of Luther. Dour. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Aug 6 2007, 01:08 PM Post #85 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
The greatest good for the greatest number, huh? That was never a part of Christian teachings, as I understand it. So, let me understand your point of view more clearly ... if you could be sure that you would shorten the war by torturing 10,000 innocent children, it's your view that that would be morally justified? And consistent with Christian teachings? |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Aug 6 2007, 01:54 PM Post #86 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Makes it no less accurate. Life this side of the fall can be quite dour at times, IT. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Aug 6 2007, 01:55 PM Post #87 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Does make it accurate either, Dewey. Of course, since by self definition all your human activities are covered with crap, I can't really see any grounds for your thinking that you can see the matter clearly.
|
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Aug 6 2007, 02:01 PM Post #88 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
I was going to question the implicit utilitarianism also, but I'll let Quirt cover that. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Aug 6 2007, 02:13 PM Post #89 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Past posts have already proven your rather limited understanding of the breadth of Christian teaching and doctrine.
Your comment is asinine. I do not equate torturing 10,000 innocent children with the obliteration of a series of religious structures, which was the point that started this conversation. Are you familiar with the history of the Civil War? Do you understand that a significant component in the North's victory was the desolation, industrial/military disruption, and psychological terror, caused by Sherman's operations? Are you familiar with the history of WW II? Do you realize that a major part of bringing the Nazis to their knees was Allied saturation bombing, of both military and civilian targets? So, to your question. Would I torture 10,000 children, to achieve an allegedly noble goal? No, I would not. Would I have given the same order as Truman, to drop the two atomic bombs, which killed quite a few more chilren than your example? Yes, I would. A contradiction? Perhaps, but there it is anyway. As Augustine said in writing about just war, even a just war may be made unjust by certain means, and torture of innocent children would cross that line. Would I have ordered Sherman to the sea, despite the inevitable suffering of innocents it caused? Yes. Would I have instructed his troops to torture and rape the population as they did so, to increase the psychological impact? No, I would not. Would I have ordered saturation bombing to the extent seen in WW II over civilian and military targets? Yes. Would I do so today, given superior armaments? No. Would I target non-military, but highly significant psychological targets (which is exactly what we're discussing here)? Yes. Would I allow 10,000 innocent children to be tortured in the short term, in order to allow actions that would save 100,000 or more from being tortured in the longer term? Yes. Quirt, you're one of those people who want the crystalline answer. It doesn't exist this side of Eden's gate. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Aug 6 2007, 02:15 PM Post #90 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Ditto.
|
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Aug 6 2007, 02:22 PM Post #91 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Of course since the Catholic view does not hold that, it is not by self definition.
|
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Aug 6 2007, 02:25 PM Post #92 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
No, I don't need a crystalline answer. But I believe there is an important difference between right and wrong, and I believe that difference can be found in Christian teachings (as well as other places). It is no surprise to me that you've descended from your usual moral high ground and started to get angry, because your position is both highly illogical and morally indefensible. I think, somewhere deep inside, you know that it's morally indefensible as well as inconsistent with your usual belief structure, and that's why you're getting angry. The real point here is that you're saying totally opposite things. This is a direct quote of what you said:
ANY strategy. ANY tactic. But now you are saying this:
A totally different thing than what you said before. Basically, your position is veering all over the map as you get challenged. You seem to be down to the old Supreme Court standard on pornography ... you know what's OK, and what isn't, when you see it, without reference to any principles whatsoever. And then, when challenged on what your principles actually are, you resort to accusing those who point out your inconsistencies of wanting a "crystalline answer". Bottom line, you haven't yet pointed to a single passage in the teachings of Jesus that would suggest that he would have taken a "greatest good for the greatest number" approach. And I don't think you can. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Aug 6 2007, 02:28 PM Post #93 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
True.
In respect of your earlier comment above, how can you justify that? That would violate a most basic of moral norms: it is never permissible to do an evil act in order that a good might come of it. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Frank_W | Aug 6 2007, 02:37 PM Post #94 |
![]()
Resident Misanthrope
|
There's no such thing as a "clean" war. Collateral damage does happen. Personally, I think it's more the enemy's PERCEPTION that we are more ruthless, than it is, the necessity to actually ACT ruthlessly. And in fact, when they expect you to be ruthless and instead, you extend the hand of kindness, after the crap has quit flying, then you have made an ally for life from what was once your sworn enemy. |
|
Anatomy Prof: "The human body has about 20 sq. meters of skin." Me: "Man, that's a lot of lampshades!" | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Aug 6 2007, 02:37 PM Post #95 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I justify it by the same means that FDR did. When he became aware of the atrocities occurring in the death camps, he could have altered war plans to divert all attention to liberating the camps, or he could have continued to fight the war as planned, on the assumption that to do so would save more people in the long run, concentration camp victims as well as Allied soldiers. I will grant to FDR the assumption that he was appalled at the human misery in the camps, but for the greater good, he had to focus on ending that misery in a different way. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Aug 6 2007, 02:47 PM Post #96 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Sorry, you hadn't asked for that before. Please open any New Testament, and look at any of the many teachings of Jesus that deal with the hypocrisy of holding to the letter of the law - the "crystalline" understanding of achieving God's will - instead of working for its spirit: reconciliation with God; establishment of peace and justice; and the general betterment of humanity in accordance with God's wishes. There are many such citations, you won't have any trouble finding them. As to their extension to "the greatest good for the greatest number," there are obviously limitations to that concept that you've brought up - but do you actually believe that Christianity teaches something other than the ideal of achieving the greatest good, and peace, and justice, for as many people as can be provided it? That these things are to be reserved for a select few? You, sir, not I, seem to have a fairly perverse understanding of Christianity. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Aug 6 2007, 02:47 PM Post #97 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
FDR did not allow the death camps. Had the death camps been under his authority, then he would have culpability. You are confusing the moral agent. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Aug 6 2007, 02:49 PM Post #98 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I agree with this completely. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Aug 6 2007, 02:51 PM Post #99 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
No, I'm not. He could have altered strategy to divert his forces to liberate specific locations, rather than deploying his military assets in the manner that he did. Had he done so, he may have liberated a few camps sooner, but the war would have dragged on, killing more people, in uniform and in pinstripes in the remaining unliberated camps. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| QuirtEvans | Aug 6 2007, 03:08 PM Post #100 |
|
I Owe It All To John D'Oh
|
Exactly where did I refer to holding to the letter of the "law"? I referred to moral principles. You don't abandon principles.
Yes, and I will explain, after I dismiss your next line, which is just outright silly:
Of course not. My understanding of Christian morality would best be captured by an analogy: the Hippocratic oath. "make a habit of two things — to help, or at least to do no harm." Do no harm. That is my understanding of a course of action of which Jesus would approve. I think that Jesus would say that choosing between the torture of 10,000 children to save 100,000 children is a false choice. That God would not want us to make that choice. And that we have to remain true to our principles ... to refuse to torture the 10,000 children ... and to have faith that doing no harm will result in the best outcome. I think that Jesus would say that, by forswearing the doing of any harm, you will, in the long run, achieve the greatest good, and peace, and justice, for as many people as possible. And that allowing yourself to be trapped in a false choice is a Devil's bargain. |
| It would be unwise to underestimate what large groups of ill-informed people acting together can achieve. -- John D'Oh, January 14, 2010. | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |









6:46 AM Jul 11