"Lest we forget"

[bogan]

Don't you think that's a tad arrogant?
Who elected us god?
By what right, moral or otherwise, are we permitted to be judge, jury and executioner?
And who's the arbiter of whether we are right (have a gold star) or misguided (playground bully award)

I think it is a tad noble, risking it all in the defence of those who cannot defend themselves.
The same moral rights which justify self defence justify the defence of others.
Now that is the real question, and not one easily answered since crystal balls don't work.

[Akzle]

sometimes I think you must be a different species ...

i wish i was.
One thats allowed to kill humans. Like a moose. Or bear. Just not a regular moose or bear, one with opposable thumbs so i can operate firearms and drive. Then id go hang out with the kombocha mushroom people.

Actually, maybe rather a virus, the T virus.

[Voltaire]

i wish i was.
One thats allowed to kill humans. Like a moose. Or bear. Just not a regular moose or bear, one with opposable thumbs so i can operate firearms and drive. Then id go hang out with the kombocha mushroom people.

Actually, maybe rather a virus, the T virus.

Hey Rob your other forum is missing you http://www.lifestyleblock.co.nz/index.php

http://www.lifestyleblock.co.nz/vfor...p/t-37542.html

[TheDemonLord]

Don't you think that's a tad arrogant?
Who elected us god?
By what right, moral or otherwise, are we permitted to be judge, jury and executioner?
And who's the arbiter of whether we are right (have a gold star) or misguided (playground bully award)

So - let me ask this directly:

You are watching a gang of 20 people, armed with Machetes - they have just hacked the Arms and genetalia of some 30 men in a village, while leaving them to bleed out, with their wives and children watching.

They then proceed to force the sons (at machete point) to rape the daughters, while the mothers are held down to be gang raped as well.

Once they are finished, they are going to execute all the sons (Slowly, while normally forcing the survivors to watch), and mutilate all the survivors (normally using whatever is to hand - so Knives, Flares, Broken bottles, Shotguns, pistols - whatever takes their fancy really)

You are standing on a hill with an SR-25 (Designated Marksmen Rifle) with 30 rounds.

Do you stop the slaughter, rape and Torture?

If the Answer is no - then - you are a despicable human being (and I use the word despicable with every bit of Malice that is implied in the word)

If the Answer is yes - then how did you decide to intervene? I would expect it would be by empathy with the victims and some notion of natural justice that what was being done to them is wrong and must be stopped.

We, in the western world have the power to stop such atrocities, with Power is granted responsible to use it wisely. I concede that we don't always get it right, sometimes we intervene when we shouldn't and sometimes we don't intervene when we should - and with the clarity of hindsight, people like you and I are left to argue at length as to the merits of our action or inaction

but I put to you that there are situations where all peaceful alternatives have been exhausted and to stop a greater evil, we must send in troops

[Bikemad]

you mean theyll destroy auckland AND kill all the politicians and jewcunts?!
Who's hand do i shake?, where do i forward the cheque?
Sign me up!

clearly you have not thought this through...........kill the polys and the jews and you won't have a cheque to forward

[mstriumph]

I think it is a tad noble, risking it all in the defence of those who cannot defend themselves.
The same moral rights which justify self defence justify the defence of others.
Now that is the real question, and not one easily answered since crystal balls don't work.

I repeat "And who's the arbiter of whether we are right (have a gold star) or misguided (playground bully award"

[mstriumph]

i wish i was.
One thats allowed to kill humans. Like a moose. Or bear. Just not a regular moose or bear, one with opposable thumbs so i can operate firearms and drive. Then id go hang out with the kombocha mushroom people.

Actually, maybe rather a virus, the T virus.

you really shouldn't forget to take your medication ... it makes you almost ... loveable

[bogan]

I repeat "And who's the arbiter of whether we are right (have a gold star) or misguided (playground bully award"

There is none. Should a lack of permission from a higher power prevent us from ever going to war in defense of those to weak to defend themselves? for that matter is defense of one's own nation always righteous?

[mstriumph]

So - let me ask this directly:

You are watching a gang of 20 people, armed with Machetes - they have just hacked the Arms and genetalia of some 30 men in a village, while leaving them to bleed out, with their wives and children watching.

They then proceed to force the sons (at machete point) to rape the daughters, while the mothers are held down to be gang raped as well.

Once they are finished, they are going to execute all the sons (Slowly, while normally forcing the survivors to watch), and mutilate all the survivors (normally using whatever is to hand - so Knives, Flares, Broken bottles, Shotguns, pistols - whatever takes their fancy really)

You are standing on a hill with an SR-25 (Designated Marksmen Rifle) with 30 rounds.

Do you stop the slaughter, rape and Torture?

If the Answer is no - then - you are a despicable human being (and I use the word despicable with every bit of Malice that is implied in the word)

If the Answer is yes - then how did you decide to intervene? I would expect it would be by empathy with the victims and some notion of natural justice that what was being done to them is wrong and must be stopped.

We, in the western world have the power to stop such atrocities, with Power is granted responsible to use it wisely. I concede that we don't always get it right, sometimes we intervene when we shouldn't and sometimes we don't intervene when we should - and with the clarity of hindsight, people like you and I are left to argue at length as to the merits of our action or inaction

but I put to you that there are situations where all peaceful alternatives have been exhausted and to stop a greater evil, we must send in troops

The quick answer is that we send in the united nations who stand there in their blue helmets and watch ... thereby giving tacit approval to the proceedings.

That's cynical in the extreme and sounds facile but it illustrates my point - mebbe we should think about what we do that facilitates and encourages nasties ... and stop doing it?

..........that's probably not as attractive as dashing in, banners flying, to dish out retribution after the event ... but it may be more effective?

question is ... do our 'leaders' have enough foresight, intelligence and patience to put it into practice...

[bogan]

mebbe we should think about what we do that facilitates and encourages nasties ... and stop doing it?

Things like treating women as equals instead of property you mean?

[mstriumph]

There is none. Should a lack of permission from a higher power prevent us from ever going to war in defense of those to weak to defend themselves? for that matter is defense of one's own nation always righteous?

1. Belief in a "higher power" seems to get folk into more strife than anything else, conflictwise.
2. Normally what we see (the conflict) is the end product of years, sometimes decades of buildup with rights, wrongs, claims, counterclaims on both sides ... I think we are sometimes too quick to judge/ move on/ interfere in the current situation without viewing the buildup/background. Also, I don't trust 'us' not to allow our own self-interest to direct our actions.
3. Yes, if we are directly attacked we are obliged to defend ourselves - no question ... we just have to remember that other nations have that right too, when we have marched into THEIR country.
4. Defence has a 'c', not an 's'. Think of the children

[mstriumph]

Things like treating women as equals instead of property you mean?

Love it ... but you don't have to debate me if you don't want to, you know?

[TheDemonLord]

The quick answer is that we send in the united nations who stand there in their blue helmets and watch ... thereby giving tacit approval to the proceedings.

That's cynical in the extreme and sounds facile but it illustrates my point - mebbe we should think about what we do that facilitates and encourages nasties ... and stop doing it?

..........that's probably not as attractive as dashing in, banners flying, to dish out retribution after the event ... but it may be more effective?

question is ... do our 'leaders' have enough foresight, intelligence and patience to put it into practice...

And why is it you think the United Nations has turned into a limp wristed organisation that is too scarred to slap someone on the wrist with a wet bus ticket?

I put forward it is because people who share many of your sentiments:

War is bad
We shouldn't send troops in because they might get hurt/die
Everyone should hold hands, get along and sing Kum-by-yah (or however it is spellt)

You say that we facilitate and encourage nasties - I agree, you also say we should stop what we are doing that encourages and facilitates - I also agree: by standing on the side lines and not kicking ass (when it needs to be kicked) we are definitely encouraging and facilitating them.

As for our Leaders - of course they don't - they are human, often with insufficient information and conflicting viewpoints from the people - but without a better alternative, they are the best we have

[mstriumph]

So, the Rwandan Genocide, People going round and carving up (literally) with Machetes people from the opposite tribe, not to mention all the Rape, mutilation, torture etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan...ans_of_killing

were we not justified to send in troops to stop the wholesale slaughter?

If you say no, I invite you to read the accounts of what happened in Rwanda -...............

read this one
tell me we were effective
tell me we acted with disinterested concern for the victimised Rwandan nationals
tell me our hands our clean

http://www.rwandanstories.org/genoci..._the_west.html

or weep - as I do.

[bogan]

1. Belief in a "higher power" seems to get folk into more strife than anything else, conflictwise.
2. Normally what we see (the conflict) is the end product of years, sometimes decades of buildup with rights, wrongs, claims, counterclaims on both sides ... I think we are sometimes too quick to judge/ move on/ interfere in the current situation without viewing the buildup/background. Also, I don't trust 'us' not to allow our own self-interest to direct our actions.
3. Yes, if we are directly attacked we are obliged to defend ourselves - no question ... we just have to remember that other nations have that right too, when we have marched into THEIR country.
4. Defence has a 'c', not an 's'. Think of the children

1. So all we have is ourselves at our time to decide whether it is right to go to war or not; this is why I remember those who made the sacrifice in the name of the freedom we enjoy today. I do not taint that memory by somehow insinuating they were wrong to make such a choice.
2. It is, but again, this changes nothing as all we have is ourselves and our time to make the decision. Years of buildup do not excuse atrocities and oppression that we may choose to go and fight.
3. Pretty simplistic view, you know there are such things as border disputes right? And counterattacks as the best form of defense.
4. Meh, my browser spell check only comes in American English, the two are interchangeable in almost all forms of communication nowadays anyway.

Love it ... but you don't have to debate me if you don't want to, you know?

Why would you think I don't want to? Projection of you not wanting me to, on account of me pointing out some truths you're not entirely happy with?