Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 General Skepticism
 Hitchens
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 2

Gorgo
SFN Die Hard

USA
5310 Posts

Posted - 12/22/2013 :  04:13:21   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Gorgo a Private Message  Reply with Quote
After years of this behavior, there is no reason to think that the Bushes and the Clintons meant anything other than the destruction of a society that wasn't far from the edges of being a "first world" country, and Obama carried it on as long as he could. There is no mistake.

Originally posted by On fire for Christ

yeah the invasion in retrospect was a mistake. But not for the reasons people were saying before it started. It was a mistake because Iraq doesn't seem to be better off now. Or at least they have different but still very real problems. If Iraq was now in a peaceful democracy would the anti-war protesters admit they were wrong? I doubt it, because their original concerns weren't with the end result, it was the process. My concern was always the end result.

I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter



Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9687 Posts

Posted - 12/22/2013 :  13:57:41   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by On fire for Christ

yeah the invasion in retrospect was a mistake.

The invasion wasn't "a mistake". It was a fucking travesty!
It shouldn't have happened in the first place. It was a war of aggression against a country which posed no danger to USA or England.
It was a violation of international law.
It was a violation of Jus gentium
The conduct by the forces during the invasion violated the Geneva Convention on several points. The failure to maintain law and order in the occupied territory violated the Geneva Convention.

I consider USA and England war criminals for what they have done.

But there's a bigger issue to this. Because two major powers of the world decided the Geneva Convention isn't worth shit, they opened the door to every other country and fighting forces in the world: double standard is King, no point in following the Convention since your opponent won't care anyway. So it's going to be open season on any soldiers.
For every American (or English) soldier captured and tortured, I say "bo-hooo... Cry me a fucking river, then go and blame your own government for keeping the ball rolling."


If Iraq was now in a peaceful democracy would the anti-war protesters admit they were wrong?

Iraq being a peaceful democracy or the mess it is now has absolutely nothing to do with me being right or wrong.
I know I am right:
Even if Iraq was a peaceful democracy today, the invasion would still be a fucking travesty for the reasons I've already enumerated above. Violations of international law and the Geneva Conventions.


My concern was always the end result.

So you think the end justify the means? That's just plain evil waiting to happen!

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Edited by - Dr. Mabuse on 12/22/2013 14:00:17
Go to Top of Page

Gorgo
SFN Die Hard

USA
5310 Posts

Posted - 12/22/2013 :  17:41:27   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Gorgo a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Hitchens also was a "strong influence" on a young man who decided to put his life on the line. How many died because of Hitchens' promotion of U.S. terrorism?

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/11/hitchens200711

I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter



Edited by - Gorgo on 12/22/2013 17:42:29
Go to Top of Page

sailingsoul
SFN Addict

2830 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2014 :  12:38:03   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send sailingsoul a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Gorgo

Hitchens also was a "strong influence" on a young man who decided to put his life on the line. How many died because of Hitchens' promotion of U.S. terrorism?

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/11/hitchens200711
I would like a bit of clarification, if you don't mind Gorgo. Being a strong influence is one thing. He was and still is a strong influence on me and countless others. He will be a strong influence to those who are born after his death, through videos of him saying his thing and other recorded output from him. This is true, however are you thinking or saying Christopher Hitchens is responsible for this man's death?

There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS
Go to Top of Page

Gorgo
SFN Die Hard

USA
5310 Posts

Posted - 01/05/2014 :  16:13:55   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Gorgo a Private Message  Reply with Quote
sailingsoul, what does "strong influence" mean? The article isn't clear. Does it mean that he wouldn't have gone if it weren't for Hitchens? Would he have gone if Hitchens' writing had been a "strong influence" to do something constructive, or would Daily have found some other "strong influence?" Does what Daily did matter, as it pertains to Hitchens?

Was Hitchens not happy to send other people to commit the crimes he supported, whether or not the war even took place? He was someone who purported to be a journalist, a person who cared about facts, that instead urged people to follow the lies.

Just because Hitchens supported criminal actions in one area, does that mean that we shouldn't applaud what he did in other areas? In what other areas should we applaud him? Did he give us some special knowledge that overshadowed the lies that he was pushing?

I'm still up in the air about Hitchens, even after reading Richard Seymour, but I'm having trouble getting too excited about celebrating him.

I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter



Edited by - Gorgo on 01/05/2014 17:29:07
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 2 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.08 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000