Afghanistan

[Serious Paul]

I kinda liked the where would you go thread so lets move the raghead killin' over here shall we? I am all for killin stuff, so lets get it on. I'll start.

I think, and I am dead serious that Violence does beget violence, but that sometimes violence is not only the best solution but the right one. I think that we as a Nation (Meaning the United States of America) have a duty and responsibility to not only defend our citizens, ?"avenge" their deaths, but also to send a clear concise message that "We are nots to be fucked with."

Okay lets get it on.

[Spiral]

Isreal's been doing a good job of telling the Palestinians that they're not to be fucked with, either, but those pesky extremists keep blowing themselves up in pizza parlours and packed buses.

[Salvation122]

Then Isreal hasn't been doing a very good job.

[Spiral]

Isreal's been doing a fine job. Those Palestinians who are willing to turn themselves into Shrapnel Delivery Systems (SDSs) simply either do not give a flying fuck, or are further motivated by the fact that a heavily armed and armoured military force is hammering on their "fellow people" (in quotations because many Palestinians, I'm sure, want nothing to do with the aformentioned SDSs). So they sidle up to the soft flesh of Isreal's pale underbelly and martyr themselves.

Dammit, I wish I could remember the figures for the nember of people who have died since this latest bout of violence erupted ~18 months ago. I heard the breakdown this morning on the CBC. Shit.

[Serious Paul]

While I'll agree that the Israelis are ass kickers from way back, I really think if we put our minds to it, the good US of A could show the world what Ass kickin' is. Hands down, no question in my mind.

Personally I am surprised at the restraints the Israelis show. It must be tempting for them on occassion, to just say 'Fuck it, shoot 'em all, let Allah sort 'em out." That the conflict has been llimited for centuries to what it is, I'd say that the Israelis show good restraint.

I know, E for fragging effort.

[Salvation122]

If Isreal had been doing a good job telling the Palestinians they weren't to be fucked with, the Palestinians wouldn't be blowing themselves up. They'd be too afraid to.

Personally, I think that the Isrealis should line up everybody involved with the PLO and shoot them in the head. (Except for Arafat; there has to be somone to surrender.) Not doing so shows that the Isrealis aren't really serious about stopping the problem.

[Spiral]

While I'll agree that the Israelis are ass kickers from way back, I really think if we put our minds to it, the good US of A could show the world what Ass kickin' is. Hands down, no question in my mind.

Hiroshima


Nagasaki


Everyone knows the US can kick ass when required. Blowing shit up only goes so far in solving problems, however. We're all well aware of this.

[Serious Paul]

Sal you're my hero.

[PMWrestler]

If Isreal had been doing a good job telling the Palestinians they weren't to be fucked with, the Palestinians wouldn't be blowing themselves up. They'd be too afraid to.

This is true....but it's very hard for them to do that amazing job, when the UN, and the nieve in America hold them back. All they can do is try to contain it, which is one of the reasons the Isreali counter-terror teams are so good. Better than our Delta Force perhaps.

[Salvation122]

That's not violence; that's the /threat/ of violence, which is another animal entirely.

If I shoot anyone who walks toward my house, I'm going to get the shit kicked out of me eventually by people who wanted to walk past my house, or loved those people who I shot, or just don't like me randomly shooting people. But if I put a sign in my lawn that says "No Trespassers," or, "I've got a gun, assholes," there's a lot greater chance that I'll live for two weeks.

The threat of violence means nothing if you don't have the guts to back it up. To take your example, let's say that you put that second sign out in your yard, and somebody decided to walk in your yard anyway, just to piss you off, or test the boundaries, or whatever. You don't shoot the guy. Pretty soon, everybody's walking through your yard again, and the sign doesn't really mean anything. Sometimes you have to shoot the fucker in the head. Not every time. Not even the first time, necessarily. But you do eventually have to shoot, or your pretty warning means nothing.

Practical example: The United States has the single largest nuclear deterrent in the world. Does anyone really think we'll use it? Nah. So they don't care if they piss us off by running planes into our buildings. I still think that we should have started the war on Afghanistan by dropping a tactical nuke down a cave; it would show people that we aren't fucking around.

Peace through superior fucking firepower. It's not always pretty, but it works.

[PMWrestler]

Sal, you are a god among men. Where were you back in the go anywhere thread, I could have used your help. lol

[Spiral]

(repost from th'other thread)

The Cold War never turned "hot" because Russia and the US were afraid of Mutually Assured Destruction.

That's not violence; that's the /threat/ of violence, which is another animal entirely.

That wasn't the threat of violence. That was the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction -- the eradication of all life on Earth and the transformation of the planet into a giant, irradiate monument to the stupidity of the human species.

Thank you.

[PMWrestler]

But isn't Mutually Assured Destruction just the result of the Ultimate Violence?

[Serious Paul]

Neat pics, what do they have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing. We haven't actually used a serious nuclear weapon since. Thankfully, I suppose. Since World War II there has not been a war of that scale. I am saying thee should be. I am glad people like you are reluctant to use the hard option. I'm not. Some times people only learn if you thump them. Period. I think this is one of those moments in history where we need to put some people out of house, home, life and liberty.

As a nation we need to take a proactive stance and in a much larger scale. To me it isn't just Lex Talionis, an eye for an eye. It needs to be much more. A dead village for an eye, a waste land for a tower. For me this is a fair trade. For every American killed, I think 10000 random Afghans should be not only kiled, but Horribley maimed, murdered and destroyed.

I am sure your first thought wil be "Well that won't stop them. It will only make them hate us more.". SO WHAT?

Like I care. We can kill more of them than can of us,that simple. How far do yuo think they are willing to go? Total suicide? Great, then we get rid of them all. They surrender we still win. Period.

[Spiral]

I still think that we should have started the war on Afghanistan by dropping a tactical nuke down a cave; it would show people that we aren't fucking around.

By doing so, you would remove the only thing that prevents terrorists from popping a suitcase nuke in the stadium during the superbowl. Nobody will use nukes because doing so will utterly alienate you from the rest of the world. Your allies won't dare to support you. Everyone becomes your enemy, and you will be terminated with extreme prejudice.

[Salvation122]

It's nice to know that intolerance and racism have been stamped out in 2002. Chee-rist.

Tolerance is easy. It's knowing when to be intolerant that's hard. As a society, we are far, far, far too tolerant.

[Serious Paul]

War is won by those prepared to kill.

I am are you?:) I like how this is shaping up. Get your shots in I have to go to work now, but I'll be back to see the Havoc tommorrow. Play nice.

[PMWrestler]

I still think that we should have started the war on Afghanistan by dropping a tactical nuke down a cave; it would show people that we aren't fucking around.

By doing so, you would remove the only thing that prevents terrorists from popping a suitcase nuke in the stadium during the superbowl. Nobody will use nukes because doing so will utterly alienate you from the rest of the world. Your allies won't dare to support you. Everyone becomes your enemy, and you will be terminated with extreme prejudice.

The people of Afghanistan are already alienated from the rest of the world. And the other assholes from Iran, or Saudia Arabia, or whatever, feel like they are too, because if not, they wouldn't practice terrorism. The only thing stopping them is logistics. Once they get one, and are able to sneak it here....say 2 or 3 years from now, once security is lax again, I wouldn't put it past them from doing just that, and blowing us up with "suitcase nukes"

[Spiral]

It's nice to know that intolerance and racism have been stamped out in 2002. Chee-rist.

Tolerance is easy. It's knowing when to be intolerant that's hard. As a society, we are far, far, far too tolerant.

No. Intolerance is easy. It's inherrently connected to ignorance and/or apathy. Indifference is just as easy. Tolerance is hard, because tolerance is what preserves free speech and freedom of expression, because tolerance is built on understanding, and understanding takes effort. Tolerance is what allows debates like this exist.

Tolerance is never, ever easy, and never, ever mistake indifference for tolerance. People die because of indifference and intolerance, but people die for tolerance.

[Salvation122]

By doing so, you would remove the only thing that prevents terrorists from popping a suitcase nuke in the stadium during the superbowl.

Terrorists haven't yet used a nuclear weapon because they don't yet have the capability. If they did, one would have been used, the same way biological and chemical weapons have been used.

Nobody will use nukes because doing so will utterly alienate you from the rest of the world. Your allies won't dare to support you.

I understand that. Fuck 'em. The world's economy is, to a large extent, built around the US. You won't trade with us? Fine, we won't fucking well feed you. The US is self-sufficent, to a large extent, and could be more so. The majority of the rest of the world is not.

I'm not saying that we should have used a nuke because the conflict waranted it. I'm saying that, sometime soon, we have to use one to show the world that we've done it before, and we can do it again.

[Moonwolf]

Spiral: I agree entirely. Intolorance caused things like, the crusades, Jihads, the Holocaust, etc, etc. From our past record(as humanity), the hard part has been being nice to one another.

Also, the Palestinians are fucked off with the Isrealis because Isreal invaded them! And then moved their people into the conquered land. While the USA gave them weapons and support. And then they killed off people in the refuge camps. The Isreali government brought what they are getting now on themselves.

[PMWrestler]

Tolerance is never, ever easy, and never, ever mistake indifference for tolerance. People die because of indifference and intolerance, but people die for tolerance.

Of course people die because from tolerism. We were too tolerant of the "rights" of Middle Easterners getting on planes on September 11th. So instead of being accused of racial profiling, security guards didn't randomly stop one of the for a search of thier bags, or thier person. They let them get on thier planes. So now, instead of offended Mid Easterners, we have 343 dead fireman, not to mention the cops, PA workers, and the civilians, along with military personell at the Pentagon. All of them died because oif tolerance.

[Spiral]

So instead of being accused of racial profiling, security guards didn't randomly stop one of the for a search of thier bags, or thier person. They let them get on thier planes. So now, instead of offended Mid Easterners, we have 343 dead fireman, not to mention the cops, PA workers, and the civilians, along with military personell at the Pentagon. All of them died because oif tolerance.

Racial profiling accomplishes zilch except an indeterminant (goddamit where are my sources when I need them) number of middle-east-looking type people rotting in prison in prison with no charges being brought against them. And I'm not taking about the POWs in Cuba.

All those people died because the companies employing those security guards were apathetic and indifferent to the security of their customers. Not because they didn't care, but because they didn't think It (WTC) was possible. What happened was that a bunch of people making minimum wage and with shitty training were all that stood between people (I prefer to call them sheep, but anyway) prepared to die (and kill) for what they believed in and their vessels of destruction. Racial profiling is a steaming load of Mcarthian (sp?), witch-hunting bullshit, and the only reason you're supporting it is because you're NOT a bearded middle-eastern male (which includes almost anyone who isn't white or black (a convenient pairing for someone like El Shrub, who sees only in those two extremes)), and you're not the one being dragged out of your house, pulled out of line, or publically assaulted and/or harrassed with no basis whatsoever.

[3278]

That's not violence; that's the /threat/ of violence, which is another animal entirely.

If I shoot anyone who walks toward my house, I'm going to get the shit kicked out of me eventually by people who wanted to walk past my house, or loved those people who I shot, or just don't like me randomly shooting people. But if I put a sign in my lawn that says "No Trespassers," or, "I've got a gun, assholes," there's a lot greater chance that I'll live for two weeks.

The threat of violence means nothing if you don't have the guts to back it up.

I agree completely with this point. Again, we're talking about "targeted violence." Not too much, not too little. And not toward the wrong people.

Practical example: The United States has the single largest nuclear deterrent in the world. Does anyone really think we'll use it? Nah. So they don't care if they piss us off by running planes into our buildings. I still think that we should have started the war on Afghanistan by dropping a tactical nuke down a cave; it would show people that we aren't fucking around.

Oh my god, are you stupid? This is absolutely as dumb as your above statement that Israel hasn't been doing a good enough job scaring the Palestinians.

They don't care.

We're talking about a culture that's undergoing the same upheaval we went through when our culture began becoming secularized while simultaneously undergoing both an industrial revolution and a religious upheaval on the scale of the Crusades. They don't give a shit that we've got nukes; what good will they do, anyway? Your "tactical nuke in a cave" would kill exactly as many people as a bunkerbuster, and piss off the entire world, to boot. Or are you so tunnel-visioned that you think the whole world consists of the US and its enemies?

It's time to get it through your head that the rest of the world matters. Using nukes is out of the question in this case. Or did you not know that much of the rest of the world isn't terribly pleased about the fact that a 200-year-old country with a history of instability and aggressiveness possesses enough power to destroy the world?

We're not going to scare Islamic fundementalists with the bomb, any more than they're going to scare us with planes. What you're going to do is galvanize the entire Arab community, and a fair portion of the rest of the world, into hating us and fighting us.

Peace through superior fucking firepower. It's not always pretty, but it works.

No. It doesn't. Sal, they knew we had the ability to kill every last Islamic fundementalist on the planet, and they did it anyway. They're not scared. Beating a mad dog only makes him madder.

You know what the smartest thing we could do is? Say to the Islamic fundementalist community, "Hi. We're America. You don't like us, and we understand why. Many of your countries were secularized without your consent because some of your leaders came to our country to be educated. To top it all off, we've used your contries over and over as proxies in fights you had no part of. And we've treated you like pawns to feed our own economy. But you've alternately obstructed us and willingly taken our aid, you've killed thousands of people because you didn't like the politics of their leaders, you've committed atrocities against civilians that we can't even count. Well, guess what: you killed several thousand of our people to get our attention; you've got it. Let's call it even. Now you people sit down with our people, and we figure out a way to get along. Now, we're not going to make any changes inside our own country; we're still going to play baseball and worship more than one god. But we'll look at our foreign policy, and we'll be fair this time. We'll stop screwing you over to get ahead. Now, we can't give you everything - we still want to buy your oil and park battleships off your coasts because it's convenient - but we'll stop doing the things that really offend you, we'll reach a comprimise. You let us buy Saudi oil, we pull our females out of the military forces there. We comprimise. So let's all be good people, and let's talk."

[PMWrestler]

Racial profiling is a steaming load of Mcarthian (sp?), witch-hunting bullshit, and the only reason you're supporting it is because you're NOT a bearded middle-eastern male (which includes almost anyone who isn't white or black (a convenient pairing for someone like El Shrub, who sees only in those two extremes)), and you're not the one being dragged out of your house, pulled out of line, or publically assaulted and/or harrassed with no basis whatsoever.

No, the reason that I'm supporting it is because it prevents crimes from happening. If a certain percentage of people have commited a crime, and that number is much higher than another ethnic group, then why shouldn't you search them, or stop them, or at least get in thier way?
If twice the number of speeding violations were commited by a certain kind of car, than by all the others combined, I'm sure the police would be radar gunning them much more, to try to bring that number down...why not do the same with people?

[Spiral]

Yea 32! Now I can go back to working on my paper (which was due almost a week ago)!

BTW, I hope I made myself a good proxy in your absence.

[3278]

By doing so, you would remove the only thing that prevents terrorists from popping a suitcase nuke in the stadium during the superbowl.

Terrorists haven't yet used a nuclear weapon because they don't yet have the capability. If they did, one would have been used, the same way biological and chemical weapons have been used.

You're wrong. They do have the capability. If I can build a nuclear weapon - and I can - then so can they. And they were buying plutonium in the Sudan ten years ago. They can do it.

Nobody will use nukes because doing so will utterly alienate you from the rest of the world. Your allies won't dare to support you.

I understand that. Fuck 'em. The world's economy is, to a large extent, built around the US. You won't trade with us? Fine, we won't fucking well feed you. The US is self-sufficent, to a large extent, and could be more so. The majority of the rest of the world is not.

I've stepped off the edge of the world, and into a parallel dimension where everyone's insane but me and Spiral. The irony's killing me.

We are not self-sufficient, not by a long shot. Have you ever heard the term "trade deficit?" And yes, the United States is a large portion of the world economy, but it is by no means built around us!

We could be self-sufficient, but I think you're missing the point of why the US has not had to fight a war on its own soil in modern times, despite having soil lots of people would like; because we give people stuff. We're nice to them. We literally pay people to not get into wars with us, because it's cheaper than the war.

[PMWrestler]

You're wrong. They do have the capability. If I can build a nuclear weapon - and I can - then so can they.

You can build a nuclear weapon? If the average person with a computer could build a nuclear weapon, why would the military pay huge amounts of money to people to do it for them?

But then again...maybe you can...the internet is a strange and dangerous place.

[Spiral]

We are not self-sufficient, not by a long shot. Have you ever heard the term "trade deficit?" And yes, the United States is a large portion of the world economy, but it is by no means built around us!

Thank you thank you so much for fielding that one. The US is not self-sufficient by any means. They (mainly the south) are running out of water, for one thing. Fast. This is something which is going to put Canada in a very, very precarious position in about 10 years, because the President is going to come knocking for our water, and I hope the Canadian gov't can come up with a polite way to say: "Fuck off, you wasted yours, and we're not about to let you waste ours."

Plus, a lot of what the US produces and sells abroad is value-added products, which (given time) the source countries can do on their own. Canada is a big sucker here--we waster SO much potential wealth by not doing the value-added stuff at home. We ship the US the raw materials, the refine them and sell them back to us at an inflated price. It's fucking STUPID.

[3278]

Tolerance is never, ever easy, and never, ever mistake indifference for tolerance. People die because of indifference and intolerance, but people die for tolerance.

Of course people die because from tolerism. We were too tolerant of the "rights" of Middle Easterners getting on planes on September 11th. So instead of being accused of racial profiling, security guards didn't randomly stop one of the for a search of thier bags, or thier person. They let them get on thier planes. So now, instead of offended Mid Easterners, we have 343 dead fireman, not to mention the cops, PA workers, and the civilians, along with military personell at the Pentagon. All of them died because oif tolerance.

Yes. Yes, indeed, everyone's gone mad.

You're right, all those people could have lived if we were all more intolerant. Of course, millions more would have died because of intolerance. How many of those fireman were niggers, or spics? How many were wops or chinks or krauts? How many were fucking ragheads?

You want to start racially profiling? Good. Because that means that we can start not letting Spaniards on planes, because of the Basque extremists. No more Armenians on planes; the ASALA's some nasty folk. Definately no Irish; those people have some /real/ problems with terrorism. Hey, you think New York cops might have a problem with the racial profiling of the Irish? I mean, they'd all have to arrest themselves.

Tolerance didn't kill those people; the Afghani version of you did.

[Spiral]

You can build a nuclear weapon? If the average person with a computer could build a nuclear weapon, why would the military pay huge amounts of money to people to do it for them?

So could I. I just need the plutonium and a couple other minor things. The military can do it a lot more efficiently and portably than I can, but I can still do it--the radiation would kill me though.

[3278]

You're wrong. They do have the capability. If I can build a nuclear weapon - and I can - then so can they.

You can build a nuclear weapon? If the average person with a computer could build a nuclear weapon, why would the military pay huge amounts of money to people to do it for them?

Well, for a few reasons.

1. They paid people a lot of money to /invent/ it. I doubt I could have done that. I /really/ doubt I could have done that.

2. A large portion of the expense is in the preparation of the fissionables. A terrorist doesn't have to be nearly so careful about that, given that he's:
a) Not terribly concerned about environmental or personal contamination
b) Not building a particularly large weapons, and not building an H-Bomb

3. The vast majority of the cost of a nuclear weapon is the delivery system.

4. Government-made bombs are made to /incredibly/ exacting specifications. They don't need to be, but they're looking to get the biggest possible bang.

5. The government seems to like paying the defense contractors a lot of money for not very much work. I wish they wouldn't do that; if tanks cost half as much as they do, we could have twice as many tanks. Which I think would be pretty cool.

But then again...maybe you can...the internet is a strange and dangerous place.

Anyone with a lot of radium clocks and a high-school education can build an A-Bomb. If you don't know how, you should have listened more closely in physics. There's nothing special about me because I know how to build one; I would assume the majority of us do. [Now, I know how to make a neutron bomb, and that does make me special. And happy.] But there's nothing incredible about knowing how to make an atom bomb.

[PMWrestler]

Tolerance didn't kill those people; the Afghani version of you did.

See, I was like you before. Nieve. But I did a lot of growing up from the time I woke up on the 11th, till the time I went to sleep that night. And like I said before, I assure you that you would see this all very differantly if it was your cousin who died, if it was the 7 guys (from my dad's company) you've looked up to and imitated, and talked to a eaten with and cried with that died, if it was 343 people that you would give anything in the world to be like that died. You would hate these people just a little more. You would be the one who wanted to nuke the rag heads out of existance.

[Spiral]

I assure you that you would see this all very differantly if it was your cousin who died, if it was the 7 guys (from my dad's company) you've looked up to and imitated, and talked to a eaten with and cried with that died, if it was 343 people that you would give anything in the world to be like that died.

Harsh and cold as it sounds, therein lies the difficulty. You're too close to the situation to make unbiased judgements. This is why cops get pulled off cases that involve their families or friends, why judges can't preside over cases they're personally implicated in, and why (in Canada, at least), elected politicians aren't allowed to personally control stock in companies. Conflict of interest.

[3278]

Tolerance didn't kill those people; the Afghani version of you did.

See, I was like you before. Nieve. But I did a lot of growing up from the time I woke up on the 11th, till the time I went to sleep that night. And like I said before, I assure you that you would see this all very differantly if it was your cousin who died, if it was the 7 guys (from my dad's company) you've looked up to and imitated, and talked to a eaten with and cried with that died, if it was 343 people that you would give anything in the world to be like that died. You would hate these people just a little more. You would be the one who wanted to nuke the rag heads out of existance.

See, I was like you, before. Naive. But I did a lot of growing up when I realized that the world is bigger than the people I care about. And though I haven't yet said it, I assure you that you would see this all very differently if you realized that the sort of actions you want to take are the ones that killed your cousin, the seven guys from your dad's company, and the 343 firemen. You would learn to get past your hatred so you could make sure your mother, your father, your coworkers, and everyone in your country, didn't have to live in a world where everyone acted like children. You would detach yourself a little more. You would be the one who wants to better the world, not enact vengeance.

[PMWrestler]

Harsh and cold as it sounds, therein lies the difficulty. You're too close to the situation to make unbiased judgements

Nah, thats not cold or harsh....it's true. But in my opinion, everyone in America was touched by this tragedy. EVERYONE here shouldn't be able to make unbiased judgements. Where's the "Remember the Maine!" or "...a day which will live in infamy"? all we have is people saying we shouldn't touch the poor, troubled, trampled on, Afghans....American society has grown cold towards it's own people, in trying to be caring to others.

[Salvation122]

Oh my god, are you stupid? This is absolutely as dumb as your above statement that Israel hasn't been doing a good enough job scaring the Palestinians.

Did you read the bottom of the thread, too?

I said that I knew it wasn't necessary, and that it wasn't politically possible. But it sends a message that somehow got lost after Reagan, one that Isreal has, one that we need to make again:

"Don't fuck with us. We'll kill you.

We've become the single most developed country, from a political, technological, economic and military stance, on the planet in two hundred and twenty-six years. We've saved your asses time and time again, with no real compelling reason to do so other than that we're nice guys. Believe us, if you piss us off, we will destroy you, eventually. It's only a matter of time - and that's not even a very big one."

We're talking about a culture that's undergoing the same upheaval we went through when our culture began becoming secularized while simultaneously undergoing both an industrial revolution and a religious upheaval on the scale of the Crusades.

I understand that they're fundamentally unstable. I don't really think that that's a good thing. Frankly, I'd prefer a galvanized Arabia against us than an unstable Arabia that can't make up it's mind.

They don't give a shit that we've got nukes.

Yeah, but, see, everyone else does.

It's time to get it through your head that the rest of the world matters. Using nukes is out of the question in this case.

Again, I understand that.

Or did you not know that much of the rest of the world isn't terribly pleased about the fact that a 200-year-old country with a history of instability and aggressiveness possesses enough power to destroy the world?

They better get used to it. I don't plan on going anywhere.

No. It doesn't.

It doesn't with those that don't care if they die. Overall, it works beautifully.

Sal, they knew we had the ability to kill every last Islamic fundementalist on the planet, and they did it anyway. They're not scared. Beating a mad dog only makes him madder.

Which is why you shoot said dog in the head. Or starve it. Or poison it.

You know what the smartest thing we could do is? Say to the Islamic fundementalist community, "Hi. We're America. You don't like us, and we understand why. Many of your countries were secularized without your consent because some of your leaders came to our country to be educated. To top it all off, we've used your contries over and over as proxies in fights you had no part of. And we've treated you like pawns to feed our own economy. But you've alternately obstructed us and willingly taken our aid, you've killed thousands of people because you didn't like the politics of their leaders, you've committed atrocities against civilians that we can't even count. Well, guess what: you killed several thousand of our people to get our attention; you've got it. Let's call it even. Now you people sit down with our people, and we figure out a way to get along. Now, we're not going to make any changes inside our own country; we're still going to play baseball and worship more than one god. But we'll look at our foreign policy, and we'll be fair this time. We'll stop screwing you over to get ahead. Now, we can't give you everything - we still want to buy your oil and park battleships off your coasts because it's convenient - but we'll stop doing the things that really offend you, we'll reach a comprimise. You let us buy Saudi oil, we pull our females out of the military forces there. We comprimise. So let's all be good people, and let's talk."

Isn't that what Clinton did? Did it work?

You're wrong. They do have the capability. If I can build a nuclear weapon - and I can - then so can they. And they were buying plutonium in the Sudan ten years ago.

Really? You have the equipment to safely handle plutonium for long periods of time, and to mask the bomb so that it doesn't release enough radiation to kill you after an hour or so of carrying it around on a plane without enough lead to make every metal detector in the airport go off?

I know they know how to build a bomb. My father knows how to build a nuclear weapon; he drew it out for me once, when I was about eight. Anyone that has earned a decent engineering degree in the past thirty years can build a nuclear weapon. It's not even particularly difficult to get the nuclear material, though it is expensive. But putting the thing together and walking around with it without having your skin melt isn't all that easy.

We could be self-sufficient, but I think you're missing the point of why the US has not had to fight a war on its own soil in modern times, despite having soil lots of people would like; because we give people stuff. We're nice to them. We literally pay people to not get into wars with us, because it's cheaper than the war.

I understand that. I also understand that it's hard to fight a war when you can't eat, even if you can feed your military, as the Russian Revolution showed. We supply, what, a quarter of all grain to the world? Maybe a sixth more or less? If that goes away, fighting a world war becomes pretty much impossible. (Actually, the world would probably blow itself up and leave the planet a charred, toxic wreck, if we went to war under those circumstances.) We're saying the same thing, I think: That people wouldn't fuck with us because we give them things they like. Like food and coal and natural gas. Important things. Things that it becomes difficult to do without, in the long run.

[3278]

Harsh and cold as it sounds, therein lies the difficulty. You're too close to the situation to make unbiased judgements

Nah, thats not cold or harsh....it's true. But in my opinion, everyone in America was touched by this tragedy. EVERYONE here shouldn't be able to make unbiased judgements. Where's the "Remember the Maine!" or "...a day which will live in infamy"? all we have is people saying we shouldn't touch the poor, troubled, trampled on, Afghans....society has grown cold towards it's own people, in trying to be caring to others.

Oh my god! What country are you living in? All I hear is the "Nuke the Ragheads" bullshit. I haven't heard anyone saying that we should be nice to the poor Afghanis. Jesus, just look at this thread.

[PMWrestler]

You would detach yourself a little more. You would be the one who wants to better the world, not enact vengeance.

Besides my bloodlist for these bastards, how about the fact that if we don't retaliate for this, the people around the world would realize that America can be swayed by terrorist attacks?That we'll give in whenever we are pushed. If we don't retaliate, then what's coming, makes the Trade Center look like a walk in the park.

[Salvation122]

I haven't heard anyone saying that we should be nice to the poor Afghanis.

Uh, bullshit. We had a whole thread on v0.2 about how we should be nice to the poor Afghanis in Guantanamo Bay.

[Spiral]

American society has grown cold towards it's own people, in trying to be caring to others.

Pfft. It's all about the money. And the oil. But mostly about the money. The "me" culture of western society pervades even to the highest offices of governance.

Which is why you shoot said dog in the head. Or starve it. Or poison it.

Which is what the gov't has been doing. It just bit back. Hardcore.

We supply, what, a quarter of all grain to the world?

When I have more time, I'll try to pull up some figures one way or t'other.

edit: Crazy quote-shit happening.

[Adam]

But then again...maybe you can...the internet is a strange and dangerous place.

You know, even my mother is enlightened enough to know that the internet isn't strange and dangerous - but information that you can get off of it can be.

[PMWrestler]

Oh my god! What country are you living in? All I hear is the "Nuke the Ragheads" bullshit. I haven't heard anyone saying that we should be nice to the poor Afghanis.

The entire "places you would like to go" thread, for a time, turned into people saying we should be nice to the Afghani's. Turn on the news, all of the people on CNN, and other news media personell keep preaching about ending the war, and to stop the "slaughter"

[3278]

Oh my god, are you stupid? This is absolutely as dumb as your above statement that Israel hasn't been doing a good enough job scaring the Palestinians.

I said that I knew it wasn't necessary, and that it wasn't politically possible. But it sends a message that somehow got lost after Reagan, one that Isreal has, one that we need to make again:

"Don't fuck with us. We'll kill you.

Do you think they didn't get the memo? Do you think they didn't know that before they got on the plane?

You know what the smartest thing we could do is? Say to the Islamic fundementalist community, "Hi. We're America. You don't like us, and we understand why. Many of your countries were secularized without your consent because some of your leaders came to our country to be educated. To top it all off, we've used your contries over and over as proxies in fights you had no part of. And we've treated you like pawns to feed our own economy. But you've alternately obstructed us and willingly taken our aid, you've killed thousands of people because you didn't like the politics of their leaders, you've committed atrocities against civilians that we can't even count. Well, guess what: you killed several thousand of our people to get our attention; you've got it. Let's call it even. Now you people sit down with our people, and we figure out a way to get along. Now, we're not going to make any changes inside our own country; we're still going to play baseball and worship more than one god. But we'll look at our foreign policy, and we'll be fair this time. We'll stop screwing you over to get ahead. Now, we can't give you everything - we still want to buy your oil and park battleships off your coasts because it's convenient - but we'll stop doing the things that really offend you, we'll reach a comprimise. You let us buy Saudi oil, we pull our females out of the military forces there. We comprimise. So let's all be good people, and let's talk."

Isn't that what Clinton did? Did it work?

To borrow a phrase from you, then he must not have done it well enough. Hell, I don't think he did it at all, or certainly not with the right people.

You're wrong. They do have the capability. If I can build a nuclear weapon - and I can - then so can they. And they were buying plutonium in the Sudan ten years ago.

Really? You have the equipment to safely handle plutonium for long periods of time, and to mask the bomb so that it doesn't release enough radiation to kill you after an hour or so of carrying it around on a plane without enough lead to make every metal detector in the airport go off?

Good lord, Sal, what kind of bomb do you think I'd make here? And what kind of idiot to you think I am? You don't build a hydrogen bomb; that'd be ridiculous. I couldn't build a hydrogen bomb. You build a plain old atom bomb. You need about 50 kilos of enriched uranium; if you're not well-enough connected to get that, you just need a radium gun and some thorium.

And who the hell would get on a plane with something like that!? See, there's these funny things the float on the water, called "boats," and they sometimes go from the Middle East to America...

[Spiral]

But then again...maybe you can...the internet is a strange and dangerous place.

You know, even my mother is enlightened enough to know that the internet isn't strange and dangerous - but information that you can get off of it can be.

Come on Adam. His statement could have meant that as easily as it could mean what you're inferring it to mean.

[3278]

Oh my god! What country are you living in? All I hear is the "Nuke the Ragheads" bullshit. I haven't heard anyone saying that we should be nice to the poor Afghanis.

The entire "places you would like to go" thread, for a time, turned into people saying we should be nice to the Afghani's. Turn on the news, all of the people on CNN, and other news media personell keep preaching about ending the war, and to stop the "slaughter"

Ah. See, you have no way of knowing this, but nearly all of the people in that thread who were commenting were not from America.

As for CNN, I wouldn't know; I don't watch television.

[Spiral]

And who the hell would get on a plane with something like that!? See, there's these funny things the float on the water, called "boats," and they sometimes go from the Middle East to America...

No shit. <5% of those containers get searched. I think it's ~3%.

[Spiral]

As for CNN, I wouldn't know; I don't watch television.

Word, yo.

[3278]

I haven't heard anyone saying that we should be nice to the poor Afghanis.

Uh, bullshit. We had a whole thread on v0.2 about how we should be nice to the poor Afghanis in Guantanamo Bay.

Ah, yes. I recall that. You do recall that most of the people saying we need to be nice to them weren't American, right?

[PMWrestler]

You know, even my mother is enlightened enough to know that the internet isn't strange and dangerous - but information that you can get off of it can be.

As a matter of fact I /did/ mean the information you can get off of it. But....if you can get the information off if it....wouldn't that make the informtion part of the internet itself? Which could make the internet dangerous.....or something like that...the semantics[sp?] even confuse me, and I wrote the words.