Ecce Homo

[Doug]

Ruby: thank you for your clear reply.

I take it you think we should not have intervened in Korea, in which case all Koreans would now be living under the regime of Kim Jong Il.

And, presumably, we should not have gotten involved in WWII? (We could easily have avoided it -- we could have simply brought home our military forces from the other side of the Pacific, and turned the Phillippines over to Japan -- or just abandoned them, which would have amounted to the same thing.)

In the case of the ICC, suppose it were to condemn the genocidal leader of a state whose army and militias are killing thousands of innocent people every day.

Would not the policemen sent to arrest him have to be escorted by quite a few soldiers? Wouldn't these soldiers best be supported by an airforce, with bombs?

If not, how could the decision of the ICC be enforced?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

No military interferrence. Your best bet is to send humanitarian aid and to also work with govts using tactics like incentives or the International criminal court as well as working with the nations in the region who are neighbors to those who are in conflict.

Bombing people in conflict and adding more fighting and more violence isnt going to solve violence at all. Whether we like it or not we have a few facts to face.

First fact...human beings mostly come to their self determination via violence and outside interferrence usually PROLONGS the chaos, the violence, the suffering and the conflicts AND it denies them the very thing they are fighting for in the first place.

Second fact....outsiders NEVER interferre for altruistic reasons and their own motivations are just another conflict of struggle for the people to have to fight against.

In the rare instance that nations want to step into to stop a widespread genocide..it must be done by the international community with an emphasis on just rescuing people BUT maintaing a stance that LEAVES them their self determination which may mean allowing a civil war to continue but only stopping a genocide. This is one great reason to join the ICC, its one of the best ways to remove those committing genocide by arresting them and let them stand trial for their crimes...its so much better than bombing people as "help".

Of course you can always send humanitarian aid, that isnt a military intervention nor does it deny anyone their self determination but it shouldnt come with strings that they will use certain corps products or change their laws to favor us in any way....then its not aid, its coercion.

Yup sending aid works so well in places like Somalia or Darfur. You haven't a clue what your on about. You remind me of the german green leader during the Cold War. Her plan for defeating the Soviets if they invaded was to have no army no nukes, no support, why if they invaded her plan was to just have all the people sit in the streets and refuse to work.

Can you guess what would have happened if they did that? Try taking a look at the peaceful demonstrations in Burma for an answer.

 

[Doug]

Ruby's arguments seem to be a variation on an aphorism which is quite popular: "Violence never settles anything."

Unfortunately, this is exactly backward: all serious conflicts of interest are settled by violence, either its direct use, or the threat of it, institutionalized in police, prisons, and armies.

As old Bismarck said: "The great issues of the day are not decided through speeches and majority resolutions ... but through blood and iron."

 

[Ruby]

Ruby: thank you for your clear reply.

I take it you think we should not have intervened in Korea, in which case all Koreans would now be living under the regime of Kim Jong Il.

And, presumably, we should not have gotten involved in WWII? (We could easily have avoided it -- we could have simply brought home our military forces from the other side of the Pacific, and turned the Phillippines over to Japan -- or just abandoned them, which would have amounted to the same thing.)

In the case of the ICC, suppose it were to condemn the genocidal leader of a state whose army and militias are killing thousands of innocent people every day.

Would not the policemen sent to arrest him have to be escorted by quite a few soldiers? Wouldn't these soldiers best be supported by an airforce, with bombs?

If not, how could the decision of the ICC be enforced?

No we shouldnt have intervened in Korea and you cant be sure at all that they would all be living under Kim Jon Ill....in fact possibly they would all have had more power and gotten rid of him. Its hard to say but the fact is that it is their own struggle to win or lose.


We could not avoid WW2, we were dragged into it by being attacked ourselves and war was declared upon us. Secondly that has nothing to do with self determination...stopping others from invading OTHER soveriegn nations and limiting ourselves to STOPPING invasions and nothing more would not violate anyones self determination rights at all.

The ICC carries power if we treat it with good faith and not mis-use it. Along with charges come options (freezing accounts and arresting when they step outside their borders etc). It sheds light, light based on EVIDENCE that is not weighed out by ONE NATION with its own interests and agenda but rather by a more unbiased court which must meet a specific criteria that is applied equally to all nations and actions.

The ICC decisions cant always be enforced. This is a fact to be faced...we cant control or fix all wrongs either and we have to think carefully about the WRONGS we create and commit while trying to "fix" wrongs as well. We have to face that wrongs we create and commit are many times actually WORSE than the original wrongs we say we want to correct (and truthfully, there arent any real cases of nations intervening based on altruistic basis or that held to such basis...its always the EXCUSE to futher ones own nations agenda even to the detriment of the nation you are claiming to help).

 

[Ruby]

Ruby's arguments seem to be a variation on an aphorism which is quite popular: "Violence never settles anything."

Unfortunately, this is exactly backward: all serious conflicts of interest are settled by violence, either its direct use, or the threat of it, institutionalized in police, prisons, and armies.

As old Bismarck said: "The great issues of the day are not decided through speeches and majority resolutions ... but through blood and iron."

Incorrect, we use violence to defend ourselves or to stop nations from aggressively attacking others.

Interferring in nations rights to self determine their own domestic life, community life, laws, politics etc IS NEVER GOOD.

You make my point for me in a way....internal issues are often determined by violence and civil war, but yet you think we have a right to go in and STOP IT as if you are saying that violence cant solve their problems. My stance is that we have to leave them to their own struggles, even the violent ones. The highest right in the world is self determination, so therefore using violence to STOP a nation from interferring in ANOTHER nations rights is acceptable just as using violence to defend yourself (own nation) is acceptable.

 

[Ruby]

Yup sending aid works so well in places like Somalia or Darfur. You haven't a clue what your on about. You remind me of the german green leader during the Cold War. Her plan for defeating the Soviets if they invaded was to have no army no nukes, no support, why if they invaded her plan was to just have all the people sit in the streets and refuse to work.

Can you guess what would have happened if they did that? Try taking a look at the peaceful demonstrations in Burma for an answer.

Sending humanitarian aid is ALL YOU CAN DO, internal struggles are for the people within the struggle to solve and not for outsiders to interferre in and determine.

You completely mischaracterize my position AS USUAL.

Its funny, on one hand both of you defend the concept of violence yet seem to think you have to JUMP INTO every situation where there is violence to STOP IT and never consider the fact that you only ADD to the violence and ADD to the body count and ADD to the duration and suffering of the conflict AND deny the people who are in the struggle their RIGHTS TO SELF DETERMINE.

Burma is really going through it now, but it is their struggle to win or lose, not ours. They have a RIGHT to it and to do it their own way without anyone outside adding to the violence there already. We can show them support in other ways but should not become DIRECTLY involved in THEIR struggle. Denying people their rights isnt a GOOD thing to do.

 

[Gunny]

Wow more junior high school projection. You really are such a coward who thinks he can hide it by hiding behind weapons and "we are big powerful nation and everyone is envious". You make it obvious that you simply cant go beyond very basic low level concepts.

Nah ... more like I'm tired of listening to the gradeschool lies and rhetoric and you and those of your ilk are worthy of nothing more.

I believe i have more than established the fact throughout my life that I am nowhere near a coward.

You on the other hand do nothing but spew lies and propaganda while hiding behind the anonymity of the internet.

Not hard to figure out who's trying to blow smoke here.

 

[Ruby]

Nah ... more like I'm tired of listening to the gradeschool lies and rhetoric and you and those of your ilk are worthy of nothing more.

I believe i have more than established the fact throughout my life that I am nowhere near a coward.

You on the other hand do nothing but spew lies and propaganda while hiding behind the anonymity of the internet.

Not hard to figure out who's trying to blow smoke here.

Just more macho swagger....how predictable. You have no idea on the details of my life nor do I need to spout them off when talking about the merits of an issue...but thats because I deal in facts and evidence. Apparently all you can do is keep referencing your military service hoping people will swoon and forget the lack of substance in your posts.

 

[Gunny]

Just more macho swagger....how predictable. You have no idea on the details of my life nor do I need to spout them off when talking about the merits of an issue...but thats because I deal in facts and evidence. Apparently all you can do is keep referencing your military service hoping people will swoon and forget the lack of substance in your posts.

Oh do tell where I "keep referencing my military service" ... let's see THOSE facts and evidence ....

 

[onedomino]

Incorrect, we use violence to defend ourselves or to stop nations from aggressively attacking others.

Interferring in nations rights to self determine their own domestic life, community life, laws, politics etc IS NEVER GOOD.

You make my point for me in a way....internal issues are often determined by violence and civil war, but yet you think we have a right to go in and STOP IT as if you are saying that violence cant solve their problems. My stance is that we have to leave them to their own struggles, even the violent ones. The highest right in the world is self determination, so therefore using violence to STOP a nation from interferring in ANOTHER nations rights is acceptable just as using violence to defend yourself (own nation) is acceptable.

Right, just like the country where you live, Sweden, sat back and did nothing while the Nazis slaughtered Jews, Poles, Russians, and almost everyone else they could get their hands on in WW2. In fact, the country where you live did worse than nothing: it took transportation payment from the Nazis for rail shipping stolen Norwegian iron ore which was turned into tanks with which the Germans killed allied soldiers and civilians. You live in one of the most cowardly and immoral countries on the planet and you have the nerve to criticize America (which seems to be your hobby). You take the immoral position that America should never intervene when evil is perpetrating violence simply because it is the internal affair of another nation. That, for example, America and the UN should not have resisted the invasion of South Korea by the communists. That is a profoundly immoral position and one that we can be sure fits very well into Swedish political life.

 

[Chips Rafferty]

Right, just like the country where you live, Sweden, sat back and did nothing while the Nazis slaughtered Jews, Poles, Russians, and almost everyone else they could get their hands on in WW2. In fact, the country where you live did worse than nothing: it took transportation payment from the Nazis for rail shipping stolen Norwegian iron ore which was turned into tanks with which the Germans killed allied soldiers and civilians. You live in one of the most cowardly and immoral countries on the planet and you have the nerve to criticize America (which seems to be your hobby). You take the immoral position that America should never intervene when evil is perpetrating violence simply because it is the internal affair of another nation. That, for example, America and the UN should not have resisted the invasion of South Korea by the communists. That is a profoundly immoral position and one that we can be sure fits very well into Swedish political life.

Captain America said:

In fact, the country where you live did worse than nothing: it took transportation payment from the Nazis for rail shipping stolen Norwegian iron ore which was turned into tanks with which the Germans killed allied soldiers and civilians.

Whereas you disgustingly greedy buzzards, as always, steadfastly war-profited for most of the war, and only came in when it was safe to do so - after the unbelievable brave Russians had completely fucked Germany - by single-handedly inflicting 85% of all German military casualties in WW2 - before you gutless braggarts had seen a shot fired in anger.

Only then, as in WW1, did you craven capitalistic carrion eaters slink in, like the mangy Hyenas that you are, to gorge yourself on infinitely braver people's kill.

And ever since you have been risibly blowing your own bags about being world-beating Ubermensch.

When the truth is in your dishonourably abbreviated "war" you beat nothing but the utterly dispirited, absolute sweepings of the German military root cellar.

Even then you far exceeded the martial deeds of your lower-than-shark shit, couldn't-knock-a-sick-moll-off-a-piss-pot, Scotch-Irish "Souper" breed - who sold out their own Scottish people and played Imperial jailer to their Celtic cousins in Ireland, for a sip of Pommie Proddie soup.

 

[onedomino]

Captain America said:

Whereas you disgustingly greedy buzzards, as always, steadfastly war-profited for most of the war, and only came in when it was safe to do so - after the unbelievable brave Russians had completely fucked Germany - by single-handedly inflicting 85% of all German military casualties in WW2 - before you gutless braggarts had seen a shot fired in anger.

Only then, as in WW1, did you craven capitalistic carrion eaters slink in, like the mangy Hyenas that you are, to gorge yourself on infinitely braver people's kill.

And ever since you have been risibly blowing your own bags about being world-beating Ubermensch.

When the truth is in your dishonourably abbreviated "war" you beat nothing but the utterly dispirited, absolute sweepings of the German military root cellar.

Even then you far exceeded the martial deeds of your lower-than-shark shit, couldn't-knock-a-sick-moll-off-a-piss-pot, Scotch-Irish "Souper" breed - who sold out their own Scottish people and played Imperial jailer to their Celtic cousins in Ireland, for a sip of Pommie Proddie soup.

This from an Aussie self proclaimed psychotopic drug user who would be speaking Japanese if it was not for America. Get back on the Lexapro CR before you drown in bile. If hatred was money, CR could almost afford to build a ladder out of his evil oubliette.

 

[Chips Rafferty]

This from an Aussie self proclaimed psychotopic drug user who would be speaking Japanese if it was not for America. Get back on the Lexapro CR before you drown in bile. If hatred was money, CR could almost afford to build a ladder out of his evil oubliette.

You oughta try Lexapro to relieve your fixated fear of pre-industrial age foreigners, Dumbino.

Don’t be afraid of the stigma your loud-mouthed but inherently yellow Souper society attaches to “pussies” taking psychotropic potions to suppress the indigenous Seppo disposition of panic stricken paranoia.

Why, hundreds of thousands of, apparently, spineless Seppo Vets are taking it, or some other form of soporific Dutch courage!

I’ll bet that even Chesty L Puller Himself takes it or knows someone who takes it

Of course your heroes, the broken down Bilkos and the unjustifiably bragging Radio Shop Rangers, who are constantly beating the war drums and whose close quarter combat experience consisted of dodging crockery from a sexually frustrated and thus permanently enraged wife, don’t need dehydrated fire-water to taunt the far-off enemy form the safety of their arm(oured) chairs.

Buying bread from a man in Brussels
He was six foot four and full of muscles
I said, "Do you speak-a my language?"
He just smiled and gave me a Lexapro sandwich
And he said,

"I come from a land down under
Where beer does flow and men chunder
Can't you hear, can't you hear the thunder?
I better run, I better take cover."

 

[Gunny]

You oughta try Lexapro to relieve your fixated fear of pre-industrial age foreigners, Dumbino.

Don’t be afraid of the stigma your loud-mouthed but inherently yellow Souper society attaches to “pussies” taking psychotropic potions to suppress the indigenous Seppo disposition of panic stricken paranoia.

Why, hundreds of thousands of, apparently, spineless Seppo Vets are taking it, or some other form of soporific Dutch courage!

I’ll bet that even Chesty L Puller Himself takes it or knows someone who takes it

Of course your heroes, the broken down Bilkos and the unjustifiably bragging Radio Shop Rangers, who are constantly beating the war drums and whose close quarter combat experience consisted of dodging crockery from a sexually frustrated and thus permanently enraged wife, don’t need dehydrated fire-water to taunt the far-off enemy form the safety of their arm(oured) chairs.

Buying bread from a man in Brussels
He was six foot four and full of muscles
I said, "Do you speak-a my language?"
He just smiled and gave me a Lexapro sandwich
And he said,

"I come from a land down under
Where beer does flow and men chunder
Can't you hear, can't you hear the thunder?
I better run, I better take cover."

That would be LtCol Lewis B Puller.

If the "L" is one of your little shots, no I don't take shit. I refuse to, thanks.

 

[Psychoblues]

Oh, yes you do take shit.

That would be LtCol Lewis B Puller.

If the "L" is one of your little shots, no I don't take shit. I refuse to, thanks.

I never met a GunnyL that didn't learn very early how to "take shit".

 

[Gunny]

Oh, yes you do take shit.




I never met a GunnyL that didn't learn very early how to "take shit".

 

[Psychoblues]

I figured you would wonder about that.

Indoctrination has never been a problem for you that I can tell!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Gunny]

I figured you would wonder about that.




Indoctrination has never been a problem for you that I can tell!!!!!!!!!!!

Huh ... you don't know a damned thing about me except that I own you at will. Go try and poke someone else.

 

[Diuretic]

Anyone can be indoctrinated, we humans are easily trained.

 

[Psychoblues]

Just what do you own?

Huh ... you don't know a damned thing about me except that I own you at will. Go try and poke someone else.

I doubt that you own the shoes on your feet or the shirt on your back. You certainly don't "own" me.