Who should rule test?

[RetiredGySgt]

Okay. I agree with you. I think that genocide is wrong because (in general) murder is wrong. Yet, just because we say that something is wrong does not prove that it is a universal absolute. Please continue. As an absolutist, explain how you conclude that murder is wrong. By the way, were the Salem Witch Trials and the Spanish Inquisition wrong?

Yes they were.

Those events were murder. Murder is wrong because it is without reasonable cause. It is not in defense of self, it is not in defense of others, it is not in defense of anything any sane person would call acceptable. There is no reason to kill someone that is not in some way a reasonably proven threat to others. That would be one of the reasons unwell people are not put to death until they are well.

There is NO evidence that Witches caused any real threat to anyone or any society, There is NO evidence that simply not believing a set version of Christian religion was a threat to anything except the specific church leadership and position of power.

 

[Shogun]

they were thought of about as much defense of self (witchcraft) and defense of others (inquisition) as you thought bombing lebenon was defense of israel.


Sure, YOU can see it for what it was this side of your ethnocentrism but, back then, you are totally mistaking their motivations.


Let me ask with the example he should have said:


THE CRUSADES TO RECLAIM JERUSALEM... wrong or not?

 

[mattskramer]

Yes they were.

Those events were murder. Murder is wrong because it is without reasonable cause. It is not in defense of self, it is not in defense of others, it is not in defense of anything any sane person would call acceptable. There is no reason to kill someone that is not in some way a reasonably proven threat to others. That would be one of the reasons unwell people are not put to death until they are well.

There is NO evidence that Witches caused any real threat to anyone or any society, There is NO evidence that simply not believing a set version of Christian religion was a threat to anything except the specific church leadership and position of power.

I agree with you but that still does not explain that it is a universal absolute. Why should people not murder innocent people who are not a threat?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

they were thought of about as much defense of self (witchcraft) and defense of others (inquisition) as you thought bombing lebenon was defense of israel.


Sure, YOU can see it for what it was this side of your ethnocentrism but, back then, you are totally mistaking their motivations.


Let me ask with the example he should have said:


THE CRUSADES TO RECLAIM JERUSALEM... wrong or not?

Bombing Lebanon WAS a defensive measure you retard. And no the Crusades were not right, BUT they were war, not murder.

 

[mattskramer]

they were thought of about as much defense of self (witchcraft) and defense of others (inquisition) as you thought bombing lebenon was defense of israel.


Sure, YOU can see it for what it was this side of your ethnocentrism but, back then, you are totally mistaking their motivations.


Let me ask with the example he should have said:


THE CRUSADES TO RECLAIM JERUSALEM... wrong or not?

I see your point. People disagree on what constitutes a threat and what does not constitute a threat. This issue of ethics can also apply to whether preemptive assaults are justified. “Gee I though that Iraq was an immeniant threat to America”.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I see your point. People disagree on what constitutes a threat and what does not constitute a threat. This issue of ethics can also apply to whether preemptive assaults are justified. “Gee I though that Iraq was an immeniant threat to America”.

No one ever claimed Iraq was an emminent threat. But then that lie has been used by the left so much I can see why someone that doesn't pay attention would repeat it.

 

[mattskramer]

Bombing Lebanon WAS a defensive measure you retard. And no the Crusades were not right, BUT they were war, not murder.

Perhaps children in South Vietnam should have been murdered so that they would not grow up to be anti-USA communists. Perhaps Herod had the right idea in killing children so that “the King of Kings” would not replace him as he understood his advisers to caution him. What is justifiable murder and why should unjustifiable murder be not allowed anyway?

 

[mattskramer]

No one ever claimed Iraq was an emminent threat. But then that lie has been used by the left so much I can see why someone that doesn't pay attention would repeat it.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/kfiles/b24970.html

http://www.ph.ucla.edu/EPI/bioter/iraqimminent.html

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Iraq_as_an_imminent_threat

http://mediamatters.org/items/200408050012

 

[Shogun]

Bombing Lebanon WAS a defensive measure you retard. And no the Crusades were not right, BUT they were war, not murder.

oh yea.. because pals and muslims in the M.E. probably don't see themselves at war either!

bombing civilian populations was NOT a defensive measure, bitch.


napalming a village is just defense too, isnt it? Gassing Kurds?


Notice how he stutters about labeling the crusades BAD... check mate.

 

[Shogun]

No one ever claimed Iraq was an emminent threat. But then that lie has been used by the left so much I can see why someone that doesn't pay attention would repeat it.

are you fucking kidding me?



HAHAHAHAHAHA!


defend this post so that I can lay down some quotes.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

are you fucking kidding me?



HAHAHAHAHAHA!


defend this post so that I can lay down some quotes.

Provide the quotes retard. You sure are lacking on facts. Go ahead you fucking moron, quote away. Provide the links so I can then prove you to be the board reject with the brains of a gnat.

 

[Shogun]

oh ill do one step better...

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xQk72bp7B84"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xQk72bp7B84" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

 

[Shogun]

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JlClqwpQQcU"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JlClqwpQQcU" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Simply amazing. The first one trys to make the claim but fails and I notice it is a minutre out of how long an interview? The second one NEVER even uses the word. perhaps you would carry to review your proof more carefully DUMBSHIT.

 

[Shogun]

Listen to their very words, pussy.

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mMBDCQ4cPx0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mMBDCQ4cPx0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And another vid that does not include the word, keep trying stupid.

 

[Shogun]

No one ever claimed Iraq was an emminent threat. But then that lie has been used by the left so much I can see why someone that doesn't pay attention would repeat it.


Hey, if you can stand by this retarded fucking post after hearing their own fucking words make you a fool then so be it.

 

[mattskramer]

are you fucking kidding me?



HAHAHAHAHAHA!


defend this post so that I can lay down some quotes.

This is about imminent threat."
• White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03

"Well, of course he is.”
• White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett responding to the question “is Saddam an imminent threat to U.S. interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?”, 1/26/03

 

[RetiredGySgt]

This is about imminent threat."
• White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03

"Well, of course he is.”
• White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett responding to the question “is Saddam an imminent threat to U.S. interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?”, 1/26/03

Two non politicians with no power and no authority. I will wait for you to explain how Bush or any of his political appointees ever said it. And maybe you could explain how it is President Bush announced that he was taking action so that Iraq and Saddam Hussein would NOT become an imminent threat.

I won't hold my breath waiting.

But hey at least YOU found someone that actually used the word, rather then retard Shogun.

I guess next you will quote where democrats used the word since they are in our Government also, ehh?

 

[Shogun]

listen, you can pretend that the entire run up to the war wasn't a conglomerate of WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION but it looks to me like you are dancing just like you accuse Larkin of...



you retard.