The World's Policeman

[Brant Gaede]

Your "source" number three (3) is a propaganda site...>>> http://www.worldcant...s-in-ten-months

Wiki is not a reference site in too many cases.

Now, I am suspicious of your motives.

A...

The civilian death toll from night raids in Afghanistan is well known and hardly controversial. Read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_raids_in_Afghanistan

Your sources aren't very good. Anything primary or reflecting some scholarship?

--Brant

[Francisco Ferrer]

Rolling Stone has run a couple of long, well-researched pieces on U.S.-led atrocities in Afghanistan:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-kill-team-20110327 and

http://www.rollingstone.com/feature/a-team-killings-afghanistan-special-forces

[BaalChatzaf]

Rolling Stone has run a couple of long, well-researched pieces on U.S.-led atrocities in Afghanistan:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-kill-team-20110327 and

http://www.rollingstone.com/feature/a-team-killings-afghanistan-special-forces

What is the difference between an "attrocity" and an attack on an enemy under war conditions that takes enemy lives perhaps with collateral damage. "attrocity" is a hot button word to excite anger. In war there is killing and destruction. Such is the nature of war. One way of winning a war is to kill enough of the enemy that what is left does not want to go on fighting.

[Brant Gaede]

That's not the way A-Team Special Forces comported themselves in Vietnam amongst civilians. That said, no other military in Vietnam got more bang for the buck.

--Brant

[Peter]

Brant wrote:

That's not the way A-Team Special Forces comported themselves in Vietnam amongst civilians. That said, no other military in Vietnam got more bang for the buck.

end quote

I agree with that legitimate praise but consider all the glorified violence in out culture. All the murderous super heroes, serial killers, cops with unlimited ammunition, etc., really turn me off.

Those video games where you slice and dice or shoot your enemies have been linked to mass murderers and I think the link is valid. I am really sick of the special affects too: all the dangerous car chases that nearly kill dozens of pedestrians or motorists, the huge fireballs, the rocket propelled grenades fired at people. What’s with that? The stories are usually pedestrian and on the level of a 12 year old but the special affects are spectacular and still costly even with computer animation.

I’m not a big fan of “old fart’s” programming of movies but I would like to see fewer special affects and more story line and better dialogue.

[Brant Gaede]

I think video games are mostly garbage. I don't play them, but the tv ads glorifying their phony violence are so unreal they get no respect from me.

--Brant

[Francisco Ferrer]

Rolling Stone has run a couple of long, well-researched pieces on U.S.-led atrocities in Afghanistan:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-kill-team-20110327 and

http://www.rollingstone.com/feature/a-team-killings-afghanistan-special-forces

What is the difference between an "attrocity" and an attack on an enemy under war conditions that takes enemy lives perhaps with collateral damage. "attrocity" is a hot button word to excite anger. In war there is killing and destruction. Such is the nature of war. One way of winning a war is to kill enough of the enemy that what is left does not want to go on fighting.

One of the predictable consequences of long-term occupation of a country is that the occupiers start by thinking of the natives as potential enemies, and soon end up thinking of them all as enemies. As the articles show, the victims were essentially killed for being Afghans.

"In war there is killing and destruction. Such is the nature of war. One way of winning a war is to kill enough of the enemy that what is left does not want to go on fighting."

Therefore, I suppose, we should have applauded the killing of non-combatants when the Soviets were in Afghanistan, as it would have justified our own actions there now.

[Francisco Ferrer]

Just came across a magnificent quotation:

"It is forbidden to kill. Therefore, all murderers are punished, unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets."

--Voltaire

[BaalChatzaf]

Just came across a magnificent quotation:

"It is forbidden to kill. Therefore, all murderers are punished, unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets."

--Voltaire

Voltaire was rarely wrong. He was a genius.

[Selene]

Your "source" number three (3) is a propaganda site...>>> http://www.worldcant...s-in-ten-months

Wiki is not a reference site in too many cases.

Now, I am suspicious of your motives.

A...

The civilian death toll from night raids in Afghanistan is well known and hardly controversial. Read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_raids_in_Afghanistan

You consider this "proof?"

A...

[Brant Gaede]

Your "source" number three (3) is a propaganda site...>>> http://www.worldcant...s-in-ten-months

Wiki is not a reference site in too many cases.

Now, I am suspicious of your motives.

A...

The civilian death toll from night raids in Afghanistan is well known and hardly controversial. Read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_raids_in_Afghanistan

You consider this "proof?"

A...

It's confirmation bias with anecdotal evidence. Any war is full of horror stories. War itself is horrible.

--Brant

referenced book or study needed

[Francisco Ferrer]

Your "source" number three (3) is a propaganda site...>>> http://www.worldcant...s-in-ten-months

Wiki is not a reference site in too many cases.

Now, I am suspicious of your motives.

A...

The civilian death toll from night raids in Afghanistan is well known and hardly controversial. Read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_raids_in_Afghanistan

You consider this "proof?"

A...

It's confirmation bias with anecdotal evidence. Any war is full of horror stories. War itself is horrible.

--Brant

referenced book or study needed

In other words, any war is full of horror stories. Therefore do not bother us with reports of killings/tortures/detentions of civilians in Afghanistan.

You consider this "proof?"

A...

Another report here with plenty of footnotes to scoff at:

http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/Night-Raids-Report-FINAL-092011.pdf

[Selene]

Another report here with plenty of footnotes to scoff at:

http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/Night-Raids-Report-FINAL-092011.pdf

George Soros

Founder / Chairman

Investor and philanthropist George Soros established the Open Society Foundations to help countries make the transition from communism.

Christopher Stone

President

Christopher Stone is the president of the Open Society Foundations. He is an international expert on criminal justice reform and on the leadership and governance of nonprofits.

Mission & Values

The Open Society Foundations work to build vibrant and tolerant societies whose governments are accountable and open to the participation of all people.

Read more about our mission and values

History

The Open Society Foundations, which began 1979, remain today committed to the global struggle for open society and responding quickly to the challenges and opportunities of the future.

Learn more about our history

=======================================================================

As soon as I stop laughing I will address your arguments....

[Francisco Ferrer]

Let's follow the logic:

1. The Drug Policy Alliance says the War on Drugs is a failure.

2. George Soros funded the Drug Policy Alliance.

3. George Soros is evil.

4. Ergo, what the Drug Policy Alliance says about the Drug War must be a lie.

If we are to judge a particular report by the way it is funded, then wouldn't we have to declare every word issued by the U.S.
Department of Defense, which is funded 99.99% by coercion, a lie?

Here are three more reports:

http://www.comw.org/pda/0201strangevic.html

http://www.comw.org/pda/0402rm9.html

http://www.comw.org/pda/0201oef.html

[Brant Gaede]

It's a nicely referenced article (87). One can use it to work off of. I won't. Atrocities are inevitable in a conflict sputtering along in it's 13th year, especially in that the degradation of the national weal must be reflected in the degradation of the military, albeit with a significant lag time. In itself this war is a multi-faceted atrocity, almost a never-ending story. Stupidity and ignorance in the Bush administration continues with the current twit of a President. Even in Korea and Vietnam we didn't know how to use troops on the ground. Westmoreland, for instance, wasn't smart enough for his responsibilities, but smart enough for LBJ who in turn was in over his head.

War is indeed "the health of the State." Everything and everyone else gets traduced and degraded. If Vietnam and Korea were proxy wars against international expansionist communism--leave the nuclear weapons unfired--and made sense that way, there is no way these oil anti-terrorism wars make any sense whatsoever. If there are over a billion Muslims there is an unending supply of possible Muslim warriors coming on line now and into the future in response to an unwinnable war the United States perpetuates. We can't win it and they don't have to for they glory in war itself from the bottom up powered by their religious mores while the US is doing it from the top down and very badly. Ironically, the Muslims are much more individualistic this way. Much more doesn't do it, of course, for they really don't represent individualism except very, very superficially. The U.S. has actually destroyed the leaders who were vicious enough to keep these folks under some kind of control, and now they make hay in Africa and elsewhere in a way we wouldn't have imagined a decade ago.

--Brant

[Mikee]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/10598247/Kim-Jong-un-executes-direct-relations-of-purged-uncle.html

Including children and grandchildren. All traces of 'Uncle Jang' ordered erased from the earth.

This is the libertarian "it's none of my business" and "I could care less" and "I got rights, fuck you" world: reversion to the dark ages.

Kim Jong Un makes Obama look like George Washington. For now.

[Francisco Ferrer]

Let's see if I follow you. Kim Jong Un is able to execute presumably innocent people because this is a "libertarian 'it's none of my business' and 'I could care less' and 'I got rights, fuck you' world."

This libertarian world is news to me. Are U.S. citizens permitted to opt out of paying the bill for intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan? For drone strikes in Pakistan? For the covert action in Libya? For the U.S. training of Syrian rebels? For the 68,000 U.S. troops stationed in Europe? For the 51,000 in East Asia and the Pacific?

And if a killer dictator like Kim exists because of our supposedly current "it's none of my business" policy, when was the Golden Age when foreign dictator-murders were always put out of commission?

Just name a decade in U.S. history.

[Mikee]

The inability or unwillingness to see the difference between even the worst decade of US history and Kim Jong Un, makes Kim Jong Un possible.

[Francisco Ferrer]

No one on this thread has asserted that there is no difference between the governments of the the U.S. and North Korea. To imply as much is to evade defending your claim by throwing up a strawman argument.

So let's get back to your Post #91.

1. Where is the evidence that the world (specifically where U.S. foreign policy is concerned) is more "libertarian" under Obama?

2. If we have reverted to the "dark ages" in our supposedly "none of my business" treatment of other nations, when exactly were the "light ages"? When were dictators like Kim routinely removed from power?

[Mikee]

No one on this thread has asserted that there is no difference between the governments of the the U.S. and North Korea. To imply as much is to evade defending your claim by throwing up a strawman argument.

So let's get back to your Post #91.

1. Where is the evidence that the world (specifically where U.S. foreign policy is concerned) is more "libertarian" under Obama?

2. If we have reverted to the "dark ages" in our supposedly "none of my business" treatment of other nations, when exactly were the "light ages"? When were dictators like Kim routinely removed from power?

Your first statement is bullshit. You never ever talk about the relative peace and freedom that has been enjoyed by the western democracies or the astounding progress in science and technology and standard of living lead far and away by the United States. You go on and on about the "evils" of the United States ad nauseam. What are you advocating? Anarchy?

1: What? You have a reading comprehension problem.

2: See #1. [When did I ever rave about "light ages"..?]

You can do this forever, if you have a point to make, something positive to add to the human condition, make it. Where are your ideas to get from here to where you would like to be? What actions? Make a useful suggestion, not keep repeating how horrible the United States is and how many taxes you have to pay and "nobody has the right to tax me for things I don't believe in" and Bush this and Bush that Blah, blah. You can't get anywhere by standing at the side of the road crying.

[Francisco Ferrer]

Go ahead and cite one example of my equating the U.S. and North Korean governments. You cannot because I never said such a thing--on this thread or anywhere else.

Not only are you dishonest, but you appear incapable of constructing a logical argument. In a single sentence you say both that U.S. foreign policy is "libertarian," and that it is reverting "to the dark ages." Explain how it can be both.

You fault me for not celebrating the "relative peace and freedom" of this country while you carry on about how Obama is making Kim's mass murders possible. What are you doing criticizing when you should be celebrating? Why are you, in your own words, "standing at the side of the road crying"?

In answer to my question, "Where is the evidence that the world (specifically where U.S. foreign policy is concerned) is more "libertarian" under Obama?" you write, "What? You have a reading comprehension problem."

No, the problem is in comprehending how A can be non-A.

In Post #8 of this thread you wrote, "I envision the minimal government of a pure capitalist and free country being paid for services rendered and by voluntary contribution." This is my goal as well--and I call it "libertarian."

Now, once again, where is the evidence that we are approaching some "libertarian" state of foreign affairs under Obama? I pay not one cent less in war tax under Obama. Interventions in Libya and Syria and increased drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen show there is nothing minimal about Obama's foreign policy.

I asked, "If we have reverted to the 'dark ages' in our supposedly 'none of my business' treatment of other nations, when exactly were the 'light ages'? When were dictators like Kim routinely removed from power?"

You answered, "When did I ever rave about 'light ages'..?"

No one said you "raved." But the claim that we are reverting to the "dark ages" logically implies the existence of a period when things were not dark. If allowing a killer-dictator like Kim to remain in power is evidence of darkness or the beginnings thereof, name one decade of U.S. history that may be described as "light" by comparison.

If you cannot, then your claim is meaningless.

You write, "Where are your ideas to get from here to where you would like to be? What actions?"

Why make this demand of me and not of yourself? In the several posts you've contributed to this thread, you have not once included a detailed plan for reaching the "minimal government of a pure capitalist and free country."

What's stopping you?

[Brant Gaede]

No one has a moral duty to save North Koreans from what is a military dictatorship, but the North Koreans have no moral right to object to being saved. A war to save them by, say, a freer South Korea may be immoral for the South Koreans but not the North Koreans. The brutal fact of the matter is in such war North Korea will rain thousands of high explosive rockets down on the South Korean capital, devastating a metropolitan area inhabited by over 10 million people not able to get out of the way.

When theoretical bs meets geo-political reality, it's one ounce meets a ton.

--Brant

[Mikee]

Go ahead and cite one example of my equating the U.S. and North Korean governments. You cannot because I never said such a thing--on this thread or anywhere else.

Not only are you dishonest, but you appear incapable of constructing a logical argument. In a single sentence you say both that U.S. foreign policy is "libertarian," and that it is reverting "to the dark ages." Explain how it can be both.

You fault me for not celebrating the "relative peace and freedom" of this country while you carry on about how Obama is making Kim's mass murders possible. What are you doing criticizing when you should be celebrating? Why are you, in your own words, "standing at the side of the road crying"?

In answer to my question, "Where is the evidence that the world (specifically where U.S. foreign policy is concerned) is more "libertarian" under Obama?" you write, "What? You have a reading comprehension problem."

No, the problem is in comprehending how A can be non-A.

In Post #8 of this thread you wrote, "I envision the minimal government of a pure capitalist and free country being paid for services rendered and by voluntary contribution." This is my goal as well--and I call it "libertarian."

Now, once again, where is the evidence that we are approaching some "libertarian" state of foreign affairs under Obama? I pay not one cent less in war tax under Obama. Interventions in Libya and Syria and increased drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen show there is nothing minimal about Obama's foreign policy.

I asked, "If we have reverted to the 'dark ages' in our supposedly 'none of my business' treatment of other nations, when exactly were the 'light ages'? When were dictators like Kim routinely removed from power?"

You answered, "When did I ever rave about 'light ages'..?"

No one said you "raved." But the claim that we are reverting to the "dark ages" logically implies the existence of a period when things were not dark. If allowing a killer-dictator like Kim to remain in power is evidence of darkness or the beginnings thereof, name one decade of U.S. history that may be described as "light" by comparison.

If you cannot, then your claim is meaningless.

You write, "Where are your ideas to get from here to where you would like to be? What actions?"

Why make this demand of me and not of yourself? In the several posts you've contributed to this thread, you have not once included a detailed plan for reaching the "minimal government of a pure capitalist and free country."

What's stopping you?

You are a self serving liar. The meaning of what I said is obvious, your twisting about and assigning obviously false interpretations of it is your cowardly avoidance of that meaning. I'm done with you.

[Francisco Ferrer]

In Post #94 I wrote, "No one on this thread has asserted that there is no difference between the governments of the the U.S. and North Korea."

In Post #95 you wrote of that sentence, "Your first statement is bullshit."

Now all you have to do to prove that you are right is quote someone here who made such an assertion. That should be an easy matter if, as you say, it is obvious.

You can call me a liar. You can call me self-serving. You can call me cowardly. But name-calling is not going to make a statement that was never uttered magically appear.

[Mikee]

In Post #94 I wrote, "No one on this thread has asserted that there is no difference between the governments of the the U.S. and North Korea."

In Post #95 you wrote of that sentence, "Your first statement is bullshit."

Now all you have to do to prove that you are right is quote someone here who made such an assertion. That should be an easy matter if, as you say, it is obvious.

You can call me a liar. You can call me self-serving. You can call me cowardly. But name-calling is not going to make a statement that was never uttered magically appear.

It is bullshit because it is an evasion. Everything you've posted reeks of contempt for the United States, the people in it and the people that serve in law enforcement and the military. What is your opinion about N. Korea? What is your solution? If it's do nothing... My posts 91, 93, and 95 remain unanswered by you.