Taliban kill 126 in a Pakistan school. Mostly children (1 Viewer)

[Doctor Detroit]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.

I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand imply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

I would ask for some sort of translation, but I'm sure Jonessed or Strikes2k will be here any second to get to the bottom of this.

I didn't think I was being that confusing. Understanding something does not imply moral acceptance. I can try to understand something but still regard it as evil.

Would be nice if you'd take your trail of tears and stalkers with you sometimes and let a thread breathe.

But that might be asking a lot I suppose. Carry on.

 

[HellToupee]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.

I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand imply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

I would ask for some sort of translation, but I'm sure Jonessed or Strikes2k will be here any second to get to the bottom of this.

I didn't think I was being that confusing. Understanding something does not imply moral acceptance. I can try to understand something but still regard it as evil.

Would be nice if you'd take your trail of tears and stalkers with you sometimes and let a thread breathe.

But that might be asking a lot I suppose. Carry on.

Who posted in: Taliban kill 126 in a Pakistan school...

Member name Posts timschochet 25 Sinn Fein 19 Two Deep 11 El Floppo9

the one man FFA locust swarm is in full effect

 

[timschochet]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.

I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand imply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

I would ask for some sort of translation, but I'm sure Jonessed or Strikes2k will be here any second to get to the bottom of this.

I didn't think I was being that confusing. Understanding something does not imply moral acceptance. I can try to understand something but still regard it as evil.

Would be nice if you'd take your trail of tears and stalkers with you sometimes and let a thread breathe.

But that might be asking a lot I suppose. Carry on.

I just starting posting again in this thread after several hours.

 

[Guest]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand

Limply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

So if hypothetically our interrogation tactics could prevent a massacre like the school massacre from happening again would you be in?

Good question. I don't know. I think yes.

That's bull#### (IMO). I would hunt down one of the perpetrators of this act and thrust a rusty spoon into their carotid artery and not ever lose a wink of sleep over it. But torturing someone to gain information is morally wrong. Period. One of the major problems I have with this nation is that we are only as good as our ideals and disapline to stand by them because they are right. You lose that, you lose your way, as we have.

 

[Fennis]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.

I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand imply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

I would ask for some sort of translation, but I'm sure Jonessed or Strikes2k will be here any second to get to the bottom of this.

I didn't think I was being that confusing. Understanding something does not imply moral acceptance. I can try to understand something but still regard it as evil.

Would be nice if you'd take your trail of tears and stalkers with you sometimes and let a thread breathe.

But that might be asking a lot I suppose. Carry on.

Who posted in: Taliban kill 126 in a Pakistan school...

Member name Posts timschochet 25 Sinn Fein 19 Two Deep 11 El Floppo9

the one man FFA locust swarm is in full effect

### #### floppo

 

[timschochet]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand

Limply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

So if hypothetically our interrogation tactics could prevent a massacre like the school massacre from happening again would you be in?

Good question. I don't know. I think yes.

That's bull#### (IMO). I would hunt down one of the perpetrators of this act and thrust a rusty spoon into their carotid artery and not ever lose a wink of sleep over it. But torturing someone to gain information is morally wrong. Period. One of the major problems I have with this nation is that we are only as good as our ideals and ankle to stand by them because they are right. You lose that, you lose your way, as we have.

His premise was that torture would be 100% effective and that I knew it going in. Under such circumstances, I believe it is probably more moral to accept torture in order to save lives than to refuse. However, I don't think such conditions have existed in real life.

 

[Guest]

Can somebody explain to me how some of thepeople posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same peopleposting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.I think the two are separate issues. I condemnwhat the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand

Limply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

So if hypothetically our interrogation tactics could prevent a massacre like the school massacre from happening again would you be in?

Good question. I don't know. I think yes.

That's bull#### (IMO). I would hunt down one of the perpetrators of this act and thrust a rusty spoon into their carotid artery and not ever lose a wink of sleep over it. But torturing someone to gain information is morally wrong. Period. One of the major problems I have with this nation is that we are only as good as our ideals and ankle to stand by them because they are right. You lose that, you lose your way, as we have.

His premise was that torture would be 100% effective and that I knew it going in. Under such circumstances, I believe it is probably more moral to accept torture in order to save lives than to refuse. However, I don't think such conditions have existed in real life.

Like saying you could rape Kate Upton, but no one would ever know. The answer is don't. It's wrong.Don't give me "but we're the last two on Earth, I'm saving the species" bulk####. You stay away from Kate Upton, Timmy.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.

I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand imply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

I would ask for some sort of translation, but I'm sure Jonessed or Strikes2k will be here any second to get to the bottom of this.

I didn't think I was being that confusing. Understanding something does not imply moral acceptance. I can try to understand something but still regard it as evil.

Would be nice if you'd take your trail of tears and stalkers with you sometimes and let a thread breathe.

But that might be asking a lot I suppose. Carry on.

I just starting posting again in this thread after several hours.

My post is now the 14th consecutive post that has you, someone responding to you, or someone talking about you.

It's a trend, a bad one. I like you and all, but nothing is getting by the Tim moat for hours or days at a time in some threads. Just sayin.

 

[Two Deep]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand

Limply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

So if hypothetically our interrogation tactics could prevent a massacre like the school massacre from happening again would you be in?

Good question. I don't know. I think yes.

That's bull#### (IMO). I would hunt down one of the perpetrators of this act and thrust a rusty spoon into their carotid artery and not ever lose a wink of sleep over it. But torturing someone to gain information is morally wrong. Period. One of the major problems I have with this nation is that we are only as good as our ideals and disapline to stand by them because they are right. You lose that, you lose your way, as we have.

So you would be reactive after the 140 kids are dead instead of proactive and prevent those deaths.That doesn't make any sense. IMO

 

[Fennis]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand

Limply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

So if hypothetically our interrogation tactics could prevent a massacre like the school massacre from happening again would you be in?

Good question. I don't know. I think yes.

That's bull#### (IMO). I would hunt down one of the perpetrators of this act and thrust a rusty spoon into their carotid artery and not ever lose a wink of sleep over it. But torturing someone to gain information is morally wrong. Period. One of the major problems I have with this nation is that we are only as good as our ideals and disapline to stand by them because they are right. You lose that, you lose your way, as we have.

So you would be reactive after the 140 kids are dead instead of proactive and prevent those deaths.That doesn't make any sense. IMO

Pakistan tortures the #### out of people. Yet that didn't prevent those 140 kids from dying.

 

[Guest]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand

Limply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

So if hypothetically our interrogation tactics could prevent a massacre like the school massacre from happening again would you be in?

Good question. I don't know. I think yes.

That's bull#### (IMO). I would hunt down one of the perpetrators of this act and thrust a rusty spoon into their carotid artery and not ever lose a wink of sleep over it. But torturing someone to gain information is morally wrong. Period. One of the major problems I have with this nation is that we are only as good as our ideals and disapline to stand by them because they are right. You lose that, you lose your way, as we have.

So you would be reactive after the 140 kids are dead instead of proactive and prevent those deaths.That doesn't make any sense. IMO

Agree to disagree. Wrong is wrong and creates a ripple effect through generations. You torture, you recruit tomorrow's enemy - and not without cause.

 

[Sinn Fein]

The concept of mutually-assured-destruction relies on the concept that if you try to kill me and mine, I am going to try to kill you and yours. There is no distinction drawn between civilian or military targets. Death is death. We believe in that concept - the general public would expect us to hit back at any nation that hit at us - damn the consequences or civilian casualties.

This same concept is in play - assuming the Taliban believe that the Pakistani military deliberately targeted civilians, even in a war effort.

Mutually Assured Destruction refers to the nuclear detente created by the ability of both sides in the cold war to annihilate the human race, even after a surprise attack.

What you are refering to is an eye for an eye. A bronze age, or older, concept

mutually assured destruction is an eye-for-an-eye - in the nuclear age.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Correct me if im wrong. I think what Tim is saying is that taliban fighters and terrorists in general aren't cowards because they are willing to die for their cause. While on the surface that sounds heroic ,if you peel off the top you will see that they are willing to die because they dont believe that they are going to die ,they believe that they will live for eternity in a greater realm surrounded by hot virgins.

Killing unarmed women and children is the definition of coward in any language .

 

[timschochet]

Correct me if im wrong. I think what Tim is saying is that taliban fighters and terrorists in general aren't cowards because they are willing to die for their cause. While on the surface that sounds heroic ,if you peel off the top you will see that they are willing to die because they dont believe that they are going to die ,they believe that they will live for eternity in a greater realm surrounded by hot virgins.

Killing unarmed women and children is the definition of coward in any language .

Well, I don't know the actual formation of the Taliban, but I doubt that most of them are willing to kill themselves. I consider them brave because in the struggle against American and NATO forces over the last 13 years, they have time and again proven their bravery under fire. That can't be denied.

I don't regard the killing of children as either brave or cowardly. It's evil.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Correct me if im wrong. I think what Tim is saying is that taliban fighters and terrorists in general aren't cowards because they are willing to die for their cause. While on the surface that sounds heroic ,if you peel off the top you will see that they are willing to die because they dont believe that they are going to die ,they believe that they will live for eternity in a greater realm surrounded by hot virgins.

The line between brave and crazy is always fuzzy.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Correct me if im wrong. I think what Tim is saying is that taliban fighters and terrorists in general aren't cowards because they are willing to die for their cause. While on the surface that sounds heroic ,if you peel off the top you will see that they are willing to die because they dont believe that they are going to die ,they believe that they will live for eternity in a greater realm surrounded by hot virgins.

Killing unarmed women and children is the definition of coward in any language .

Well, I don't know the actual formation of the Taliban, but I doubt that most of them are willing to kill themselves. I consider them brave because in the struggle against American and NATO forces over the last 13 years, they have time and again proven their bravery under fire. That can't be denied.

I don't regard the killing of children as either brave or cowardly. It's evil.

I never said anything about killing themselves(although the term suicide bomber speaks for itself) ,but they are willing to die for their religious beliefs.

They are evil cowards

 

[-fish-]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.

I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand imply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

I would ask for some sort of translation, but I'm sure Jonessed or Strikes2k will be here any second to get to the bottom of this.

I didn't think I was being that confusing. Understanding something does not imply moral acceptance. I can try to understand something but still regard it as evil.

Would be nice if you'd take your trail of tears and stalkers with you sometimes and let a thread breathe.

But that might be asking a lot I suppose. Carry on.

I just starting posting again in this thread after several hours.

My post is now the 14th consecutive post that has you, someone responding to you, or someone talking about you.

It's a trend, a bad one. I like you and all, but nothing is getting by the Tim moat for hours or days at a time in some threads. Just sayin.

problem is there are intelligent people that just won't engage anymore. I'm interested in this topic. I'm also pretty close to some special forces guys that have been on both sides of torture, as well as fighting the Taliban. I've talked to them about this today and I thought what they had to say was interesting, but I click here and remember it's pointless to wade into these threads anymore. I gave up years ago. so did many other good, thoughtful people.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.

I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand imply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

I would ask for some sort of translation, but I'm sure Jonessed or Strikes2k will be here any second to get to the bottom of this.

I didn't think I was being that confusing. Understanding something does not imply moral acceptance. I can try to understand something but still regard it as evil.

Would be nice if you'd take your trail of tears and stalkers with you sometimes and let a thread breathe.

But that might be asking a lot I suppose. Carry on.

I just starting posting again in this thread after several hours.

My post is now the 14th consecutive post that has you, someone responding to you, or someone talking about you.

It's a trend, a bad one. I like you and all, but nothing is getting by the Tim moat for hours or days at a time in some threads. Just sayin.

problem is there are intelligent people that just won't engage anymore. I'm interested in this topic. I'm also pretty close to some special forces guys that have been on both sides of torture, as well as fighting the Taliban. I've talked to them about this today and I thought what they had to say was interesting, but I click here and remember it's pointless to wade into these threads anymore. I gave up years ago. so did many other good, thoughtful people.

i would love to hear what your SF friends have to say

 

[timschochet]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.

I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand imply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

I would ask for some sort of translation, but I'm sure Jonessed or Strikes2k will be here any second to get to the bottom of this.

I didn't think I was being that confusing. Understanding something does not imply moral acceptance. I can try to understand something but still regard it as evil.

Would be nice if you'd take your trail of tears and stalkers with you sometimes and let a thread breathe.

But that might be asking a lot I suppose. Carry on.

I just starting posting again in this thread after several hours.

My post is now the 14th consecutive post that has you, someone responding to you, or someone talking about you.

It's a trend, a bad one. I like you and all, but nothing is getting by the Tim moat for hours or days at a time in some threads. Just sayin.

problem is there are intelligent people that just won't engage anymore. I'm interested in this topic. I'm also pretty close to some special forces guys that have been on both sides of torture, as well as fighting the Taliban. I've talked to them about this today and I thought what they had to say was interesting, but I click here and remember it's pointless to wade into these threads anymore. I gave up years ago. so did many other good, thoughtful people.

So this is my fault? Do a lot of you really believe this- that my presence is preventing thoughtful debate?

 

[Slapdash]

Pakistan is a scary country

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.

I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand imply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

I would ask for some sort of translation, but I'm sure Jonessed or Strikes2k will be here any second to get to the bottom of this.

I didn't think I was being that confusing. Understanding something does not imply moral acceptance. I can try to understand something but still regard it as evil.

Would be nice if you'd take your trail of tears and stalkers with you sometimes and let a thread breathe.

But that might be asking a lot I suppose. Carry on.

I just starting posting again in this thread after several hours.

My post is now the 14th consecutive post that has you, someone responding to you, or someone talking about you.

It's a trend, a bad one. I like you and all, but nothing is getting by the Tim moat for hours or days at a time in some threads. Just sayin.

problem is there are intelligent people that just won't engage anymore. I'm interested in this topic. I'm also pretty close to some special forces guys that have been on both sides of torture, as well as fighting the Taliban. I've talked to them about this today and I thought what they had to say was interesting, but I click here and remember it's pointless to wade into these threads anymore. I gave up years ago. so did many other good, thoughtful people.

I used to love talking about things such as asymmetrical warfare, my time in Central Asia, and the strategic vision and tactical abilities of our forces. Now people would rather stalk Tim and post #### like this if they aren't doing that.

Why bother? Me, Beer 30, Higgins, Offa, Shiny, Redman, Zilla and others used to discuss this stuff at length, interesting stuff. Now jon mx or Max Threshold make it about Hillary Clinton, Tim chimes in, then Jonessed, Strikes 2k and the Legion of Dumb follows and it's all over. The Libya thread was my last try, no use talking to myself anymore.

You're right, all the thoughtful stuff left long ago. I'm not sad about it, but that's where we are here in 12/14. At least the wagering thread is still awesome!

ETA: names

 

[Limp Ditka]

Wonderful. Now tim's probably going to start handicapping

 

[Christo]

Can somebody explain to me how some of thepeople posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same peopleposting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.I think the two are separate issues. I condemnwhat the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand

Limply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

So if hypothetically our interrogation tactics could prevent a massacre like the school massacre from happening again would you be in?

Good question. I don't know. I think yes.

That's bull#### (IMO). I would hunt down one of the perpetrators of this act and thrust a rusty spoon into their carotid artery and not ever lose a wink of sleep over it. But torturing someone to gain information is morally wrong. Period. One of the major problems I have with this nation is that we are only as good as our ideals and ankle to stand by them because they are right. You lose that, you lose your way, as we have.

His premise was that torture would be 100% effective and that I knew it going in. Under such circumstances, I believe it is probably more moral to accept torture in order to save lives than to refuse. However, I don't think such conditions have existed in real life.

Like saying you could rape Kate Upton, but no one would ever know. The answer is don't. It's wrong.Don't give me "but we're the last two on Earth, I'm saving the species" bulk####. You stay away from Kate Upton, Timmy.

Would raping Kate Upton save 126 lives?

 

[-fish-]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.

I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand imply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

I would ask for some sort of translation, but I'm sure Jonessed or Strikes2k will be here any second to get to the bottom of this.

I didn't think I was being that confusing. Understanding something does not imply moral acceptance. I can try to understand something but still regard it as evil.

Would be nice if you'd take your trail of tears and stalkers with you sometimes and let a thread breathe.

But that might be asking a lot I suppose. Carry on.

I just starting posting again in this thread after several hours.

My post is now the 14th consecutive post that has you, someone responding to you, or someone talking about you.

It's a trend, a bad one. I like you and all, but nothing is getting by the Tim moat for hours or days at a time in some threads. Just sayin.

problem is there are intelligent people that just won't engage anymore. I'm interested in this topic. I'm also pretty close to some special forces guys that have been on both sides of torture, as well as fighting the Taliban. I've talked to them about this today and I thought what they had to say was interesting, but I click here and remember it's pointless to wade into these threads anymore. I gave up years ago. so did many other good, thoughtful people.

So this is my fault? Do a lot of you really believe this- that my presence is preventing thoughtful debate?

yes. absolutely. you're the worst thing that ever happened to this board. there's a reason that a large contingent of the best posters on this board have withdrawn to a single thread.

 

[Reginald Cornsilks]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.

I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand imply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

I would ask for some sort of translation, but I'm sure Jonessed or Strikes2k will be here any second to get to the bottom of this.

I didn't think I was being that confusing. Understanding something does not imply moral acceptance. I can try to understand something but still regard it as evil.

Would be nice if you'd take your trail of tears and stalkers with you sometimes and let a thread breathe.

But that might be asking a lot I suppose. Carry on.

I just starting posting again in this thread after several hours.

My post is now the 14th consecutive post that has you, someone responding to you, or someone talking about you.

It's a trend, a bad one. I like you and all, but nothing is getting by the Tim moat for hours or days at a time in some threads. Just sayin.

problem is there are intelligent people that just won't engage anymore. I'm interested in this topic. I'm also pretty close to some special forces guys that have been on both sides of torture, as well as fighting the Taliban. I've talked to them about this today and I thought what they had to say was interesting, but I click here and remember it's pointless to wade into these threads anymore. I gave up years ago. so did many other good, thoughtful people.

So this is my fault? Do a lot of you really believe this- that my presence is preventing thoughtful debate?

Really? pretty much the only reason I stopped weighing in on threads like this. I stick to gambling and drinking threads now. You ruin almost every thread you lead posts in with your non stop LOOK AT MY OPINION, I MUST STATE IT crap.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Yeah cornsilkes is a smart guy lost to the times, good example.

We have plenty of people left who post stuff about Bill Clinton's affairs in environmental threads, and someone talking gun control in a bowling thread. So we have that going for us, which is nice.

 

[Reginald Cornsilks]

Yeah cornsilkes is a smart guy lost to the times, good example.

We have plenty of people left who post stuff about Bill Clinton's affairs in environmental threads, and someone talking gun control in a bowling thread. So we have that going for us, which is nice.

BTW: I agree with you too. The problem: just as much as tim is his followers who stalk every post his makes and, in turn, ruin threads. Tim could reel it back a little and his minions could go away and it'd be pretty fun again to discuss political/world issues. You know, jump in, once in a while and make a case for how you feel, then I'll see you again in a few days. Impossible for tim and his posse. MUST...RUIN....EVERY....THREAD....THAT....WE....ALL....USED....TO....ENJOY....DEBATING

 

[timschochet]

Wow. I was not aware that so many people considered me such a liability here. fish doesn't surprise me; he has always expressed distaste for me. Reginald Cornsalks I don't really know but he seems like a good guy. Dr. Detroit is someone I've really come to respect, so that hurts.

It was never my intention to "dominate" threads, much less ruin them by their presence. I honestly enjoy good discussion and debate, and that's why I'm here. I've come to love a lot of you guys and I enjoy discussing stuff. It's true that there are people who follow me around in order to attack me, and they can be as annoying to me as they are to everyone else. But perhaps it is my fault.

I'm sorry guys. I really am. I guess I will try to scale it back some. I am who I am; I have strong opinions and I do like to express them and engage in discussion/debate. But I will try to limit it to stuff that really matters to me. If it seems like I am starting to "dominate" a thread, I will take a breather. I promise I will try.

If that doesn't work and several people still continue to believe that I am a negative to this forum, then I will leave for good. I don't want to ruin things for anyone.

 

[-fish-]

Yeah cornsilkes is a smart guy lost to the times, good example.

We have plenty of people left who post stuff about Bill Clinton's affairs in environmental threads, and someone talking gun control in a bowling thread. So we have that going for us, which is nice.

BTW: I agree with you too. The problem: just as much as tim is his followers who stalk every post his makes and, in turn, ruin threads. Tim could reel it back a little and his minions could go away and it'd be pretty fun again to discuss political/world issues. You know, jump in, once in a while and make a case for how you feel, then I'll see you again in a few days. Impossible for tim and his posse. MUST...RUIN....EVERY....THREAD....THAT....WE....ALL....USED....TO....ENJOY....DEBATING

not that the other people aren't culpable, but without the catalyst, the rest of them wouldn't be so present. most people gave up. some are apparently trying to wear him out, which will never happen.

back to threads about drinking and whether wings are actually food or not. see you guys in 6 months.

 

[-fish-]

Wow. I was not aware that so many people considered me such a liability here. fish doesn't surprise me; he has always expressed distaste for me. Reginald Cornsalks I don't really know but he seems like a good guy. Dr. Detroit is someone I've really come to respect, so that hurts.

It was never my intention to "dominate" threads, much less ruin them by their presence. I honestly enjoy good discussion and debate, and that's why I'm here. I've come to love a lot of you guys and I enjoy discussing stuff. It's true that there are people who follow me around in order to attack me, and they can be as annoying to me as they are to everyone else. But perhaps it is my fault.

I'm sorry guys. I really am. I guess I will try to scale it back some. I am who I am; I have strong opinions and I do like to express them and engage in discussion/debate. But I will try to limit it to stuff that really matters to me. If it seems like I am starting to "dominate" a thread, I will take a breather. I promise I will try.

If that doesn't work and several people still continue to believe that I am a negative to this forum, then I will leave for good. I don't want to ruin things for anyone.

on the self-awareness scale, you don't even register. I don't think you're a bad person. I do believe that you are the primary reason that a lot of smart people have given up posting here. this place was better before you, and when you arrived you probably actually liked the level of debate and discussion, because it used to be pretty informative and even civil.

if you weren't a Rand disciple, you might realize that the greater good would be served by you going away.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Wow. I was not aware that so many people considered me such a liability here. fish doesn't surprise me; he has always expressed distaste for me. Reginald Cornsalks I don't really know but he seems like a good guy. Dr. Detroit is someone I've really come to respect, so that hurts.

It was never my intention to "dominate" threads, much less ruin them by their presence. I honestly enjoy good discussion and debate, and that's why I'm here. I've come to love a lot of you guys and I enjoy discussing stuff. It's true that there are people who follow me around in order to attack me, and they can be as annoying to me as they are to everyone else. But perhaps it is my fault.

I'm sorry guys. I really am. I guess I will try to scale it back some. I am who I am; I have strong opinions and I do like to express them and engage in discussion/debate. But I will try to limit it to stuff that really matters to me. If it seems like I am starting to "dominate" a thread, I will take a breather. I promise I will try.

If that doesn't work and several people still continue to believe that I am a negative to this forum, then I will leave for good. I don't want to ruin things for anyone.

I have more issue with the stalkers and that you continue to engage them day after day, week after week, year after year. Let some of them go and you'll get less blame for things that are sometimes beyond your control.

I like you, I agree with things you say. But I'm not sure why you continue to engage the likes of Strikes2k and others, I think they'd stop posting here if you ignored them. Win/Win

 

[Reginald Cornsilks]

Wow. I was not aware that so many people considered me such a liability here. fish doesn't surprise me; he has always expressed distaste for me. Reginald Cornsalks I don't really know but he seems like a good guy. Dr. Detroit is someone I've really come to respect, so that hurts.

It was never my intention to "dominate" threads, much less ruin them by their presence. I honestly enjoy good discussion and debate, and that's why I'm here. I've come to love a lot of you guys and I enjoy discussing stuff. It's true that there are people who follow me around in order to attack me, and they can be as annoying to me as they are to everyone else. But perhaps it is my fault.

I'm sorry guys. I really am. I guess I will try to scale it back some. I am who I am; I have strong opinions and I do like to express them and engage in discussion/debate. But I will try to limit it to stuff that really matters to me. If it seems like I am starting to "dominate" a thread, I will take a breather. I promise I will try.

If that doesn't work and several people still continue to believe that I am a negative to this forum, then I will leave for good. I don't want to ruin things for anyone.

You say something like this at least once a month for 2 years now.

Spend more time with people who actually know you and care about you and then come supplement it with some friendly political discussion like every single other person here. You show up on the boards at 7 am and post, almost all day, everyday until midnight. There are other things in life. You'd take so much less heat if you were an "after the work day" or "during the work day" guy. You are literally a before, during, after work day guy with stronger opinions than anyone here. You're acting incredulous, but I feel like you've heard that many times before. I've never met anyone so intent on making sure everyone knew their opinion. I do think you have some mild form of asbergers (based on experience) and think you need to talk to someone about it (not meant as an insult, but you should really see someone about this). I just get beat over the head with tim, tim's opinions, tims haters over and over and over for years. I dont ever bother trying to engage you anymore. Your followers have gotten almost more annoying now. You're a smart guy, but you absolutely have some sort of complex. I wrote my honors thesis on Reagans influence over the end of the Cold War, however, there's zero chance on jumping in on that thread and stating my very well researched position with your turd lying there and the half dozen flies circling it. It's not fun.

There's life out there besides a glowing screen with anonymous people typing back to you. Try to live it. At the end of our time, none of us behind this glowing screen you've wasted so much of your life engaging with will matter. Only those on your side of your glowing screen will.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Also derailing a thread about 140 some kids dying isn't the worst thing. I think this is one of the most horrible things I've ever seen, and can't imagine the depravity of those who did this for some political gain (and it was certainly more political/power play than religious). I met some of the nicest people in Pakistan and think it's a great country, and Peshawar is by far my favorite city in Central/South Asia. I feel terrible for the parents, families, friends of the victims and for all the Pakistani moderates who have to tell people they are from Pakistan.

 

[Limp Ditka]

I have strong opinions

Here's problem #1.

While you might think you have strong opinions, there's at least a 50/50 chance that your opinion is going to change midstream.

The likes of jonessed and strikeoutinlife2k know this and play you because of it.

 

[Fennis]

Also derailing a thread about 140 some kids dying isn't the worst thing. I think this is one of the most horrible things I've ever seen, and can't imagine the depravity of those who did this for some political gain (and it was certainly more political/power play than religious). I met some of the nicest people in Pakistan and think it's a great country, and Peshawar is by far my favorite city in Central/South Asia. I feel terrible for the parents, families, friends of the victims and for all the Pakistani moderates who have to tell people they are from Pakistan.

I have several "work friends" who are Pakistani. It was a devastating day for them.

 

[32 Counter Pass]

It is Allah's will.

Until peeps get outta this mind set $h1t will be awful.

 

[-fish-]

It is Allah's will.

Until peeps get outta this mind set $h1t will be awful.

extremists of all religions are a problem.

 

[32 Counter Pass]

agree. That is my point.

 

[-fish-]

Tim, if 50 people (not aliases, actual separate people) to ask you to stop posting in political and religious threads, would you?

Post all the draft threads you want. Post funny stuff. Post about your life. Hell, post in the GMTAN (you have, and you got no pushback, because you acknowledged and respected the no religion/no politics request).

Just see what happens if you just lurk in political discussions for a while. It may not work, but if I'm right, maybe you reconsider the value of forcing your opinion into...well, everything.

 

[flapgreen]

No reason to try and understand why someone would do something like this. It doesn't matter.

 

[-fish-]

No reason to try and understand why someone would do something like this. It doesn't matter.

why wouldn't it matter? if understanding it could prevent it from happening again, why wouldn't you want to figure out what could be done, if anything?

 

[Short Corner]

Can somebody explain to me how some of the people posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same people posting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.

I think the two are separate issues. I condemn what the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand imply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

I would ask for some sort of translation, but I'm sure Jonessed or Strikes2k will be here any second to get to the bottom of this.

I didn't think I was being that confusing. Understanding something does not imply moral acceptance. I can try to understand something but still regard it as evil.

Would be nice if you'd take your trail of tears and stalkers with you sometimes and let a thread breathe.

But that might be asking a lot I suppose. Carry on.

I just starting posting again in this thread after several hours.

My post is now the 14th consecutive post that has you, someone responding to you, or someone talking about you.

Stop being part of the problem

 

[msommer]

The concept of mutually-assured-destruction relies on the concept that if you try to kill me and mine, I am going to try to kill you and yours. There is no distinction drawn between civilian or military targets. Death is death. We believe in that concept - the general public would expect us to hit back at any nation that hit at us - damn the consequences or civilian casualties.

This same concept is in play - assuming the Taliban believe that the Pakistani military deliberately targeted civilians, even in a war effort.

Mutually Assured Destruction refers to the nuclear detente created by the ability of both sides in the cold war to annihilate the human race, even after a surprise attack.

What you are refering to is an eye for an eye. A bronze age, or older, concept

mutually assured destruction is an eye-for-an-eye - in the nuclear age.

With nuclear weapons. That's the difference

 

[Sinn Fein]

The concept of mutually-assured-destruction relies on the concept that if you try to kill me and mine, I am going to try to kill you and yours. There is no distinction drawn between civilian or military targets. Death is death. We believe in that concept - the general public would expect us to hit back at any nation that hit at us - damn the consequences or civilian casualties.

This same concept is in play - assuming the Taliban believe that the Pakistani military deliberately targeted civilians, even in a war effort.

Mutually Assured Destruction refers to the nuclear detente created by the ability of both sides in the cold war to annihilate the human race, even after a surprise attack.What you are refering to is an eye for an eye. A bronze age, or older, concept

mutually assured destruction is an eye-for-an-eye - in the nuclear age.

With nuclear weapons. That's the difference

ok The concept does not change just because you change the weapon/method. you fire one at me, I will fire one at you.

 

[Henry Ford]

Wait, there's a bowling thread?

 

[Otis]

Can somebody explain to me how some of thepeople posting in this thread saying they understand or want to try and understand how a people can kill innocent children in school (even implying they are brave) are the same peopleposting in other threads condemning our interrogation tactics.

Sure.I think the two are separate issues. I condemnwhat the Taliban did. I also condemn what our government did (though I am NOT equating the two- the acts of torture we committed were awful, but not nearly AS awful as what the Taliban did. So please don't misinterpret me here.)

At the same time I try to understand why the Taliban did what they did, and I try to understand why our government did what they did. You seem to believe that attempts to understand

Limply forgiveness. I strongly disagree with you. I want to understand so that we can try to prevent it.

So if hypothetically our interrogation tactics could prevent a massacre like the school massacre from happening again would you be in?

Good question. I don't know. I think yes.

That's bull#### (IMO). I would hunt down one of the perpetrators of this act and thrust a rusty spoon into their carotid artery and not ever lose a wink of sleep over it. But torturing someone to gain information is morally wrong. Period. One of the major problems I have with this nation is that we are only as good as our ideals and ankle to stand by them because they are right. You lose that, you lose your way, as we have.

His premise was that torture would be 100% effective and that I knew it going in. Under such circumstances, I believe it is probably more moral to accept torture in order to save lives than to refuse. However, I don't think such conditions have existed in real life.

Like saying you could rape Kate Upton, but no one would ever know. The answer is don't. It's wrong.Don't give me "but we're the last two on Earth, I'm saving the species" bulk####. You stay away from Kate Upton, Timmy.

Would raping Kate Upton save 126 lives?

If you could last a good ten minutes, probably, assuming we are talking about cows and pigs.

 

[beer 30]

The Pakistani government has been playing a duplicitous game for a long time. They pretend to work with us on going after terrorists while at the same time hiding and coddling many of them. There was no way that high level military guys didn't know where bin Laden was for instance.

This is horrific and the Islamic monsters that did this hold the vast amount of responsibility, but the government holds some as well for the dangerous game they've been playing. Now they know that you can't befriend a viper.

Yet it seems the Taliban was targeting military leaders by hitting this school. Seems odd, if the military were supporting the taliban.

There are some that speculate this was in retaliation for the June offensive the Pak's launched against the Taliban

 

[msommer]

The concept of mutually-assured-destruction relies on the concept that if you try to kill me and mine, I am going to try to kill you and yours. There is no distinction drawn between civilian or military targets. Death is death. We believe in that concept - the general public would expect us to hit back at any nation that hit at us - damn the consequences or civilian casualties.

This same concept is in play - assuming the Taliban believe that the Pakistani military deliberately targeted civilians, even in a war effort.

Mutually Assured Destruction refers to the nuclear detente created by the ability of both sides in the cold war to annihilate the human race, even after a surprise attack.What you are refering to is an eye for an eye. A bronze age, or older, concept

mutually assured destruction is an eye-for-an-eye - in the nuclear age.

With nuclear weapons. That's the difference

ok The concept does not change just because you change the weapon/method. you fire one at me, I will fire one at you.

When me and you are both the entire human race it does

 

[Sinn Fein]

The concept of mutually-assured-destruction relies on the concept that if you try to kill me and mine, I am going to try to kill you and yours. There is no distinction drawn between civilian or military targets. Death is death. We believe in that concept - the general public would expect us to hit back at any nation that hit at us - damn the consequences or civilian casualties.

This same concept is in play - assuming the Taliban believe that the Pakistani military deliberately targeted civilians, even in a war effort.

Mutually Assured Destruction refers to the nuclear detente created by the ability of both sides in the cold war to annihilate the human race, even after a surprise attack.What you are refering to is an eye for an eye. A bronze age, or older, concept

mutually assured destruction is an eye-for-an-eye - in the nuclear age.

With nuclear weapons. That's the difference

ok The concept does not change just because you change the weapon/method. you fire one at me, I will fire one at you.

When me and you are both the entire human race it does

The concept is the same - the scale is different.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

The Pakistani government has been playing a duplicitous game for a long time. They pretend to work with us on going after terrorists while at the same time hiding and coddling many of them. There was no way that high level military guys didn't know where bin Laden was for instance.

This is horrific and the Islamic monsters that did this hold the vast amount of responsibility, but the government holds some as well for the dangerous game they've been playing. Now they know that you can't befriend a viper.

Yet it seems the Taliban was targeting military leaders by hitting this school. Seems odd, if the military were supporting the taliban.

There are some that speculate this was in retaliation for the June offensive the Pak's launched against the Taliban

I thought http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=722780 was the June Offensive.