OT: No more "opinions" from me

[Teal]

Fourth, I won't concede that the only full resolution to the conflict is genocide.

I would have to agree with you.
That wouldnt be so good since the vast majority of the people living there are just like you and I...
They are not all scum sucking mindless fanatic murdering terrorists the same that not all Greeks own restaurants or Italians are in the mafia.
Too bad its pretty much the only way the media portrays them.

I dont have the answer to how the correct resolution will come about since there will always be terrorists the same way there will always be bad news cast coverage of terror.

Fine...me either. But the reality is that we will be fighting these idiots until the end of time without it. It's just the world we now live in. We will ALWAYS be fighting these people. Always.

[Inuyasha]

I'll do you one better, how about get rid of All religion. Religion is why these stupid wars are fought in the first place.

[Teal]

I'll do you one better, how about get rid of All religion. Religion is why these stupid wars are fought in the first place.

"Religion is only good for pissin', moanin', and startin' wars."
Ted Nugent


Yep. Can't argue with you there.

[JackB1]

Totally agree "Inu"....I think we are seeing more and more new generations of kids growing up and realizing that religion does far less good than bad.....especially when it is used as a backbone for war. Neither side will give any credence or respect to the other's religion, because doing so would discredit your own religion. In religous people's minds, there is only ONE "real" or "true" religion. That means whichever one is the "real" or legitimate one, would make ALL THE OTHERS false. I totally respect people who use religion for their own peace of mind, well being and morals and family values and such, but there are far too many out there who don't use it in that manner. I really believe that religion was originally "created" to help people deal with death. It is a very comforting thing to believe that when you die, you go to a "better place".

Back to Teal's discussion.....
I can't believe that you (Teal) or anyone would think that our actions in Iraq, including our documented torture of POW's, hasn't created more terrorists. I wish you could ask them how they felt about the USA after we dropped bombs on a country that never attacked us and then decided to force our democratic system on them. This is the whole mentality that "they hate us anyway, so why try and understand why" that will never get either side anywhere. It's very similiar to the Arabs vs the Jews. Everyone does what they do for a reason. These terrorists don't come out of the womb with a hatred of the USA alrready in their brains. It is taught, learned, passed along and nurtured. Until we attack the problem at it's roots, we will never make any headway.

I also think that you actually believe that us being in Iraq has somehow prevented a terrorist attack on us over here. If that were true, then I would be all for us setting up permanant camp in Iraq and staying there forever, but there is no correlation between the two. Terrorist activity has dramatically increased every year that we have been there, but just not on our homeland. But to think that Al Queda is not here inside our borders, plotting and planning, is simply naive. Our borders, airports, ports and mass transit systems are no more or only minimally more safe than they were pre 9/11. Future attacks will be thwarted by superior intellegence....not by tanks in Iraq.

I'll do you one better, how about get rid of All religion. Religion is why these stupid wars are fought in the first place.

[JackB1]

Jack,

For the love of God, learn how the quotes tag works!

I know how to reply below the quotes.....I just don't know how to
do it "in between". I guess I'll just stick to replying below.

[Brando70]

If we took the resources used in Iraq for the last four years and applied them to our own homeland security and fighting terrorism transnationally (because that's what terrorism is, a transnational threat), I find it very hard to believe that 20,000+ Americans would have been killed or wounded by terrorist attacks during that time.

I am sick and tired of having the messenger blamed for pointing out the strategic fucknuttery of this war. Of course people want to defeat terrorism. I don't like radical Islam any more than anyone else. But I have never believed that launching a conventional occupation of Iraq was the way to fight that threat. Now, four years later, when we're nowhere near where we were supposed to be, I haven't seen anything to change my mind about that. Who has been running this show for the last four years? Not liberals. And yet liberals are somehow responsible for the lack of progress because they won't slap yellow ribbons and flags on everything and keep their mouths shut? That's like me telling you it doesn't make sense to kill a fly on your forehead by hitting it with a hammer, then when you hit yourself, you blame me for not thinking more positively.

XXXIV is right. Most people in this world, no matter what they believe, are more or less the same. They want to have a job, have a home, have food, have sex, and have a family. If they have those things, generally speaking, they're not going to rock the boat. But when they don't have those things, they get angry, and they'll start listening to the guy who promises those things, or at least blames someone else for their misfortune.

[kevinpars]

All those billions of dollars later and that miserable fu%$head Bin Laden is still out there. That is all I need to know about the results of our war and our terrorism policy. Think about how happy that SOB must be about how things have gone the last few years in Iraq, think about that scum breathing the same air as you and me. I don't want to hear about the great strides we have made or the other terrorists that have been captured. Yeah, that makes me happy the way Yankee fans are happy with just making the playoffs. The guy responsible is still out there and the country that financed the attacks is getting absurdly rich with American dollars spent on oil.

Meanwhile our government spends their time in an elaborate pissing contest where the American People are the big losers.

[FatPitcher]

I'll do you one better, how about get rid of All religion. Religion is why these stupid wars are fought in the first place.

That's not true at all. You get rid of religion, and the people who use it as an excuse for war or as a recruiting/inspirational tool to con people into fighting for them will just use something else to justify and facilitate their wars.

When positions of religious authority are also positions of political authority, people who want political power will aspire to those positions, even if they care nothing about the religion itself. So in those cases you end up with a bunch of hypocrites doing stuff that often conflicts directly with the original teachings of that religion. Kind of the "power corrupts" thing, except that here it's corrupting the institution.

The solution is not to get rid of religion, but to keep religious authority and political authority as separate as possible.

[pk500]

Well said, FatP. To say religion is the cause of all wars is a broad brush that is inaccurate and dangerous.

Were the Korean War and Vietnam War fought over religion? Hell, no. How could they? Communist nations were officially atheist or agnostic.

The U.S. Civil War wasn't fought over religion. Nor was World War I. Or World War II, despite the horrible subtext of Hitler's desire to exterminate the Jews.

Without religion, this planet would be f*cked. Period. There are days of horror and sorrow where if you didn't believe in a higher power, there wouldn't be much to believe in at all. There's absolutely no way I could live life like that.

Take care,
PK

[FatPitcher]

If we took the resources used in Iraq for the last four years and applied them to our own homeland security and fighting terrorism transnationally (because that's what terrorism is, a transnational threat), I find it very hard to believe that 20,000+ Americans would have been killed or wounded by terrorist attacks during that time.

I am sick and tired of having the messenger blamed for pointing out the strategic fucknuttery of this war. Of course people want to defeat terrorism. I don't like radical Islam any more than anyone else. But I have never believed that launching a conventional occupation of Iraq was the way to fight that threat. Now, four years later, when we're nowhere near where we were supposed to be, I haven't seen anything to change my mind about that. Who has been running this show for the last four years? Not liberals. And yet liberals are somehow responsible for the lack of progress because they won't slap yellow ribbons and flags on everything and keep their mouths shut? That's like me telling you it doesn't make sense to kill a fly on your forehead by hitting it with a hammer, then when you hit yourself, you blame me for not thinking more positively.

XXXIV is right. Most people in this world, no matter what they believe, are more or less the same. They want to have a job, have a home, have food, have sex, and have a family. If they have those things, generally speaking, they're not going to rock the boat. But when they don't have those things, they get angry, and they'll start listening to the guy who promises those things, or at least blames someone else for their misfortune.

That's a really backwards way of thinking, and I'll tell you why. How many Americans perished at the hands of the British before the Revolutionary War? How many slaves died before the Civil War? Compare those numbers to the casualty numbers from those wars. Since we're going solely based on numbers, you must think that pulling out of Vietnam was a bad idea. After all, only 58k Americans died there, while over 3 million Cambodians and Vietnamese were slaughtered in the chaos that ensued after our withdrawal.

This conflict is a battle of wills, not guns. The only way to win is not to kill bin Laden or any number of terrorists. It's to break their will, to get them to realize that we aren't going to pack it up and leave them alone. That's why it's so embarassing that this moronic Congress is doing its damndest to get us to give up. I have always said that I thought the invasion of Iraq was unnecessary, but the decision to give up--and that is exactly what it is, no matter what nice term you use--would be far more devastating in the long run than the decision to invade in the first place.

I don't hear much on the subject of Afghanistan. Is everyone pretty much agreed that the invasion there was justified, or what?

[Brando70]

That's a really backwards way of thinking, and I'll tell you why. How many Americans perished at the hands of the British before the Revolutionary War? How many slaves died before the Civil War? Compare those numbers to the casualty numbers from those wars. Since we're going solely based on numbers, you must think that pulling out of Vietnam was a bad idea. After all, only 58k Americans died there, while over 3 million Cambodians and Vietnamese were slaughtered in the chaos that ensued after our withdrawal.

And that's a great way to add oranges to an apple pie.

The American Revolution and the Civil War have no relevance on the topic at hand. We had to fight the British to achieve independence. We had to fight the South to eliminate slavery. The question is, did we have to fight Iraq to fight terrorism? My opinion -- and it's just an opinion -- is that we would have been better served not doing what we did, and if that's the case, we need to reconsider staying there.

As for Vietnam, the bigger question is whether our actions were the best way to handle the situation in the first place? And what would have been the answer to pulling out -- stay in SE Asia in perpetuity? Bomb them back to the Stone Age?

I think we have to take a hard look at Iraq and look at the costs and benefits of staying. Like many other GOP leaders have said, we have to establish metrics to measure our progress, and if we don't meet those metrics, reevaluate our situation there. But this administration doesn't like that because they're really an anti-democratic bunch who want the Executive Branch to be able to do what it likes, without interference from the rabble or their elected representatives.

[FatPitcher]

OK, fine, but that's completely different from saying that the war is not worthwhile because the number of deaths prevented < the number of war casualties.

I interviewed a bunch of South Vietnamese survivors of the war and its aftermath when I was in high school. Definitely puts things in a different light when you hear about things directly from the people who experienced them.

[JackB1]

OK, fine, but that's completely different from saying that the war is not worthwhile because the number of deaths prevented < the number of war casualties.

I interviewed a bunch of South Vietnamese survivors of the war and its aftermath when I was in high school. Definitely puts things in a different light when you hear about things directly from the people who experienced them.

1 death is too much to the wife, family and kids of a 21 year old soldier
that died over there. Justifying a war by the number of casualties is totally irrelevant.

[ScoopBrady]

I don't think I've ever seen somebody declare that they were going to stop posting in political threads and resume doing it in the same thread before. It's like saying you're never going to be with another woman after your wife dies and then getting laid at her funeral.

All joking aside, I do feel the need to say something about this whole thread because it bothers me a little. This thread comes across as someone who was feeling down about getting ganged-up on in another thread looking for a pat on the back and encouragement rather than someone who sincerely wanted to let everyone know that he wasn't going to be posting in OT threads anymore. That would lead me to believe that this type of post will happen again should Jack continue to post in OT political threads. I don't want to see a pattern develop here nor do I want to see a precedent set. If I see this kind of thread again I will hold that person to it, at least for longer than a couple of hours.

I'm sorry if this is coming off as harsh Jack. I really don't want you to feel like I'm singling you out. You just happened to start the thread. You're a good guy that I think has thin skin when it comes to OT posts and a hard time explaining your political thoughts in writing. There's no shame in that.

This post is really meant as a message to everybody about posting dramatic "You won't see me 'round here no more!" threads. For future reference, if you decide not to post at DSP anymore take a page out of the last time pk stopped posting here. PM the people you want to know and stop posting. If you decide you're not going to post in OT Political threads or threads about Loius Gossett Jr. , then PM the people who post in those types of threads that you want to know and stop posting.

[JackB1]

I don't think I've ever seen somebody declare that they were going to stop posting in political threads and resume doing it in the same thread before. It's like saying you're never going to be with another woman after your wife dies and then getting laid at her funeral.

All joking aside, I do feel the need to say something about this whole thread because it bothers me a little. This thread comes across as someone who was feeling down about getting ganged-up on in another thread looking for a pat on the back and encouragement rather than someone who sincerely wanted to let everyone know that he wasn't going to be posting in OT threads anymore. That would lead me to believe that this type of post will happen again should Jack continue to post in OT political threads. I don't want to see a pattern develop here nor do I want to see a precedent set. If I see this kind of thread again I will hold that person to it, at least for longer than a couple of hours.

I'm sorry if this is coming off as harsh Jack. I really don't want you to feel like I'm singling you out. You just happened to start the thread. You're a good guy that I think has thin skin when it comes to OT posts and a hard time explaining your political thoughts in writing. There's no shame in that.

This post is really meant as a message to everybody about posting dramatic "You won't see me 'round here no more!" threads. For future reference, if you decide not to post at DSP anymore take a page out of the last time pk stopped posting here. PM the people you want to know and stop posting. If you decide you're not going to post in OT Political threads or threads about Loius Gossett Jr. , then PM the people who post in those types of threads that you want to know and stop posting.

Scoop,
I didn't plan this. I was kind of convinced to not let this stuff bother me and continue to post my feelings. I am however being more careful to try not to offend anyone and just post my opinon or ask others theirs. If it ever degrades into a "negative pile on", then that will be it for me for those types of discussions. I really just replied to Teal's question and kind of got "rolling" again. The whole "purpose" of the initial thread was to let you guys know how I felt and see if there were others that felt the same way. I had numerous pm's from folks who started their replies with........"I agree with you 100%.......Clearly it is still the minority, but it was a substantial number of folks who choose to stay out of "controversial" topics here, just as some do in real life. I guess the moral of the story is, if you post something like that, you better be able to handle the response. I thought that this thread turned into a "healthy debate" over whether or not to pull out of Iraq. No personal attacks. No
"piling on"....just an interesting discussion. It gave me hope, be whether or not i continue down this road remains to be seen. I certainly will not make any "announcement" if I do.

[Jared]

Quick note:

For the numerous people PM-ing Jack agreeing with him and staying out of controversial topics because of the tone in these threads, or for other reasons that can potentially be fixed, please PM me and let me know your concerns. If there are problems that should be fixed, I can't do much to help if I don't know what your concerns are.

[DivotMaker]

Without religion, this planet would be f*cked. Period. There are days of horror and sorrow where if you didn't believe in a higher power, there wouldn't be much to believe in at all. There's absolutely no way I could live life like that.

You and I have had our disagreements in the past on various topics, but your statement above, I could not agree MORE with. VERY well said.

[JackB1]

Without religion, this planet would be f*cked. Period. There are days of horror and sorrow where if you didn't believe in a higher power, there wouldn't be much to believe in at all. There's absolutely no way I could live life like that.

You and I have had our disagreements in the past on various topics, but your statement above, I could not agree MORE with. VERY well said.

PK....there is a HUGE difference between believing in a higher power (which I do) and organized religion. Some people do use religion to help get them through the day or to justify certain inexplicable events, but there are just as many who use it for personal gain, profit, greed, murder, etc. But saying to "get rid of all religion" is too broad a paintbrush (as u like to say) . We do though need to get rid of religion in our government. This country is all about diversity which includes religions of many types and also atheists and agnostics. When a govt representative promotes his religion, he leaves out all people who aren't in that religous camp.

[pk500]

Agree on the complete separation of church and state, Jack. My stance on that has been very clear in the past and remains unchanged.

But I also believe that organized religion promotes more regular practice of one's faith. When you're in services among like-minded worshippers every weekend, the message tends to penetrate more and is manifested more in your daily life, in my opinion. You're part of that faith community, whatever your beliefs.

It's no different than any other club. If you're a cyclist, don't you think you'd ride more if you joined a cycling club and rode with friendly, like-minded cyclists every Sunday who were more than willing to share their knowledge? Or what about Xbox Live? Hasn't the community aspects of that service enhanced your gaming and made gaming more of a regular part of your leisure time?

Humans are communal beings; we like doing things in groups. And that tends to promote more frequency of the things we do in groups. Some good, some bad.

I have nothing against those who believe in a higher power yet aren't part of an organized sect; I think it's great. But in my experience, their need for a higher power only becomes apparent during crisis situations instead of being a daily or at least weekly part of their lives.

You don't have to attend Mass, services or synagogue to believe or have faith. But if you do believe, why wouldn't you want to learn more about your faith and how it fits into your life, let it permeate you and spend an hour a week among like-minded friends in your community?

I've never understood that. I still get a lot out of Mass every Sunday. It's an hour of peace, reflection and appreciation every week in our life, which can be stressful as hell with work, activities and three young kids, that is very appreciated.

I don't go because I think I "have to," out of some sort of Catholic guilt bred by 12 years of Catholic school. Plus many of our friends go to the same church, and we've met some very nice people through church. So bonus!

But as they say, different strokes. And there really is no "correct" way when it comes to faith. It's completely up to each person's interpretation, and that's where faith can lead to trouble, when regular worshippers try to ram their beliefs down others' throats.

Take care,
PK

[JackB1]

Agree on the complete separation of church and state, Jack. My stance on that has been very clear in the past and remains unchanged.

But I also believe that organized religion promotes more regular practice of one's faith. When you're in services among like-minded worshippers every weekend, the message tends to penetrate more and is manifested more in your daily life, in my opinion. You're part of that faith community, whatever your beliefs.

It's no different than any other club. If you're a cyclist, don't you think you'd ride more if you joined a cycling club and rode with friendly, like-minded cyclists every Sunday who were more than willing to share their knowledge? Or what about Xbox Live? Hasn't the community aspects of that service enhanced your gaming and made gaming more of a regular part of your leisure time?

Humans are communal beings; we like doing things in groups. And that tends to promote more frequency of the things we do in groups. Some good, some bad.

I have nothing against those who believe in a higher power yet aren't part of an organized sect; I think it's great. But in my experience, their need for a higher power only becomes apparent during crisis situations instead of being a daily or at least weekly part of their lives.

You don't have to attend Mass, services or synagogue to believe or have faith. But if you do believe, why wouldn't you want to learn more about your faith and how it fits into your life, let it permeate you and spend an hour a week among like-minded friends in your community?

I've never understood that. I still get a lot out of Mass every Sunday. It's an hour of peace, reflection and appreciation every week in our life, which can be stressful as hell with work, activities and three young kids, that is very appreciated.

I don't go because I think I "have to," out of some sort of Catholic guilt bred by 12 years of Catholic school. Plus many of our friends go to the same church, and we've met some very nice people through church. So bonus!

But as they say, different strokes. And there really is no "correct" way when it comes to faith. It's completely up to each person's interpretation, and that's where faith can lead to trouble, when regular worshippers try to ram their beliefs down others' throats.

Take care,
PK

Paul, it sounds like you are getting the most good possible out of your religous practice and that is great. It it a personal, family thing, that you like to share with others in the community who believe in doing the same. That's perfect. If everyone used religion like that, the world would be a much better place.

Personally, I believe in a "higher power" or in a "creater" of this universe, but I don't pretend to know much else and am not afraid to say "I Don't Know". When people pretend their "beliefs" are fact, that's when I shake my head. I try to be a good person and have a good set of morals and if I am judged by my "creator" at the end of the line, I hope that I am on his (or hers) "good side". Common sense says that if one religion is true than all the others are false. Does that mean all those others are wrong for believing what they were taught ot grew up around? Of course not. In the end we are all praying to the same "higher power", since there can only be one, but we all just call him by a different "name". Again, this is just my belief and everyone is entitled to their own.

[pk500]

Jack:

Yeah, but you're a DICK. So something went off the rails.

You know I'm just kidding, man!

Love,
Dick Fain

[ProvoAnC]

I'm not so sure if I buy into the whole "religion is at the center of all conflicts" BS. I don't think its as big a deal as its being made out to be.

Common sense says that if one religion is true than all the others are false.

I also don't buy that either. If the sky is blue in WI and overcast in GA, is it still not blue here and overcast there?

You made a point about people making their beliefs facts...well they are...to them. Perception is reality and if I think God sits on a cloud with a big white beard...well, he does.

As far as people trying to push their beliefs on someone else...s*** that happens all the time. What do you think ad agencies are for? All those commercials, etc? No one is pissed cause McDonalds wants you to buy their new fat-ass sandwich.