- This topic has 260 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 6 months ago by
Zeitgeist.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 17, 2009 at 9:30 PM #471277October 17, 2009 at 10:42 PM #470467
Allan from Fallbrook
Participant[quote=briansd1]Allan, I find it hard to believe that someone who supports wars of resources acquisition, preemptive strikes, and using the military, if necessary, to get out of paying our debts doesn’t have some moral flexibility.
What about all the collateral damage? That’s just tough luck, huh?
BTW, I support the above too, when they make sense.
It’s always easy to be faithful to the narrow mission. But it’s much harder to look at the larger moral picture.[/quote]
Brian: I don’t support using the military to get out of paying our debts. I simply said that I was certain that TPTB had already game planned that scenario and wouldn’t hesitate to use that option, if push came to shove.
What about collateral damage? Wars, by their very nature, are really, really fucking messy. Especially when you start throwing around some of the systems in the US arsenal; systems designed to do a huge amount of damage. I don’t advocate for “clean” war, there ain’t no such thing. I also don’t advocate for war, unless no other viable option exists. I’m a former soldier and combat veteran and I hate war. But, I also recognize its necessity and, unfortunately, its utility as well.
And it appears that you’re accusing me of an inability to know the difference between the tactical and the strategic. I would imagine this is to inveigle me into believing that “moral flexibility” is a boon for the latter, but the bane of the former. Yes?
Don’t kid yourself, Brian, I’m a Jesuit educated Catholic. We invented treachery, the acquisition of power to serve our own ends, and really good collegiate and high school football programs. I know the difference, but I don’t delude myself into thinking that somehow I occupy some superior intellectual perch that condones the “banality of evil” through a warped understanding of Hegel or Nietzsche.
Nothing is more corrosive than the “rightness” that comes from feeling you have been granted a special “mission” and due to your keen insight, towering intellect and ability to be “morally flexible” (i.e. doing what needs to be done and for the Greater Good). That’s what Torquemada thought, too.
As Scaredy observed, “No one expects the Spanish Inquisition”. Careful you don’t become what you behold.
October 17, 2009 at 10:42 PM #470649Participant[quote=briansd1]Allan, I find it hard to believe that someone who supports wars of resources acquisition, preemptive strikes, and using the military, if necessary, to get out of paying our debts doesn’t have some moral flexibility.
What about all the collateral damage? That’s just tough luck, huh?
BTW, I support the above too, when they make sense.
It’s always easy to be faithful to the narrow mission. But it’s much harder to look at the larger moral picture.[/quote]
Brian: I don’t support using the military to get out of paying our debts. I simply said that I was certain that TPTB had already game planned that scenario and wouldn’t hesitate to use that option, if push came to shove.
What about collateral damage? Wars, by their very nature, are really, really fucking messy. Especially when you start throwing around some of the systems in the US arsenal; systems designed to do a huge amount of damage. I don’t advocate for “clean” war, there ain’t no such thing. I also don’t advocate for war, unless no other viable option exists. I’m a former soldier and combat veteran and I hate war. But, I also recognize its necessity and, unfortunately, its utility as well.
And it appears that you’re accusing me of an inability to know the difference between the tactical and the strategic. I would imagine this is to inveigle me into believing that “moral flexibility” is a boon for the latter, but the bane of the former. Yes?
Don’t kid yourself, Brian, I’m a Jesuit educated Catholic. We invented treachery, the acquisition of power to serve our own ends, and really good collegiate and high school football programs. I know the difference, but I don’t delude myself into thinking that somehow I occupy some superior intellectual perch that condones the “banality of evil” through a warped understanding of Hegel or Nietzsche.
Nothing is more corrosive than the “rightness” that comes from feeling you have been granted a special “mission” and due to your keen insight, towering intellect and ability to be “morally flexible” (i.e. doing what needs to be done and for the Greater Good). That’s what Torquemada thought, too.
As Scaredy observed, “No one expects the Spanish Inquisition”. Careful you don’t become what you behold.
October 17, 2009 at 10:42 PM #471005Participant[quote=briansd1]Allan, I find it hard to believe that someone who supports wars of resources acquisition, preemptive strikes, and using the military, if necessary, to get out of paying our debts doesn’t have some moral flexibility.
What about all the collateral damage? That’s just tough luck, huh?
BTW, I support the above too, when they make sense.
It’s always easy to be faithful to the narrow mission. But it’s much harder to look at the larger moral picture.[/quote]
Brian: I don’t support using the military to get out of paying our debts. I simply said that I was certain that TPTB had already game planned that scenario and wouldn’t hesitate to use that option, if push came to shove.
What about collateral damage? Wars, by their very nature, are really, really fucking messy. Especially when you start throwing around some of the systems in the US arsenal; systems designed to do a huge amount of damage. I don’t advocate for “clean” war, there ain’t no such thing. I also don’t advocate for war, unless no other viable option exists. I’m a former soldier and combat veteran and I hate war. But, I also recognize its necessity and, unfortunately, its utility as well.
And it appears that you’re accusing me of an inability to know the difference between the tactical and the strategic. I would imagine this is to inveigle me into believing that “moral flexibility” is a boon for the latter, but the bane of the former. Yes?
Don’t kid yourself, Brian, I’m a Jesuit educated Catholic. We invented treachery, the acquisition of power to serve our own ends, and really good collegiate and high school football programs. I know the difference, but I don’t delude myself into thinking that somehow I occupy some superior intellectual perch that condones the “banality of evil” through a warped understanding of Hegel or Nietzsche.
Nothing is more corrosive than the “rightness” that comes from feeling you have been granted a special “mission” and due to your keen insight, towering intellect and ability to be “morally flexible” (i.e. doing what needs to be done and for the Greater Good). That’s what Torquemada thought, too.
As Scaredy observed, “No one expects the Spanish Inquisition”. Careful you don’t become what you behold.
October 17, 2009 at 10:42 PM #471080Participant[quote=briansd1]Allan, I find it hard to believe that someone who supports wars of resources acquisition, preemptive strikes, and using the military, if necessary, to get out of paying our debts doesn’t have some moral flexibility.
What about all the collateral damage? That’s just tough luck, huh?
BTW, I support the above too, when they make sense.
It’s always easy to be faithful to the narrow mission. But it’s much harder to look at the larger moral picture.[/quote]
Brian: I don’t support using the military to get out of paying our debts. I simply said that I was certain that TPTB had already game planned that scenario and wouldn’t hesitate to use that option, if push came to shove.
What about collateral damage? Wars, by their very nature, are really, really fucking messy. Especially when you start throwing around some of the systems in the US arsenal; systems designed to do a huge amount of damage. I don’t advocate for “clean” war, there ain’t no such thing. I also don’t advocate for war, unless no other viable option exists. I’m a former soldier and combat veteran and I hate war. But, I also recognize its necessity and, unfortunately, its utility as well.
And it appears that you’re accusing me of an inability to know the difference between the tactical and the strategic. I would imagine this is to inveigle me into believing that “moral flexibility” is a boon for the latter, but the bane of the former. Yes?
Don’t kid yourself, Brian, I’m a Jesuit educated Catholic. We invented treachery, the acquisition of power to serve our own ends, and really good collegiate and high school football programs. I know the difference, but I don’t delude myself into thinking that somehow I occupy some superior intellectual perch that condones the “banality of evil” through a warped understanding of Hegel or Nietzsche.
Nothing is more corrosive than the “rightness” that comes from feeling you have been granted a special “mission” and due to your keen insight, towering intellect and ability to be “morally flexible” (i.e. doing what needs to be done and for the Greater Good). That’s what Torquemada thought, too.
As Scaredy observed, “No one expects the Spanish Inquisition”. Careful you don’t become what you behold.
October 17, 2009 at 10:42 PM #471297Participant[quote=briansd1]Allan, I find it hard to believe that someone who supports wars of resources acquisition, preemptive strikes, and using the military, if necessary, to get out of paying our debts doesn’t have some moral flexibility.
What about all the collateral damage? That’s just tough luck, huh?
BTW, I support the above too, when they make sense.
It’s always easy to be faithful to the narrow mission. But it’s much harder to look at the larger moral picture.[/quote]
Brian: I don’t support using the military to get out of paying our debts. I simply said that I was certain that TPTB had already game planned that scenario and wouldn’t hesitate to use that option, if push came to shove.
What about collateral damage? Wars, by their very nature, are really, really fucking messy. Especially when you start throwing around some of the systems in the US arsenal; systems designed to do a huge amount of damage. I don’t advocate for “clean” war, there ain’t no such thing. I also don’t advocate for war, unless no other viable option exists. I’m a former soldier and combat veteran and I hate war. But, I also recognize its necessity and, unfortunately, its utility as well.
And it appears that you’re accusing me of an inability to know the difference between the tactical and the strategic. I would imagine this is to inveigle me into believing that “moral flexibility” is a boon for the latter, but the bane of the former. Yes?
Don’t kid yourself, Brian, I’m a Jesuit educated Catholic. We invented treachery, the acquisition of power to serve our own ends, and really good collegiate and high school football programs. I know the difference, but I don’t delude myself into thinking that somehow I occupy some superior intellectual perch that condones the “banality of evil” through a warped understanding of Hegel or Nietzsche.
Nothing is more corrosive than the “rightness” that comes from feeling you have been granted a special “mission” and due to your keen insight, towering intellect and ability to be “morally flexible” (i.e. doing what needs to be done and for the Greater Good). That’s what Torquemada thought, too.
As Scaredy observed, “No one expects the Spanish Inquisition”. Careful you don’t become what you behold.
October 17, 2009 at 10:45 PM #470472Zeitgeist
ParticipantHey Brian, here is some more spam for you:
http://frugalzeitgeist.com/cheap-halloween-party/October 17, 2009 at 10:45 PM #470654ParticipantHey Brian, here is some more spam for you:
http://frugalzeitgeist.com/cheap-halloween-party/October 17, 2009 at 10:45 PM #471010ParticipantHey Brian, here is some more spam for you:
http://frugalzeitgeist.com/cheap-halloween-party/October 17, 2009 at 10:45 PM #471085ParticipantHey Brian, here is some more spam for you:
http://frugalzeitgeist.com/cheap-halloween-party/October 17, 2009 at 10:45 PM #471302ParticipantHey Brian, here is some more spam for you:
http://frugalzeitgeist.com/cheap-halloween-party/October 17, 2009 at 11:17 PM #470482briansd1
GuestThis is what I mean by the religious nuts. They were out again in San Diego today. They came from, you guessed it, Kansas.
Six members of the Westboro Baptist Church traveled across San Diego County visiting Jewish organizations, churches and schools as part of a national tour. They plan to picket more than a dozen San Diego locations through Monday.
“Obama is the anti-Christ,” said Shirley Phelps-Roper of Topeka, Kansas, who demonstrated with five family members. “He uses the White House as a bully pulpit to push fags and Jews.”
They’re monitored as a hate group and known for their provocative picket signs.
Members of the Westboro Baptist Church from Kansas are in San Diego, and they’re targeting local churches as well as gay and Jewish communities.
For more on the controversial protests, watch Phil Blauer’s video story
October 17, 2009 at 11:17 PM #470664GuestThis is what I mean by the religious nuts. They were out again in San Diego today. They came from, you guessed it, Kansas.
Six members of the Westboro Baptist Church traveled across San Diego County visiting Jewish organizations, churches and schools as part of a national tour. They plan to picket more than a dozen San Diego locations through Monday.
“Obama is the anti-Christ,” said Shirley Phelps-Roper of Topeka, Kansas, who demonstrated with five family members. “He uses the White House as a bully pulpit to push fags and Jews.”
They’re monitored as a hate group and known for their provocative picket signs.
Members of the Westboro Baptist Church from Kansas are in San Diego, and they’re targeting local churches as well as gay and Jewish communities.
For more on the controversial protests, watch Phil Blauer’s video story
October 17, 2009 at 11:17 PM #471020GuestThis is what I mean by the religious nuts. They were out again in San Diego today. They came from, you guessed it, Kansas.
Six members of the Westboro Baptist Church traveled across San Diego County visiting Jewish organizations, churches and schools as part of a national tour. They plan to picket more than a dozen San Diego locations through Monday.
“Obama is the anti-Christ,” said Shirley Phelps-Roper of Topeka, Kansas, who demonstrated with five family members. “He uses the White House as a bully pulpit to push fags and Jews.”
They’re monitored as a hate group and known for their provocative picket signs.
Members of the Westboro Baptist Church from Kansas are in San Diego, and they’re targeting local churches as well as gay and Jewish communities.
For more on the controversial protests, watch Phil Blauer’s video story
October 17, 2009 at 11:17 PM #471095GuestThis is what I mean by the religious nuts. They were out again in San Diego today. They came from, you guessed it, Kansas.
Six members of the Westboro Baptist Church traveled across San Diego County visiting Jewish organizations, churches and schools as part of a national tour. They plan to picket more than a dozen San Diego locations through Monday.
“Obama is the anti-Christ,” said Shirley Phelps-Roper of Topeka, Kansas, who demonstrated with five family members. “He uses the White House as a bully pulpit to push fags and Jews.”
They’re monitored as a hate group and known for their provocative picket signs.
Members of the Westboro Baptist Church from Kansas are in San Diego, and they’re targeting local churches as well as gay and Jewish communities.
For more on the controversial protests, watch Phil Blauer’s video story
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.