Death tolls spur pro-war stance, study finds

Sep 05, 2011 By Tony Fitzpatrick
Credit: Morguefile

Within hours this summer, 30 American troops died in a strike in Afghanistan and millions of American investors watched the Dow Jones Average shed an astonishing 634 points in one day.

While it might be difficult to find similarities in the two events, social psychologists can detect a common theme: in each case investments ( and human lives) were made, and those resources were painfully lost.

The 'sunk-cost' effect

Untold Americans experienced what is called the sunk-cost effect: Less a cognitive thought than an emotional one, this effect is the feeling that they are being wasteful if they terminate a prior commitment. Thus, they pondered: Stay the course and “waste not, want not; or “cut and run.”

Such a piercing event as suffering the greatest loss of American troops in the nearly 10-year-old war might seem to serve as a catalyst for people to denounce the war and demand a way out.

But a psychologist at Washington University in St. Louis, in what is thought to be the first non-anecdotal demonstration of the “activation” of the sunk-cost effect, has tested subjects and found that highlighting casualties prior to a questionnaire on both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars actually swayed people’s pro-war attitudes rather than discouraged them.

Alan J. Lambert, PhD, Washington University associate professor of psychology in Arts & Sciences, and Washington University colleagues John Paul Schott and Laura D. Scherer. Schott, a doctoral student in psychology, is the study's lead author. Scherer, a recent graduate of the university's doctoral program, is a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine at the University of Michigan. The research team tested two groups each of approximately 85 students in 2007, on the Iraq War, and 2009, on the Afghanistan War.

Subjects were put into two groups; in one they were asked to solve three decisions, all related to sunk-cost effects; in the other, they solved three different problems, not related to sunk costs.

In the former, one of the questions dealt with whether a subject would eat and finish an expensive lobster dinner even though it was not appealing because to not finish would be wasteful; in the latter, a subject’s friend has flown in to visit and a choice must be made between going out to dinner, the friend’s preference, or to a concert, the subject’s.

Those participants exposed to the sunk-cost scenarios unknowingly were being primed to think of the aversiveness of throwing away previous investments, what Lambert calls “the don’t-waste” goal.

In Phase II of the experiment, all subjects were assigned one of two short reading assignments: One assignment was about war casualties, the other about the weather. Next, all subjects took an attitude questionnaire of 25 generic questions about the particular war.

Lambert and his group found that those subjects exposed to the don’t-waste goal who read the story about war casualties tended to be significantly more in favor of the war than those controls who weren’t primed the same way.

“The study shows that you can experimentally manipulate the salience of the don’t-waste goal and if it’s active in one context, choosing whether to eat the lobster, it also carries over into a completely different one — people’s appraisal of whether they want to commit to the Iraq or Afghan wars.”

Lambert’s findings will be published this fall in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.

People's attitudes are malleable

Lambert is especially interested in people’s attitudes, which he says are malleable and can be stretched like a rubber band either way, and the contextual factors that contribute to attitudes and decisions.

“We try to understand the situational factors that lead people to shift their opinions,” he says. “People are notoriously bad at making assessments on when it’s time to stop. They tend to be influenced by factors that they shouldn’t be paying attention to, and probably the biggest of these is the psychological sense that they might be throwing away their investments. That’s often a terrible basis for making the decision.”

Whether they are consciously aware of it or not, people often base their decisions on an informal assessment of the costs and benefits of any choice, Lambert says. The problem, as noted by psychologist Robyn Dawes and others, is that people should be making assessments on the basis of future costs and benefits.

But that’s not what people do.

Instead of looking forward, they look backward, and tend to make decisions in the service of justifying past expenditures that are “sunk” (irretrievable), no matter what they decide to do. That, said Lambert, is the core of the sunk-cost effect, in the sense that people are paying attention to resources that are already spent – and, hence, should be ignored.

The sunk-cost effect occurs across situations, from investing, to expenditure of time, to relationships. In each case, can be sunk, “irretrievably no matter what your future decisions are,” he says.

“Lives may be one of the more potent triggers of the sunk-cost effect. Money and relationships that are sunk are tough, too, but throwing away lives is deeply aversive, and such a powerful thing.

“The troops are dead and we can’t get them back, but people still have this sense that they should continue their investment in the war to justify their deaths.”

Formal study of the sunk-cost effect began about 50 years ago, first appearing in economics, but people long have been aware of the general “pull” of sunk costs, including Abraham Lincoln, who was fond of relating a saying his father told him: “When you make a bad bargain, hug it all the tighter.”

While Lambert likes the Lincoln quote, he thinks it implies a free will that he thinks is lacking in the sunk-cost effect.

“I think of it as more of a feeling that you have to hold it closer, that the idea of letting go is so aversive,” Lambert says.

The John Kerry moment?

People long have suspected that the tendency to justify the involvement in ongoing conflicts such as the Vietnam War was driven by the sunk-cost effect. However, the “evidence” for this idea is more anecdotal than empirical, Lambert says.

“What we’ve done is show that some of the more anecdotal views of human decision-making can be tested under controlled conditions,” he says.

At what point, then, do people override the sunk-cost effect and experience the John Kerry moment?

Kerry, representing Vietnam Veterans Against the War, testified in April of 1971 before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and asked: “How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?”

Lambert said such a thing would be like “the antidote for the sunk-cost effect.

“I think in some way, you have to get people to look forward and make them aware that sunk cost is a gut feeling,” he says. “You can either train them to not have the feeling that they’re wasting resources or need to recoup their investment, or train them to not pay attention to the feeling.

“Our next direction may very well be the search for the antidote.”

Explore further: Data indicate there is no immigration crisis

Related Stories

The kids are alright

May 26, 2011

Children should be seen and not heard... who says? A Philosophy academic at The University of Nottingham is challenging the adage by teaching primary school children to argue properly.

Recommended for you

Data indicate there is no immigration crisis

8 hours ago

Is there an "immigration crisis" on the U.S.-Mexico border? Not according to an examination of historical immigration data, according to a new paper from Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy.

Combating bullying in New Zealand

10 hours ago

Victoria University of Wellington's Accent Learning is rolling out a new bullying prevention programme for schools—a first for the Southern Hemisphere.

Why has Halloween infiltrated Australian culture?

12 hours ago

Halloween appears to have infiltrated Australian culture, and according to a University of Adelaide researcher, the reason for its increasing popularity could run much deeper than Americanisation.

The hidden world of labor trafficking

13 hours ago

When it comes to human trafficking, we often hear about victims being kidnapped or violently taken from their homes. But what about people who are forced into labor in the U.S.?

User comments : 250

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

_nigmatic10
4.6 / 5 (9) Sep 05, 2011
The only thing it spurs in me is how senseless and wasteful war is.

..and yes, i am ex-military too.
antialias_physorg
4.2 / 5 (6) Sep 05, 2011
Our next direction may very well be the search for the antidote

The antidote may be to realize that human lives (even soldiers' lives) are not like dollars. You can replace a lost dollar with a gained one - but you cannot replace a lost life (only if you're cynical enough to treat humans like statistics).

And what exactyl will the antidote be good for? It isn't the people that decide to 'spend lives' for profit. It's the politicians. And they know what they're doing (and don't care about others paying the price for their personal enrichment)
TheQuietMan
4.2 / 5 (6) Sep 05, 2011
Depends on the root causes of the war. If the war is started on a lie then it needs ended as quickly as possible.

If the war is started by someone else, who will resume it as quickly as they can if you walk away, there is little choice but to continue.

You need to look at the history to make this assessment.
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (112) Sep 05, 2011
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.

This world in arms is not spending money alone.

It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.

The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities.

It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population.

It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals.

It is some 50 miles of concrete highway.

We pay for a single fighter with a half million bushels of wheat.

We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people.

This, I repeat, is the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking.

This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron."
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (109) Sep 05, 2011
Those were the words of noted peacenik and socialist, Dwight Eisenhower.

http://www.youtub...-wgPGTp8
TheQuietMan
3.4 / 5 (11) Sep 05, 2011
Sounds pretty, but if you have enemies they will take all those fine things away in a heart beat. Or have you forgotten the Twin Towers.

Of course, the real goal is lives and freedom. While it doesn't have much chance of happening they really want us under Sharia Law.

He who forgets history is bound to repeat it.

Seems WWII is forgotten. The Twin Towers are a fading memory.
Erscheinung
2.6 / 5 (15) Sep 05, 2011
Frank, Why would you rate TheQuietMan a 1 for his remark. It was inarguable.

The problem with "peaceniks and socialists" are that they are just stupid naive about the world we actually live in. Your child-like fantasy world is simply not a possibility any time soon, so therefore your thoughts are not relevant. Grow up, and live in the real world.

...And why would you PM me, call me a "faggot", and tell me to get lost? Are you a child or a grown man?
antialias_physorg
4.6 / 5 (10) Sep 05, 2011
Sounds pretty, but if you have enemies they will take all those fine things away in a heart beat.

Yes. But the US has no enemies that would like to invade it (and never had in its entire history...if one discounts the ludicrous attempt by Japan.).

The only two powers with largish militaries are Russia and China.

Russia's military is geared towards defense only (as is China's). Neither military is able to wage an overseas campaign (and in the case of China it would be foolish to wage one. Why wage a war on a country that owes you a LOT of money? You'd only be trashing stuff that already belongs to you.)
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (115) Sep 05, 2011
First Paulthebassguy creates about 5 puppet accounts solely to vote me down (most of them haven't even made posts), now he's making up BS about getting PMs from me. Erscheinung, it's obvious you are paulthebassguy and a weak troll. Please go away.

It was inarguable.


LOL.

While it doesn't have much chance of happening they really want us under Sharia Law.


Chance of Sharia Law: 0%
Chance of Christian Law: Too High

Seems WWII is forgotten. The Twin Towers are a fading memory.


Do you really think Eisenhower had forgotten WWII or WWI when he was in office?

Do you realize influenza kills over 30,000 people every year, just in the United States? That's 10 9/11's every year. Why don't we spend a trillion dollars curing influenza? Oh that's right, you can't really hate influenza. You want someone to hate. You want an entire culture to hate. A culture to blame your problems on. Seems like you have forgotten WWII.
Erscheinung
2.6 / 5 (10) Sep 05, 2011
First Paulthebassguy creates about 5 puppet accounts solely to vote me down (most of them haven't even made posts), now he's making up BS about getting PMs from me. Erscheinung, it's obvious you are paulthebassguy and a weak troll. Please go away.


You're truly immature. I'm not "paulthebassguy", try again. And yes you did PM me, Erscheinung, with that rude comment.
Erscheinung
2.3 / 5 (21) Sep 05, 2011
Do you realize influenza kills over 30,000 people every year, just in the United States? That's 10 9/11's every year. Why don't we spend a trillion dollars curing influenza? Oh that's right, you can't really hate influenza. You want someone to hate. You want an entire culture to hate. A culture to blame your problems on. Seems like you have forgotten WWII.


Spoken like a twelve year old girl that loves puppies, a child that lives her intellectual live in perpetual fantasy, of what 'should be', rather than what is or has to be.

War is an unfortunate necessity as are jails and guns and conservatives.

Sorry, but a fact of life is that people die,.. they die of influenza, they die of cancer, they die in war and car crashes too. In fact as many die in car crashes as influenza, 30,000 in the USA. Do you want to ban cars? No, why not (?), that's as practical as banning the military from war, and sinking that money into solving a problem that may not be solvable in any case.
FrankHerbert
2.9 / 5 (114) Sep 05, 2011
Spoken like a twelve year old girl that loves puppies...

War is an unfortunate necessity as are jails and guns and conservatives.


Spoken like a true fascist.

Anyway, there are anti-influenza drugs. We have vaccines and treatments for when you actually get sick. I think a trillion dollars is a conservative estimate of money spent post-9/11 on operations in the Middle East. So my point stands: many, many more lives would have been saved had that money been spent on influenza treatment and research. This is non-debatable, as NO lives have been saved due to our operations. Just on our side, we've lost more soldiers than civilians lost on 9/11. Civilian death tolls in the Middle East are high enough that I don't even feel comfortable speculating on numbers. It's just too high.

So please keep letting your fears guide you like a good fascist. You call me a 12-year-old girl, but you seem to be the one who still believes in the boogeyman (except he's wearing a turban).
Erscheinung
2.2 / 5 (19) Sep 05, 2011
So my point stands: more lives would have been saved had that money been spent on influenza treatment and research. This is non-debatable, as NO lives have been saved due to our operations.


More bleeding heart drivel. If the USA does not destroy it's enemies, it WILL be picked apart. I'm sorry for the civilians over there that are caught in the cross fire, but a) the USA does not target civilians so you can't support Vindicar in saying the USA are terrorists (which you have),.. and b) it's THEIR country and therefore their responsibility to prevent a regime from gaining power that is stupid enough to back those who attack a super power. Those civilians are responsible for their own countries future or lack there of, period.

It's not one or the other. A military is a necessity. Even Obama understands this, and gained a lesson in reality vrs idealism, ...as he is doing a decent job against Afghanistan,... despite his campaign rhetoric of ending the war right away.
Erscheinung
2.4 / 5 (17) Sep 05, 2011
,... and yes it is debatable. You count only lives lost now in this particular war,... yet you don't bother estimating future events had the USA stopped going after al-quida and it's enemies, and instilling a strong military presence and fear into that region. That's why liberals and their disinterested pie-in-the-sky idealism is child-like and useless. I don't need to invent boogeyman in a world like ours, we have radical muslim cave-man fanatics on the verge of gaining nuclear weapons, and who's source of wealth will not last forever.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (113) Sep 05, 2011
I never said a military wasn't a necessity. Please let me know where I said this or implied it. All I did was post Eisenhower's Cross of Iron speech. Did you assume that's what Eisenhower wanted too?

If you actually care to know where I stand, I believe our current operations in the Middle East are not just a waste of money but a detriment to their stated goals. They could (should) have been executed in a more responsible manner, but even carried out well (which they weren't) I doubt these wars would have been better than alternatives. Iraq was particularly unnecessary.

If the USA does not destroy it's enemies, it WILL be picked apart.


You're stupid.

I'm sorry for the civilians over there that are caught in the cross fire


No you aren't.

USA does not target civilians


The US does target civilians and in doing so is a terrorist organization.

it's THEIR country and therefore...


Yeah sure if they were all just ball-swingin' individualists like us...moron
axemaster
2.8 / 5 (11) Sep 05, 2011
Don't worry Erscheinung, when you die coughing from some disease that could have been eradicated with ease, me and my military contractor friends will be laughing and drinking $2000 bottles of wine - best of all, paid for by YOUR tax money!

You think I'm kidding? I'm about to graduate with a B.S. in physics from a prestigious university, and I've already got a job lined up - paid for by the government at the tune of $150,000 per year STARTING WAGE!

LOL!
Erscheinung
2.5 / 5 (13) Sep 05, 2011
...some disease that could have been eradicated with ease...


What are you talking about? Where did I say not find cures for diseases? The notion that the existence of the military is preventing cures for diseases is just plain stupidity. I can't make sense of your post.
axemaster
3.3 / 5 (12) Sep 05, 2011
What are you talking about? Where did I say not find cures for diseases? The notion that the existence of the military is preventing cures for diseases is just plain stupidity. I can't make sense of your post.

Well, the military budget uses vast amounts of money, nearly 700 billion dollars per year. If for example, 100 billion of those dollars were instead directed towards medical research... that would more than double the amount of medical research funding. At a cost of just 14% of the military budget, nearly all of which is ultimately wasted anyway.
GDM
2.1 / 5 (10) Sep 05, 2011
Sounds like what we really need to do is to start making decisions based on cold, hard, provable facts, based on UNEMOTIONAL logic. The Iraq war was based on a lie, covered up by Cheney, et al, and because of the emotional state of a President seeking revenge against the idiot who plotted against his father. It was easier than telling the grieving nation that the Taliban was so easily defeated all too soon. Now, after 10 plus years of occupation, the Taliban is coming back, simply because the vast majority of Afghans now believe we are the occupying infidels (Christian), not their saviors.
Erscheinung
2.5 / 5 (13) Sep 05, 2011
You want an entire culture to hate. A culture to blame your problems on. Seems like you have forgotten WWII.


You think that the motive for going into afghanistan is because of hate of muslims? When the left can't argue rationally, they resort to race baiting. Who we hate are a identifiable group, radical muslims, who have declared Jihad on the west, and who have acted to that goal.

I never said a military wasn't a necessity. Please let me know where I said this or implied it.


Well, umm, when an identifiable group of people bring down two massive buildings ON AMERICAN SOIL and YOU still see no need to go after them and detroy them with the military,... you saying exactly that. If not for the above reason, why else would the military be put to use.

Secondly, for you to say the USA military are terrorist and TARGET civilians is outrages slander. Your entire mentality is counter to what made this country great.
Erscheinung
2.3 / 5 (15) Sep 05, 2011
What are you talking about? Where did I say not find cures for diseases? The notion that the existence of the military is preventing cures for diseases is just plain stupidity. I can't make sense of your post.

Well, the military budget uses vast amounts of money, nearly 700 billion dollars per year. If for example, 100 billion of those dollars were instead directed towards medical research... that would more than double the amount of medical research funding. At a cost of just 14% of the military budget, nearly all of which is ultimately wasted anyway.


Are you retarded? Obama, spent more on welfare programs in one year than Bush spent on the military in Iraq during his entire term. Further, Obama spent four times on failed stimulus plans in one year than Bush's worst year in spending.

Your view of things are too simple, it's not if we didn't do 'that' we could have done 'this'. That immature thinking.
Erscheinung
2.3 / 5 (12) Sep 05, 2011
The Iraq war was based on a lie, covered up by Cheney, et al, and because of the emotional state of a President seeking revenge against the idiot who plotted against his father.


Yes, hard facts. What proof do you have to support this conspiracy theory? The Iraq war had nothing to do with 9/11 or the taliban, or attempted assassination on Bush Sr. Liberal mentality is entirely based on emotional response.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (110) Sep 05, 2011
Are you retarded? Obama, spent more on welfare programs in one year than Bush spent on the military in Iraq during his entire term. Further, Obama spent four times on failed stimulus plans in one year than Bush's worst year in spending.


Holy shit, where do you get your information? Your grandmother's inbox?

The Iraq war had nothing to do with 9/11 or the taliban.


What

The

Fuck.

That's not what the Bush administration said.

http://www.youtub...;t=0m26s
FrankHerbert
2.7 / 5 (109) Sep 05, 2011
Here's an excellent interview with an NYPD officer on the subject.

http://www.youtub...ZYH2x9-k

"We were getting back for 9/11"

"The government exploited my feelings of patriotism, of deep desire for revenge, for what happened to my son, but I was so insane with wanting to get even I was willing to believe anything."
Erscheinung
2.3 / 5 (15) Sep 05, 2011
@Frank, Any idiot can put together "gotcha videos" on youtube, and obviously do. That was not the reason for going into Iraq, nor did Cheney say it was,... there probably was unnecessary rhetoric though.

The issue with Iraq had a long history prior to that of 9/11. This issue revolved around Saddam declaring the destruction of WMD's that existed at one time (indisputable). These UN resolutions requiring this from Saddam stemmed from Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. So the history is way longer than 9/11. The UN was still playing seek and search, which was profoundly idiotic as any country could simply hide things. The point of the original UN resolutions as understood by USA were for SADDAM to Prove the destruction of those banned weapons. He didn't, therefore he could not be trusted once UN sanctions were to expire. The relation to 9/11 was the potential terrorist threats given the WMD's.
Erscheinung
2.3 / 5 (15) Sep 05, 2011
Here's an excellent interview with an NYPD officer on the subject.

http://www.youtub...ZYH2x9-k

"We were getting back for 9/11"

"The government exploited my feelings of patriotism, of deep desire for revenge, for what happened to my son, but I was so insane with wanting to get even I was willing to believe anything."


One man's opinion, a dime a dozen. Every major democrat in office voted for that war, on account of rational mistrust of Saddam. That is what matters, not what Bush-haters attempted to slander Bush with.

To the dolts who said that Bush lied about WMD's,... he would have to have KNOWN that there were no wmd's in Iraq to have lied. Logic. Since this was not possible resoundingly, before going into Iraq and since Saddam even postured as if he did have them, such slander is emotional driven non-sense.

The hate-bush dime-a-dozen dolts used the fact that no wmd's were found AFTER invading the country to use against Bush's decision BEFORE we went in.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (12) Sep 05, 2011
The Iraq war...because of the emotional state of a President seeking revenge against the idiot who plotted against his father.
You are naive and watch far too many soap operas. We destroyed the most dangerous WMDs in the middle east - saddaams army.
It was easier than telling the grieving nation that the Taliban was so easily defeated all too soon. Now, after 10 plus years of occupation, the Taliban is coming back blahblah
The taliban and al Quaida are 'coming back' because of the outrageous rate of population growth in the religionist cultures of the region. Afghanistan was set to double its pop in 16 yrs before we got there. Pakistan is not far behind.

Teddy roosevelt called this 'warfare of the cradle'. Taliban and al quaida have an inexhaustible supply of cannon fodder courtesy of religion. These idle youth would be forming into vast armies with the intent of establishing a new nuclear-armed caliphate empire if we werent busy attriting them. Obviously.
cont
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (113) Sep 05, 2011
To the dolts who said that Bush lied about WMD's


They manufactured evidence you intensely dishonest person. Remember the whole Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame/Scooter Libby affair? So yes the administration lied about WMD. Your little pithy "logic" comment is pathetic. I guess I don't know if Erscheinung has a child sex slave business in his basement because I've never seen it.

They also lied about connections between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Which I provided direct evidence for in the two videos I posted. Are "gotcha videos" like Sarah Palin's "gotcha questions"? How is showing a video of the 2003 State of the Union Address, where Bush claimed Muhammed Atta met with Iraqi intelligence officials 5 months before 9/11, gotcha anything?
Erscheinung
2.7 / 5 (12) Sep 05, 2011
Are you retarded? Obama, spent more on welfare programs in one year than Bush spent on the military in Iraq during his entire term. Further, Obama spent four times on failed stimulus plans in one year than Bush's worst year in spending.


Holy shit, where do you get your information? Your grandmother's inbox?


There called facts.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.6 / 5 (11) Sep 05, 2011
Why do you think bin laden was under pakistani protection? He was performing the state a valuable Service, by giving these disgruntled young people a cause and an enemy to fight.

Al quaida gathers them up, arms them, and sends them west and into the guns of western forces. Otherwise they would be moving against the crumbling despotic regimes of syria, egypt, et al. They would be busy rallying palestinians, kurds, and all the other islamist factions into a congealed Force intent upon uniting the lands from tel aviv to dhaka, butuan to istanbul...and on to paris.

This is the stated islamist goal. And without western forces in place to compartmentalize the region, reduce the populations, and slowly destroy the cultures which create the problem to begin with, this new empire would be forming right now with the primary intent of converting the entire world.

According to them the world will be islamist either by propagation or by the gun. And they are fully committed to this, unto death.
Erscheinung
2.3 / 5 (15) Sep 05, 2011
The Iraq war...because of the emotional state of a President seeking revenge against the idiot who plotted against his father.


You are naive and watch far too many soap operas. We destroyed the most dangerous WMDs in the middle east - saddaams army.


Excellent point!! A pile of wmds can't hurt anyone. A man who outright murdered 5,000 of his own people in one event, does posses the mentality of a terrorists, and since the War On Terror was declared, he absolutely had to go.
axemaster
4.1 / 5 (9) Sep 05, 2011
The UN was still playing seek and search, which was profoundly idiotic as any country could simply hide things.

Actually, it's not easy to hide things, and the inspections were highly effective. They never found anything because there never was anything.

The relation to 9/11 was the potential terrorist threats given the WMD's.

Saddam was never in cahoots with Al Qaida. They were in fact extremely hostile towards one another, as the Bush administration was undoubtably aware. So there was no real basis for the invasion.

To the dolts who said that Bush lied about WMD's,... he would have to have KNOWN that there were no wmd's in Iraq to have lied.

So if I told you there was a bomb in your car, and you checked and found nothing, I could simply say "Oh, well, there could have been one"?
FrankHerbert
2.7 / 5 (106) Sep 05, 2011
There called facts.


FWD: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: OBAMAS SECRETISTIC MUSLIMIST MARXISTIC SOCIALISTIC ISLAMISTIC ALINSKYITEIST DEMOCRAT PLOT TO DESTROY HARD WERKIN GOD FEARIN AMERCANS WITH TAXES SOCIALISM AND GAYS.

Sounds reliable to me.
Erscheinung
2.2 / 5 (13) Sep 05, 2011
They manufactured evidence you intensely dishonest person. Remember the whole Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame/Scooter Libby affair? So yes the administration lied about WMD. Your little pithy "logic" comment is pathetic. I guess I don't know if Erscheinung has a child sex slave business in his basement because I've never seen it.


Are you ignorant or just have a reading comprehension problem? There is indisputable evidence that Saddam had AND used wmds in the past, prior to 9/11. Again, the point of the UN resolutions are expected by the USA was that Saddam was to account for WMD's HE HIMSELF ADMITTED TO HAVING. The USA wanted to know where they were. Understand. Saddam failed or refused to demonstrate the destruction of them. There have been analysis of why,.. possibly he did not want Iran to think he did not have them. In any case, it was not the USA's or Bush's responsibility to make sure Iraq had no wmd's,... it was solely Saddam's, period.
Erscheinung
2.2 / 5 (13) Sep 05, 2011
The UN was still playing seek and search, which was profoundly idiotic as any country could simply hide things.


Actually, it's not easy to hide things, and the inspections were highly effective. They never found anything because there never was anything.


Actually, it's very easy to hide things, which is why Bin Laden escaped capture for a decade. Iraq is a large country, and a pile of wmd's are small. Get a clue. The UN's limp wrist approach was rejected by the USA, get over it. Further the UN didn't not pass an objection to USA invasion.

I know liberals have trouble following logic,... but I'll try again. Read slowly; The only reason you can say that resoundingly, is because the USA invaded and found none,.. i.e. you couldn't say that resoundingly prior to that. All you could say was that the UN inspectors didn't find them,... NOT that they don't exist in Iraq. The two statements are light-years apart given Saddam's willingness to murder people outright.
axemaster
4.5 / 5 (8) Sep 05, 2011
Excellent point!! A pile of wmds can't hurt anyone. A man who outright murdered 5,000 of his own people in one event, does posses the mentality of a terrorists, and since the War On Terror was declared, he absolutely had to go.

If this were the case, then why didn't we go after one of the many other far worse threats:

Sudan - http://www.genoci...dan.html

Sudan in particular utterly dwarfs anything Saddam ever managed to perpetrate - and it happened during the Bush administration. So please, don't pretend the Bush administration was ever motivated by a desire to save lives.

Actually, it's very easy to hide things, which is why Bin Laden escaped capture for a decade.

It's far easier to hide a person than it is to hide weapons. WMDs require vast manufacturing facilities and leave sustained chemical/nuclear fingerprints. A person requires a tiny room and TV. They are incomparable.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.1 / 5 (10) Sep 05, 2011
Saddam was never in cahoots with Al Qaida...So there was no real basis for the invasion.
So whats your point? We obviously needed to be there, and sadddams military obviously needed to be destroyed. And the majority of the people needed to hear something immediate and scary to keep them from grumbling and thinking they needed to object.

Do you think most americans wouldve accepted the more accurate explanation, that we needed to position western forces in the region for STRATEGIC purposes? Let alone try to understand what that means??

This was obviously the case. The unrest and instability happening today as a direct result of criminal religionist-mandated pop growth, was obviously predictable decades ago.

The west took the necessary steps it absolutely HAD to take, in order to contain the situation. These Steps took time to plan, prepare, and execute; and they HAD to be kept secret.

The public would NOT have understood and thus had absolutely NO BUSINESS being involved.
Erscheinung
2.6 / 5 (10) Sep 05, 2011
The relation to 9/11 was the potential terrorist threats given the WMD's.


Saddam was never in cahoots with Al Qaida. They were in fact extremely hostile towards one another, as the Bush administration was undoubtably aware. {..}


That's correct. I said the only relation was that both Al-Quida and Saddam involved concern over terrorism, NOT that they were working together. Al-Quida didn't invent terrorism,.. car bombs and such are a well known tactic of the sand monkeys, both shi-ites and sunnis.
Erscheinung
2.8 / 5 (11) Sep 05, 2011
To the dolts who said that Bush lied about WMD's,... he would have to have KNOWN that there were no wmd's in Iraq to have lied.

So if I told you there was a bomb in your car, and you checked and found nothing, I could simply say "Oh, well, there could have been one"?


Like Frank, your statement comes from lack of knowledge of the history. Saddam DID have a history of developing and using WMD's. It wasn't about maybe's or could-haves pulled out of the air.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (108) Sep 05, 2011
NOT that they were working together.


Both Cheney and Bush in the 2003 State of the Union address claimed Muhammed Atta met with Iraqi officials 5 months before 9/11. These were in the "gotcha videos" I posted.

sand monkeys


Really?
axemaster
4.1 / 5 (9) Sep 05, 2011
We obviously needed to be there, and sadddams military obviously needed to be destroyed.

Somehow I doubt that the more than 120,000 Iraqies who have died since the invasion would agree with you.

And the majority of the people needed to hear something immediate and scary to keep them from grumbling and thinking they needed to object.

Well, why don't we just appoint a dictator then?

This was obviously the case. The unrest and instability happening today as a direct result of criminal religionist-mandated pop growth, was obviously predictable decades ago. The west took the necessary steps it absolutely HAD to take, in order to contain the situation.

I have no idea what you're even talking about. It sounds like you think we should be practicing eugenics on people in other countries, in order to control their population sizes? What?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.3 / 5 (9) Sep 05, 2011
Sudan in particular utterly dwarfs anything Saddam ever managed to perpetrate - and it happened during the Bush administration. So please, don't pretend the Bush administration was ever motivated by a desire to save lives.
The sad FACT is that religions cause this kind of horror. The priorities of the west are to 1) contain the immediate unrest caused by overpopulation and 2) destroy the cultures which force it to take place.

There is no way to assist peoples affected by religionist reproductive aggression. Assisting them only adds to the problem and makes it far worse. It strengthens the cultures which cause it. These cultures must be eliminated before the horror will end.

Cultural destruction was the primary Reason the world wars were fought. This was the greatest Result of them. Because religionist cultures were destroyed throughout eurasia nearly 1 BILLION abortions could occur.

Peace now prevails where religionism once reigned. The Cycle has been broken.
Erscheinung
2.7 / 5 (12) Sep 05, 2011
The west took the necessary steps it absolutely HAD to take, in order to contain the situation. These Steps took time to plan, prepare, and execute; and they HAD to be kept secret.

The public would NOT have understood and thus had absolutely NO BUSINESS being involved.


Exactly correct. The last thing the USA had time for is to rationalize with religiously anti-war liberals. When we went into Iraq, I thought that it was the perfect strategic situation,... to have a military sitting in Iraq, to demonstrate a willingness to act,... a little show for Iran to consider wrt nuclear weapon programs.
axemaster
4.6 / 5 (10) Sep 05, 2011
The sad FACT is that religions cause this kind of horror. The priorities of the west are to 1) contain the immediate unrest caused by overpopulation and 2) destroy the cultures which force it to take place.

There is no way to assist peoples affected by religionist reproductive aggression. Assisting them only adds to the problem and makes it far worse. It strengthens the cultures which cause it. These cultures must be eliminated before the horror will end.

Cultural destruction was the primary Reason the world wars were fought. This was the greatest Result of them. Because religionist cultures were destroyed throughout eurasia nearly 1 BILLION abortions could occur.

Peace now prevails where religionism once reigned. The Cycle has been broken.


I'm... I've simply no way to express the revulsion your statement is making me feel. A serious question: are you a neo-Nazi? What are you?

Honestly, I've never encountered such a terrifying view of the world...
Erscheinung
2.5 / 5 (11) Sep 05, 2011
NOT that they were working together.


Both Cheney and Bush in the 2003 State of the Union address claimed Muhammed Atta met with Iraqi officials 5 months before 9/11. These were in the "gotcha videos" I posted.

sand monkeys


Really?


I don't know about that so I will concede the point. If there was any link drawn between al-quida and Saddam, it was either rhetoric or since events were fluid, it was a mistaken intel. In any case the notion that Bush/Cheney lied to go to war is as idiotic as the 911 inside job conspiracy. Again, all major senators in the house and senate voted for the war in Iraq,... so based on intel that they and Bush had available, the decision was made.

Didn't you call me a "faggot" in your PM to me, now all of sudden you're offended by sand-monkeys?

I don't care for radical muslims, .. oppressing women, cave-man religion, anti-west,.. Yes, I feel fine calling them sand-monkeys, if they call me a infidel.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.3 / 5 (9) Sep 05, 2011
Somehow I doubt that the more than 120,000 Iraqies who have died since the invasion would agree with you.
They would have died ANYWAY, in the regional wars to follow. And it would have been WORSE. It always is.
Well, why don't we just appoint a dictator then?...I have no idea what you're even talking about. It sounds like you think we should be practicing eugenics on people in other countries, in order to control their population sizes? What?
You love buzz words dont you? Dictators, eugenics, ethnic cleansing...

And you seem to know very little about religion. 'Be fruitful and multiply, fill up the earth.' -sound familiar? ALL religions require this of adherents. Islam is currently engaged in reproductive warfare against the world. Most all the unrest today can be directly attributed to this.

There are vital Issues which the general public cannot have a say in resolving. Combating the ruinous effects of religion is one of them.
GDM
2.4 / 5 (12) Sep 05, 2011
"which is why Bin Laden escaped capture for a decade"
No, he escaped capture for over a decade because Bush stopped looking for him, or is that another "gotcha" video? Obama found and killed him in less than 3 years. FACT.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (108) Sep 05, 2011
The only reason I don't vote down Otto for his genocidal comments is because he is entirely internally consistent with his comments from as far as I've seen. He truly fears all religions and believes they will lead to overpopulation and destruction. It may be horrible, but he has a well thought out position. I may share his fears, but not his solutions.

Erscheinung on the other hand just hates muslims. They're his "other". His position is arrived at via hate and fear, not reason nor logic. If he doesn't get them they'll get him and that's that, no time to talk *hangs a sign on the door that reads "Gone Genocidin'"*
GDM
3.2 / 5 (9) Sep 05, 2011
"The last thing the USA had time for is to rationalize"
Ever hear of the word "democracy"? You would prefer that a government should not have to consult with the governed? I think axemaster is correct.
Erscheinung
2.5 / 5 (11) Sep 05, 2011
"which is why Bin Laden escaped capture for a decade"
No, he escaped capture for over a decade because Bush stopped looking for him, or is that another "gotcha" video? Obama found and killed him in less than 3 years. FACT.


Wow. Obama wasn't there moron. Obama had zero to do with it, idiot. The only thing Obama had to do with it, is to make the final call,... a call that a 4th grader could have made. The apparatus of the War On Terror and hunt for Obama was already existent. Further more Obama voted against funding the Afghanistan war against the majority of his own party, so really he had less than nothing to do with getting Osama.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (107) Sep 05, 2011
Uhh actually Erscheinung, Bush shutdown the unit that was looking for bin Laden in 2005, the same year he constructed his compound and moved in. So yeah, Bush didn't just not find him, he stopped looking.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
A serious question: are you a neo-Nazi? What are you?
Another buzzword. Take off your rose-colored glasses. Look at all the regions of the world where conflict, starvation, misery, and abuse exist. You will find the people in the thralls of a religion which is configured to demand they produce as many babies as they can for their god.

Even israel. 300,000 marched in the streets protesting cost of living and lack of housing. These are SYMPTOMS of cultures trying to outreproduce one another. You think there is any way of avoiding WAR because of this??

Gaza has among the highest growth rates in the region. Over half are living on outside assistance. Over half are still in SCHOOL. This is what WAR looks like.

This is the way the world IS. If it scares you then you must realize that this is why the vast majority of people cannot be involved in the crucial efforts to FIX it.

Fighting is mandatory because it is absolutely INEVITABLE, one way or another.
axemaster
5 / 5 (6) Sep 05, 2011
And you seem to know very little about religion. 'Be fruitful and multiply, fill up the earth.' -sound familiar? ALL religions require this of adherents. Islam is currently engaged in reproductive warfare against the world. Most all the unrest today can be directly attributed to this.

Actually, socioeconomic standing mostly determines the number of children, not religion. The correlation is very strong. So bombing these countries would result in more kiddies, not less.

There are vital Issues which the general public cannot have a say in resolving. Combating the ruinous effects of religion is one of them.

In case you didn't know, the USA is one of the most religious countries in the world. Kind of undermines your whole argument. Should we be bombing ourselves?

Speaking as an atheist, I'd like to know about these "ruinous effects of religion". I haven't noticed any that compelled me to, say, BLOW UP THE WORLD.
Erscheinung
2.2 / 5 (10) Sep 05, 2011
Erscheinung on the other hand just hates muslims. They're his "other". His position is arrived at via hate and fear, not reason nor logic. If he doesn't get them they'll get him and that's that, no time to talk *hangs a sign on the door that reads "Gone Genocidin'


Slander. I don't hate muslims at all. In fact the vast majority are good people. If you had an ounce of honesty about you, you would have noticed I said RADICAL muslims. But you're not honest,.. you would rather people think I love slaughtering muslims than be honest. A true liberal.
Erscheinung
2.1 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
"The last thing the USA had time for is to rationalize"
Ever hear of the word "democracy"? You would prefer that a government should not have to consult with the governed? I think axemaster is correct.


What? You purposely left out the end of that sentence, which was dishonest. I already stated above that most high profile democrats even voted to fund the war. That is democracy. Obama, on the other had did not seek financial approval for supporting the rebels against Gadafi. Where's the democracy there. Bush did, Obama Didn't. Facts.
Erscheinung
2.1 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
Uhh actually Erscheinung, Bush shutdown the unit that was looking for bin Laden in 2005, the same year he constructed his compound and moved in. So yeah, Bush didn't just not find him, he stopped looking.

Bush stopped looking? For that idiot statement, I will no longer educate you for a period of one hour. Go away now.
GDM
2.7 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
Good. Go away forever. I think erscheinung's head just imploded in a stunning example of a perfect vacuum.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.3 / 5 (6) Sep 05, 2011
The only reason I don't vote down Otto for his genocidal comments
Ethnicity has little to do with culture frank. Shlomo Sand, a jew, explains this in the myth of the jewish people.
http://www.youtub...vANgw9Mk

-As far as islamist intents on reestablishing the caliphate and converting the world, this is very well understood. They love to spout about it. This islamist/ex-orthodox jew IS a bigot.
http://www.youtub...3vhTO248

-And I am certainly not the only person who fears religionism. Bill Maher, another jew, does too and he is neither nazi nor bigot.
http://www.youtub...TVUulGwc

-Watch the whole movie if you havent already.
http://www.youtub...k44b2nhs

-And finally, the statistics I cite re pop overgrowth are all well-known and widely accepted.
http://www.johnst...dex.html

-One can only imagine what eurasia would be like today if all those people and their decendents to 4 gens were alive.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (106) Sep 05, 2011
http://www.nytime...tel.html

"WASHINGTON, July 3 [2006] The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday."

Hmm, right about the time bin Laden was moving into his compound, no? Maybe you should spend that hour educating yourself instead of cheer leading for genocide on a science message board.
axemaster
5 / 5 (4) Sep 05, 2011
Obama, on the other had did not seek financial approval for supporting the rebels against Gadafi. Where's the democracy there. Bush did, Obama Didn't. Facts.

I voted for Obama in '08. However, I agree that Obama's decision to go into Libya without adequately consulting Congress was disturbing.

On the other hand, at least he managed to garner widespread international support, and the approval of the Libyan people, and troops were not landed, so it wasn't totally inappropriate.

I already stated above that most high profile democrats even voted to fund the war. That is democracy.

Yes, they voted to fund it. And that is indeed democracy. But it would have been politically disasterous not to, so they didn't have much choice. I remember people back then being branded "anti-American" and even "traitors" for opposing the war. It was a very extreme situation.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 05, 2011
Actually, socioeconomic standing mostly determines the number of children, not religion.
More bullshit propaganda. Religions tell their people that children are their greatest gift to god. Fundamentalists relegate their women to doing NOTHING but making and raising children. They have no concept of living within their means bescuse their religions tell them that god will provide for the faithful. Their charities are all designed to support families which have grown too large to support themselves.

Again, LOOK at the areas of the world currently engaged in conflict. Their cultures are all religionist.

Look at the areas of the world currently at peace. Their cultures are all secular and their indigenous pops at or near zero growth.
GDM
3.3 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
"Again, LOOK at the areas of the world currently engaged in conflict. Their cultures are religionist."

Yes, like the US. However, some of us are opposed to mixing religion and government. It appears that the current crop of GOP presidential wannabes are just the opposite. Scary, isn't it?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.4 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
"Again, LOOK at the areas of the world currently engaged in conflict. Their cultures are religionist."

Yes, like the US. However, some of us are opposed to mixing religion and government. It appears that the current crop of GOP presidential wannabes are just the opposite. Scary, isn't it?
The fastest growing groups in the US are religionist: Hasidim, amish, mormon, islamic. Amish are the fastest, oddly enough. Their growth rate is the same as gazans or kurds.
axemaster
4.3 / 5 (4) Sep 05, 2011
Actually, socioeconomic standing mostly determines the number of children, not religion.
More bullshit propaganda. Religions tell their people that children are the greatest gift to god.

The data doesn't lie, my friend.

They have no concept of living within their means bescuse their religions tell them that god will provide for the faithful.

Now that's just silly. Although you might be able to apply that to the USA, ^_^

Their charities are all designed to support families which have grown too large to support themselves.

Ummm... aren't most charities like that? Isn't that sort of the whole meaning of "charity"?

Again, LOOK at the areas of the world currently engaged in conflict. Their cultures are religionist.

Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps the religions are so strong BECAUSE of the wars, poverty, and general horrors? People have to believe in something, and if not in this life, then in the next.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
The data doesn't lie, my friend.
Then link or STFU.
Now that's just silly. Although you might be able to apply that to the USA
LINK or STFU.
Ummm... aren't most charities like that? Isn't that sort of the whole meaning of "charity"?
Sorry, religious charities usually benefit believers.

"Zakat or alms-giving is the practice of charitable giving by Muslims based on accumulated wealth, and is obligatory for all who are able to do so. It is considered to be a personal responsibility for Muslims to ease economic hardship for others and eliminate inequality.[24]Zakat consists of spending 2.5% of one's wealth for the benefit of the poor or needy, including slaves, debtors and travelers."

"The Zakat must be distributed in the community from which it was taken."
Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps the religions are so strong BECAUSE of the wars, poverty, and general horrors?
Sorry. People fight when their kids begin to starve. This is the result of overpop.
Erscheinung
2.1 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
@ Frank,

I'm not going to argue with you about whether Bush stopped looking for Osama, because the notion is so far beyond rational, ..that the guy who invented the war on terror would stop looking for the key representative of that attack,... that the source must be viral internet hate-Bush delusion syndrome non-sense.

I will leave you will counter arguments however;

http://www.ohiomm...n-laden/
GDM
2.3 / 5 (6) Sep 05, 2011
Crap! It's back, and he still won't take Bush's actual words for the truth. There is no hope for him.
Erscheinung
2.1 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
Your mind is poisoned by left-wing web sites, which are replete with lies, distortions, and engineered half-truths. Had the USA under Bush's watch actually stopped looking for Osama, (which is absolutely absurd), the MSM have been all over it. Bush declared time and again, he would never give up the search for Osama as long as he was president.

Did you bother reading the link I provided?
GDM
3 / 5 (8) Sep 05, 2011
Yes I did, and it is racist, right-wing propaganda, poisoning your mind. I don't visit "left-wing" web sites, unless you consider physorg to be one of them. I spend most of my time on scientific sites, such as NASA, JPL, Commercial Space Watch, Spaceflight Now, Flibe Energy, Res Communis (The Journal of Space Law) and numerous other science oriented sites. Oh yes, and the Marine Corp Heritage Foundation as well. But then, being a right-winger such as yourself, you probably think all science is "left wing". Begone, this is supposed to be a site to discuss science.
axemaster
5 / 5 (4) Sep 05, 2011
Then link or STFU.

I am working on that. I have found a number of pieces that discuss the subject in passing, but I have yet to find anything specifically addressing the issue. The same is the case for the religion vs birth rate issue.

Sorry, religious charities usually benefit believers.

"Zakat or alms-giving is the practice of charitable giving by Muslims based on accumulated wealth... The Zakat must be distributed in the community from which it was taken."

Nowhere in that quote does it say that Muslims won't help people from other religions. On the other hand, I'm smart enough not to put them any higher than our own, reasonably racist society.

Sorry. People fight when their kids begin to starve. This is the result of overpop.

And people starve because of poor socioeconomic status. Poor socioeconomic status results from a poor economy, economic exploitation, and wars. They have kids to try and improve their lives, for example to help work the farm.
axemaster
5 / 5 (5) Sep 05, 2011
Here's a link describing the Demographic Transition Model, which is the widely accepted model for population dynamics. It's interesting to note that the model doesn't mention the word "religion" even once.

http://en.wikiped...ansition
Erscheinung
2.3 / 5 (6) Sep 05, 2011
...this is supposed to be a site to discuss science.


Then why are spending so much time in this and other threads discussing politics? Hypocrite.
GDM
2.6 / 5 (5) Sep 05, 2011
Did you forget the "we" or do you think you are immune to that charge?
axemaster
5 / 5 (4) Sep 05, 2011
Oh come you two, isn't that a bit of a tangent? Better to talk about something, rather than nothing.

Also, where'd TheGhostofOtto1923 go? He was funny! In his I-want-to-slaughter-people sort of way.
Erscheinung
2.3 / 5 (6) Sep 05, 2011
Did you forget the "we" or do you think you are immune to that charge?


No, not if you're immune to your own decree,..."Begone, this is supposed to be a site to discuss science.". I do discuss science and also battle the legions of lefties that post here.
GDM
2.3 / 5 (6) Sep 05, 2011
LOLROTFLMAO!
Ciao, sweetie...
FrankHerbert
2.7 / 5 (105) Sep 05, 2011
@ Frank,

I'm not going to argue with you about whether Bush stopped looking for Osama, because the notion is so far beyond rational, ..that the guy who invented the war on terror would stop looking for the key representative of that attack,... that the source must be viral internet hate-Bush delusion syndrome non-sense.


You're assuming the goal of the War on Terror was "victory". The goal of the War on Terror was war itself. Wars let you suspend civil liberties. Wars let you consolidate power. Wars let your contractor buddies raid the treasury. Wars get you re-elected. Wars get people to shut up. Wars let you call your political opponents "traitors".

You seem like someone that might appreciate Alexis de Tocqueville. His tome _Democracy in America_ covers this thoroughly. Unending war is democracy's greatest threat. Not 'radical' Muslims. Not liberals. Not conservatives. Unnecessary, unending war will be the downfall of the US. Nothing else.
Erscheinung
2.1 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
You're assuming the goal of the War on Terror was "victory". The goal of the War on Terror was war itself. Wars let you suspend civil liberties {, let your contractor buddies raid the treasury, get you re-elected.} Wars get people to shut up. Wars let you call your political opponents "traitors".


Sounds like a conspiracy theory. Do you think 911 was an inside job too?

Over thinking events breeds conspiracy theories. Our presence in the middle east was necessary. I already showed that both democrats and republicans voted to fund the Iraq and Afghanistan war, so saying they were conducted as a means for power doesn't make sense. George Bush and Dick Cheney and for that matter Barack Obama, are not evil people, they are just trying to do whats best for the country. We disagree on the form of government and therefore the means of attaining whats best for the country,... but going beyond that into the realm of evil conspiracy is not conducive to rational discussion.
Erscheinung
2.1 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
... No, I don't assume there is going to be an final ending "victory". The war on terrorism is on-going as is generally defending the country. Whether or not we should have gone into Iraq is debatable, and many reasonable people think not in hind sight,.. but Frankly I think it absurd and not rational to say we shouldn't have gone into Afghanistan, to go after the people who brought down those buildings, and hit the pentagon itself.
Erscheinung
2.1 / 5 (11) Sep 05, 2011
LOLROTFLMAO!
Ciao, sweetie...


FrankHerbert 09.04.2011 23:17
go away faggot

Erscheinung 10 h 25 min ago
Is there a problem?

FrankHerbert 8 h 22 min ago
cry more

Erscheinung 7 h 58 min ago
"cry more"? Didn't make sense, liar. You stop rating people 1's without due cause, and you will stop getting them without cause.

FrankHerbert 7 h 43 min ago
lol

Erscheinung 5 h 34 min ago
If you translate Erscheinung from German into English it may help you figure it out, even though I already told you who I am in a past thread. I'm definitely not Paulthebassguy.

FrankHerbert 5 h 14 min ago
dude, i know you're not paulthebassguy. i said that so people would think you were lying about me calling you a faggot. jeez

Erscheinung 5 h ago
Oh, I didn't get that,... don't know who paulthebassguy is. Aren't you proud of calling me a faggot? Maybe you would offend your friends? LOL

FrankHerbert 4 h 51 min ago
nah it's just fun to call conservatives faggots and watch their heads explode.
Erscheinung
2.6 / 5 (10) Sep 05, 2011
...More PM history from FrankHubris;

[he starts by trying to dig up posts from 13 years ago, but it wasn't me,LOL]

FrankHerbert 08.03.2011 02:11
"(The only 'NO' a liberal understands is the one that arrives at muzzle velocity.)"
Freeper since 1998? You're a terrorist. Have fun with your FBI visit.

Noumenon 08.08.2011 16:52
What is this?!!

FrankHerbert 08.08.2011 16:56
Justice.

Noumenon 08.08.2011 17:08
Dear Dingus, I'm not the sole owner of the username "Noumenon",.. in fact many times I must add characters at the end because "Noumenon" is already taken on many boards. I googled the above phrase. I have never posted at newrepublic.com, nor have I ever threatened anyone on any board. I do not hold such vitriolic hatred toward lefties. You can't debate on principals so you attempt to demonize me. Unfortunately for you the Internet has well over one billion users and "Noumenon" is known to anyone who has seriously studied philosophy. Find something else to do Frank.
axemaster
5 / 5 (5) Sep 05, 2011
IN THIS THREAD:

Conservatives and Liberals learn that they are equally likely to be a$$holes.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (105) Sep 05, 2011
I don't think 9/11 was an inside job, or even that anyone intentionally allowed it to happen.

I think initially Afghanistan was appropriate, but due to the unnecessary mess in Iraq, Afghanistan was neglected to the point of near failure, severely compounding the problem and human cost.

Iraq... I don't know what Iraq was. What I'm convinced of though, is that it was anything but its stated goals. The administration claimed Mohammed Atta met with Iraqi officials 5 months before 9/11, implying Iraq was involved. Totally false. They fabricated reports of Iraq buying yellowcake uranium. They outed CIA agent Valerie Plame (who actually was protecting us against WMD), probably costing some of her contacts lives, just to get back at her husband for revealing the yellowcake fabrication.

Our stated reasons for going to Iraq were false and it's obvious the administration knew. People generally know if they have fabricated evidence. It's reasonable to speculate if their motives aren't known.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (105) Sep 05, 2011
Wow, paulthebassguy is making up chat logs now. Great. Is that for your creative writing class? So Noumenon is another one of your sockpuppets?
Humpty
2.6 / 5 (5) Sep 05, 2011
I like how the REALLY STUPID "America is the center of the universe" attitude reigns......

"Such a piercing event as suffering the greatest loss of 30 American troops in the nearly 10-year-old war might seem to serve as a catalyst for people to denounce the war and demand a way out."

Ummm AND how many people in Iraq have they killed? Individually, collectively and as a combined occupation force?

Oh a few million people have died in Iraq as a result of all the US lead sanctions and wars against these people... and what?????

30 US troops (invasion and occupation and oil theft) died?Ohhh NO outrage, outrage, outrage!!!
Erscheinung
2.5 / 5 (8) Sep 05, 2011
Wow, paulthebassguy is making up chat logs now. Great. Is that for your creative writing class? So Noumenon is another one of your sockpuppets?


Noumenon = Erscheinung, as I already disclosed in the Ayn Rand thread, the first time it was used. There are no other "sock puppets".

If I posted a screen shot of my PM's you'd probably claim I Photoshopped it. No one believes you.
Erscheinung
2.7 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
I don't think 9/11 was an inside job, or even that anyone intentionally allowed it to happen.

I think initially Afghanistan was appropriate, but due to the unnecessary mess in Iraq, Afghanistan was neglected to the point of near failure, severely compounding the problem and human cost.


This is a reasonable conclusion.
FrankHerbert
2.7 / 5 (105) Sep 05, 2011
Paulthebassguy, you are a weak troll, and you need to leave. You're up to what, 6 puppet accounts now? Go ahead shop some PMs. No one would care to look at them anyway. It's really telling how when people start to pick apart your ideology you resort to account puppetry and making up conversations in an attempt to discredit your critics. Weak.

This is a reasonable conclusion.


You would have found that out a lot earlier if you hadn't felt the need to strawman me. You might get the exchange of ideas you say you are looking for if you actually argue with the people in front of you instead of the caricatures you insist on creating.
Erscheinung
2.5 / 5 (8) Sep 05, 2011
Iraq I don't know what Iraq was.{..}it was anything but its stated goals. The administration claimed Mohammed Atta met with Iraqi{..}implying Iraq was involved. Totally false. They fabricated reports of Iraq buying yellowcake uranium. They outed CIA agent Valerie Plame{..}just to get back at her husband for revealing the yellowcake fabrication.
Our stated reasons for going to Iraq were false and it's obvious the administration knew. People generally know if they have fabricated evidence. It's reasonable to speculate if their motives aren't known.


The stated goals of Iraq was to take out Saddam because he posed a threat. The rhetoric in trying to sell this was a hack job admittedly. I already conceded the Atta link. The yellow cake however was not a fabrication, it actually occurred. Rice made the mistake of apologizing for this intel, but later admitted it was real and shouldn't have apologized, by then the media ate it up, and now Bush-Haters still think it was a fabrication.
Erscheinung
2.3 / 5 (9) Sep 05, 2011
,.. no other justifications were required IMO, other than we didn't trust Saddam once UN sanctions were lifted. As I said though above, many rational people say it was a mistake. Fine. I disagree from a longer term strategic stand point.

Paulthebassguy, you are a weak troll, and you need to leave. You're up to what, 6 puppet accounts now? Go ahead shop some PMs. No one would care to look at them anyway. It's really telling how when people start to pick apart your ideology you resort to account puppetry and making up conversations in an attempt to discredit your critics. Weak.


I don't know if you're trying to be funny, but I have no other sock puppets other than Noumenon (original) and Erscheinung, and Erscheinung was disclosed to you and Ethelred already, you just forgot. Those PM's are real and expose FrankHubris for what he is. To me it is all hilarious. No one believes your weak attempt to discredit the above.

I see someone created a "Erscheinung2". How grown up.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (104) Sep 05, 2011
Erscheinung, the yellow cake intelligence was fabricated. This is a fact. Please provide evidence to the contrary. I'm trying to understand how you could have become so misinformed unless you are simply just lying. Where did you hear such utter crap? I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here.

I see someone created a "Erscheinung2". How grown up.


Nice cover paul.
georgesoros
2 / 5 (8) Sep 05, 2011
It's not just death tolls that spur a pro war stance - it's also the level of aggression in an individual's temproment.

As an example, this thread provides the perfect insight. People like FrankHerbert are obviously very aggressive, as shown by his personal derogitory and repeated argumentative comments. Then, all that's required to start a war is another party who disagrees, for example Erscheinung. Being German, this person would be very dangerous - I only hope for Frank's sake that he isn't jewish or owns any land in Poland because one morning he might be taking a shower as usual and then BAM! Death from a poisonous gas.
Noumenon
4.6 / 5 (50) Sep 05, 2011
LOL, Mr. Soros.
Noumenon
3.7 / 5 (68) Sep 05, 2011
{.} the yellow cake intelligence was fabricated. {.}Please provide evidence to the contrary. {.} Where did you hear such utter crap? I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here.


According to Cheney's new book (which I have not read), there was contact between Iraqi Officials and those of Niger. Cheney told Rice that it was a political mistake to apologize for the intel, because it was accurate, to which Rice conceded. But you hate those two people, so...

Initially the intel came from Italy. In Wilson's own report (2002) it was stated "the former Prime Minister of Niger was unaware of any Iraqi contracts [no one suggested any contracts or actual sales took place] for yellowcake, but acknowledged that in 1999 Iraq may have been interested in discussing yellowcake sales but the PM "steered the conversation away.". It's remarkable that the Niger PM admitted that much. What rational Cheney gives in his book I do not know. The top Dem's (Kerry, Clinton,..) cited this intel also.
Noumenon
3.7 / 5 (68) Sep 05, 2011
"Both the US and British investigations make clear that some forged Italian documents, exposed as fakes soon after Bush spoke, were not the basis for the British intelligence Bush cited, or the CIA's conclusion that Iraq was trying to get uranium."

http://www.factch...222.html
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (105) Sep 05, 2011
The intelligence was fabricated and until you provide evidence to the contrary you are willingly spreading misinformation.

http://www.factch...222.html


Why strongarm Wilson like they did if they didn't have something to hide?
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (98) Sep 05, 2011
The Niger PM admitted Iraq contacted them for yellow-cake, this is from Wilson. None of this matters. There was no evidence that any yellow cake was ever transferred, yet Kerry, Clinton and the Dem gang even used the intel in their speeches supporting action in Iraq, without absolute proof standards. So blame them also.

As I outlined above, the issue was that Saddam failed to prove the destruction of WMD's that was known to have existed in Iraq, indisputably. Was there a sales pitch for war? Yes, regrettably, as it was unnecessary given the nature of Saddam.

It's not up to the American people to approve war and make these kinds of strategic decisions; they're simply not qualified. The decision was made not on singular specific threats like in a movie. It's more subtle and complicated than that. Iraq contacted Niger about yellow-cake.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (105) Sep 05, 2011
As I outlined above, the issue was that Saddam failed to prove the destruction of WMD's that was known to have existed in Iraq, indisputably.


How is this possible though? You've said in earlier posts that it's 1) incredibly easy to hide such things and 2) the UN inspectors were "limp-wristed" and it doesn't seem you would trust any conclusion they would come to. How exactly was Saddam supposed to prove he didn't have anything? The yellow cake Saddam did have was known and cataloged by the IAEA. This was all obtained prior to the first Gulf War.

Though Bush may not have knowingly lied on that particular issue, the intelligence was fabricated and you refuse to admit such. You keep saying Rice shouldn't have apologized. Your own source does not agree. No where does it say the intelligence was correct. It does however mention a lot of apologizing various bush administration officials did for the mistake.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (108) Sep 05, 2011
The Niger PM admitted Iraq contacted them for yellow-cake, this is from Wilson.


"The subject of uranium sales never actually came up in the meeting, according to what Wilson later told the Senate Intelligence Committee staff. He quoted Mayaki as saying that when he met with the Iraqis he was wary of discussing any trade issues at all because Iraq remained under United Nations sanctions. According to Wilson, Mayaki steered the conversation away from any discussion of trade.

For that reason, Wilson himself has publicly dismissed the significance of the 1999 meeting. He said on NBCs Meet the Press May 2, 2004:

Wilson: At that meeting, uranium was not discussed. It would be a tragedy to think that we went to war over a conversation in which uranium was not discussed because the Niger official was sufficiently sophisticated to think that perhaps he might have wanted to discuss uranium at some later date."

Your source.
georgesoros
1 / 5 (7) Sep 05, 2011
Frank, prepare to put mustard on your words because you will soon have to eat them, along with some humble pie that comes direct from the oven of shame, turned up to gas point egg on your face.
maccaroo
5 / 5 (2) Sep 05, 2011
Whoa! It's amazing how little it takes for the trolls to get going.

...back to the article... I think there's more to the sunk-cost effect than just looking back. The reason we need to justify past actions (and rectify those mistakes) is because it speaks to our credibility in making future decisions. Ironic, I know. Turning a big mistake into a smaller one will, in the future, allow us to justify other decisions.

Life is not a computer game or an email address where you can just restart or change your identity. Your track record, and how you make good on the bad situations, speaks a lot.
Noumenon
3.8 / 5 (68) Sep 05, 2011
How exactly was Saddam supposed to prove he didn't have anything?

The UN resolution called for Saddam to destroy his admitted wmds in the presence of UN inspectors. I would have believed the UN witnessed such disposal.

The yellow cake Saddam did have was known and cataloged by the IAEA. This was all obtained prior to the first Gulf War.

That's correct. That was old stuff, not relevant to subsequent events. He had other wmds unaccounted for, which was the point of subsequent UN resolutions.

Though Bush may not have knowingly lied on that particular issue, the intelligence was fabricated and you refuse to admit such.


Yes the Italian intel was BS. All I needed to do was prove that Bush did not lie, per above,. but,.. "Both the US and British investigations make clear that some forged Italian documents, exposed as fakes soon after Bush spoke, were not the basis for the British intelligence Bush cited, OR the CIA's conclusion that Iraq was trying to get uranium."
Noumenon
3.7 / 5 (68) Sep 05, 2011
Another source outlining the events from which I got the statement that the Niger PM admitted Iraq did contact about yellow-cake, but denied any sales contracts existed; The Italian, British, and an unknown foreign source were involved as sources.

http://uspolitics...iger.htm

The point of all this is that the notion that Cheney and Bush lied to go to war is false. Intel was imperfect and generally failed to prove (as in Q.E.D. standards) that Iraq tried to buy yellow cake,... though such standards were too high for the likes of Saddam.

If your contention is that Cheney directed the falsification of the forged docs, you must provide proof of that.
axemaster
5 / 5 (2) Sep 06, 2011
If your contention is that Cheney directed the falsification of the forged docs, you must provide proof of that.

Not exactly proof, but suspicious enough for sure:

http://www.rawsto...430.html
kochevnik
3.2 / 5 (9) Sep 06, 2011
More bleeding heart drivel. If the USA does not destroy it's enemies, it WILL be picked apart.
You say that like it's a bad thing. Actually it's policy. You are being picked apart, counter-reformationist. Only not by military means. You're just too thick to know it. Everything around you was invented by liberals. Even your government was founded by liberal democrats. Your conservative friends were called Tories and they were traitors in the American Revolution.
Skepticus
3 / 5 (4) Sep 06, 2011
I wonder why psychologists are needed to expose this fundamental of human nature? To humans, war is fun, enjoyable, profitable. What is a better way to settle your arguments, first started with a club, then guns and atom bombs? Experience the rush of adrenaline and exhiliration when your foes fall by the wayside, and you are the alpha monkey, while the females drooled in admiration and fear!There's the loot! there's the women! there's the oil! there's the land! There's the chance to write/rewrite history to your liking! There's the oppotunity to wipe pagan's religions off and promoting your own!For the lost of lives, what of it? Our guys are always heroes, the enemies' mongrel bastards..! And remember, no wars has ever been started with the sentence: "we are all equally humans, so we are goin' to beat the shit out of you"..!
kochevnik
3 / 5 (8) Sep 06, 2011
@Noumenon yellow-cake
So? Raw uranium ore exists in many places. After he failed to connect Iraq to 9/11. Bush's WMD lie was done in tandem with the Tories in the UK. That's history. Revisionism is all you've got.
kochevnik
3 / 5 (7) Sep 06, 2011
It's not up to the American people to approve war and make these kinds of strategic decisions; they're simply not qualified.
So you agree this is really an education issue? For a while there I thought you were a fascist warmonger. Well, chickenhawk more likely. BTW you're unqualified to participate in a republic.
hush1
3 / 5 (2) Sep 06, 2011
The first comment is introspective. There is insight there.
I digress to no further comment here.
finitesolutions
1.2 / 5 (6) Sep 06, 2011
It will be nice if Americans will somehow mysteriously disappear from their own country. i mean the country will be suddenly full of corpses. We can take it from there.
A dead American is way more valuable than a live one. Just saying...
antialias_physorg
3.7 / 5 (3) Sep 06, 2011
A dead American is way more valuable than a live one. Just saying...

False. You can't tax a dead American.

But objectively speaking: Most any country is making more debt than they are collecting taxes. this means that all the people in those countries would be worth more dead than alive (because not going into debt is worth more than doing so)

seriously: It's not the Americans' fault. It's the fault of a select few greedy bastards (and those can be found in every country. Usually at the place where their kind floats to).
Magnette
3 / 5 (2) Sep 06, 2011
@Noumenon yellow-cake
So? Raw uranium ore exists in many places. After he failed to connect Iraq to 9/11. Bush's WMD lie was done in tandem with the Tories in the UK. That's history. Revisionism is all you've got.


Actually you'll find that it wasn't the Tories in the UK as the Labour party(Left-ish)were in power from 1997 until 2010.

On the plus side, thank you for remembering that the USA wasn't the only country involved in the Iraq and Afghanistan debacles. A lot of the posters/keyboard warriors on this thread seem to think that the US was totally responsible for saving us all from the bad guys when this patently isn't true.
It would be nice for you all to remember that we were all involved in many ways which includes losing a lot of military people, particularly here in the UK.
kochevnik
3 / 5 (8) Sep 06, 2011
False. You can't tax a dead American.
Actually I heard mention of a death tax proposal to stymie the costs involved in burying anonymous vagabonds and forgotten seniors and orphans, as well as lining city coffers. But I think there's more profit in invading small countries, stealing their oil, and billing the taxpayers on behalf of the oil companies and Raytheon, Blackwater et al.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.4 / 5 (7) Sep 06, 2011
I am working on that. I have found a number of pieces that discuss the subject in passing, but I have yet to find anything specifically addressing the issue. The same is the case for the religion vs birth rate issue.
Translation: it appears otto knows what he's talking about because all I find is stuff which confirms what he says. Like this:
http://en.wikiped...religion

-And this:
http://moreintell...ertility

-Obviously. The major religions remaining today are all designed to maximize growth by propagation. Women are oppressed by them for this very purpose. It is written into the very fabric of their beliefs.

Those religions which are now extinct were simply not as good at forcing propagation within their ranks.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.3 / 5 (6) Sep 06, 2011
Or this:
http://news.monga...ho2.html

-Compare this list with the % of abortions per country:
http://www.johnst...4pd.html

-You will note the inverse correlation. You will also note that the countries with the most endemic violence and suffering, those with RELIGION-dominated cultures, are the ones experiencing the fastest pop growth.
Here's a link describing the Demographic Transition Model, which is the widely accepted model for population dynamics.
Yes, widely accepted in 1929 when it was concocted.
It's interesting to note that the model doesn't mention the word "religion" even once.
Indeed, a glaring omission given the fact that, according to the contemporary info I've posted, religionist cultures are the fastest growing in the world. By Design.

Your model is more sociopolitical propaganda of the tabula rasa type, meant at the time (prior to ww2) to divert attention away from the role of religions in pop growth.
Noumenon
3.7 / 5 (69) Sep 06, 2011
"He has used them, not once, but repeatedly -- unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war, not only against soldiers, but against civilians; firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. Not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. . . . I have no doubt today that, left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again. . . . " - Bill Clinton, Dec 1998

"It is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons. We might have destroyed them in '98. We tried to, but we sure as heck didn't know it because we never got to go back there." - Bill Clinton 2003
Noumenon
3.7 / 5 (69) Sep 06, 2011
"I agree with President Bush -- he has said that Saddam Hussein is evil. And he is. [He] is a vicious dictator and a documented deceiver. He has invaded his neighbors, used chemical arms, and failed to account for all the chemical and biological weapons he had before the Gulf War. He has murdered dissidents and refused to comply with his obligations under UN Security Council Resolutions. And he has tried to build a nuclear bomb. Anyone who believes in the importance of limiting the spread of weapons of mass killing, the value of democracy and the centrality of human rights must agree that Saddam Hussein is a menace. The world would be a better place if he were in a different place other than the seat of power in Baghdad or any other country." - Howard Dean Feb 2003

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Nancy Pelocy
Noumenon
3.7 / 5 (69) Sep 06, 2011
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeleine Albright Feb 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has 10 times since 1983." - Sandy Berger Feb 1998

"When [Bill] Clinton was here recently he told me was absolutely convinced, given his years in the White House and the access to privileged information which he had, that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction until the end of the Saddam regime." - Portuguese PM J. Barroso Oct 2003

"There is a problem -- the probable possession of weapons of mass destruction by an uncontrollable country, Iraq. The international community is right . . . in having decided Iraq should be disarmed." - Jacques Chirac, Feb 2003
Noumenon
3.7 / 5 (69) Sep 06, 2011
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years." - Rockefeller, Intelligence Committee.

"There is no doubt that . . . Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. . . . In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Bob Graham, in a letter TO President Bush.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (102) Sep 06, 2011
Right, so posting the opinions of those you disagree with is supposed to achieve what? Unlike you, I don't believe something just because the leadership of the party I generally support does. Try thinking for yourself sometime.
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (99) Sep 06, 2011
Right, so posting the opinions of those you disagree with is supposed to achieve what? Unlike you, I don't believe something just because the leadership of the party I generally support does. Try thinking for yourself sometime.


They're not just "people I dissagree with",.. they're people in high office all with access to intel. The point was that at the time not only the majority of the left, but the majority of the world had reason to distrust Saddam and think he had WMD's. Some came to accept the UN inspections, but not those who mattered.
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (98) Sep 06, 2011
It will be nice if Americans will somehow mysteriously disappear from their own country. i mean the country will be suddenly full of corpses. We can take it from there.
A dead American is way more valuable than a live one. Just saying...


Do you agree with this man-child Frank? You voted Vendicar a five for admitting to making similar idiotic remarks.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (102) Sep 06, 2011
All with access to forged intel. From the factcheck link you posted earlier. Since opinions matter...

"(From a web chat sponsored by Kerry for President Oct. 29, 2003)

*** Joe Wilson (Oct 29, 2003 11:24:53 AM)
I would remind you that had Mr. Cheney taken into consideration my report as well as 2 others submitted on this subject, rather than the forgeries

*** Joe Wilson (Oct 29, 2003 11:25:06 AM)
the lie would never have been in President Bush's State of the Union address

*** Joe Wilson (Oct 29, 2003 11:25:14 AM)
so when they ask, "Who betrayed the President?"

*** Joe Wilson (Oct 29, 2003 11:25:30 AM)
They need to point the finger at the person who inserted the 16 words, not at the person who found the truth of the matter."

Wilson, the source of the intel, says the interpretation was bogus. He even uses the word "lie". So list all the deceived democrats you want, but they were deceived and politically weak. I did not vote for Senators Kerry nor Clinton.
Erscheinung
2.1 / 5 (7) Sep 06, 2011
FrankHunris I know you're not that dense,... those dates all are AFTER the invasion of Iraq. My quotes are from PRIOR to the supposed Bush/Cheney lies and administration. Look at the dates.

As to the "16 words" of Bush's Speech, Wilson's report was not based on them, try reading again.

All the political cockroaches scurried once the sh!it hit the fan; After the invasion and subsequent lack of wmds, the dirty politics began from the left. I'm not interested in discussing this, because it's pure tactical politics.

The point of the above quotes I posted is that previous administrations, and those across the pond (in fact much of the world) also had reason to believe Saddam a threat,... so therefore the notion that Bush/Cheney had some monopoly on this notion is factually incorrect.

Yes, they sold the war. They should have just said,.. 'we suspect Saddam has yellowcake, we don't no for sure,... but one thing is certain, we don't trust him,.. we think he will support terrorists'
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (102) Sep 06, 2011
Hmm I seem to remember Republicans accusing Clinton of wagging the dog when he dealt with Iraq in 1998. If a ground war was such a good idea in 2003, why didn't the republicans support airstrikes in 1998? IIRC, they also accused Clinton of wagging the dog for launching cruise missiles at Al Qaeda camps around the same time.
Noumenon
4.5 / 5 (51) Sep 06, 2011
Hmm I seem to remember Republicans accusing Clinton of wagging the dog when he dealt with Iraq in 1998. If a ground war was such a good idea in 2003, why didn't the republicans support airstrikes in 1998? IIRC, they also accused Clinton of wagging the dog for launching cruise missiles at Al Qaeda camps around the same time.


Yes, I recall, but I don't know about the circumstances and context surrounding that,.. I wouldn't be surprised though; It's called dirty politics. See unlike you i'm not married to a party, i'm married to principals.

Taking out Saddam was the rational thing to do as he himself was the issue, he was the WMD, as historically proven. The controversy over lack of wmd's is meaningless as Bush was not obliged to make sure they were there, only to provide a reasonable suspicion that He was a threat. This was already accomplished in the Clinton administration long before Bush, as the above quote prove.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (103) Sep 06, 2011
Do you really think Saddam Hussein would have caused more damage to the US since 2003 than we have to ourselves? Well obviously you do. And you will forever be wrong.

Do you accept all the 5's Otto has given you? He's supported genocide in this very thread.
Noumenon
4.5 / 5 (51) Sep 06, 2011
It will be nice if Americans will somehow mysteriously disappear from their own country. i mean the country will be suddenly full of corpses. We can take it from there.
A dead American is way more valuable than a live one. Just saying...


Do you agree with this man-child Frank? You voted Vendicar a five for admitting to making similar idiotic remarks.


You must have forgotten to answer the above question Frankhubris.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (101) Sep 06, 2011
There is no way to assist peoples affected by religionist reproductive aggression. Assisting them only adds to the problem and makes it far worse. It strengthens the cultures which cause it. These cultures must be eliminated before the horror will end.

--Genocidal comment from Otto

September 6, 2011, 10:54 am 3 TheGhostofOtto1923 | FrankHerbert |
September 6, 2011, 10:49 am 3 TheGhostofOtto1923 | FrankHerbert |
September 6, 2011, 10:46 am 3 TheGhostofOtto1923 | FrankHerbert |
September 6, 2011, 10:42 am 3 TheGhostofOtto1923 | FrankHerbert |
September 6, 2011, 10:37 am 3 TheGhostofOtto1923 | FrankHerbert |
http://www.physor...activity

Do you accept the praise Otto has given you in this thread, Eichmanndung?
Noumenon
2.9 / 5 (98) Sep 06, 2011
Do you really think Saddam Hussein would have caused more damage to the US since 2003 than we have to ourselves?


Yes. Your knowledge is lacking. Saddam right now would be, like us, suspecting Iran to be developing Nukes,... and therefore Saddam would be scurrying to do the same, and in turn Iran would have even more reason to pursue them. There would have been a nuclear arms race in the middle east of all places.

But besides this obvious concern, Saddam vowed to get back at America,.. he absolutely would have supported some type of terrorist group.

In saying we did more damage to ourselves, you're being near-sighted. Our military presence in that region is not something that can be quantified that simply.

Apply your own logic wrt Obama stimulus plan,... 'what would have happened had we not'. It can only be at best debatable. All military top strategic brains know we need to be there and wrt national security & their opinion is more valuable than liberal peace-niks all day.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (6) Sep 06, 2011
Right, so posting the opinions of those you disagree with is supposed to achieve what? Unlike you, I don't believe something just because the leadership of the party I generally support does. Try thinking for yourself sometim


They're not just "people I dissagree with",.. they're people in high office all with access to intel. The point was that at the time not only the majority of the left, but the majority of the world had reason to distrust Saddam and think he had WMD's. Some came to accept the UN inspections, but not those who mattered.
Ya see Nou, we were INVITED.

-And relax frank. I do not support genocide and you know it. Culture does NOT equal ethnicity. Look it up. Maybe people can be talked out of their genocidal cultures? I don't know - ask boko haram.
Noumenon
3.6 / 5 (70) Sep 06, 2011
There is no way to assist peoples affected by religionist reproductive aggression. Assisting them only adds to the problem and makes it far worse. It strengthens the cultures which cause it. These cultures must be eliminated before the horror will end.

--Genocidal comment from Otto

September 6, 2011, 10:54 am 3 TheGhostofOtto1923 | FrankHerbert |
September 6, 2011, 10:49 am 3 TheGhostofOtto1923 | FrankHerbert |
September 6, 2011, 10:46 am 3 TheGhostofOtto1923 | FrankHerbert |
September 6, 2011, 10:42 am 3 TheGhostofOtto1923 | FrankHerbert |
September 6, 2011, 10:37 am 3 TheGhostofOtto1923 | FrankHerbert |
http://www.physor...activity

Do you accept the praise Otto has given you in this thread, Eichmanndung?


I do not. I'm actually against abortion, even as a agnostic person. I rated Axem, a five above disagreeing.

There, now are you going to explain why you rate Vendicar a five, and answer my ? wrt the idiot I quoted?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (6) Sep 06, 2011
The History of Iraq
8000bc- mesopotamians invented modern religion and seeded the world with it re: Abraham odyssey.
650ad- Persia overrun by Arabs; caliphate founded. Pop growth kept in check by constant colonization and war.
1500ad- Ottomans took over. Pop growth kept in check by constant deprivation, oppression, and war.
1950s- Brits divided middle east nations into artificial 'countries' to localize conflict. Baathist Sunni minority given control of the one called Iraq. Pop growth kept in check through increasing deprivation, oppression, and war.
1980- Islamic revolt in Iran. Iran/Iraq war orchestrated to further stress pops and restrict growth. 
1990- 'My army was getting to be a problem.' -Saddm. So he sends them south into the desert where they can safely be carpet-bombed by coalition forces.
2001- 9/11 signals the start of western strategic reoccupation of the ME. In preparation for the next war.
Late 2011-2012- Palestine declares statehood. Israel attacks Iran. Next war begins
Noumenon
4.5 / 5 (53) Sep 06, 2011
Do you accept the praise Otto has given you in this thread, Eichmanndung?


Otto can agree or disagree with me at anytime, I have no control over that. If he agrees than obviously I would agree with that agreement.

Otto is speaking in terms of population growth. This is a topic that sociologist study all the time. Socialist are dangerous people because they desire to take sociologist derived facts about such things and implement them through social engineering. This is what socialism is all about,... pouring over social statistics and then "fixing" every societal problem that exists.

I'm entirely opposed to this, because you can't have a far-leftist perfect society fantasy nirvana, and a free society at the same time. They are mutually opposed notions. Instead I accept society problems as inherent in a free society.
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (103) Sep 06, 2011
Keep generalizing, asshole.

There is no exchange of ideas here.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.4 / 5 (7) Sep 06, 2011
I do not. I'm actually against abortion, even as a agnostic person. I rated Axem, a five above disagreeing.
SO AM I. I am against war, and poverty, and misery, and ignorance. And religion.

Humanity has lived in an extremely desperate and miserable state ever since the development of agriculture. Every technological innovation has made this condition worse. Populations only grow faster and collapse more quickly.

In this context all the horrors Of overpopulation are INEVITABLE. Unavoidable. Inescapable. And delaying them only makes them WORSE. Letting them happen by themselves is NOT an OPTION.

Abortion is hopefully only an interim solution until we can engineer the tropical repro rate out of humanity. And end religion before it kills us all.

Our religions gave us all the misconception that anything is avoidable, even death, if we just try hard enough, with the best of intentions. But people will still continue to have too many babies, which makes our intentions moot.
Noumenon
3.7 / 5 (67) Sep 06, 2011
I guess you're not going to answer my question wrt finitesolutions childish statement. What about Vendicar_Decarian's outrageous comments,..

"12 more American terrorists were murdered in Iraq this weekend. More will soon follow them into death. The more dead americans in Iraq the better." - Vendicar_Decarian

"The world needs more dead americans in Afghanastan & Iraq" - Vendicar_Decarian

"[regarding above quote by Vendicar] As true today as the day it was written." - Vendicar_Decarian

"Killing Bush now top priority of all Loyal Democrats" - Vendicar_Decarian

... do you agree with these? You rated him a five when he admitted he made them.

I thought you were a reasonably intelligent person whom I could engage in debate,.. not like kochevnik, finitesolutions, Vendicar_Decarian, and GDM,.. where it's clear they must be 20 year-old know-nothings and just like being radical for the sake of being radical. There opinion is not relevant as such far leftism has no power. Are you like them?
Noumenon
4.6 / 5 (50) Sep 06, 2011
Our religions gave us all the misconception that anything is avoidable, even death, if we just try hard enough, with the best of intentions. But people will still continue to have too many babies, which makes our intentions moot.


I agree with your conclusions wrt to religion, but not that it should be forcibly eradicated. I don't agree that religion itself is responsible for high birth rates. Populations explode in lower class and poorer cultures. I don't agree about conspiracies wrt to muslims over populating Europe. I do agree that the west should institute strong assimilation measures for immigration, and that lack of this is the reason Europe has a "muslim problem".
FrankHerbert
2.8 / 5 (103) Sep 06, 2011
I generally don't read his comments. I see "_____tard" chuckle, and give him a five. The way my voting typically works is I have people that almost always get 1's (dogbert, marjon, you) because you're assholes in how you present your opinions. There are others I disagree with that I generally don't rate. Then there are those I generally give 5's to simply because I think it sticks in the craw of those I give ones to, as this question of yours has demonstrated. Mission accomplished.

But no, I'm a Real American(tm) and I support soldiers on an individual level. I don't wish any of them ill will. I however oppose the congressional-military-industrial complex.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.2 / 5 (6) Sep 06, 2011
Otto can agree or disagree with me at anytime, I have no control over that. If he agrees than obviously I would agree with that agreement.
Nou is right - the people of the world were duped into accepting the necessity of war, as usual. And then the real Reasons for it were concealed by blaming them on retired politicians, as usual.

No old kings to depose, the bushes and cheney and blair et al are chuckling in their easy chairs, writing books and watching football. Democracy is so good at this. Both Sides were complicit in our deception. As usual. 2 Sides - 1 Coin. Above a certain Level, both you guys are on the Same Side.
Noumenon
3.8 / 5 (67) Sep 06, 2011
But no, I'm a Real American(tm) and I support soldiers on an individual level. I don't wish any of them ill will. I however oppose the congressional-military-industrial complex.


OK, that is a rational viewpoint. Good to hear. But you do think we need a military, right? I mean even star trek fought wars and that was far into the future.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (12) Sep 06, 2011
I however oppose the congressional-military-industrial complex.

Are you opposed to the congressional-education-industrial complex or the congressional-agricultural-industrial complex or the congressional-science-industrial complex or....
National defense is ONE constitutional function of the federal government the 'progressives' oppose.
But they are not opposed to unconstitutional income redistribution.
GDM
2.3 / 5 (3) Sep 06, 2011
Hey, I'm back. I just couldn't resist setting noumenon straight. No, I'm not some 20 year-old know-nothing and I challange your assumptions. What is your education? experience? history? I'm willing to exchange, in public, mine. How about it?
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (13) Sep 06, 2011
Hey, I'm back. I just couldn't resist setting noumenon straight. No, I'm not some 20 year-old know-nothing and I challange your assumptions. What is your education? experience? history? I'm willing to exchange, in public, mine. How about it?

Post it on your profile page. No need to even ask. But then why should anyone believe it?
GDM
2.3 / 5 (3) Sep 06, 2011
Noumenon's challenge, not yours, ryggeson2. I don't care about you.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (11) Sep 06, 2011
Noumenon's challenge, not yours, ryggeson2. I don't care about you.

So you are like Buffet? He won't pay more taxes unless everyone else does?
Why do you need to wait?
If this was between you and Nou, there is the PM route. No need for anyone else to know.
Noumenon
3.8 / 5 (68) Sep 06, 2011
Hey, I'm back. I just couldn't resist setting noumenon straight. No, I'm not some 20 year-old know-nothing and I challange your assumptions. What is your education? experience? history? I'm willing to exchange, in public, mine. How about it?


Impress me with your posts instead, as that will carry more meaning.

There are plenty of PhD's fresh out of college that appear to know nothing.

My degree and experience is in software. This is meaningless when speaking of politics. If you study physics, correct my physics posts and I will be grateful for the lesson.
GDM
2 / 5 (4) Sep 06, 2011
Appearances can be deceiving. I gave you a 5 above for admitting to a "rational viewpoint". I love a good fight, that's why I was a Marine Sgt and a Vietnamese interpreter. I love a good argument, that's why I became a lawyer. I dislike the far left, that's why I was a registered republican for over 20 years, until Bush II and the far right wing. I love mathmatics and logic, that's how I made my fortune in software for the last 35 years. I think it is kind of childish to post "scores" at all, but what the hell. I don't like people who use epithets, like "-tards" or inflamatory titles as if that could explain anything, but I react like any human would. I believe that governments are created by the people to serve the people, and they are more complex than most of us can comprehend. I believe that the US is deeply divided to the point of near civil war, and I would like to avoid that. Some compromise is needed, but apparently, the GOP will have nothing of it.
Noumenon
3.8 / 5 (67) Sep 06, 2011
GDM, I'm sorry I grouped you with kochevnik, finitesolutions, Vendicar_Decarian. Based on your above post, that was clearly wrong. It was based on the "Obama got Osama while Bush stopped looking" post.
GDM
2 / 5 (4) Sep 06, 2011
Not entirely wrong. You have your opinions, I have mine. I doubt we will ever see eye-to-eye, and we will always have "the facts" behind us, no matter what. I'm bored with this thread, so I'll see you on another in the future. Maybe it will be less of an "open sore" and more scientific. I suspect the writers of the "sunk-cost" proposal have enough evidence to write another paper. See ya, I'm outta here!
Javinator
5 / 5 (1) Sep 06, 2011
I think the sunk cost effect could studied by watching poker games and seeing how different players respond to similar hands while having made different valued bets (investments) in the pot.

In large professional poker tournaments all players' hands and bets are recorded so there would be a large pool of data (multiple people and multiple hands) to analyze.

Good, professional players would seem to have received "the antidote" since they've trained themselves not to get suckered in on bad hands. Tilting is an example in a break in training and letting your emotions get the best of you (ie. giving in to the sunk cost effect).

It's unfortunate though, because assuming poker's a decent model for the sunk cost effect, "the antidote" appears to require not only a decent amount of training, but first hand experience with multiple failures (ie. lots of poorly played hands) and evidence of longer term success (ie. actually winning money).
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 06, 2011
@finalsolutions
It will be nice if Americans will somehow mysteriously disappear from their own country. i mean the country will be suddenly full of corpses. We can take it from there.
A dead American is way more valuable than a live one. Just saying...
Uh...how you doin?

-Who was it you want to exterminate again?
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (5) Sep 06, 2011
Not to pour more fuel on the fire, but how come nobody has yet mentioned the Downing Street Memo scandal in connection with the "Iraq WMD" fabrication?

http://en.wikiped...eet_memo

Get a freaking clue. Bush and Cheney (and Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz, and Rice, and Powell, and on, and so on, and on) out and out lied to the nation and the world. They of course had their preconceived reasons and notions for going into Iraq -- going all the way back to the founding of the neocon movement and as openly and shamelessly proclaimed on www.newamericancentury.org long before the Iraq invasion and long before 9/11. WMD was a lie and a pretext, nothing more.

And the testament to the sheer murderous IDIOCY of the neocon vision has now been self-authored in free-flowing blood. Too bad we actually had to run that experiment. The conclusion was obvious and foregone to anyone not apriori suffering from terminal neocon testosterone poisoning.
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (9) Sep 06, 2011
I believe that governments are created by the people to serve the people, and they are more complex than most of us can comprehend.

Which is why govt power must be limited as the authors of the Constitution intended and many others, like Bastiat, Mises and Hayek have supported.
"The existence of persons and property
preceded the existence of the legislator, and his function is only
to guarantee their safety.
It is not true that the function of law is to regulate our consciences,
our ideas, our wills, our education, our opinions, our
work, our trade, our talents, or our pleasures. The function of
law is to protect the free exercise of these rights, and to prevent
any person from interfering with the free exercise of these same
rights by any other person." The Law
they are more complex than most of us can comprehend.

Does this include GDM? After all, he claims to be a lawyer so people are not too complex for him?
ryggesogn2
2.3 / 5 (9) Sep 06, 2011
"Wikileaks new release from purloined files of the Department of Defense may help remind people that, contrary to popular opinion and media memes, the US did find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and in significant quantities."
"another vindication of the primary reason for restarting the war: Hussein and Iraq had violated the truce and refused to comply even after 17 UN resolutions demanding compliance. Hussein never had any intention of abiding by the truce, for whatever motivations one wants to assign to him. After the invasion, the US proved (through an armed-version of Wikileaks in Iraqs diplomatic files) that the UN had allowed Hussein to grab billions in personal wealth by perverting the embargo in the Oil-for-Food Program, which would have given Hussein the means to fuel another WMD program as soon as the West withdrew from Iraq, and to restart Husseins dreams of pan-Arab dominance through military adventurism. "
http://hotair.com...document
Noumenon
4.5 / 5 (53) Sep 06, 2011
Not to pour more fuel on the fire, but how come nobody has yet mentioned the Downing Street Memo scandal in connection with the "Iraq WMD" fabrication?

http://en.wikiped...eet_memo long before the Iraq invasion and long before 9/11. WMD was a lie and a pretext, nothing more.

And the testament to the sheer murderous IDIOCY of the neocon vision has now been self-authored in free-flowing blood. Too bad we actually had to run that experiment. The conclusion was obvious and foregone to anyone not apriori suffering from terminal neocon testosterone poisoning.


Riiight, cause that's why nearly all the top dems believed it also. There is NO debate whether Iraq had WMD's at one time, everyone knows he did possess them as a matter of historical fact.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (11) Sep 06, 2011
"Iraq had an active nuclear weapons program prior to the 1991 Persian Gulf War, but was forced to verifiably dismantle it under the supervision of UN inspectors. The U.S.-led March 2003 invasion of Iraq and subsequent capture of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein definitively ended his regimes pursuit of nuclear weapons. Libya voluntarily renounced its secret nuclear weapons efforts in December 2003. Argentina, Brazil, South Korea, and Taiwan also shelved nuclear weapons programs."
http://www.armsco...ohaswhat
Vendicar_Decarian
3.7 / 5 (6) Sep 06, 2011
RyggTard seem to have forgotten his hate for the U.N.

"Iraq had an active nuclear weapons program prior to the 1991 Persian Gulf War, but was forced to verifiably dismantle it under the supervision of UN inspectors." - RyggTard

Can you tell us RyggTard why Rumsfeld went to Iraq and shook hands with Saddam while that nuclear weapons program was active and just after it is claimed that Saddam killed several thousand Kurds with poison gas?

No need to answer, we all know why. It was to give Saddam political cover for his crimes. Saddam was America's good buddy at the time.

http://www.youtub...oejmpkgw

http://www.youtub...=related

PinkElephant
4.2 / 5 (5) Sep 06, 2011
So now that we've deposed Hussein, "democracy" reigns in Iraq. Soon to be 10 years of ongoing low-level war (when shall we finally start calling it a Quagmire?), daily car bombs, ongoing violence, assassinations. And as soon as we finally "pull out" and end that particular rape marathon, what progeny shall spew forth in the resulting power vacuum? Another civil war between the Kurds, the Sunnis, and the Shiites? Another strong-arm dictator to "stabilize" the situation with Western funds and CIA assistance? Should be fun to watch. Pass the popcorn, and cue up the Taps.

Who "won" the Iraq and Afghan wars? Iran won the former, Pakistan and China the latter. A couple of $Trillion, a few thousand more American deaths, tens of thousands wounded and crippled for life, and hundreds of thousands (perhaps multiple millions) non-American casualties later, it's SSDD except America is more hated than ever. Blowback waiting in the wings over the next several decades. Go Neocons!
kochevnik
3.3 / 5 (7) Sep 07, 2011
There is NO debate whether Iraq had WMD's at one time, everyone knows he did possess them as a matter of historical fact.
Yes. In fact, Bush keep the receipt as proof of purchase from the USA!
kochevnik
3.3 / 5 (7) Sep 07, 2011
@Noumenon ...I'm sorry I grouped you with kochevnik, finitesolutions, Vendicar_Decarian.
ryggesogn2 said that classification was a liberal activity, to create communism or some such rot. So are you coming over to the other side now?
finitesolutions
1.3 / 5 (4) Sep 07, 2011
@TheGhostofOtto1923
"Uh...how you doin?

-Who was it you want to exterminate again?
"
Arrogant retarded inferior Americans.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (6) Sep 07, 2011
They're not just "people I dissagree with",.. they're people in high office all with access to intel. The point was that at the time not only the majority of the left, but the majority of the world had reason to distrust Saddam and think he had WMD's. Some came to accept the UN inspections, but not those who mattered.
Absolutely. The OBVIOUS fact that all of you gullible ideologue side-takers fail to notice, is that BOTH SIDES were complicit in creating the conditions which made the Iraq invasion possible.

Saddam dutifully provided clear provocation. Brits, the US, et al fabricated evidence and concocted excuses. Both conservatives and libs supported it as nou's quotes attest.

And further, all these reasons conveniently degenerated into controversy after the fact, keeping people guessing and arguing about it for decades.

ALL of war is Deception. This includes the preparation and the aftermath. Congratulations - you all have in fact been fooled again. Of absolute Necessity.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (6) Sep 07, 2011
We'll Be Fighting In The Streets
With Our Children At Our Feet
And The Morals That They Worship Will Be Gone
And The Men Who Spurred Us On
Sit In Judgement Of All Wrong
They Decide And The Shotgun Sings The Song

I'll Tip My Hat To The New Constitution
Take A Bow For The New Revolution
Smile And Grin At The Change All Around
Pick Up My Guitar And Play
Just Like Yesterday
Then I'll Get On My Knees And Pray
We Don't Get Fooled Again

The Change, It Had To Come
We Knew It All Along
We Were Liberated From The Fold, That's All
And The World Looks Just The Same
And History Ain't Changed
'Cause The Banners, They Are Flown In The Next War

Meet The New Boss
Same As The Old Boss

http://www.youtub...a_player

-There is only one Boss in this world. EMPIRE.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (2) Sep 07, 2011
Both conservatives and libs supported it as nou's quotes attest.
That is a lie. The "libs" were demonstrating in the streets, in hundreds of thousands, against the war. True liberals were firmly against the war. Only 21 out of 50 Senate Dems voted for the war, and 61% of House Dems voted against the war. Centrist corporate sell-outs voted for the war, because they care more about political maneuvering than about principles. But don't you dare associate the Liberals with that shameful, nightmarish national failure.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 07, 2011
The "libs" were demonstrating in the streets blah
Hey I didn't actually research it, I know better. I was going on what I remember, and the few quotes posted by Noumenon of your Leaders dutifully implicating themselves and further muddying the history we all so love arguing about.

Your leaders voted predictably and the war was Prosecuted as a result because it was Essential to do so. Feeling petulant are we PE? Too bad. The Right Things get Done whether we approve of them or not.

All middle eastern leaders have done their Work and are being retired one by one, in the only manner possible. Look at Turkey - strategically withdrawing it's support of Israel so it can declare neutrality when war breaks out. How many freedom fighters have died lately in Libya, Syria, Egypt? These places have been safely secured, their armies and manpower safely depleted.

Iran and Israel can now solve their mutual problems in the Only Way possible. In battle. TOGETHER.

And peace will again return.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 07, 2011
Halleluijyah. Allahu achbar.

The people are always the true Enemies of Leaders. This includes you and me. Remember this.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (2) Sep 07, 2011
it was Essential to do so
It was not.
The Right Things get Done
Hardly. Frequently, the right things are not done, while the wrong things are.
These places have been safely secured, their armies and manpower safely depleted.
So if that's the tactic of choice for this mythical world elite, then how come they did exactly the opposite all through the Cold War?

Do you know what a Crank is, Otto? It's someone who can never be convinced they are wrong, by any piece of evidence, or by any argument. You want to tell us you aren't a Crank? Then pray tell, what type of evidence or argument could POSSIBLY, EVER demonstrate to you that you are wrong?

Your "theory" is infinitely malleable, and adaptable after-the-fact to any and every circumstance and turn of history. It has no predictive power, because it does not describe any real-world mechanism.

Crank away...
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 07, 2011
It was not.
It was so.
Hardly. Frequently, the right things are not done, while the wrong things are.
According to YOU. How is it that so many people would disagree on just what those things are and what their disposition should be? How would you expect that anything of Importance would ever get done if the people were allowed to decide them??

You have no idea why things happen the way they do. Therefore you have no clue about what their proper resolution should be. Further, you don't really CARE, because it's not your JOB to care, you're not TRAINED to understand, and you know there are People who are and who spend their whole lives preparing to make these Decisions.

You can spout dogma and strike poses all_you_want.

Our tropical repro rate makes collapse and war INEVITABLE. Religions were concocted to take advantage of this, to outgrow enemies and replace battle losses. Religions were used to conquer the world. They now threaten it with destruction. This explains all.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 07, 2011
Your "theory" is infinitely malleable, and adaptable after-the-fact to any and every circumstance and turn of history.
So's yours. Your leaders and pundits work very hard to see that this is so.
It has no predictive power,
Let's see, I predict madness and mayhem and destruction. Think I'm right?
because it does not describe any real-world mechanism.
It describes a Manner of maintaining a State of overall Stability so that gradual Progress can ensue. Your state-sponsored crankdom only describes recurring insanity with no direction and no hope of eventual resolution.

I like mine better.

The world is improving, slowly, despite humanity's penchant for tearing it apart. This used to be called Providence. But as god does not obviously exist, some human Convention must be responsible. Something which operates safely beyond the purview of the general populace to fuck it up. I like to call it EMPIRE. :)
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 07, 2011
It's Mantra goes something like this: Divide the people up and set them against one another in orderly and constructive ways. For if this is not done then the people will only do it themselves and we will have lost everything that we have struggled so far for so many years to accrue. AGAIN.

The people will always fight because there will always be too many people, is what They said. And so They set about to construct a Culture in which people were finally able to live within their means.

We see that Culture emerging today. It emerged briefly in greece and Rome. Our Culture.

But it is surrounded by throngs of people still wanting to fight because their chlidren are starving. And they will always think it is our fault unless the obsolete cultures they live in, can be destroyed.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 07, 2011
OOp I missed a question:
how come they did exactly the opposite all through the Cold War?
What are you talking about? Together both parties ruled the world. Anyone stepped out of line, they saw what happened to hiroshima yes?

Meanwhile many constructive and wildly Beneficial wars were engineered by these two ersatz Enemies. Good cop bad cop. the USSR sells israels enemies junk weapons, enabling israel to easily win war after war. But these were the weapons Russia was going to conquer Europe with! Sure they were. Fact is, these loser countries had nowhere else to GO.

Thorough wars of cultural destruction in china, Korea, Vietnam, afghanistan et al, waged tag team-style by east and west TOGETHER. Not to mention the cultural ruination taking place discretely behind the iron curtain.

The US and USSR were so obviously dire ENEMIES because they had so many nukes pointed at each other. Like they were ever going to destroy the world. Ha! They were created to SAVE it. Humans are rubes
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.1 / 5 (7) Sep 07, 2011
Crank? Then pray tell, what type of evidence or argument could POSSIBLY, EVER demonstrate to you that you are wrong?
OK. You want to convince me I'm wrong? Then convince me that the ONE BILLION abortions which have taken place in the last 100 years, not to mention all the pregnancies which never occurred thanks to international family planning efforts, were just the chance result of giving women the 'freedom to choose' and not a concerted Effort to control population growth?

And explain to me how this Phenomenon could have occurred had not the religionist cultures which would have resisted them, been destroyed during the world wars and the subsequent spread of communist martial law?

These programs alone ended the spiraling Cycles of collapse and war throughout most of eurasia. If you think such a significant Thing could possibly have happened by accident and not by Design then you will have to convince me of that.
kochevnik
2.8 / 5 (5) Sep 08, 2011
Republicans/Tories = Death tolls = Pro-war stance. Aborting these authority-worshiping at-risk fascists with overgrown fear-focusing amygdalae is key to restoring peace. Since South California introduced widespread abortion services, crime in LA county has fallen every year and the murder rate is maintained below 300, even while the population increased 60% without adding police. Israeli zionists have created a vaccine to neutralize religious fervor and the mossad has already launched several strategic initiatives to immunize Muslims. Conservatism is a social disease with origins in scarcity, poverty and paranoia.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (8) Sep 08, 2011
"According to the FBI, 699 people were murdered in Los Angeles County, California in 2009 making Los Angeles' murder rate 7.09 murders per 100,000 people. In 2008 this murder crime rate in Los Angeles was 8.16 per 100,000 people. Of those cities within LA County that fully reported crime to the FBI, a number have rates that are more than double this county average. Compton, for example, had a murder rate of 38.35 per 100,000 people. Inglewood's rate was 23.95."
http://www.policy...dex.html
" VIOLENT CRIMES 90,037 89,810 89,058 84,670 76,652 66,350 65,047 63,397 59,788 54,747

HOMICIDE 1,000 1,070 1,162 1,053 1,038 1,068 1,012 863 806 699
"
http://stats.doj....19/1.htm
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (2) Sep 08, 2011
ONE BILLION abortions which have taken place in the last 100 years...just the chance result of giving women the 'freedom to choose' and not a concerted Effort to control population growth?
What makes you think otherwise? BTW, do you know how many times Earth's population doubled in the last 100 years? I'll make it easy for you:

http://en.wikiped...2100.png

If you think such a significant Thing could possibly have happened by accident and not by Design then you will have to convince me of that.
You reject one set of religions, only to replace it with another of your own making. Newsflash: there is no omnipotent, omniscient caretaker of the world, there to give our lives meaning, purpose, and structure.

And there is no such thing as a global conspiracy that has left no paper trail, has not leaked, been betrayed, or been unmasked by investigators or competing geopolitical/economic interests for centuries upon centuries on end.
kochevnik
3 / 5 (5) Sep 08, 2011
Inglewood's rate was 23.95."
Yet they live better than you. Killer parties, nice digs, flashy cars, interesting people from all over the world while you troll at your keyboard, collecting $1.15 for each Randoid drivel you post from your zionist Koch handlers. They're probably in Inglewood laughing at you too.
ryggesogn2
2.5 / 5 (8) Sep 08, 2011
Inglewood's rate was 23.95."
Yet they live better than you. Killer parties, nice digs, flashy cars, interesting people from all over the world while you troll at your keyboard, collecting $1.15 for each Randoid drivel you post from your zionist Koch handlers. They're probably in Inglewood laughing at you too.

Support your assertions with data. (Anti-Jew, too?)
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (3) Sep 08, 2011
Anti-Jew, too?
While I don't condone kochevnik's apparent paranoia (or understand why he thinks the Koch's are somehow idempotent with Zionism -- even if some Koch's are Zionist, and I'm not saying any of them are because I don't know -- certainly not all Zionists are Koch's or have even heard of the Koch's...) -- still, let's try to distinguish anti-Zionist from anti-Jew.

I'm quite tired of people conflating Judaism with Zionism. Zionism is a political movement spearheaded by certain Jews as well as Gentiles, but not all Jews are Zionists. Quite a few Jews are pro-Jewish but at the same time utterly reject Zionism.

Saying that anti-Zionists are anti-Jewish, is like saying that anti-Communists are anti-Cuban.
ryggesogn2
2.7 / 5 (7) Sep 08, 2011
"

A Definition of Zionism

Zionism, the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel,"
http://www.jewish...ism.html

If one is opposed to Jews returning to Israel and creating the ONLY democracy in the Middle East, I suspect they are anti-Jewish as well.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (5) Sep 08, 2011
Not every Jew wants to "return" to a land which is not their true "homeland". Homeland is where you were born and grew up, not where some old book says some of your remote ancestors, or ancient practitioners of your newly adopted religion as the case may be, used to live thousands of years ago.

Furthermore, not every Jew wants to go to Israel at the cost of forcefully displacing people who have lived there for centuries, and placing oneself, one's family, and one's extended offspring for who knows how many generations to come, under constant threat of religiously/culturally motivated murder and war, not to mention the possibility of yet another genocide.

Lastly, there are many _religious_ Jews who believe that it is not their place to return to Biblical lands, until a true Messiah sent by God leads them back there. They view modern Israel as a heretical sham that won't last. They are probably quite right.

More e.g. here:

http://www.jewsag...ism.com/
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (8) Sep 09, 2011
Jews did not forcibly displace anyone, until they were attacked. They started buying land over 100 years ago and by 1948 had made their land productive.
It was the Arabs, Jew haters, that expelled Jews from their 'homelands' and tried to force the Jews out from the land they legally purchased. Arabs told the non-Jews in Israel to leave before the attacks so they would not be in the way.
Too bad for the Arabs, who supported NAZIs, the Jews kicked their ass and to the winner go the spoils.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 09, 2011
BTW, do you know how many times Earth's population doubled in the last 100 years? I'll make it easy for you:
-And your point being -? ALL those unborn and uncreated would have been part of this explosive growth. ALL working hard to make ALL of Eurasia look like gaza and new Delhi. But things would have collapsed long before that point. They always did.
You reject one set of religions, only to replace it with another of your own making. Newsflash: there is no omnipotent, omniscient caretaker of the world, there to give our lives meaning, purpose, and structure.

And there is no such thing as a global conspiracy that has left no paper trail, has not leaked, been betrayed, or been unmasked by investigators or competing geopolitical/economic interests for centuries upon centuries on end.
You seem pretty confident of this. Got any proof?

The most you can say is it PROBABLY doesn't exist, otherwise you sound like a creationist. And I say evidence tells us it DOES exist.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.6 / 5 (7) Sep 09, 2011
Jews did not forcibly displace anyone, until they were attacked. They started buying land over 100 years ago and by 1948 had made their land productive.
So- what happened to all the land abandoned by the 800k refugees who fled the country? Why did they leave to begin with, if they weren't forced to? Does this land sit vacant or was it declared public property and given to Jews for settlement, much like the Arab land they are stealing in the west bank and now reluctantly trying to remove settlers from?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 09, 2011
Newsflash: there is no omnipotent, omniscient caretaker of the world, there to give our lives meaning, purpose, and structure.
Newsflash: Leaders don't give a shit whether your life has meaning or not PE. They know that everybody is struggling to give their lives 'meaning' which for the great bulk of humanity means producing large families. It always has.

And in an an industrial, agricultural world the MEANING of this is cyclic overgrowth, conflict, and collapse; and with it the irrecoverable destruction of a finite environment. This has been going on for 10,000 years. Early Leaders wrote about and lamented this ruination. Hammurabi tried to recover the Euphrates valley by removing topsoil saltified by irrigation. He Failed.

The Meaning for Them of life was survival. The human condition threatened it's own existence; Their existence. The future of their Tribe and Their Families. They decided it was the Proper Time to make war on the people.

And They are Winning, brilliantly.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 09, 2011
If one is opposed to Jews returning to Israel
Well, according to this well-respected Jewish historian from tel aviv university, the Jews never LEFT palestine. According to shlomo sand (and many others) jewish indigenes stayed and adopted Islam. Jews elsewhere were the result of proselytizing. Ashkenazis were the remnants of Khazar pushed westward into Europe by the Mongols.
http://www.youtub...a_player

-According to shlomo (and MANY others) the Zionist myth of a Jewish 'people' was concocted along with the other nationalist fables (german, Russian, Italian, etc) at about the same time.

-And according to otto this was all in Preparation for the world wars of the next century... as war would be the Inevitable and Forseeable result of the Industrial Revolution, and so had to be Prepared for with great Care and much Planning lest it destroy all of civilization in one fell Swoop. And ruin the planet for good this time. Obviously.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.3 / 5 (6) Sep 09, 2011
They view modern Israel as a heretical sham that won't last. They are probably quite right.
Whoa! A decidedly religionist judgement. Are you a closet religionist? HOW SAD.

Lets be clear; there is NO GOD to send any savior to deliver humanity from itself and create a lasting state of Peace upon the earth.

If things are to get better it is up to people to do this for themselves. Unfortunately, humans have become capable of ruining this planet and destroying themselves before they became able to shed those animalistic proclivities which makes this INEVITABLE.

Fortunately a Wise Group of Leaders was able to deduce this sorry state and begin to Deal with it in Ways that no god ever could. And one of the first Things They did, was invent suitable Gods which could assist Them in the Task.

These Gods Deify deception. They Sanctify lies. They Glorify suffering, murder, and martyrdom. Their Time is past. We are being called upon to speak out and demand the end of their unholy tyranny.
ryggesogn2
3.4 / 5 (5) Sep 09, 2011
the land abandoned by the 800k refugees who fled the country

Why did they leave? Because their fellow Muslims encouraged them to get out the way. Note you said they abandoned their property.
Arabs did force Jews to leave and did steal their property. But this happened to Jews for centuries.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 09, 2011
"...Jewish military advances, and fears of massacre after Deir Yassin, which caused many to leave out of panic. Later, a series of laws passed by the first Israeli government prevented them from returning to their homes, or claiming their property. They and many of their descendants remain refugees. Later in the war, Palestinians were expelled as part of Plan Dalet. The expulsion of the Palestinians has since been described by some historians as ethnic cleansing, while others dispute this charge."
http://en.wikiped...n_exodus

-So in other words they were scared off, fled to escape war, and then weren't allowed back. And THEN their land was appropriated. Right?

I notice you're pretty good at referencing sources except when you know you're wrong, like now.

Dier Yassin massacre:
http://en.wikiped...r_Yassin
PinkElephant
4.3 / 5 (3) Sep 09, 2011
-And your point being -?
Being, that you diagnose global population control regardless of whether population was actually under control or evidently continued to explode exponentially. That's a hallmark of Crankdom: no matter the actual outcome, it fits -- nay, supports and validates -- the "theory".
You seem pretty confident of this.
Ockham's Razor. Plus, universally manifest innate human desire for rationalization and supplication, which religionists and Cranks alike manage to fulfill through their respective inventions. You're a showcase.
Are you a closet religionist?
Of course not; I just agree with them in their assessment that Israel is a sham, and that in its present construction it can't and won't last. I just come to that conclusion via different reasoning. The larger point, of course, was that it is ignorant, racist, and just plain stupid to equate Jews with Zionists. None of which particularly surprises, considering it's Swenson we're dealing with here.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (6) Sep 09, 2011
Esscuse me while I finish dismantling mr ryggesnoggy:

Plan Dalet
"...in expectation of an invasion by regular Arab armies. "Plan Dalet" called for the conquest and securing of Arab towns and villages inside the area alloted to the Jewish state and along its borders. In case of resistance, the population of conquered villages was to be expelled outside the borders of the Jewish state. If no resistance was met, the residents could stay put, under military rule. According to the academics Walid Khalidi and Ilan Pappe, its purpose was to conquer as much of Palestine and to expel as many Palestinians as possible."
http://en.wikiped...an_Dalet

-Which is exactly what happened:

"About 100 Arab villages were conquered and emptied of their inhabitants, and almost all Jewish settlements enjoyed territorial continuity, with the notable exception of Jerusalem. Many Arab leaders left the country and local leadership collapsed."
Cont
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (6) Sep 09, 2011
"On the Jewish side, the number of those killed during the execution of the plan was 1,253, of which 500 were civilians. On the Arab side, Jewish counter-attacks and offensives precipitated a mass exodus of 250,000-300,000 people."

-Creating a garrison state requires defensible borders and securing the perimeter.
PinkElephant
4 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
Hammurabi tried to recover the Euphrates valley by removing topsoil saltified by irrigation. He Failed.
Then in the 20th Century, the Soviets managed to saltify pretty much the entire Uzbekistan and most of Kazakhstan by diverting so much freshwater for cotton irrigation from the Aral Sea that it's all but gone now.

Otto, the truth is that humans NEVER LEARN. We keep on repeating the same mistakes over and over, because we either never pay attention to (or are altogether ignorant of) our own history, or we are driven by short-term avarice and power-lust with no thought for long-term consequences, and we invariably deem ourselves smarter and better than our ancestors and too often arrogantly assume we can get away with things that brought them down.

It's one of the universal observations, found in all religions and ethnic traditions: everything goes in circles.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (6) Sep 09, 2011
Being, that you diagnose global population control regardless of whether population was actually under control or evidently continued to explode exponentially.
Not true. It is you who state a global pop growth figure without differentiating between which pops are growing (religionist) and which are not (western secular).
Ockham's Razor. Plus, universally manifest innate human desire for rationalization and supplication,
Blah??
which religionists and Cranks alike manage to fulfill through their respective inventions. You're a showcase.
So if I interpret this correctly; PE discounts what I say without taking issue with anything SPECIFIC, just because it RESEMBLES something which PE regards as crankish or crank-related.

Come On. Challenge me on specifics or STFU. The world wars were not fought with the hope that any one prevailing culture would win out. They were fought to destroy ALL of them. Including western as it was Xian-dominated at the time.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (6) Sep 09, 2011
The Tigris/Euphrates complex was the main source of Sumerian food. It's ruin caused the collapse of that civilization. Ours is alive and well. We finally learned to anticipate collapse and use it to our advantage. Read about Joseph and pharaoh in the Good Book.[qWe keep orepeating...we either never pay attention to (or are altogether ignorant of) our own history, or we are driven by short-term avarice and power-lust with no thought for long-term consequences And that's what you're told by official Cranks, because that's what it can look like from gen to gen, event to event. It CAN'T resemble anything else if you only examine one thing at a time.

By your estimation the ruin in Babylon would slowly have marched around the globe and we would be subsisting in isolated pockets today. But the opposite has happened. We are on the verge of leaving the planet because an environment where Knowledge could be continuously accrued without loss was maintained. This took immense Effort to achiev
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (2) Sep 09, 2011
a global pop growth figure without differentiating between which pops are growing (religionist) and which are not (western secular)
I'm sorry, I thought your thesis involved a GLOBAL conspiracy of leaders? Do I understand correctly that now the conspiracy has retreated in scope to cover only to the secular west?

Say, is either China or India collapsing from their respective mammoth populations? How are their leaders doing -- fearing for their lives, or living like kings?
PE discounts what I say without taking issue with anything SPECIFIC
I take issue with practically EVERYTHING you say. Take any particular pronouncement, and it's either obviously false due to numerous modern and historical counter-examples, or it expresses a position that welcomes any and all counterexample as affirmation.

If you believe a massive centuries-old conspiracy can leave no paper trail or tangible proof for all to see (never mind avoid being exposed in other ways), you believe in miracles.
ryggesogn2
3.4 / 5 (5) Sep 09, 2011
"The refugees were confident that their absence would not last long, and that they would return within a week or two. Their leaders had promised them that the Arab armies would crush the 'Zionist gangs' very quickly and that there was no need for panic or fear of a long exile."

- Monsignor George Hakim, Greek Catholic Bishop of Galilee, in the Beirut newspaper Sada al Janub, August 16, 1948

"Of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly lived in Haifa not more than 5,000 or 6,000 remained. Various factors influenced their decision to seek safety in flight. There is but little doubt that the most potent of the factors were the announcements made over the air by the -Higher Arab Executive, urging the Arabs to quit.. . . It was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades."

- The London weekly Economist, October 2, 1948
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (2) Sep 09, 2011
world wars were not fought with the hope that any one prevailing culture would win out. They were fought to destroy ALL of them
No culture ever lasts. All cultures reach their apex, then decline, to be replaced by others. Empires rise and fall, and so do cultures. It's been this way throughout recorded history, and almost certainly for a hundred thousand years prior.
the ruin in Babylon would slowly have marched around the globe
Before Babylon, there was a vast empire spanning sub-Saharan and equatorial Africa. Today, very little is known or left except hints of massive settlements and infrastructure only visible from space. One has to assume that empire, too, fell victim to over-exploitation of its natural resources, or changing climate. The Aztecs suffered the same fate in the Americas. And in mid-East, long after Babylon, Persia blossomed into a regional superpower only to then fade into oblivion.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (6) Sep 09, 2011
I'm sorry, I thought your thesis involved a GLOBAL conspiracy of leaders? Do I understand correctly that now the conspiracy has retreated in scope to cover only to the secular west?
It Does. And it has.
Say, is either China or India collapsing from their respective mammoth populations? How are their leaders doing -- fearing for their lives, or living like kings?
Since Mao they have aborted to the tune of some 600 MILLION, as well as the 1 child/family law, not to mention the 40M he killed outright. Neither could have been effected before him.

Before Mao china had near-constant war, revolution, famine. The great wall cost millions of lives to build. A true Public Works project.

India is not doing well at all. Moslem unrest, mass murder from marxists in the east, misery, starvation. What does a few fat leaders have to do with it?
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (2) Sep 09, 2011
It Does. And it has.
In other words, not only does your "thesis" change with the time of day, it even openly self-contradicts without batting an eye.
Before Mao china had near-constant war, revolution, famine.
And after Mao it didn't? Holy crap, really? No revolution OR famine to be associated with Mao?
The great wall cost millions of lives to build.
And was of course done long before Mao. BTW the Qing dynasty did quite well, and felt no need for imposing fertility laws.

Actually, any leader with two neurons to rub together wants his governed population to GROW rather than shrink. More subjects means more income for him and his cohorts, and more bodies and resources to throw around in his military conquests.
What does a few fat leaders have to do with it?
If Indian leaders feel no natural incentive or demonstrate any ability to organize a massive and long-lived, miraculous conspiracy for a new world order, what makes Western leaders so fundamentally different?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (6) Sep 09, 2011
You've heard of the massive demonstrations over corruption in India?
http://www.nytime...oes.html

-This precedes the collapse of democracy which Aristotle told us results in despotism. This is CAUSED by pop pressure. In indias case it is predominantly Moslems and Hindus trying to outreproduce one another.
The Aztecs suffered the same fate in the Americas.
No, the Aztecs and incas both very conveniently created young empires which were easily commandeered by euros.
And in mid-East, long after Babylon, Persia blossomed into a regional superpower only to then fade into oblivion.
Darius and Alexander conspired to collapse their respective empires and consolidate the known world. Aristotle taught them both how to do it and WHY it needed to be done. This explains that whole farce of the boy/king conquering the world because he was just so damn brilliant.

Now THIS is a good story.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (6) Sep 09, 2011
In other words, not only does your "thesis" change with the time of day, it even openly self-contradicts without batting an eye.
Your saying it does does not make it so.
And after Mao it didn't? Holy crap, really? No revolution OR famine to be associated with Mao?
Absolutely not. Look up the Xian-instigated revolt in the 1800s where some 200 MILLION died. Or the Mongol invasions. Or the few million that the japanese killed. China has been VERY quiet under communism. Except of course for all that initial bloodshed. Which would have continued UNABATED without the draconian prenatal infanticide.
Actually, any leader with two neurons to rub together wants his governed population to GROW rather than shrink. More subjects means more income for him and his cohorts, and more bodies and resources to throw around in his military conquests.
Most leaders are of the Fold. Engineered war benefits all Leaders. Immensely so. Except the ones who have to die as part of their Role.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (2) Sep 09, 2011
Look up the Xian-instigated revolt in the 1800s where some 200 MILLION died. Or the Mongol invasions. Or the few million that the japanese killed.
Come on now, Otto. Aren't these all examples of Planned Wars that the Leaders mutually Agreed and Arranged to Effect population Control? Therefore, by your logic, all these things were Intended, Good, and Proper. So why should the Leaders want to change their Tack all of a sudden? Now they're all for Peace instead of War. If it argues like a Crank, it must be a Crank...
China has been VERY quiet under communism.
Also under a significant chunk of Qing dynasty, and also during a significant period of Ming dynasty prior to that. And when China's "communism" falls apart, as it inevitably and eventually will, there will be more periods of chaos and order, under all kinds of social and political arrangements. That's life.
Most leaders are of the Fold. ... etc.
Blah?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (6) Sep 09, 2011
Poor archduke Ferdinand. His driver actually drove around LOOKING for the assassins because of some foul-up.
If Indian leaders feel no natural incentive or demonstrate any ability to organize a massive and long-lived, miraculous conspiracy for a new world order, what makes Western leaders so fundamentally different?
Hmmm I see you are still not grasping the Scope of Empire.

In Europe during the middle ages, all dynastic rulers were related. All traced their roots back to Charlemagne, who conquered Europe with the popes blessing.

These euro rulers were constantly moving borders and setting groups against one another to no obvious reason, besides the idea that they were all jealous fops intent on having more than their cousins.

Meanwhile Europe stayed consistently stable overall. Euros became very good fighters and were able to repel Moslem incursion. They developed the tech during all this constructive warfare to easily and quickly conquer the Americas.
Cont
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 09, 2011
...even if the pre-colombian civilizations hadn't been specifically Prepared for conquest. 25k mi of paved roads perfectly suited for carts to gather up all the gold... for a culture without the wheel.
Come on now, Otto. Aren't these all examples of Planned Wars that the Leaders mutually Agreed and Arranged to Effect population Control?
Indeed indeed.
Therefore, by your logic, all these things were Intended, Good, and Proper. So why should the Leaders want to change their Tack all of a sudden? Now they're all for Peace instead of War.
Communism. Martial law for the Machine Age.

Dynastic rulers were ill-suited for speedy capitalism and it's faux political system, democracy. So the monarchies were destroyed in much healthy and constructive revolution.

But capitalism needed an able Foe. In olden times it was Cain vs Abel, farmers vs herders. In the industrial age it naturally became workers against bosses, another Iteration of a biblical tale... Slaves vs their keepers.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 09, 2011
You must admit, capitalism and communism are so much more Effective at wholesale cultural destruction, yes? In tandem they are unbeatable. Perhaps they are the last Iteration; perhaps something even more Efficient will need to be concocted, to replace them.

Or perhaps the Plans of Mice and Men are at last approaching Fruition and the people can finally be dispensed with for good?

The great flood originally described the destruction of mankind because the noise they all made kept the gods awake. We are now noisier than ever and we threaten their planet as never before.

You haven't yet asked a question that I don't have a very good answer for. Try harder.
PinkElephant
4.5 / 5 (2) Sep 09, 2011
His driver actually drove around LOOKING for the assassins
Nonsense.
no obvious reason, besides the idea that they were all jealous fops intent on having more than their cousins.
Or the idea that they were rightly paranoid of someone backstabbing them and taking their place -- so always strove to strike first. Machiavellian behavior in a Machiavellian environment: where's the basis for surprise?
Europe stayed consistently stable overall.
Oh, right. Aside from all the wars and plagues, rising and falling empires, totally stable "overall". Crankitty-crank-crank.
Euros became very good fighters and were able to repel Moslem incursion.
As opposed to before, when they weren't able to repel such incursions, and weren't such good fighters. Cranktastic.
They developed the tech during all this constructive warfare to easily and quickly conquer the Americas.
Yeeah. Except ancient Egyptians already had enough "tech" to easily and quickly conquer the Americas.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
carts to gather up all the gold
Except there was hardly any gold to gather up.
for a culture without the wheel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_road_system#Main_routes

"These roads provided easy, reliable and quick routes for the Empire's civilian and military communications, personnel movement, and logistical support. The prime users were imperial soldiers, porters and llama caravans, along with the nobility and individuals on official duty."

Apparently, roads have utility even without the wheel. Who'da thunk. Crank-crank...
Indeed indeed.
Indeed, the Leaders did something completely different before they did something else entirely. All of which goes to prove that nothing -- no matter what or when -- ever gets done without a Plan. There is always a Plan, because there is no way to prove that there isn't a Plan (one can't prove a negative.) Also, the world is full of conspiratorial magic and miracles. Hallelujah, and Amen.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
Communism. Martial law for the Machine Age.
As opposed to Fascism -- relic of a pre-Machine past.
Dynastic rulers were ill-suited for speedy capitalism and it's faux political system, democracy.
Wow, I thought only intellectual giants of Swenson's caliber were capable of conflating capitalism with democracy. Congrats on delving to a new low... (or is it that you're high?)
much healthy and constructive revolution
Bitterly fought and opposed by all the world's elites (apparently, because they all secretly liked it so much.) Ka-CRANK!
Slaves vs their keepers.
And wannabe keepers vs. entrenched keepers.
another Iteration of a biblical tale...
Why such Biblical chauvinism? Name me one religion or culture that doesn't offer up such tales? Why use the culturally myopic word "Biblical" as a substitute for the more obvious and universal "Human"?
capitalism and communism
Capitalism exists in some forms, Communism is unattainable. Apples vs. Oranges.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
You haven't yet asked a question that I don't have a very good answer for. Try harder.
Yes indeed, you have ALL the answers, for EVERYTHING.

Religion tends to do that. Funny though, to watch it deny its own true nature.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 09, 2011
Aren't you ebullient tonight. Or is that effluvient -?
As opposed to Fascism -- relic of a pre-Machine past.
Fascism is only an extreme form of army-building, turning whole countries into war machines. When the war ends fascism goes away.
Wow, I thought only intellectual giants of Swenson's caliber were capable of conflating capitalism with democracy. Congrats on delving to a new low... (or is it that you're high?)
Silly gullible human. One complements and justifies the other. Both are based on COMPETITION. Only the 2 of them together can accommodate the accelerated pace of tech development.

And these revolutions were quite probably instigated by Freemasons, at least on one level.

And communism IS unattainable. It was in every way Martial Law of a very brutal sort, hiding behind dogma.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
When the war ends fascism goes away.
That should be quite a revelation to the Spanish...
Only the 2 of them together can accommodate the accelerated pace of tech development.
Ahhh-China! Excuse me. Before I sneezed, I was going to mention pre-WWII Germany and Japan, as well as the Soviet Union.
these revolutions were quite probably instigated by Freemasons, at least on one level.
You know why I even engage with you, even though it's obvious you're too far gone and a completely lost cause? Because it just gets funnier and funnier.
Aren't you ebullient tonight.
Yes, I'm rather enjoying this farce of a discussion thread, thank you.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 09, 2011
Bitterly fought and opposed by all the world's elites
Oh they were so horrible and bad. Only horrible and bad people could ever have Arranged them. I say only horrible and bad people would ever let collapse happen by itself. people cannot stop floods but they can anticipate them, plan for them, and work hard to preserve the most vital and irreplaceable things from them. Especially if they lose everything a few times. Ever read about Atlantis? A fitting allegory written by Leaders.

The bible also is uniquely full of such stories. It takes earlier stories like the flood myth and reconfigured them to apply DIRECTLY to the Idea of establishing Order in the midst of chaos.

The biblical flood myth obviously (to me) describes the flood of humanity upon the earth and the Enochian priestly Caste who foresees it and builds an ark to preserve mankinds store of knowledge through the deluge. Enoch/thoth, grandfather of Noah, Keeper of Knowledge and the First of his Kind.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
only horrible and bad people would ever let collapse happen
Who says collapse needs anyone's permission? You know, in the real world on this here planet, sh*t happens.
people cannot stop floods but they can anticipate them
For the most part, they usually fail to see it coming, even when it's obvious in hindsight.
plan for them
You can't plan for _all_ the possible floods, because you'd bankrupt yourself and you won't have time for anything else. So you don't plan for anything until catastrophe blows up in your face, after which you spend a few years getting ready for its repeat before getting gob-smacked by a different type of disaster for which you weren't ready. Rinse, repeat.
work hard to preserve the most vital and irreplaceable things
By historically burning and destroying them. It can, indeed, be hard work getting out of dodge with one's behind intact. I'll grant you that...
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 09, 2011
That should be quite a revelation to the Spanish...
Generalissimo Franco is STILL alive don't you know. Really, did postwar Spain look anything like prewar Spain? Of course not. Except it DID continue to keep the communists at bay. Sometimes in a very warlike fashion. The danger was great.

Let's dig through the pile...
Except there was hardly any gold to gather up.
There was enough gold to devastate economies throughout Europe. Much of it was simply scuttled.
"These roads provided easy, reliable and quick routes yaddayadda
All mysteries need explanations eh? Or else the people might think you don't know everything.

This intricate system was built in a matter of decades, right before the conquest, using 1/3 the GDP of the entire population. So was macchu picchu, the last redoubt of a Priesthood who knew full well that a Spanish invasion replete with biowarfare agents was imminent. They built the place and destroyed all access to it.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
The bible also is uniquely full of such stories.
Here we go with cultural chauvinism again. The Bible is but a pale imitation of the corpus of myths and tales in ancient Egypt, ancient Greece, ancient China and India, even the ancient Norse and the ancient Australian Aborigines. There's nothing "unique" about the Bible, except for its historically transient dominance of contemporary culture, and the pedestal you insist putting it on.
Idea of establishing Order in the midst of chaos
The Bible has so many meanings and interpretations, that I don't begrudge you yet another. You're no different than the numerologists and the mystics, and the rest of their ilk. You just *think* you're different. But then, so do they all.
an ark to preserve mankinds store of knowledge
I recall lots of animals on the Ark, but not that much space set aside for books or artifacts...
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
it DID continue to keep the communists at bay. Sometimes in a very warlike fashion. The danger was great.
Yes, of course, why didn't I see it myself. The Leaders deemed it proper for Communists to triumph in Russia, China, Cuba, throughout Meso- and South-America -- but oooh no!! not in Spain!! Dios mío, no en España también! Unquestionably, Spain and Germany had to be Saved from the Communists. It was all part of the Plan, and Fascism was the solution. Never mind that Britain, USA, and so many others somehow managed to keep the Communists at bay without falling into Fascism. Never mind, because that too was all part of the Plan.
There was enough gold
What little gold they did recover, didn't begin to pay for the expenditures of trans-Atlantic expeditions and colonization. That's why they had to resort to colonial slave labor to try and make the economics work.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 09, 2011
You know, in the real world on this here planet, sh*t happens.
That's what I've been SAYING. Shit* is predictable. *Shit can be anticipated. It can be Controlled and the Results of it Predetermined. When this is done, *shit* can be enormously, wildly Constructive. Beneficial. World saving. Joseph and pharoah ended up owning everything in Egypt just because they knew that prosperity breeds collapse.

Selling this Philosophy to leaders around the world who were desperately struggling with the same problems, must've been a piece of cake. A viral Meme spread via diplomacy amongst rulers. Divide the people and set them against one another in Creative ways. They will only blame you as their children begin to starve. Here, marry my daughter and I'll marry yours.

A Tribe was born.
..can't plan for _all_ the possible floods
You learn as you go. You create economies which finance wars from the Rewards generated in the last. They can employ the very best minds the world has to offer.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
This intricate system was built in a matter of decades, right before the conquest, using 1/3 the GDP of the entire population.
Yeah, right. Because to no roads are required to maintain a geographically dispersed empire, and such an empire can arise without roads.
So was macchu picchu, the last redoubt of a Priesthood who knew full well that a Spanish invasion replete with biowarfare agents was imminent.
The "last redoubt" in a fight they supposedly knew was coming, and that they supposedly knew they were going to lose. And the point of such a "redoubt" would be...?

And really, they actually knew it was the SPANISH who'd invade them, as opposed to Portuguese, French, British, or Hawaiians?

And they knew all about biowarfare, too. Wowzers, the ancients really did know a lot more than we give them credit for...
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 09, 2011
I recall lots of animals on the Ark, but not that much space set aside for books or artifacts...
Duh its allegory. Animals are nice symbols for Knowledge of the natural world yes?
triumph in Russia, China, Cuba, throughout Meso- and South-America -- but oooh no!! not in Spain!!
Obviously it's a lot more complicated than you're thinking. Play any chess?
What little gold they did recover, didn't begin to pay for the expenditures of trans-Atlantic expeditions and colonization.
Nevertheless if it had made it's way back to Europe by independent trade it would have fatally devalued treasuries and collapsed economies. It had to be secured before the continents were opened to trade. Cortez was not greedy, he was on a Mission.
Uhhhh, almost never.
The shit I am talking about, the root Cause of all misery and conflict, is our tropical repro rate. It's course CAN be predicted. It's mitigation CAN be Engineered.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
Shit* is predictable.
Uhhh, no.
*Shit can be anticipated.
Uhhh, sometimes.
It can be Controlled and the Results of it Predetermined.
Uhhhh, almost never.
When this is done, *shit* can be enormously, wildly Constructive.
And when it fails -- which happens more often than not -- *s*h*i*t* blows up in your face, and then all you got is a whole lot of nothing where your head used to be.
Joseph and pharoah ended up owning everything in Egypt
As opposed to previous Pharaohs who didn't own everything in Egypt...
Divide the people and set them against one another in Creative ways.
What, divide and conquer? Jews didn't invent that. It's as old as politics, as old as society. In all likelihood, it predates Homo Sapiens Sapiens.
Here, marry my daughter and I'll marry yours.
What, alliances? Yet another age-old staple of human experience. What's new?
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
Animals are nice symbols for Knowledge of the natural world yes?
Uhhh...heeheeee... if you say so.
Obviously it's a lot more complicated than you're thinking.
Naturally. In fact, it's SO complicated that it's completely indistinguishable from a world that is NOT controlled by any Magical Conspiracy of Leaders. Damn, are they good at disguising themselves and their actions!
it would have fatally devalued treasuries and collapsed economies
I too hate it when my bank holdings get devalued by swelling with precious metals.
Cortez wad not greedy, he was on a Mission.
No doubt. He was on a Mission from God. ((R) and (C) The Blues Brothers.)
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 09, 2011
What, alliances? Yet another age-old staple of human experience. What's new?
A tribe of Leaders, is what's new.
Uhhh...heeheeee... if you say so.
Aw you're drunk.
In fact, it's SO complicated that it's completely indistinguishable from a world that is NOT controlled by any Magical Conspiracy of Leaders
Like I said rummy, things are getting Better instead of worse in your crank-filled united states of crankdom.
I too hate it when my bank holdings get devalued by swelling with precious metals.
More gold in circulation = a decline in the value of gold, all other things being equal. It also endangers those in power by creating a supply of money out of their control. Incans can trade gold for gunpowder and cannon.
As opposed to previous Pharaohs who didn't own everything in Egypt...
Like I said you don't know the bible. People from far and wide came to trade their valuables for food. This is how Joseph reunited with his brothers who sold him into slavery.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 09, 2011
Animals are nice symbols for Knowledge of the natural world yes?

Uhhh...heeheeee... if you say so.
Well I suppose they could have used clods of mud in different colors but it wouldn't have been quite as poetic, wouldn't you agree PE?

PE? OOp passed out on the floor again. Wonder if there's anything in PEs wallet? 8P
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
Aw you're drunk.
No, just increasingly amused.
things are getting Better instead of worse
True. Your adroitness at attributing the responsible agencies, however, hasn't followed such a trajectory.

Basically, that very same argument can be used to demonstrate that God exists, that Prayer works, that Aliens are responsible for it all, that a new Jungian meta-consciousness is evolving and taking over, that actually it's all the Devil's work and that we are now more removed and isolated from our spiritual cores than ever before in history.

Or maybe you're right. Maybe it's because of a magical Clan of fluttering Fairies.

I mean, it couldn't possibly be due to humanity's rising mastery of its environment, concomitant with humanity's population explosion. No ******* way. Far more likely, a shadowy cabal of Magical Ninja Masters is responsible for it all.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
More gold in circulation = a decline in the value of gold
Who cares when you're the one collecting the taxes? More gold in circulation means more gold in your treasury. Then maybe you can start building golden toilets and bathtubs, instead of just reserving the metal for currency purposes. Who doesn't want to live in a Golden Palace?
People from far and wide came to trade their valuables for food.
An event (assuming it actually occurred -- which is highly debatable) clearly unprecedented in human history until that point in time.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 09, 2011
Well I suppose they could have used clods of mud in different colors but it wouldn't have been quite as poetic, wouldn't you agree PE?
True. After all, it's not as if they had scholars, sages, bards, mystics, or any other such carriers of knowledge. It's not as if they ever encountered clay tablets, papyrus, or parchment. Clearly, animals contain far more wisdom. Especially when paired male to female. That's some really kinky knowledge, to be sure -- but a tad redundant, considering it's basically the same process across all those species, wouldn't you say?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 10, 2011
assuming it actually occurred -- which is highly debatable
It didn't.
Clearly, animals contain far more wisdom.

Allegory
1.
a. The representation of abstract ideas or principles by characters, figures, or events in narrative, dramatic, or pictorial form.
b. A story, picture, or play employing such representation. John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress and Herman Melville's Moby Dick are allegories.

-You could be acting thick but I have my doubts.
No, just increasingly amused.
The bible uses allegory to convey a message. Otto points this out and PE is amused because PE thinks bible stories are literal?? You ARE a godder. You think Israel is blasphemy and the ark story is real. What next? Moby Dick was real too? Because there is a book about him?
More gold in circulation means more gold in your treasury.
At the time gold = money. The more money in circulation, the less it's worth. More money chasing goods = inflation.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 10, 2011
Who doesn't want to live in a Golden Palace?
Uh king Midas? You don't think that story was real too do you PE?
True. After all, it's not as if they had scholars, sages, bards, mystics, or any other such carriers of knowledge
Indeed. You believe that scientific knowledge developed by the likes of Aristarchus and pythagorus was lost during the middle ages, only to miraculously reappear in the Renaissance. I say it was safely kept by monks and Arabs until such time as the world was ready for it.

It wasn't safe for merchants and brigands to have the means of finding their way across the Atlantic and back, until the dangerous cultures over there could be destroyed. Mesoamericans had armies and cities larger than any in Europe, as well as an appreciation of science. Knowledge of Europe, of it's technology, and of how to get there was dangerous knowledge indeed.

And so it was sequestered for 1000 years. The library of Alexandria was purposefully burned.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 10, 2011
The bible uses allegory to convey a message.
That's great. But I thought you implied the bible actually invented the message.
You think Israel is blasphemy
Eh, no. But lots of Hasidic and Sephardic Jews sure do.
The more money in circulation, the less it's worth. More money chasing goods = inflation.
Inflation only hurts savers. It does not hurt spenders (in fact, it only helps them.) And it doesn't hurt the authorities either, because they collect tax (or tribute, or tithe -- pick your authority and your terminology) as a percentage of income or price of transaction, thereby guaranteeing themselves a constant slice of the overall real economy regardless of the value of the currency. It only hurts them if they're hoarding the wealth; if they're spending it they don't actually care.
I say it was safely kept by monks and Arabs
Hate to break it to you, but that's common knowledge.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (2) Sep 10, 2011
Mesoamericans had armies and cities larger than any in Europe
Didn't know what a horse was, and didn't even know how to make Bronze, for Teoyaomicqui's sake. A basic-model ancient Egyptian chariot would've decimated the front ranks and sent the rest running in terror.

Oh, and about that whole biowarfare angle. How quickly we forget our own lunatic pronouncements...
as well as an appreciation of science.
Oh yeah, regular academics they were. Other than some limited astronomy (which was really more like astrology), they didn't know jack from squat. And really, how could they: just keeping all their myriad gods and rituals straight must've taken up all the free time they had available.
The library of Alexandria was purposefully burned.
Yes, but you have the purpose figured all wrong. Ask the extra-crispy heretics, witches, pagans, and political undesirables -- they'll set you on the right path.
PinkElephant
5 / 5 (1) Sep 10, 2011
Allegory
1.
a. The representation of abstract ideas or principles by characters, figures, or events in narrative, dramatic, or pictorial form.
b. A story, picture, or play employing such representation. John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress and Herman Melville's Moby Dick are allegories.
Yes, but I don't think even Walt Disney could've conceived of animals as a metaphor for knowledge. THAT takes some kind of mystic juju mastery of truly transcendent proportions.

I bet you were just born seeing bears and lobsters and stuff when looking at a clear night sky, too. Except in reality they aren't bears or lobsters at all: they are Tauntauns and Targs.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 10, 2011
Didn't know what a horse was
And luckily werent able to buy them.
and didn't even know how to make Bronze
Yah they did:
http://www.precol.../axe.htm

-But luckily weren't able to learn of it's potential from rogue euros. Bronze cannon were effective weapons.
Oh, and about that whole biowarfare angle. How quickly we forget our own lunatic pronouncements...
And how little you know about war among so many other things.

Biowarfare agents have been used for ages. Plague was used by Sparta against Athens in the siege. It was used by Mongols in the Crimea. Smallpox was USED against amerinds by the Brits. Purposefully. Look it up.

Smallpox, plague, and other diseases were spread by intent against mesoamerinds. And yes this is conjecture. But given it's history of use in Eurasia it would be surprising if it wasn't used in the Americas. Which would explain it's rapid spread among isloated tribes and thorough effect.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 10, 2011
Yes, but I don't think even Walt Disney could've conceived of animals as a metaphor for knowledge. THAT takes some kind of mystic juju mastery of truly transcendent proportions.
Again, do you have any idea what you don't know?? Animal symbolism is extensive in the bible. Noahs dove and olive branch. Balaams ass. Christ the lamb. All the creatures in revelations. Satan the SERPENT. All symbols. All metaphors meant to convey a symbolic message. None real.
regular academics they were. Other than some limited astronomy (which was really more like astrology), they didn't know jack from squat.
Like I SAID, they had an appreciation of science and would have quickly adopted euro technologies, if they had had the chance. Luckily for the world they didn't.
you have the purpose figured all wrong... heretics, witches, pagans, and political undesirables -- they'll set you on the right path.
-It was burned by Nero. Witches were midwives teaching contraception/abortion. You're dumb.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 10, 2011
Correction. First burned by Caesar. But xians finished up:
"Paganism was made illegal by an edict of the Emperor Theodosius I in 391. The holdings of the Great Library (both at the Mouseion and at the Serapeum) were on the precincts of pagan temples."

-My point is that it was burned to keep dangerous knowledge out of circulation. Xian martial law would grip Europe for centuries in the same capacity as communism did in the USSR. It kept the people poor, ignorant, and immobile. It thoroughly destroyed obsolete cultures in the same way.

Pagans and heretics were indeed burnt. Xian martyrdom was a very efficient way of tailoring this new religion in Rome, reducing pops, and keeping the adventurous from wandering about. Venturing into the Atlantic was a grave heresy.
Hate to break it to you, but that's common knowledge.
Absolutely. We only disagree on why. I say that knowledge was dangerous in very real ways. You say it was dangerous because it angered god. Which makes more sense?
TheQuietMan
3 / 5 (4) Sep 10, 2011
Frank, how many people have to die by hit and run attacks before you think there is a problem? Last time they got lucky it cost use 3000 civilians, next time it could be more.

A sure sign of a weak argument is the name calling you indulge in. Not very smart either.

I do not support the War on Terror because it is an excuse to set liberty aside, maybe never to return, but the people who supported these attacks are mostly alive, and would like to be able to do it again. Very well, the war is now in their back yard, and likely to stay until the locals can stabilize their government enough to not allow them back. It may not succeed, but it is worth a shot. It is also important to remember the Taliban and Al Qaeda are not the majority, not even close.

So, do you have any real counters to the argument, or are you going to continue with wishful thinking and hope they go away? They started this war, we'll finish it.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 10, 2011
So... We can assume the biblical flood myth was allegorical because most bible stories are. It was adopted from the earlier Sumerian version which was obviously about overpopulation. But the bible depicts a Family saving the means to replenish the earth after a great deluge unavoidably ruins it. What could this mean?

The ancients knew all about the ruinous effects of agriculture-induced overpopulation. Zeus created the Trojan war to 'empty the earth', another allegory. Noah was the descendent of a great Egyptian priest/god and the progenitor of a Chosen People.

People had been husbanding animals for millennia. They knew a great deal about them. This was an integral part of their knowledge of the natural world and essential to survival. The ark story, in my opinion, was altered specifically to describe the Role of a Priesthood in preserving mankinds accumulated store of Knowledge about itself and the natural world, from irresistible forces which would have obliterated it otherwise.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 10, 2011
Here's something else PE apparently doesn't know:

"The monetarist explanation of inflation operates through the Quantity Theory of Money, MV = PT where M is Money Supply, V is Velocity of Circulation, P is Price level and T is Transactions or Output. As monetarists assume that V and T are determined, in the long run, by real variables, such as the productive capacity of the economy, there is a direct relationship between the growth of the money supply and inflation."

-Therefore, gold being money at the time, more gold = less that gold was worth. More:

"The Austrian School maintains that inflation is always and everywhere simply an increase of the money supply (i.e. units of currency or means of exchange), which in turn leads to a higher nominal price level, as the real value of each monetary unit is eroded, loses purchasing power and thus buys fewer assets and goods and services."

-So happy to educate you.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2 / 5 (4) Sep 10, 2011
More on western hemisphere biowarfare:

Jared Diamond relates that by the time euro settlers had reached the mississippi the advanced civilization there had collapsed. This was because of their earlier contact with euro military 'explorers':

"Diseases such as measles and smallpox caused so many fatalities, because the natives lacked immunity, that they undermined the social order of many chiefdoms."

-These were people who had destroyed early military posts and desotos expedition. ONLY the disease which these early expeditions could effectively and thoroughly defeat these people.

So we have another example of a Mechanism which YOUR cranks would have you believe was purely accidental, and yet was the MOST significant factor in conquest. Not only against Mississippians but throughout the americas and elsewhere, at various times, during the entire Campaign.

Not an ancillary factor. The MOST IMPORTANT factor. And why would euros take diseased warriors on long-range expeditions anyway??
kochevnik
3.7 / 5 (3) Sep 10, 2011
Support your assertions with data.
JANEWAY: Let me ask you something. If you were something other than a human being. If you were a small bird, a sparrow. What would your world be like?
DA VINCI: I should make my home in a tree, in the branch of an elm. I should hunt insects for food, straw for my nest and in the springtime I should sing for a companion.
JANEWAY: And you would know nothing of the politics of Florence, the cutting of marble or mathematics.
DA VINCI: Of course not.
JANEWAY: But why not?
DA VINCI: My mind would be too small.
JANEWAY: As a sparrow your mind would be too small. Even with the best of teachers?
DA VINCI: If Aristotle himself were to perch on my branch and lecture till he fell off from exhaustion, still the limits of my mind would prevent me from understanding.
JANEWAY: And as a man can you accept that there may be certain realities beyond the limits of your comprehension?
DA VINCI: I could not accept that. And I would be a fool.
ryggesogn2
2.6 / 5 (5) Sep 11, 2011
So koch'nik can't support his assertions. But that HAS been demonstrated, many times.
sherriffwoody
not rated yet Sep 11, 2011
I think a big point is it sucks that it takes war for humans to advance. The only time the human race advances and experiences economic growth, in general, is during, after or around war.
ryggesogn2
3 / 5 (4) Sep 11, 2011
Koch, in 1981 I attended the Nobel Conference at Gustavus Adolphus college.
I believe it was Eugene Wigner (http://www.nobelp...io.html) who said that if a researcher could not explain his research to a layperson, or even a 6th grade student, the researcher did not understand the research himself.
Koch is following in the footsteps of 'dear leader' Obama, making excuses.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 11, 2011
"NEW YORK Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani read a familiar Bible verse at the World Trade Center.

"Giuliani, who was mayor during the terrorist attack, chose Ecclesiastes 3:4 to read at the 10th anniversary ceremony.

"It's the one that begins, "To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven."

-The specific verse:
"4 a time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance," Ecc3:4

-Meaning that there is a Proper Time for these and every activity listed in this passage, a Description of why Empire has been so successful. These Things are all INEVITABLE.

But should we weep or laugh, mourn or dance? Depends wholly on which Side you're on. Irregardless, Empire determines When, Where, How and Why.

Read the whole thing:
http://www.bibleg...sion=NIV

"11 He has made EVERYTHING beautiful in its time."
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 11, 2011
"Giuliani also said:

"God bless every soul that we lost. And God guide us to our reunion in heaven. And God bless the United States of America.""

-Now does THIS make you want to laugh or cry? Again it depends wholly upon whichever Side it is you think you're on. You know, the one which is so obviously the only right and proper and decent one to be on? The one that all the GOOD people are on?

22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." -gen2

-Yeah we learned that whatever benefits our enemies is evil; whatever benefits us is good. 

One can perhaps understand the Power inherent in the Ability to determine for us which is which, and who is who.

God bless Rudy G. I'm sure he does. Rudy's a Player. Because PE, he quoted from the holy Instruction Manual on the new Sacred Day you see.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 11, 2011
"Death tolls spur pro-war stance, study finds"

-Well of course it does. Without 9/11 would we ever have wanted to invade Iraq and Afghanistan? Do you think the Germans spent all that time, effort, and expense of raining 5000 V1 and V2 rockets on Britain and Belgium, which killed only 5000 people, to DISCOURAGE Brits from fighting?

Hardly. It was to demonstrate just who the Enemy was and what he was capable of. It was to engage the proper emotions in the allies at the Proper Time.

Germany you see was the only thing standing between western Europe and Russian communism. It took much effort to persuade euros that Germans were the Enemy. They already feared Stalin.

This was why German subs wasted similar effort sinking US merchant vessels off the east coast. We were being invited to participate. US citizens were enraged when bodies started washing up on NJ beaches.

Wars are Planned, Scheduled, and the Results Predetermined. This is how Civilized People deal with the Inevitable.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 11, 2011
THEY are our Shepherds. WE are Their flock. More animal symbolism. Instead of trying to kill off Their animal competition They learned how to domesticate them to Their best advantage. Just like us.

How much clearer could it be PE?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 12, 2011
Hey PE

Animals As Knowledge

Animal form and function is of course the record of lifes successful interaction with all the environments in which it can be found. Studying animals tells us how life works. The People who wrote the bible were well aware of this.

"18 I also said to myself, "As for humans, God tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals. 19 Surely the fate of human beings is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; humans have no advantage over animals." ecc3

-Humans of the time not only knew a great deal about animals from hunting and battling them, but they also knew how to alter their forms and behaviors for their own benefit.

Learning about animals taught People a great deal about themselves, where they may have come from, why they behaved they way they did, and how they themselves could be altered to benefit society. This last notion was described in plato's Republic.
Cont
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 12, 2011
'...Aristotle traveled with Theophrastus to the island of Lesbos, where together they researched the botany and zoology of the island.'

-Because life is such an important source of KNOWLEDGE.

Aristotle went on to tutor many of the major players on both sides of the coming Alexandrian conquest of Persia and the consolidation of the known world.

He taught Alexander exactly what the people are how to deal with them:

"Aristotle encouraged Alexander toward eastern conquest... In one famous example, he counsels Alexander to be 'a leader to the Greeks and a despot to the barbarians, to look after the former as after friends and relatives, and to deal with the latter as with beasts or plants'.'

-As I am sure he counciled Artabazus, satrap and chief advisor to Darius the Persian king, in reciprocal fashion. He tutored these 2 together in Macedon.
Cont
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (5) Sep 12, 2011
-The people, as the true enemies of Leaders, are indeed beasts. They can be used to benefit Leaders, or they can be allowed free reign and so become a critical danger to Them, as are stampeding herds or the lion which watches Them patiently in the tall grass, looking for weakness, and attacking when IT is ready.

This KNOWLEDGE of the natural world and of the human species is essential to it's survival. It is our most valuable possession. It took an enormous amount of time and effort to accrue. And because of our tenuous existence in a violent universe, it is perhaps irreplaceable. AS ARE WE.

And so it must be protected above all else from the Forces which would threaten it, AT ALL COSTS. Anything less would be Suicide and a horrible Evil. This is why we find this Process described so succinctly throughout this one book for the Ages; the bible.