RE: Men of Honor

Create a
Free Account

As the Collar Turns:

Collarchat.com - BDSM Forum

Home Login Search

RE: Men of Honor

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Gorean Lifestyles >> RE: Men of Honor

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Men of Honor - 6/18/2011 1:30:03 AM

MasterSlaveLA

Posts: 3896
Status: offline

1) He was not "assassinated". Wikipedia defines "assassination" as:

An assassination is "to murder (a usually prominent person) by a sudden and/or secret attack, often for political reasons." An additional definition is "the act of deliberately killing someone, especially a public figure, usually for hire or for political reasons."

Thus, he was not "assassinated", he was killed -- and for good reason.

2) As to the "manner in which it was handled" -- i.e., that he was shot? It was handled appropriately. He, himself, both declared war on the U.S., and claimed responsibility for 9/11 -- and was killed.

3) As to the celebration? No... I do not view that as hypocritical. After the attack on 9/11, they celebrated over the murder of INNOCENT people who had done NOTHING. Conversely, Americans celebrated the killing of a leader who ordered the murder of INNOCENT people. Thus, the difference between celebrating "murder" vs. "justice", as he was as far from INNOCENT as could be. Quite simply, most people will cheer when those who kill INNOCENTS are killed for doing so -- and rightfully so.

4) As to whether he was armed/unarmed? Depends on what report you read... some mention he had weapons beside him, and other state he "reached" for said weapons. The Americans he had killed had neither weapons, or weapons to "reach" for. Again, fitting "justice".

5) As to allegedly "invading" Pakastan? They (i) have been given BILLIONS from the U.S., and (ii) were clearly sheltering him, all the claiming to be our "ally". They lied, and we earned the right (through the billions they received) to kill a known enemy of the U.S. that they were knowingly sheltering. Thus, logic dictates, given they were sheltering him, it would have been POINTLESS to "get their permission", as said "permission" would only result in his being warned, and the opportunity lost -- yet again.

6) As to the claim to "forget 9/11" while evaluating this? Utter nonsense!!! To set aside THE VERY CRIME HE COMMITTED would be akin not presenting 3,000 deaths at a murder trial as evidence. Again, nonsense... as 9/11 was the basis of both his crime, as well as his declaration of war.

7) As to any alleged "political motives" for OBL's death? Common sense precludes this as any type of defense for two reasons... (i) no long-term political benefit, and (ii) no immediate decision to kill OBL. Anyone who knows anything about politics knows Obama would not have gained any long-term "political" benefit -- and the polls support this. He got a short, couple week bump in the polls, and then the numbers returned to where they were prior to OBL's death. Additionally, if this was "politically" motivated, then Obama would not have waited some 16 hours before giving the green light -- they'd have wanted it done ASAP in order to report it ASAP. That's not what happened.

8) As to "where" our Government was a "decade" ago? Meaning what... if he'd have been killed 10 years ago, that that would have been okay, but some 10 years later, it's not?!! That doesn't even make sense?!! I'm not aware of a statute of limitations on killing scumbags who order the deaths of some 3,000 INNOCENT people.

He's dead... I'm glad he's dead... and personally, I'd have released the pictures of him. Why? Because contrary to the myth that it would have "enraged Muslims", it wouldn't have... it would have "enraged Muslim scum-bags", as any Muslim (or non-Muslim) who viewed OBL as a hero is not someone I'd give two shits about, as they're already "enraged". So better that it serve as a reminder/warning of what will happen to them as well. Rational, peace-minded Muslims/Muslim-Americans DESPISE terrorism, Al Quida, and OBL because they've brought nothing but EMBARRASSMENT to them and their view of Islam.

_____________________________

It's only kinky the first time!!!

(in reply to AlwaysLisa)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: Men of Honor - 6/18/2011 6:35:00 AM

Arturas

Posts: 1326
Joined: 2/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

Before I respond, first I must forget his name and forget the emotion because our American system of justice must work without emotion.

You have obviously not worked in the American system of justice.

Forget 9/11 and forget the news clips and the horror we all saw and felt and some of us suffered through on 9/11. Forget his name for a second and dwell on the facts alone.

Do you really think people are going to do this? It was a defining moment in the lives of people. Sorry, man people are emotional creatures who often follow instinct where decisions are made.

This is how the American justice system works and we have pledged allegiance to that Country and our commitment to "justice for all".

Again, not really how the system works... and not everyone on these forums
1. is American or
2. has pledged allegiance to their own country or
3. has made a commitment to justice for all.

I don't have to work in the American justice system to comment on what it is supposed to be like. My education here in America serves me well enough to express accurately how it is supposed to work. How it is supposed to work is represented symbolically by the bind folded woman with scales weighing the facts and she ignores perceptions, emotions and country of origin and religion and color and gender and names.

How it "really works" is not of interest to me in the context of this discussion. I'm discussing this in terms of how it is supposed to be. How it is supposed to be is "honorable" and if it is not that way then it is less than honorable. This is nothing more than clear thought such thinking leads me to the certainty this was the invasion of another country to make a hit or a kidnapping at best. Just because it was not a first world country we made the hit in and just because it is the most hated man in America does not make this something else, something more honorable that what it really is.

Honor is not defined by 'how it works'. It is defined by how it is supposed to be else how would we know what is honorable and what is not and how we do measure up to that baseline. And so I ask you, do you think America acts honorably?

_____________________________

When her will bends to yours she will blossom like a flower under the warm spring rain and bright radiant morning star. She will surrender her all to you and lay in your arms thankful to join her soul with yours, her Master.

(in reply to sunshinemiss)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: Men of Honor - 6/18/2011 10:01:17 AM

JstAnotherSub

Posts: 3313
Joined: 6/30/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

Before I respond, first I must forget his name and forget the emotion because our American system of justice must work without emotion.

You have obviously not worked in the American system of justice.

Forget 9/11 and forget the news clips and the horror we all saw and felt and some of us suffered through on 9/11. Forget his name for a second and dwell on the facts alone.

Do you really think people are going to do this? It was a defining moment in the lives of people. Sorry, man people are emotional creatures who often follow instinct where decisions are made.

This is how the American justice system works and we have pledged allegiance to that Country and our commitment to "justice for all".

Again, not really how the system works... and not everyone on these forums
1. is American or
2. has pledged allegiance to their own country or
3. has made a commitment to justice for all.

I don't have to work in the American justice system to comment on what it is supposed to be like. My education here in America serves me well enough to express accurately how it is supposed to work. How it is supposed to work is represented symbolically by the bind folded woman with scales weighing the facts and she ignores perceptions, emotions and country of origin and religion and color and gender and names.

How it "really works" is not of interest to me in the context of this discussion. I'm discussing this in terms of how it is supposed to be. How it is supposed to be is "honorable" and if it is not that way then it is less than honorable. This is nothing more than clear thought such thinking leads me to the certainty this was the invasion of another country to make a hit or a kidnapping at best. Just because it was not a first world country we made the hit in and just because it is the most hated man in America does not make this something else, something more honorable that what it really is.

Honor is not defined by 'how it works'. It is defined by how it is supposed to be else how would we know what is honorable and what is not and how we do measure up to that baseline. And so I ask you, do you think America acts honorably?

The fact is, he masterminded the 9-11 attacks. Therefore, justice was served.

_____________________________

“Your task is not to seek for love, but merely to seek and find all the barriers within yourself that you have built against it.”

rumi

(in reply to Arturas)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: Men of Honor - 6/18/2011 2:41:36 PM

xBullx

Posts: 3962
Joined: 10/8/2005
Status: offline

Hi Lisa,

I didn't answer this thread straight away, for reasons of my own. But I am compelled to reflect on this subject now.

Would Romans call Julius Caesar an evil murderer and/or terrorist? What about Pope Urban II? Or for that matter what about, Sun Tzu, George Washington, Abe Lincoln, Hitler, Stalin, Churchill, FDR, or any other "leader" of men that was obligated to incite or reply to another with some brand of violence. We all have a unique gift for validating our own efforts as virtuous as fast as we are able to condemn our opponent to the ranks of the immoral. I suspect there were those in merry ole England that seen Washington and his rebel band as murderous thieves and in fact terrorists. And what about the carpet bombing we executed over the landscape of western Europe. Is it possible that there were no innocent civilians compressed beneath the flame and rubble of those glorified efforts? You see it is easy to forgo the facts war when it is your purpose that is best served through the mayhem.

It’s rather simple to play armchair quarterback, shithouse historian or some other categorical self important, narrow-minded know-it-all perched behind the safety of a plastic keyboard; someone that has never faced the baptism of fire or had to make ugly decisions he believes to be justified or correct based on he and his, or her own people’s life perspective. I mean we can’t believe for one second that Bin Laden thought fucking with the “Great Satan” as he seen us, could be a walk in the park. This man and in fact this warrior thought he had a noble purpose based on his ideas, and his beliefs. You and I may not agree with his perspective but that doesn’t automatically ordain us as the more noble character, holding the more righteous position.

It’s important to remember, “To the victor go the spoils” and one of the chief spoils is the right to play editor. History is filled with Wretched Heroes and Noble Tyrants… Would the conquest of the Holy Land and the carnage it created be seen as worthwhile to those that called it their home?

I don’t believe that the death of any man or woman should be met with celebration; death is the end, a last breath, some family lost, some love to wane, some hope forgone, some purpose finished, some equal met. But never cherish a death that you would not want to equally sacrifice with someone endeared to you. The death of Bin Laden was for us a battle won, but only a battle and if we fail to gather reason and the cause for his existence he will be but only the first of many more battles to follow.

When it comes to his death I guess I’ll some this up in an old cliché, “When you score a touchdown, act like you’ve actually been there before”. All the civilian celebration and pandemonium in the streets was purely emotional nonsense. And to align our soldiers and their response with frivolous merriment is ridiculous, our warriors (those that fight our battles) were celebrating a victory, not a death; a battle long waged and in the end they found no solace in his death, no conclusion to this struggle, no revenge for a nightmare. It was not a final chapter to some great saga, but only a successful outcome to this verse in the maintenance of our splendid republic.

Their intent was to issue a warning. If you have a dispute with us find a better way to impress your point, for this is our house and it is a house we are able too and will, capably defend.

I’m not a fan of Bin Laden, the fact is I don’t know that I am yet able to construct a credible opinion of the man with the minimal and prejudicial information about him that I am beneficiary of, hence I refuse to allow my emotions to dictate the entirety of response. But the man was a warrior, granted a warrior’s death, and for that, I, a fellow warrior can understand. Additionally I hope that his brethren are able to see the honor in our warriors as they saved him from the certain indignation and senseless humiliation that some political advantage would have wrought upon him. Just because his methods didn’t meet with our absolute approval doesn’t mean we should reduce our efforts to that of spoiled and selfish children.

So to him, good riddance …… and God Speed.

With that I leave you with one quote: “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. Sun Tzu.”

< Message edited by xBullx -- 6/18/2011 2:43:24 PM >

_____________________________

Live well,

Bull

I'm not an asshole; I'm simply resolute...

"A Republic, If You Can Keep It."

Caution: My humor is a bit skewed.

(in reply to AlwaysLisa)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: Men of Honor - 6/24/2011 4:02:40 PM

Aswad

Posts: 6914
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline

Tal Bull,

It is indeed very tempting to tout one's own righteousness. Glad to see some being careful about that.

My perspective is from the sidelines, for a few simple reasons, such as:

1. My country was not directly attacked, but NATO makes us allies, so I support our own involvement in this region.
2. My country profits directly from the three wars we are involved in. Indeed, our GDP was doubled by these wars.
3. My country has a history that met the definition of terrorism under international laws we supported at the time.
4. My country has most of its mobile assets, and the majority of its permanent troops, in the region.

I agree with most of what you wrote, and it might come as a surprise to some that I am not miffed about Osama being dead, per se, except for the caveats you mentioned (i.e. that death is not to be cherished or celebrated, regardless of whose it is). Nor do I regard those troops poorly for having carried out those orders. I will say they could have done a cleaner job, but I assume that is a fault of politcs and management, not of the troops themselves, just as I assume the problems with the public statements were political and administrative in nature. We suffer similar problems ourselves, and the men and women in uniform pay the price all too often, both physically, mentally and socially.

From the media coverage here, Osama was shot in the back, unarmed, with his family witnesses to the event.

This strikes me as more likely to steel and incite than to demoralize. From what our troops say about their interaction with the natives in the region, and from what both the combat units and the ISAF units report (also including the Danish units), the units which originate the attacks are brave men on the balance. Balls of steel, some of them. The death of a figurehead will create a martyr, and strengthen their resolve. Further, the family was left with a country whose military and intelligence are divided between one side that supports the U.S. in their pursuit, and one side that demonstrably supported Osama, and not just by sheltering him. In effect, they now have another strong, incensed figurehead, if they want. Either of them will do. And they'll feel the righteous justification that only seeing one side of things can impart when shit hits the fan right next to you. Just like the people in NYC who lost loved ones through no immediate fault of their own. There is now more than one, and they can rally the enemy far more effectively than ever before, and appeal to more things, playing on more strings, as it were. In effect, that can mean that we're going to see harder action, with broader support. That the thing weakened the U.S. allies in the country, and strengthened the U.S. enemies in the country, sets us back within the whole region. Not a good overall picture.

In short, this will cost us people, and it will cost you people, and it may cost all of us peace.

So, who does it benefit?

The same people who benefit from the recent political developments in the country: the rich lords of media and industry, who have clearly demonstrated that they don't give a shit about the common man. Sad thing that Obama ignores it, too, as your country won't get another shot at this vital phase. Nero plays the harp, the indignant noblesse of France has the mob up in arms, and Rome burns. That can't really be considered a good situation, and a strong president with Obama's other qualities could have solved the problem, but Obama himself is too meek, and too distanced from the need to keep the population reassured and informed about the real content of his reforms. He gets to learn the same lesson that never seems to get learned on these boards, about the choices offered someone who is misunderstood.

Incidentally, sorry that it has taken me this long to read up on the subjects in our earlier conversation.

I guess I've now sort of replied to parts of it. If you're still interested, I would love to continue that conversation.

"To Valhalla!"

< Message edited by Aswad -- 6/24/2011 4:07:57 PM >

_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.

(in reply to xBullx)

Profile

Post #: 25