Is Germany Serious?

[morbiuswilters]

Seriously, though, boomzilla: the next time you post some political bullshit that you know will spawn a huge flamewar, I'm punching you in the dick.

Look, there are certain.. things.. I try to remain ignorant of. For example, all my joking and flaming aside, I tend to think of Europeans as basically good, albeit somewhat infantile in worldview. I like to imagine that most Europeans really can tell evil actions from ones undertaken in self-defense.

I like to believe that most Europeans aren't actually antisemites; that they can see reality and they know that Israel is basically good and they realize the Palestinians are the source of most conflict, but they maybe wrongfully believe that being stern with the Israelis will bring peace. Sure, the Middle East is full of anti-Jew bigots who want to see Israel destroyed, but Europeans aren't like that, right?

These are the lies I have to tell myself to put up with this fucking sick, insane world. So please, don't post stuff that damages my carefully-constructed house of comforting lies. I need those lies.

[lushr1]

@morbiuswilters said:

@Some Japanese Assholes said:

We can no longer direct the war with any hope of success. The only course left is for Japan's one hundred million people to sacrifice their lives by charging the enemy to make them lose the will to fight.

Yes, they would prefer every Japanese person die rather than surrender. Now, obviously, they would have surrendered at some point, but I think it would have been well, well, well past the number of casualties in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Here's the thing: this kind of decision is one made all the time in war. It was a calculation by the Americans to end the war as quickly and with as few casualties (particularly Allied casualties) as possible. I don't see how anybody in their right mind could have a problem with this. The people we bombed weren't innocents (like the Chinese, Koreans, Vietnamese, Filipinos, British and Americans who died at the hands of the Japanese, who actually were innocent)--they were drenched in the blood of their regime.

What makes this even worse is that strategy was horrid, militarily. The US would have done the B&B campaign - we weren't idiots, the Japanese Navy was nonexistent and cutting off fuel supplies would ground the air force, making blockade possible. Japan would have simply starved to death, with 20+ million dead and who knows how many unnourished.



@morbiuswilters said:

In fact, the only reason people do have a problem with it is because of raving, irrational anti-Americanism combined with the unique situation of the atomic bomb. If we had firebombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki and killed 500k people (like we did other Japanese cities) nobody would be saying a fucking thing about it.

I simply don't understand the ethos of nuclear weapons - the military thinks of them as really big (but lightweight) bombs with well known but slightly odd side effects, nothing more, nothing less.

Mutually assured destruction was the logical consequence, and it arguably kept the world stable on a large scale for the longest period ever. I'm fundamentally a realist - I don't think that we are particularly moral creatures at heart, and trying to be "nicer" just gets one trampled by those who aren't quite as friendly. The best place to be (IMHO) is one of morality with a huge stick that can't be effectively warded off. The last part is important because it demonstrates the ramifications of attacking the "nice" people - you get annihilated, and there's nothing you can do about it. The only option is to be able to annihilate as well, and the two versions of "nice" start butting heads, but in a careful, non-nuclear, manner.

EDIT: I'll stop now, I promise.

[morbiuswilters]

@lushr said:

In my humble opinion (non-humble opinions follow), soldiers are killed, not murdered, no matter whose side they were on.

Most of the US soldiers were just boys from farms and cities. They didn't ask for Japan and Germany to attack their country. And it's not as if Japan and Germany were up to any good; they weren't just out to give Poland and the Jews and the Chinese a great big hug and make their lives better. They were there to kill and conquer.

The Allied soldiers who died would have lived on had it not been for the Axis powers' lust for conquest and blood. So, yes, I consider them tragic victims. I consider the Axis soldiers agents of evil, and I consider the Allied soldiers as being killed without justification (which is the definition of murder, no?)

@lushr said:

This is very by-the-book for military planning, and the modus operandi of asymetrical warfare. Infrastructure can be a far easier target than the equipment it supports and creates, making it an obvious target for bombardment, and the same is true of blockades.

I know that, but we're talking about moral dimensions here. Is it morally justifiable to attack infrastructure? To me, it comes down to who is doing the attacking: in WWII, the actions of the Allies were defensive, to counter aggression initiated by Germany and Japan. If the Allies needed to attack Axis infrastructure to bring an end to the war, that was morally justifiable. The Axis civilians who were supply the war effort were an integral part of the war; they were by no means innocent.

However, when Germany or Japan attacked Allied infrastructure, I consider that immoral, because I do not consider the aims and intentions of the Axis powers to be moral. They were attempting conquest and subjugation, neither of which was a morally justifiable aim.

To me it seems pretty simple: if you are part of an organization which is doing something evil, and you are aiding and abetting that evil, then you are a target. It doesn't matter if you're the guy pulling the trigger or the guy making the gun. If you are part of an organization which is attempting to do something good--like fighting back against said evil bastards--then I consider targeting you, whether you are civilian or military, to be immoral.

Now, war is not always that clear-cut. In fact, most wars aren't. Take the recent Iraq war, for example. While the US executed the invasion and attack, the origins of the hostilities and violence go back a lot further. And while Hussein was certainly a bloodthirsty dictator who got what was coming to him, the US's justification for the war was always a bit.. sullied, let's say. So I don't think US attacks on Iraqi civilians would have been justified, except where the civilians were very directly and deliberately aiding Hussein's regime.

[morbiuswilters]

@lushr said:

I simply don't understand the ethos of nuclear weapons - the military thinks of them as really big (but lightweight) bombs with well known but slightly odd side effects, nothing more, nothing less.

Well, in the strategic context of the Cold War, a nuclear exchange would have ended human life. So I can see why people were, rightfully, terrified of them.

But in 1945, it wasn't the end of the world, since only the US had them and even then we only had a few very weak ones (compared to what would come later.) In fact, the horrors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki probably had the positive effect of scaring the shit out of a lot of people, the world over. The result being maybe more caution and hesitation when considering using nuclear weapons. For all we know, Hiroshima and Nagasaki scared us off the path to an extinction-level WWIII.

And, as you pointed out, MAD has resulted in the most peaceful period on human history. The idealist in me hates nuclear weapons (or weapons of any kind) but the pragmatist sees that the world was headed towards ever-larger conventional wars in the first half of the 20th century, and that the A-bomb helped put an end to that, by making a world war an unwinnable prospect.

I guess you could say having a nuclear gun aimed at everyones' heads has kept us honest. Personally, I wish humanity didn't need the threat of violence to act decently, but that's what society is based on: the careful, calculated application of violence. Nuclear weapons just bring it to a worldwide scale.

[They_call_me_trouble]

@morbiuswilters said:

@They call me trouble said:

morbiuswilters, courageous foe of hateful rhetoric!

Wow, you're such a whiny pussy that if exposed to a few insults you start bawling. The funny thing is, if the Palestinians were trying to kill you you'd probably have a different attitude. But, ah, it's so easy to judge from the safety of your antisemitic cocoon.

Who's crying? But I don't see the point in trying to maintain a meaningful debate against an someone who's behaving as a barely sentient ball of rage. You have basically been trolling this thread from the beginning.

@morbiuswilters said:

Israel has tried to make
peace. Repeatedly. They want peace. But the Palestinians will accept
nothing short of genocide and destruction of Israel. What are the
supposed to do? Just die? I know that's what you want, but what do rational, not-insane-with-Jew-hatred people think?

@morbiuswilters said:

Look, there are certain.. things.. I try to remain ignorant of.
For example, all my joking and flaming aside, I tend to think of
Europeans as basically good, albeit somewhat infantile in worldview. I
like to imagine that most Europeans really can tell evil actions from
ones undertaken in self-defense.

I like to believe that most Europeans aren't actually antisemites; that
they can see reality and they know that Israel is basically good and
they realize the Palestinians are the source of most conflict, but they
maybe wrongfully believe that being stern with the Israelis will bring
peace. Sure, the Middle East is full of anti-Jew bigots who want to see
Israel destroyed, but Europeans aren't like that, right?

These are the lies I have to tell myself to put up with this fucking
sick, insane world. So please, don't post stuff that damages my
carefully-constructed house of comforting lies. I need those
lies.

See, if you could just stop with the flaming, we could get to the actual point, namely that other people ("Europeans"; but really a lot of US diplomats and experts on the region as well) disagree with you, not because they are wicked, not because they are antisemitic, but because they don't agree with your premise that everything Israel has ever done is justified by Palestinian terrorism, or that Israel has done all it can for peace and the Palestinians have done nothing (and will never be satisfied except by the destruction of Israel). They feel Israel can and should do more. (Stopping expansion of the settlements would be a good start.) Nor do they believe that this amounts to telling the Israelis to just let the Palestinians kill them. But past efforts and offers don't justify giving up on the peace process and just relying on a military solution.

For example, Israel should negotiate with Hamas, without the precondition that Hamas recognize the right of Israel to exist and disavow its goal of destroying it. Sure, that's something they definitely need to do, but as part of the outcome of negotiations. Hamas is Israel's stated enemy, but it's your enemy you need to negotiate with.

Further, everyone realizes that it would be impossible to have all the Palestinian refugees actually return to the land that is now the State of Israel, but the right of return is an important symbolic issue to the Palestinians, so some sort of symbolic concession (maybe involving a small number of them, or granting it in principle while making it undesirable in practice, or offering compensation, or some deal involving third-party countries that gives the refugees better options somewhere else)

 

You can disagree with this analysis, and that's something we could discuss. Or you could go on calling anyone who thinks Israel shares responsibility for the conflict an antisemite, and then there's really no point continuing to talk with you.

 

[dhromed]

 I was asleep for 13 hours and suddenly 3 more pages.

[morbiuswilters]

@dhromed said:

I was asleep for 13 hours and suddenly 3 more pages.

Let me summarize:

Europe: We demand from Israel levels of restraint in the face of violence that we would never demand of ourselves! If somebody killed my family in a rocket attack, I would be sure to see the nuances of their position, and would give their political grievances all due consideration. I wouldn't demand that the killers be brought to justice, nor demand that they renounce violence before giving them what they want. Also, if what they wanted was to become citizens of my country, so they could vote to put me and my people to death, I am totally cool with that. The fact that Israel is not cool with that shows just how inflexible the Jews Juden Christ killers money changers Israelis are!

Morbs: Here is a 17,000 word (500 of which are not profanities or insults) essay on why I hate you and everything stand for. Also, I approve of targeting civilians in war if the civilians are providing material assistance to a regime which is committing atrocities. Also, here are some more profanities and insults.

[PJH]

@morbiuswilters said:

@GNU Pepper said:

I'm with this guy. It's time for us to do what we all know needs to be done about these people. I think it's high time we went ahead with a Final Solution to the Muslim Question in the western world, isn't that right morbs? An entire group of billions of people is exactly as you generalize them in a sentence: misguided, violent, somehow less worthy or worse than you and yours.

Yeah, because that's exactly what I said. Still, if you can't recognize Islam as a problem, you are a fucking dipshit.

What's wrong with the Religion of Peace? Oh, sorry, meant to link to this page.

[morbiuswilters]

@They call me trouble said:

See, if you could just stop with the flaming, we could get to the actual point, namely that other people ("Europeans"; but really a lot of US diplomats and experts on the region as well) disagree with you, not because they are wicked, not because they are antisemitic, but because they don't agree with your premise that everything Israel has ever done is justified by Palestinian terrorism, or that Israel has done all it can for peace and the Palestinians have done nothing (and will never be satisfied except by the destruction of Israel).

That's not what I said at all. Why the fuck can't you read? I said I lie to myself that Europeans aren't evil and stupid, because the truth (i.e., that they are evil and stupid) is too depressing. Fucking hell, man, learn to goddamn read.

@They call me trouble said:

For example, Israel should negotiate with Hamas, without the precondition that Hamas recognize the right of Israel to exist and disavow its goal of destroying it.

So let me see if I understand.. you don't see the value in debating me, because I am a "barely sentient ball of rage" (despite the fact I've made far more cogent points and provided far more facts than you.) However, Israel should negotiate with people are trying to destroy them. On the one hand, you've set some arbitrary precondition I didn't meet (apparently "don't argue better than me cuz my think not so good!!"), so you walk away. But if Israel sets a quite reasonable precondition ("please don't try to murder us all") then that's unreasonable. Gotcha. What was it your grandfathers did during WWII, again?

@They call me trouble said:

Further, everyone realizes that it would be impossible to have all the Palestinian refugees actually return to the land that is now the State of Israel...

No. It seems that only rational people (like me, and the Israelis) realize this. I have never heard a pro-terrorist (like you) say that the right of return isn't actually something they want. I mean, Hamas' own propaganda is basically "Yeah, right of return so we can murder all of the Jews!" (Of course, that's how all of Hamas' propaganda is.. "Fill potholes on Fig Street, so we can murder all of the Jews!").

@They call me trouble said:

...but the right of return is an important symbolic issue to the Palestinians...

So if I understand you.. it's perfectly reasonable for the Palestinians to commit acts of terrorism and refuse to bargain because Israel isn't agreeing to a symbolic issue. A symbolic issue. Israelis have been unreasonable because they want peace but aren't will to agree to a symbolic issue. See, I'm repeating it a few times because I want you see just how retarded you sound. Let me put it another way: I'm going to murder your entire family unless you proclaim me the "King of Tickle Parties". And that apparently makes me the reasonable one. And if you react like I'm a lunatic, clearly you are unreasonable.

@They call me trouble said:

maybe involving a small number of them

I love that you're just pulling shit out of your ass now. Because I remember when Hamas was all "Yeah, we'll totally stop being dickwads if you just let the first 500 Palestinians into Israel".

Do you think Israel or I are as stupid as you? "Hey, let some people who have a history of suicide bombing into the heart of your country. We promise not to renege on peace this time, like we've done every single fucking time before. We won't initiate violence and break the agreement, like we've done every fucking time before, we promise!"

@They call me trouble said:

granting it in principle while making it undesirable in practice

Does Hamas know you're negotiating incredibly poorly on their behalf? Because I'm pretty sure they'd behead you if they did. Maybe rape your wife, then stone her to death for being the kind of whore who gets raped. Does the Imam know you're offering up a "right of return" with the out that it can be so undesirable that nobody would actually take it? "Yes, Palestinians can return to Israel, but first they must drink this gallon of arsenic-laced pig fat. Bottoms up, boys!

I mean, you're just flat-out making shit up now, and you don't even have any goddamn shame over it. It's like "Demand I Just Made Up Number Fifty-Seven: Maybe the Palestinians would stop being terrorist douchebags if we gave them all a free Doritos Locos taco! Heh, I dunno where that one came from, I guess I'm kind of hungry.. Demand I Just Made Up Number Fifty-Eight: Free beard shampoos for life!"

@They call me trouble said:

or offering compensation

The Palestinians already get shitloads of money from, like, everyone. They don't want money, they want blood. How are you so unable to see this? I mean, there's seriously one explanation: you do not like Jews. That's not me arguing in bad faith, it's just a fact. If your neighbor kept shooting at your house and every time you called the cops all your other neighbors called you an asshole and said you were the problem, you'd be like "Wow, I live in Crazyworld, populated by crazy people. This makes no goddamn sense. And now my neighbor is demanding the right to live in my house? But then some other crazy neighbor says he might be willing to forgo ownership of my house if I give him a Doritos Locos taco? Or maybe a check for $7000? But I think that other neighbor might be full of shit.."

@They call me trouble said:

some deal involving third-party countries that gives the refugees better options somewhere else

So now Israel is supposed to find a third party country for Palestinians to move to? (Ignore for a moment you are full of shit, that the Palestinians have never said they would accept such an offer, and that they would sooner die than take it..) Which lucky country gets the unstable, prone-to-terrorism Muslims? This is so exciting! It's like the lottery, except if you win your car blows up!

Actually, I think we just hit on the solution! We can move the Palestinians into your neighborhood!! Now, according to my Internet Wizard Skillz, you live in Switzerland (Wait, didn't you guys just make mosques illegal? You do realize Israel allows mosques, right? I mean, your country is demonstrably more anti-Muslim than Israel..)

Anyway, yeah, let's move them into your neighborhood. I'm sure the loud-mouthed Swiss jackass who thinks the Israelis are being mean to the Palestinians is going to love having them live all around him! I mean, surely they won't continue the suicide bombings, even though it got them what they wanted the last time..

Oh well, even if they do suicide bomb your town, I know you're such a pro-diplomacy guy that you'll find some way to compromise with them!

Seriously, I want you to respond to that. I want to hear your complex rationalizations for why we shouldn't plop all the Palestinians down in your city. I'm sure it will be a real hoot.

[They_call_me_trouble]

@morbiuswilters said:

@They call me trouble said:

See, if you could just stop with the flaming, we could get to the actual point, namely that other people ("Europeans"; but really a lot of US diplomats and experts on the region as well) disagree with you, not because they are wicked, not because they are antisemitic, but because they don't agree with your premise that everything Israel has ever done is justified by Palestinian terrorism, or that Israel has done all it can for peace and the Palestinians have done nothing (and will never be satisfied except by the destruction of Israel).

That's not what I said at all. Why the fuck can't you read? I said I lie to myself that Europeans aren't evil and stupid, because the truth (i.e., that they are evil and stupid) is too depressing. Fucking hell, man, learn to goddamn read.

Poe's Law in action. I took your brief dip into something resembling rational discourse (though jokingly, as I thought, dismissed) to be an admission that your anti-European/anyone-who-disagrees-with-me invective was mostly shtick.

But no. Even though what you spew is parodically extremist, I guess you mean it seriously. You appear to be a terrible person, but since you don't matter, I don't see any point interacting further with you.

 

I'd just like to add at the end that the compromises I suggested are all things that have been proposed by US and European diplomats and experts. I note that you implicitly admit that they would be hard to swallow both for Israel and Hamas; that's the nature of compromise.

[eViLegion]

@morbiuswilters said:

@eViLegion said:

Obviously, the idea of the USA going back to 1000 is absurd. No less absurd than your conjecture.

No.. I.. Jesus Christ, I don't fucking get it. Do you people not have debate classes? Rhetoric? What the shit??

My suggestion that Europe return to pre-1000 borders was deliberately fucking absurd, to illustrate how hypocritical Europe is when it demands the same of Israel. Okay? Do you get that?

If tomorrow Germany invaded Poland and Poland repulsed the invasion and won a bit of a Germany's land, would you guys be screaming about how Poland shouldn't be trying to "steal" Germany's land? Would you be like "Hey, Poland: not cool. When Germany attacked you they had a reasonable expectation they should be allowed to take your land, but when you defeated their surprise attack you went too far by taking some of their land."

I mean, it's just glaring goddamn stupidity on the surface. It's like you all are so incapable of empathizing with a Jewish person that you can't even put yourself in Israel's position and see how it's stunning victory in 1967 over a much larger, better-armed surprise attack by several of its neighbors might actually have been just cause for taking a small bit of land from those same countries.

And what's more, Israel has been adamant for 20 years now that it wants to give the land to Palestinians and let them have their own country, if only they'd fucking stop with the terrorism and calls to eliminate Israel and all Jews. I mean, you literally have one side that's will to do everything you ask of them, and another side that is intent on genocide and wiping Israel of the map, and you still act like Israel is the bad guy here.

Please, tell me the last time Israel was the first to violate a mutually-agreed upon peace accord. Please show me when Israel started a conflict by firing rockets at civilians in Palestinian territories.

Then take a long, hard look at the Palestinians, who have been the first to violate every carefully-negotiated agreement. Look at the Palestinians, who have always made the first move to interrupt periods of relative peace by using suicide bombers and cowardly attacks on civilians.

Your argument boils down to "Israel, you have a moral obligation to stand there and do nothing when you are being attacked and your citizens are being murdered." And that's asinine. But I think I know why Europeans believe this: you guys are still really ashamed of colonialism and slavery and all that, so you see white people fighting brown people with superior fire power and your first instinct is simply to see the whole thing through the lens of your own twisted, racist past. Now it's the brown people who are the noble defenders and the white people who are the evil invaders--but that's not the fucking case here, and you're basically demanding that Jews suffer and die for your White Guilt, which is totally fair after the shit you did to them.

Needs more foaming spittle to form a beautiful arcing trajectory from your mouth.



Incidentally, my argument doesn't boil down to anything, and you'd know that if you'd have taken the time to read all of the absolutely nothing that I've had to say about it. I really couldn't give a fuck about Israel, Palestine, or anyone's stupid fucking religion to be honest. I really don't care about the content of your pathetic, angry, irrelevant, ideological debate, but I do object to when your arguments totally fucking suck, and as a consequence I choose to snipe them down from the sidelines.



But top marks for the hilariously over-extrapolated straw man you have constructed with Boomzilla.



All your debating classes didn't do you much good, did they?

[boomzilla]

@morbiuswilters said:

Seriously, though, boomzilla: the next time you post some political bullshit that you know will spawn a huge flamewar, I'm punching you in the dick.

Fair enough. I should stop paying attention to Europe (except for Nigel Farage...that guy makes fun speeches), but this tripped my WTF-o-meter.

[morbiuswilters]

@They call me trouble said:

I took your brief dip into something resembling rational discourse (though jokingly, as I thought, dismissed) to be an admission that your anti-European/anyone-who-disagrees-with-me invective was mostly shtick.

I don't even know how you could read that into what I said, but I've given up expecting anything not-dumb out of your mouth.

@They call me trouble said:

Even though what you spew is parodically extremist

I think you meant "paradoxically" but that doesn't make sense, either.

@They call me trouble said:

You appear to be a terrible person...

Yes, I am so terrible for thinking Israel has a right to exist. My God, I'd probably be one of those assholes who helped hide Jews from your beloved stormtrooopers..

@They call me trouble said:

I'd just like to add at the end that the compromises I suggested are all things that have been proposed by US and European diplomats and experts.

Yes, diplomats and experts tend to be stupid and useless and for spouting off retarded shit which just makes things worse. That's double true when it comes to Israel.

@They call me trouble said:

I note that you implicitly admit that they would be hard to swallow both for Israel and Hamas...

Other than the "actually let terrorists move into Israel" thing, I think Israel would go for anything else you suggested. The problem is, they aren't stupid. They're not going to give $10 billion to Hamas for peace, just to see Hamas turn around and buy a nuke. I know you'd love that, but clearly Israel needs some assurances beyond "Hamas promises not to be evil this time, swearsies."

I do find it amusing you completely ignored how I eviscerated your stupid "suggestions". I especially like that you ignored my solution of moving the Palestinians to your city. I even explicitly asked that you respond to it, because I knew you would ignore it otherwise, but you still did not respond.

I'm both amused and deeply satisfied that you couldn't even stomach tapping out a weak lie along the line of "Sure, we'd welcome all the Palestinians in Switzerland, land where mosques are banned." I mean, you couldn't even lie and pretend like you'd be okay with having crazy terrorists for neighbors. You're slipping, man.

[morbiuswilters]

@eViLegion said:

Incidentally, my argument doesn't boil down to anything, and you'd know that if you'd have taken the time to read all of the absolutely nothing that I've had to say about it. I really couldn't give a fuck about Israel, Palestine, or anyone's stupid fucking religion to be honest.

That's not the impression I got, but maybe I confused you with one of the other morons. You all look the same to me.

[morbiuswilters]

@boomzilla said:

@morbiuswilters said:

Seriously, though, boomzilla: the next time you post some political bullshit that you know will spawn a huge flamewar, I'm punching you in the dick.

Fair enough. I should stop paying attention to Europe (except for Nigel Farage...that guy makes fun speeches), but this tripped my WTF-o-meter.

I got, like, no work done today because of this shit. My first reaction when I saw your thread was to delete it and hide in the closet. That might have been the best course of action.

Oh, and since any Jew-bash wouldn't be complete without someone bringing up the Liberty, I'll do it preemptively: clearly Israel conspired to attack a much more powerful ally, risking their most important foreign relation, for no benefit whatsoever. And the whole thing was covered up at every level of the US government, because the Jews control our whole government. The White House, the Congress, and especially the Pentagon (or should I say The Six-Sided Star.. that's what we in the ZOG call it, you know.)

In fact, I've been writing this pro-Jew propaganda from one of their banks. I'm eating a bagel and sipping some Manischewitz. Woody Allen just came in to give me a pat on the back and thank me for covering up Israel's war crimes. He said when I'm done reinforcing the Hebrews' slimy grasp around the goys' necks, I can take a crack at Soon-Yi.

[eViLegion]

@boomzilla said:

Nigel Farage...that guy makes fun speeches

Yeah... that guy is hilarious.
Add up the sum total of personality in all the other European politicians, and you still haven't got half the character of Farage. Wouldn't vote for him though; he's fucking crazy!

[boomzilla]

@eViLegion said:

@boomzilla said:

Nigel Farage...that guy makes fun speeches

Yeah... that guy is hilarious.
Add up the sum total of personality in all the other European politicians, and you still haven't got half the character of Farage. Wouldn't vote for him though; he's fucking crazy!

I've only watched speeches of his in the EU Parliament or whatever, and he seems like the only sane one there. Since he's a Brit, though, probably too much pinko in him for me to ever vote for him, though.

[eViLegion]

@morbiuswilters said:

@They call me trouble said:

Even though what you spew is parodically extremist

I think you meant "paradoxically" but that doesn't make sense, either.

No he's quite right... to less angry people your whole style of argument appears extreme. You over-rely on reductio-ad-absurdum, and ad hominem attacks, and have a tendency to be massively hostile for apparently no reason. Regulars here generally understand that is just your thing and let it slide, but to the naive visitor you appear a parody of an extremist, because you're just so full on.



Hence, "parodically extremist".



Don't get me wrong... I find it all entertaining.

[TDWTF123]

@morbiuswilters said:

Now, according to my Internet Wizard Skillz, you live in Switzerland

And suddenly it all becomes clear. I thought the scumbag was much more anti-semitic and pro-Nazi than is normal in Europe, but that's par for the course with the Swiss.

[The_Assimilator]

@TDWTF123 said:

@morbiuswilters said:

Now, according to my Internet Wizard Skillz, you live in Switzerland

And suddenly it all becomes clear. I thought the scumbag was much more anti-semitic and pro-Nazi than is normal in Europe, but that's par for the course with the Swiss.

Ah, Switzerland. The country that claims to be neutral, yet in WWII denied Jews refugee status while simultaneously helping Nazi Germany funnel funds to purchase war materiel.

Hiding behind a veil of neutrality, while doing whatever is most politically/financially beneficial, isn't being neutral; it's cowardice.

[TDWTF123]

@The_Assimilator said:

Hiding behind a veil of neutrality, while doing whatever is most politically/financially beneficial, isn't being neutral; it's cowardice.

I think that's an unfair portrayal of the Swiss position. Managing to avoid being thought of as evil Nazi bastards whilst actively encouraging and aiding the Nazi war machine wasn't cowardice, it was just very clever. Reprehensible, but astonishingly devious marketing.

As a result of successfully ducking their share of the responsibility for the Holocaust, the Swiss have never had deNazification, and to this day the country remains the main bastion of racism and neo-Nazism in Western Europe. We're talking about a country that makes Kosher meat and ritual circumcision illegal, but allows assisted suicide. They're not all that subtle, but apparently subtle enough for the 'left'.

[Ronald]

@morbiuswilters said:

Now, according to my Internet Wizard Skillz, you live in Switzerland

STALKER ALERT (again)

[Ronald]

@TDWTF123 said:

@morbiuswilters said:

Now, according to my Internet Wizard Skillz, you live in Switzerland

And suddenly it all becomes clear. I thought the scumbag was much more anti-semitic and pro-Nazi than is normal in Europe, but that's par for the course with the Swiss.

Don't worry. Eric Stoltz will get them all with the help of mole guy, and they will all end up committing suicides.

[morbiuswilters]

@eViLegion said:

Hence, "parodically extremist".

D'oh. In my defense, I was drunk when I read that, and Chrome just highlights it as a misspelling (like it does about 90% of words with more than two syllables--what the shit, Google??), so I assumed he fucked up. My apologies.

@eViLegion said:

You over-rely on reductio-ad-absurdum

By "over-rely" I'm assuming you mean "use at all", since nobody here even seemed to comprehend when I was using it.

@eViLegion said:

and ad hominem attacks

I honestly don't think I do that. I call people names a lot, but that's not an ad hominem (Chrome also shows as misspelled), and I tend to do that alongside making actual points.

@eViLegion said:

and have a tendency to be massively hostile for apparently no reason.

I'm hostile to jackasses. When people start spouting off about guns without knowing what the fuck they're talking about, or say shit like "Israel is the real problem in the Middle East", yes, I get pissed. Why wouldn't I? If someone was like "Hey, I hate black people and think we should hang them from trees!" I would also be very hostile.

[morbiuswilters]

@TDWTF123 said:

We're talking about a country that makes Kosher meat and ritual circumcision illegal...

Wow. I mean, ritual circumcision I can buy. (Personally, I'm chopped, but I can see why people would think it's a bit barbaric. But uncircumcised dongs just look.. really gross.) But kosher meat is illegal?

God, I love living in the USA. There's a lot of awful shit, but religious discrimination like that would not fly here. (Nor would the Swiss' reprehensible ban on building mosques.)

[morbiuswilters]

@Ronald said:

@morbiuswilters said:

Now, according to my Internet Wizard Skillz, you live in Switzerland

STALKER ALERT (again)

Shut up, Frenchie.

[Guest]

@morbiuswilters said:

And, yes, German and Japanese citizens were supporting the war efforts of their countries. How was the lifeblood of the Third Reich and Imperial Japan not a legitimate target?

I'm curious. How far does that extend? Would the 9/11 attacks be considered legit targets? The World Trade Center created wealth which was taxed and those taxes were used for military units in the Middle East? What about the 7/7 bombings in London, since Britain was at war with Afghanistan and Iraq at that point? Was that a legit attack?

A dude firing a gun is a legit target sure. A dude bringing him ammo is probably a legit target. The guy making the ammo is possibly also. What about the guy who mines the metal for the gun? He's been working there 40 years, the iron he mined was used for kettles and shovels until some assholes he didn't vote for took power and declared war. Is he a target? What about the truck driver who brings the iron ore for processing? What about the petrol station he fuels at? What about the young girl receptionist who makes coffee for the guy who runs the warehouse that stores the ore before it's shipped to the arms factories?

I'm not trolling or attempting to bs you. I'm genuinely curious where/when the line should be drawn, if ever. To me, there's 3 categories: those fighting under arms (the soldiers) which are fine to attack. Those DIRECTLY aiding the soldiers, by bringing them food, fuel, ammo, reloading their guns, hiding them in buildings etc, basically "giving aid and comfort to the enemy". I'd say they're a grey area but don't have too much issue if someone claimed they should be attacked.

The poor schmoes living in cities, working in power plants, factories, mines, etc? Not so much...

[Guest]

@morbiuswilters said:

@TDWTF123 said:

We're talking about a country that makes Kosher meat and ritual circumcision illegal...

Wow. I mean, ritual circumcision I can buy. (Personally, I'm chopped, but I can see why people would think it's a bit barbaric. But uncircumcised dongs just look.. really gross.) But kosher meat is illegal?

God, I love living in the USA. There's a lot of awful shit, but religious discrimination like that would not fly here. (Nor would the Swiss' reprehensible ban on building mosques.)

It's about cruelty to animals I think, rather than religious oppression. Still seems a bit silly tho.

The circumcision is fair I think, it should be illegal to do irreparable changes to a young baby, it could be considered abuse if the kid really wanted a foreskin :P

[Ronald]

@morbiuswilters said:

@Ronald said:

@morbiuswilters said:

Now, according to my Internet Wizard Skillz, you live in Switzerland

STALKER ALERT (again)

Shut up, Frenchie.

INEFFECTIVE STALKER ALERT

[morbiuswilters]

@KillaCoda said:

I'm curious. How far does that extend? Would the 9/11 attacks be considered legit targets? The World Trade Center created wealth which was taxed and those taxes were used for military units in the Middle East? What about the 7/7 bombings in London, since Britain was at war with Afghanistan and Iraq at that point? Was that a legit attack?

No, because as I explained, the people carrying out those attacks weren't fighting a moral cause.

Is this really that fucking hard? You people have, like, the moral development of 5 year olds. Either it's always wrong to hit someone or it never is. Hey, maybe it's okay to hit someone if they're being dicks!

@KillaCoda said:

What about the guy who mines the metal for the gun? He's been working there 40 years, the iron he mined was used for kettles and shovels until some assholes he didn't vote for took power and declared war. Is he a target?

I guess it depends on the extent of the evil being perpetrated by his country. If he's mining metal to make the guns that are being used to exterminate innocent people, then yes, he's a legitimate target.

@KillaCoda said:

The poor schmoes living in cities, working in power plants, factories, mines, etc? Not so much...

Did you actually read what I wrote? I covered all of this. For one, if your country's goal is "I wanna take that land from those other guys", then attacking civilians or military is not legitimate. If you're the country being attacked, and your enemy is murder its own citizens in extermination camps, then any single person contributing to the enemy's effort is a target.

The guy mining the metal to make the barbed wire at Auschwitz? Fuck him. If he doesn't want to die, he shouldn't be contributing any economic activity to the Third Reich. He's not some wide-eyed innocent; if people like him had stopped doing their jobs the war would have ended immediately. It was only because of the "little Eichmanns" (to borrow a phrase I quite like) were doing their jobs so well that the Nazis were able to achieve any of their goals.

[morbiuswilters]

@KillaCoda said:

It's about cruelty to animals I think, rather than religious oppression.

That's extremely convenient. Of course, you could say slaughtering any animal just to eat it is cruel, but it's nice of the Swiss to draw the line where it only hurts Jews.

[drurowin]

 Hey guys, what's going on in this thread?

[Ronald]

@drurowin said:

 Hey guys, what's going on in this thread?

Solaris bashing (as of now)

[drurowin]

@Ronald said:

@drurowin said:

 Hey guys, what's going on in this thread?

Solaris bashing (as of now)

Generic comment about how Solaris is better than [Windows / Mac / Linux / HP-UX / VMS / Applesoft Basic / Solaris prior to version 9 / OS-2 Warp / MS-DOS / Plan 9 / CP-M / VXworks / Ubuntu / Tru64 / IRIX / NetWare] (circle one)

 

[morbiuswilters]

@drurowin said:

@Ronald said:

@drurowin said:

 Hey guys, what's going on in this thread?

Solaris bashing (as of now)

Generic comment about how Solaris is better than [Windows / Mac / Linux / HP-UX / VMS / Applesoft Basic / Solaris prior to version 9 / OS-2 Warp / MS-DOS / Plan 9 / CP-M / VXworks / Ubuntu / Tru64 / IRIX / NetWare] (circle one)

I've wondered for awhile what kind of person still uses Solaris. "British furry who doesn't lock his doors" isn't far off from what I expected.

[Vanders]

@morbiuswilters said:

@KillaCoda said:

It's about cruelty to animals I think, rather than religious oppression.

That's extremely convenient. Of course, you could say slaughtering any animal just to eat it is cruel, but it's nice of the Swiss to draw the line where it only hurts Jews.

It'll hurt Muslims too (Halal and Kosher slaughter are close enough to the same thing, after all). Unless the law specifically only says "Kosher", but I doubt it. I dunno, I don't speak Swiss.

[Guest]

@morbiuswilters said:

Since you are dumb, I will put it in big letters:

Israel has tried to make peace. Repeatedly. They want peace. But the Palestinians will accept nothing short of genocide and destruction of Israel. What are the supposed to do? Just die? I know that's what you want, but what do rational, not-insane-with-Jew-hatred people think?

Yeah, Goebbels would be proud of you - you're using of his propaganda techniques: "Propaganda to the home front must reach optimum anxiety levels"

Genius. "They want to kill us all, but don't fret: We can kill them all first!"

[boomzilla]

@Rhywden said:

@morbiuswilters said:

Since you are dumb, I will put it in big letters:

Israel has tried to make peace. Repeatedly. They want peace. But the Palestinians will accept nothing short of genocide and destruction of Israel. What are the supposed to do? Just die? I know that's what you want, but what do rational, not-insane-with-Jew-hatred people think?

Yeah, Goebbels would be proud of you - you're using of his propaganda techniques: "Propaganda to the home front must reach optimum anxiety levels"

Genius. "They want to kill us all, but don't fret: We can kill them all first!"

WTF? TDEMSYR. I'd ask why you want to display such ignorant opinions, but I guess that's par for the course around here.

[Ronald]

@boomzilla said:

@Rhywden said:

@morbiuswilters said:

Since you are dumb, I will put it in big letters:

Israel has tried to make peace. Repeatedly. They want peace. But the Palestinians will accept nothing short of genocide and destruction of Israel. What are the supposed to do? Just die? I know that's what you want, but what do rational, not-insane-with-Jew-hatred people think?

Yeah, Goebbels would be proud of you - you're using of his propaganda techniques: "Propaganda to the home front must reach optimum anxiety levels"

Genius. "They want to kill us all, but don't fret: We can kill them all first!"

WTF? TDEMSYR. I'd ask why you want to display such ignorant opinions, but I guess that's par for the course around here.

Why people try to argue with arafatists. It's like trying to argue with jehovah's witnesses. Worse since jehovah's witnesses won't bomb airplanes or embassies.

[FrostCat]

@morbiuswilters said:

the Pentagon (or should I say The Six-Sided Star.. that's what we in the ZOG call it, you know.)

Heh. The invisible sixth point is where all the Jooooos that control the media and the government and the banks must be.

[morbiuswilters]

@FrostCat said:

@morbiuswilters said:

the Pentagon (or should I say The Six-Sided Star.. that's what we in the ZOG call it, you know.)

Heh. The invisible sixth point is where all the Jooooos that control the media and the government and the banks must be.

You can see the Sixth Point all around you--buried deep in the bodies of the gentiles--if you look:

1. On the face of the innocent, suicide-vest-wearing Palestinian boy who was cut down in his prime by Israeli soldiers
2. When a couple of goys get foreclosed on because they borrowed $500k for a McMansion in southern Florida in 2006
3. In the worldwide spike in spot prices for Christian baby blood, because Israel is hoarding it all for the Final Battle
4. When Einstein Bros runs out of the challah bagels again, even though they know damn well it's my favorite

[morbiuswilters]

@Rhywden said:

Genius. "They want to kill us all, but don't fret: We can kill them all first!"

I didn't say "Kill them all first". I just said that it's ridiculous for people to criticize Israel for protecting itself when under attack by genocidal maniacs.

And they are under attack; the Palestinians are, like, shockingly forthright about their intentions to destroy Israel. I mean, it's not something that even requires reading-between-the-lines or nuance. They're just like "Yeah, the Holocaust is a lie made up by Jews. Also, we want to make a Second Holocaust that is significantly bigger than the First."

I find it interesting that you rephrased my opinions as "They want to kill us all", even though I'm not a part of the "us". From a practical standpoint, the Palestinians and Israel's Muslim neighbors could get their wish and destroy the country and everyone in it and the actual impact on me would be negligible. It would just offend, disgust and depress me from a humanitarian and moral standpoint. (And yes, I know, you would be happy. Please don't go on about that any more.. I find your existence too sad to contemplate.)

[drurowin]

@morbiuswilters said:

@Rhywden said:

Genius. "They want to kill us all, but don't fret: We can kill them all first!"

I didn't say "Kill them all first". I just said that it's ridiculous for people to criticize Israel for protecting itself when under attack by genocidal maniacs.

And they are under attack; the Palestinians are, like, shockingly forthright about their intentions to destroy Israel. I mean, it's not something that even requires reading-between-the-lines or nuance. They're just like "Yeah, the Holocaust is a lie made up by Jews. Also, we want to make a Second Holocaust that is significantly bigger than the First."

I find it interesting that you rephrased my opinions as "They want to kill us all", even though I'm not a part of the "us". From a practical standpoint, the Palestinians and Israel's Muslim neighbors could get their wish and destroy the country and everyone in it and the actual impact on me would be negligible. It would just offend, disgust and depress me from a humanitarian and moral standpoint. (And yes, I know, you would be happy. Please don't go on about that any more.. I find your existence too sad to contemplate.)

This is why the Jews would never be in favor of immersive 3D technology as shown on Star Trek.  They wouldn't want to go to holo-Costco.

[morbiuswilters]

@drurowin said:

This is why the Jews would never be in favor of immersive 3D technology as shown on Star Trek.  They wouldn't want to go to holo-Costco.

I had an idea awhile back for how to make a fortune if this whole "Jew-killing" trend continues. Holo Cost Cutters: Your source for discounted ethnic cleansing supplies! Try our new Zyklon C: run your Polish death camp for only pennies a day!