Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted April 20, 2013 Report Posted April 20, 2013 You cannot destroy an idea with force. Have you ever seen a bullfight? The bull has an idea.....what does the matador do? Who wins in the end? Every now and then a bull jumps into the crowd.......but the people came willingly....... You are correct.....embrace the idea......bring it to you.....the crowds come, and you end up the chosen hero......
Sabres Fan in NS Posted April 20, 2013 Report Posted April 20, 2013 I agree there are no winners. I don't agree with calling this a "tragedy" and saying that we are only a short time away from the next one. An earthquake or a tornado is a tragedy. This was an intentional act of mass murder, planned and executed by a destructive cancer of an ideology. That ideology is not going to stop trying to kill people unless it is stopped by force. The reason to catch him alive and interrogate him is to find out where he got his training, support, etc. and then destroy those resources. You cannot destroy an idea with force. I agree with the former LPF. A use of force would only serve to further entrench that idea, as misguided as it is, if, indeed, these two are believing that "their Islam" made them do this. I still think that may not be the reason.
X. Benedict Posted April 20, 2013 Report Posted April 20, 2013 Have you ever seen a bullfight? The bull has an idea.....what does the matador do? Who wins in the end? Every now and then a bull jumps into the crowd.......but the people came willingly....... You are correct.....embrace the idea......bring it to you.....the crowds come, and you end up the chosen hero...... Too many ellipsis to be Death in the Afternoon, but that was a fair go.
LastPommerFan Posted April 20, 2013 Report Posted April 20, 2013 Have you ever seen a bullfight? The bull has an idea.....what does the matador do? Who wins in the end? Every now and then a bull jumps into the crowd.......but the people came willingly....... You are correct.....embrace the idea......bring it to you.....the crowds come, and you end up the chosen hero...... Don't get me wrong, force can destroy force. And in cases it must. But the bull's idea was not destroyed at the end of that match. He is bled out of his force. What does the next bull in the ring do? I agree with the former LPF. GCOE or Glass will do fine, I know not this LPF you write of.
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted April 20, 2013 Report Posted April 20, 2013 Don't get me wrong, force can destroy force. And in cases it must. But the bull's idea was not destroyed at the end of that match. He is bled out of his force. What does the next bull in the ring do? I'm actually with you on this....your original thought. Maybe I should have used the car in the lake analogy.......sometimes you need the car to fill with water in order to equalize pressure before you can open the door and escape. It's scary for quite a while, but you need to embrace the danger in order to get you to your final goal.
nfreeman Posted April 20, 2013 Report Posted April 20, 2013 You cannot destroy an idea with force. Don't get me wrong, force can destroy force. And in cases it must. But the bull's idea was not destroyed at the end of that match. He is bled out of his force. What does the next bull in the ring do? The idea isn't destroyed, but the bull is, and the people who the bull would've harmed are safe, and a number of other young bulls see that the dead bull's glorification of death and destruction didn't get him anywhere but dead and they decide not to enter the ring. There will always be another bull willing to enter the ring. But if you keep killing the bulls there will be fewer of them.
LastPommerFan Posted April 20, 2013 Report Posted April 20, 2013 The idea isn't destroyed, but the bull is, and the people who the bull would've harmed are safe, and a number of other young bulls see that the dead bull's glorification of death and destruction didn't get him anywhere but dead and they decide not to enter the ring. There will always be another bull willing to enter the ring. But if you keep killing the bulls there will be fewer of them. The first two sentences are absolutely true. I fully agree with forceful action to mitigate the immediate threat. The italicized is also true, but you left out that some young bulls will become so angry at the site of their brothers' deaths, that they will gladly enter the ring, if only for the chance of goring the matador. The bold is true, but if you're not at least trying to convince some bulls that they can have a pretty great life being gainfully employed humping cows, your not trying hard enough. To your original statement, that the ideology will stop if met with force, this is incorrect. painfully incorrect. Use force to kill combatants. Use other means to limit their creation.
Sabres Fan in NS Posted April 20, 2013 Report Posted April 20, 2013 You all can cut out the bull ... ;) . Use the terminolgy you really want to. It won't bother me, if that has you at all worried. Carry on.
LastPommerFan Posted April 20, 2013 Report Posted April 20, 2013 You all can cut out the bull ... ;) . Use the terminolgy you really want to. It won't bother me, if that has you at all worried. Carry on. So you want us to group all of Islam into one monolithic group that won't be bothered? :w00t:
Sabres Fan in NS Posted April 20, 2013 Report Posted April 20, 2013 So you want us to group all of Islam into one monolithic group that won't be bothered? :w00t: :w00t: So far as I know, I'm the only one around here that would have a vested interest, so to speak. And, I don't care.
LastPommerFan Posted April 20, 2013 Report Posted April 20, 2013 :w00t: So far as I know, I'm the only one around here that would have a vested interest, so to speak. And, I don't care. Right, so for clarity, we're talking about Catholics in Belfast.
Sabres Fan in NS Posted April 20, 2013 Report Posted April 20, 2013 Right, so for clarity, we're talking about Catholics in Belfast. I'm cool with that too. I was raised Roman Catholic.
nfreeman Posted April 21, 2013 Report Posted April 21, 2013 The first two sentences are absolutely true. I fully agree with forceful action to mitigate the immediate threat. The italicized is also true, but you left out that some young bulls will become so angry at the site of their brothers' deaths, that they will gladly enter the ring, if only for the chance of goring the matador. The bold is true, but if you're not at least trying to convince some bulls that they can have a pretty great life being gainfully employed humping cows, your not trying hard enough. To your original statement, that the ideology will stop if met with force, this is incorrect. painfully incorrect. Use force to kill combatants. Use other means to limit their creation. You are right. The ideology itself will not be destroyed by force alone. I think the destructive effects of the ideology can and mostly (but not entirely) are stopped by force, and that force is a sin qua non of stopping those effects. I also think the number of new bulls who want to enter the ring in reaction to forcible measures is much smaller than the number who are dissuaded or prevented. I agree with most of the rest. Certainly I agree that when people have a better life as an option, most of them will choose it. You all can cut out the bull ... ;) . Use the terminolgy you really want to. It won't bother me, if that has you at all worried. Carry on. SFINS -- we haven't met but I think you're a good guy and one of my biggest concerns about posting on this topic is that I really don't want to offend you. I also don't want you to think I'm the kind of person who makes assumptions about the behaviors and beliefs of an individual based on those of number of different individuals in the same, very large, group. So I appreciate your saying this. If I do use metaphor it's not because I'm trying to be cute -- I just don't want to use words that could be interpreted as a slur on a group that I had no intention of slurring. Right, so for clarity, we're talking about Catholics in Belfast. Very nice.
LastPommerFan Posted April 21, 2013 Report Posted April 21, 2013 You are right. The ideology itself will not be destroyed by force alone. I think the destructive effects of the ideology can and mostly (but not entirely) are stopped by force, and that force is a sin qua non of stopping those effects. I also think the number of new bulls who want to enter the ring in reaction to forcible measures is much smaller than the number who are dissuaded or prevented. I agree with most of the rest. Certainly I agree that when people have a better life as an option, most of them will choose it. I am in full support of making good use of what basically amounts to our global hegemony. I don't have a problem with even the most extreme measure: destroying a nation to eliminate a threat. As long as we understand, to the extent possible, what the effects will be, are attacking the correct target, and commit sufficient resources. The war started in 2001 met the first two, but failed on the third. The war started in 2003 failed all three (although at the time, my second criteria appeared, arguably, to be met). Also, if this older brother was trained in Russia, I don't see force as a legitimate option.
Neo Posted April 21, 2013 Report Posted April 21, 2013 You all can cut out the bull ... ;) . Use the terminolgy you really want to. It won't bother me, if that has you at all worried. Carry on. I am glad you're here.
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted April 21, 2013 Report Posted April 21, 2013 :w00t: So far as I know, I'm the only one around here that would have a vested interest, so to speak. And, I don't care. That's good of you.....but I was actually speaking of the need to have events take place at times that aren't so good, but lead to the actual goal. Think...Patriot Act. To give a hockey spin.....how about Brad Richards and Kaleta......did Kaleta do something stupid and wrong?.....yes. Did Richards react in proportion to the offense? Probably not. What was the outcome? A powerplay....game won....suspension for the bad guy and people rallying against him.....and a whole lot of people keeping their eyes on Kaleta while favored sons are allowed to get away with 5x the offense. Sometimes bad+stupid deserves to be punished.....but there are also plenty out there that will take advantage of a situation to do their own bad in the name of good. And I really do appreciate your stance. I know we have talked before about my own experiences. I am at a point now in macro society where I don't think any issue and any debate will make much difference. Critical mass has been reached in corruption and finance to the point we are in deep doo-doo. That's why I say have fun, be kind, and smoke'm if you got'em
Sabres Fan in NS Posted April 21, 2013 Report Posted April 21, 2013 Thanks, guys. I appreciate the kind words. We really need to talk about these things, so long as we keep perspective. Thus far, all is good. Carry on as you all see fit. And Neo, right back at you. Thanks.
spndnchz Posted April 21, 2013 Author Report Posted April 21, 2013 Timeline. Good piece. http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/inside-the-investigation-of-the-boston-marathon-bombing/2013/04/20/19d8c322-a8ff-11e2-b029-8fb7e977ef71_story.html http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/04/20/bombsavior/QE8kIjEyj7XYF6Dje9QDsO/video.html
26CornerBlitz Posted April 21, 2013 Report Posted April 21, 2013 @USATODAYsports Keith Yandle wore this special jersey honoring the youngest victim of the Boston Marathon attack: http://usat.ly/11zUBgA
biodork Posted April 21, 2013 Report Posted April 21, 2013 @USATODAYsports Keith Yandle wore this special jersey honoring the youngest victim of the Boston Marathon attack: http://usat.ly/11zUBgA I saw that last night... super-classy (Yandle is from Boston). They said on the broadcast that both teams were going to autograph it after the game and auction it off. Heck of a souvenir for someone, and a great way to raise funds for the family.
wjag Posted April 21, 2013 Report Posted April 21, 2013 Heard on tv today that the youngest bomber was naturalized on 9/11.. Is that irony or what?
Eleven Posted April 21, 2013 Report Posted April 21, 2013 @USATODAYsports Keith Yandle wore this special jersey honoring the youngest victim of the Boston Marathon attack: http://usat.ly/11zUBgA I think that is a very nice gesture. I cannot imagine having that in my house as some sort of collectible, though.
inkman Posted April 21, 2013 Report Posted April 21, 2013 I'm not sure that word even is an obscenity anymore. Chairman of the FCC agrees with you, in this case. http://m.mlb.com/bos/news/article/2013042145399574/
Grumpy Posted April 21, 2013 Report Posted April 21, 2013 Heard on tv today that the youngest bomber was naturalized on 9/11.. Is that irony or what? Yea, that was news on Friday.
Weave Posted April 21, 2013 Report Posted April 21, 2013 Investigators may never get a chance to talk with suspect #2. The U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation still was unable to interview Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis told CBS television, and authorities may never be able to speak with him, Boston Mayor Thomas Menino said. The suspect was in Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center while U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz, the federal prosecutor for the Boston area, was working on filing criminal charges, Davis said. An announcement on charges could come later on Sunday, he said. Tsarnaev was shot in the throat and had tongue damage, said a source close to the investigation, speaking on condition of anonymity. "We don't know if we'll ever be able to question the individual," Menino told ABC's "This Week" program. He did not elaborate. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/21/us-usa-explosions-boston-shooting-idUSBRE93I0GQ20130421 It would be a shame if they never get a chance to interrogate this kid.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.