User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 6:37:00 AM EDT
[#1]
I can see that, not only by this topic, but by what I see & hear in the media at large, that this is going to turn out like VietNam - only worse. We will loose even more of our good soldiers this time, all because our soldiers won't be allowed to go after "innocents" in the Mid East. Those "Innocents" that they won't be allowed to go after will turn out to have been "innocent" only because they hadn't done anything [i]yet[/i]. Those innocent people's first act will be killing our people.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 6:44:08 AM EDT
[#2]
This thread keeps re-emerging with new twists and turns, so I have improvised the following boilerplate response to them, as follows:
re: unprovoked attacks vs. justifiable acts of war Our Federal gov'ts foreign meddling\g has just as great a potential to anger those of foreign nations as our Federal gov'ts domestic meddling has the potential to anger us. Loss of freedoms caused by our Federal gov't is not really any different based on the locale of the person losing their freedoms. The difference?? We (Ar15.com'ers) happen to believe that there is NO justification for killing innocents in order to get our gov'ts attention. These foreign powers do not. Oh, one other difference - while I share the opinion that America is STILL the greatest nation the world has ever known, some of us are completely unwilling to even consider the possibility that our gov't may be doing something wrong re: its foreign policy. [b]Which is odd, given our general consensus that our own gov't is QUITE capable of evil in removing OUR freedoms thru its domestic policy.[/b] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 6:59:07 AM EDT
[#3]
As far as all Arabs supporting the attack, this is simply bullshit. Why is anyone surprised that people in Beirut support it? I just spoke to a Saudi friend of mine yesterday morning who I hadn't seen since May. He's lived in the United States for years and plans to work here. He sure as hell wasn't glad this disaster occurred.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 7:17:30 AM EDT
[#4]
Quoted: As far as all Arabs supporting the attack, this is simply bullshit. Why is anyone surprised that people in Beirut support it? I just spoke to a Saudi friend of mine yesterday morning who I hadn't seen since May. He's lived in the United States for years and plans to work here. He sure as hell wasn't glad this disaster occurred. Many people living/working here wouldn't be. Even if they did support it they most likely would keep their mouths shut. Heck, even the terrorist group is smart enough to not claim responsibility. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 7:18:47 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted: We will loose even more of our good soldiers this time, all because our soldiers won't be allowed to go after "innocents" in the Mid East. Those "Innocents" that they won't be allowed to go after will turn out to have been "innocent" only because they hadn't done anything [i]yet[/i]. Those innocent people's first act will be killing our people. Our soldiers are regular Americans doing more than more than their share in protecting our rights and our way of life. They are [b]not [/b]blood thirsty people eager to kill non combatants because they might someday pick up arms against us. That is the price we pay for being better men than our enemies.If we killed those who might someday fight us,how would you differentiate us from the terrorists? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 7:27:53 AM EDT
[#6]
Ed,
Is LOSING really the price we [i]should[/i] pay? These guys that just killed over 5,000 US Citizens hadn't done anything that we can prove before that. Are you saying that we should endure more WTCs? I'm sorry, I find your pacifistic ideas to be plain sick. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 7:38:35 AM EDT
[#7]
Garmentless -
I think you are mis-reading Ed's comments. I don't see any pacifism in them. Just an unwillingness to kill people SIMPLY because of where they live. And I doubt Ed is saying USGI's should risk their lives unnecessarily - i.e. ANY hostile acts will bring U.S. retaliation. But we do NOT go killing non-combatabts. That is what makes us the USA - the greatest nation the world has ever known. And YES, that monentary hesitation MAY cost us a few lives. It is the price of doing what is RIGHT. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 7:41:25 AM EDT
[#8]
Whatever we do, we must wage a [b]just war![/b]
Nothing less than that should be expected or condoned in this Country! And we are [u]not[/u] killing for God, thank you. He can take care of whomsoever He desires without our puny assistance. Eric The('RighteousnessExaltethANation!')Hun[>]:)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 7:46:57 AM EDT
[#9]
Is garandman saying that the attacks were justified?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 7:51:35 AM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: Eric The('RighteousnessExaltethANation!')Hun[>]:)] Yessirrreee, Eric. They fight like animals, violating God's principles. And they live in a hell hole. That verse finishes by saying "Sin is a reproach to ANY people." I think it would not be too presumptuous to say God has "reproached" the Arab nations for how they have treated Him, and violated His commands. If we want God's curse on us, all we need do is start playing the game like they do. NO THANK YOU. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 7:53:32 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Ed, Is LOSING really the price we [i]should[/i] pay? These guys that just killed over 5,000 US Citizens hadn't done anything that we can prove before that. Are you saying that we should endure more WTCs? Are you suggesting that we should have killed them without reason,just because someday they might do what they did? Then why stop there? Kill all the ex-military who disapproved the Federal Gov's handling of WACO. Do you agree with the killing done at Ruby Ridge because the Weavers might someday have done something against the Feds? Should all gun owners be killed to prevent school massacres? Prophylactic cleansing? Man think before you type! I'm sorry, I find your pacifistic ideas to be plain sick. There is a BIG difference between being a pacifist and suggesting fairness and justice on a battlefield. My USA does not condone the killing of people because of their potential for becoming criminals. My USA says everyone is innocent until proven quilty. My USA has always conducted its military actions with honor and focus.Attrocities have always been committed in war.....but it has never been our policy. Maybe I live in a different USA than you,but I like the one I described much better than the one you are suggesting. Edited to add: I am for attacking and obliterating each and everyone of the terrorists who are waging war against our country and our allies. [b]NO MORE and NO LESS [/b] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 7:57:01 AM EDT
[#12]
Quoted: Is garandman saying that the attacks were justified? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 7:57:58 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: Is garandman saying that the attacks were justified? Please see... Quoted: We (Ar15.com'ers) happen to believe that there is NO justification for killing innocents in order to get our gov'ts attention. However, when a nation plays dirty in other nations politics, they can expect SOME reprisal. But the killing of innocents is NEVER justified. EVER. Let me ask you a question- Say we were at war with China, and you found out that the USSR was selling China missiles that just levelled your entire neighborhood, killing your family and many of your friends. Then you learned that some wild eyed US citizen crashed a jet into the Kremlin, would you mourn the senseless act of violence??? [rolleyes] And NONE of this changes our JUST response to these acts - that of VAPORIZING those responsible for these terrible and sinful acts against innocent US citizens. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 8:10:58 AM EDT
[#14]
garandman:
Then perhaps you ought to change the title of your little post: "unprovoked attacks vs. justifiable acts of war". I believe you are saying that we provoked these terrorists, so you must be describing the attack as a "justifiable acts of war." I do not think that is your intention, so maybe you ought to change the header. So you are saying their ends are justified (removal of tyranical US influence) but only the means were unjustified? And as far as the killing of innocents NEVER being justified, it just depends on who you consider innocent. The people who did this would probably say that all US citizens are fair game because they elect the government that "provokes" Muslims. Its kind of like we had no problem incinerating hundreds of thousands of "innocents" in Dresden and Hiroshima basically as punishment for their government's actions. There were no strategic targets of importance in either city. And certainly whatever precise targets there were could have been targeted with precision, rather than with napalm and nukes directed at residential areas. We argued then that people bear some resonsibility for their government's actions. And face it, we are going to have to be involved in the Middle East as long as we need the oil. Solve the energy problem and we can leave them alone. But you have to solve the energy problem first. And realize that many of them will still want to kill us anyway, just because we are so different than them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 8:18:10 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: I dont beleave in guilt by association. I do beleave in guilt by [i]acclimation[/i] Those who publicly demonstrated their joy at these attacks were identifying themselves in league with the killers. They WANTED to be seen, they would not have done their celebrating in the streets otherwise. The educated Mulsims living in the West, like Matrix, have got to understand this. There were Moslims on the planes, there were Moslims in the buildngs that were hit. In the eyes of the killers they were NOT Moslims because they were living and working amongst the enemy. In the eyes of those who cheered on the streets in happiness, they were now part of the OTHER, and their lives weren't even worth consideration. All because you were living in peace, if not harmony, with non Muslims and had worked to make a living for yourself and were not living in poverty like them. A poverty that exists because their intolerance for other cultures keeps them from working with the Western world, which is where the money and markets are. As long as a sizeable portion of the Muslim world, and especally the Arab muslim world, sees secularization on the Turkish pattern as betraying Islam there can be no peace. Those people who cheered in Beruit were no more innocent than those Germans who gathered around Nazi party rallys and cheered for Hitler. They aren't guilty because they were ethnically German. They arent guilty caused they cheared. They voted, they gave money to him, they gave consent to his operations. The only Germans who were guiltless were those Hitler condemmned to the camps and silenced. I do understand it & have already stated so. "Either you are with America or you are with the terrorists." GWB, Sept. 20, 2001. Address to the Nation. I have stated several times that any sympathizers with the terrorists in or outside this nation must be dealt with. I have already stated that they hate us not because of our policies but because of our way of life...they hate us because our lives are better, our system is better, our justice is better, because our women are considered equals, because we can obtain education wherever & whenever we wish, etc. They don't just hate White, Anglo Saxon Americans...they hate Americans...period, be they white, black, brown, yellow, green, purple, etc. I'd like to see them jump for joy in the USA...they wouldn't last very long. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 8:31:28 AM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: Then you learned that some wild eyed US citizen crashed a jet into the Kremlin, would you mourn the senseless act of violence??? Would you feel better about it if it was an F-16 on a suicide mision as an act of war by the US? The Kremlin after all would be considered a legitimate military target. Does it really make all that much difference whether the pilot was wearing a uniform or not? Your analogy is not a very good one, because I think we were discussing the killing of "innocent" civilians, not a legitimate military target. But this raises an interesting issue. Was the Pentagon a legitimate target? After all, you are saying that we provoked the terrorists. They have reason to commit acts of war against us. While killing innocents is bad, I guess killing people who are not innocent is OK. So is flying a plane into the Pentagon and killing all of those uniformed personnel is OK? Are they "innocent" too? Who in America is not innocent that the terrorists could target? While the terrorists did kill all of the civilians on the airliner, they terrorists would probably just say they are collateral damage. These kinds of arguments lead you nowhere. There are always "innocents" killed; it is the nature of war. I think it is a mistake to run around saying that the means these people used is wrong, but their ends may have been justified. [b]The ends always justifies the means.[/b] We did nothing to these people to deserve this. And let me repeat, some of them would still want to kill us even if we left the Middle East entirely. They will never leave us alone, because the mere existance of our civilization is a threat to their pan-Islamic fantasyland. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 8:35:15 AM EDT
[#17]
Quoted: garandman: Then perhaps you ought to change the title of your little post: "unprovoked attacks vs. justifiable acts of war". I believe you are saying that we provoked these terrorists, so you must be describing the attack as a "justifiable acts of war." I do not think that is your intention, so maybe you ought to change the header. You are thinking TOO MUCH. I am merely addressing those two concepts, not amking any overarching statements about them. So you are saying their ends are justified (removal of tyranical US influence) but only the means were unjustified? I'm saying that Arab nations have known they are at war with us for years. And, despite the fact that we are supplying arms to their enemies, us dumb Americans just figured out we are at war with the Arabs about a week ago. We have been committing acts of war against them for twenty years by supplying arms to their enemies.. Just as we funded the Arab war machines, and committed acts of war against the Jews, for the 20 years before that. We CREATED BOTH Saddam and Usama. Essentially, we, as a nation, have stuck our noses into a Mike Tyson / Rocky Marciano fight. And we just received a black eye for our troubles. And then we act all wounded and surprised. And as far as the killing of innocents NEVER being justified, it just depends on who you consider innocent. The people who did this would probably say that all US citizens are fair game because they elect the government that "provokes" Muslims. Its kind of like we had no problem incinerating hundreds of thousands of "innocents" in Dresden and Hiroshima basically as punishment for their government's actions. My definiiton of innocent is those that have taken no hostile action toward the USA. Hiroshima is another whole discussion. Both the Japanese and AMericans agree that the A-bomb saved hundreds of thousands of lives. And face it, we are going to have to be involved in the Middle East as long as we need the oil. Solve the energy problem and we can leave them alone. But you have to solve the energy problem first. I am told we have enuf oil in Alaska to make us energy independent for 50 years. If you can get a copy of the book "TRhe Energy Non-Crisis" - READ IT. It makes me thing our gov't is manufacturing this whole "energy crisis" for teh SOLE purpose of keeping us involved in teh Middle East, under the guise of "We need the oil." Don't knock the theory - a gov't that can sacrifice 59,000 of its own for no real reason is capable of about ANYTHING. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 8:36:15 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted: There are a lot of people here who are under the misapprehension that only a European mind can generate racism. This is bull shit. [b]AMEN[/b] brother! [beer] For the record, I was born in NYC but both my parents came from Cuba. I guess I don't conform too well to the profile of a stereotypical minoroty, and I'm DAMN proud of it! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 8:38:02 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: Oh, one other difference - while I share the opinion that America is STILL the greatest nation the world has ever known, some of us are completely unwilling to even consider the possibility that our gov't may be doing something wrong re: its foreign policy. [b]Which is odd, given our general consensus that our own gov't is QUITE capable of evil in removing OUR freedoms thru its domestic policy.[/b] VERY true... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 8:42:25 AM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: ........but both my parents came from Cuba. [size=4][red]Gusanos???[/red][/size=4][:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 8:49:11 AM EDT
[#21]
While I can complete understand the outrage of the people at what has happened we should try as true humans not to blame a whole for a very small part. It's like saying all Christians are crazy becasue of the abortionist bombers.
Remember we can have this forum of statements and rebuttals because WE ARE IN THE USA and not some totalitarian piss hold of a country somewhere else so lets not lose our heads towards one another but focus this enrgy on the terrorists a la the CLAYMORE MINE " THIS SIDE OUT TOWARDS ENEMY" Specwar |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 8:50:55 AM EDT
[#22]
The term r.h. (edited by erick since thats not allowed here) is often used to refer to people who are not wearing “stupid looking hats”. I take that to mean that you are not referring to the hat but to the dress of some people of a similar racial or societal group to the intended target. not by me. That r.h. word didn't really take much cleverness to come up, I'm sure I could easily figure out a way to make fun of their smelly-ass robes or vestements or "habits" sp? or any other type of pajamas (who am I talking about here? huh? not just muslims, get with the program) I will gladly oblige in ridiculing ALL holy people who dress strange outside their homes or churches. No one will be left out. You want to wear a t-shirt or necklace with a crescent-moon or Star of David Christ on the cross be my fucking guest, I dont care. But if you want to dress up like a damned ninja here in the states as much as it is your right you can EXPECT to take a rash of shit from NORMAL (read:non-zealot religious or otherwise) uncaring people you come across who couldn't give a shit about your beliefs but only know you look like a freak, and have a right to LAUGH at and ridicule. This is not about racism or blaming a group for the actions of a few this is about what is NORMAL here. If it is what you TRULY believe that is being ridiculed you will rise above that and not care, being offended only means you're questioning your own beliefs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 8:52:50 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: Was the Pentagon a legitimate target? After all, you are saying that we provoked the terrorists. They have reason to commit acts of war against us. While killing innocents is bad, I guess killing people who are not innocent is OK. So is flying a plane into the Pentagon and killing all of those uniformed personnel is OK? Uhhhh, well, when you are at war with another nation (as the Arabs have been with the USA for years, for reasons stated above) then, uhhh, YES, killing the enemyies uniformed personnel is a legitimate activity in times of war. I think it is a mistake to run around saying that the means these people used is wrong, but their ends may have been justified. [b]The ends always justifies the means.[/b] We did nothing to these people to deserve this. THAT is where you and I differ. I reject the notion that the ends justifies the means. That thinking is EXACTLY what justifies killing civilians in the minds of thee terrorists, because of what they deem as an appropriate "end.". And let me repeat, some of them would still want to kill us even if we left the Middle East entirely. They will never leave us alone, because the mere existance of our civilization is a threat to their pan-Islamic fantasyland. That is a theory which should be tested BEFORE we engage the entire arab speaking world in war. IMO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 8:53:23 AM EDT
[#24]
At least they cheered when they had a chance, dead men don't cheer.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 8:57:01 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted: You are thinking TOO MUCH. Sorry. Its a habit I am trying to break. [;)] I'm saying that Arab nations have known they are at war with us for years. My definiiton of innocent is those that have taken no hostile action toward the USA. If they have been at war with us for twenty years, then none of them are "innocents." Hiroshima is another whole discussion. Both the Japanese and AMericans agree that the A-bomb saved hundreds of thousands of lives. That is hardly the unanimous opinion in this country, let alone in Japan. I am told we have enuf oil in Alaska to make us energy independent for 50 years. If you can get a copy of the book "TRhe Energy Non-Crisis" - READ IT. It makes me thing our gov't is manufacturing this whole "energy crisis" for teh SOLE purpose of keeping us involved in teh Middle East, under the guise of "We need the oil." That does not make much sense, because if we there only for the oil we would not support Isreal. I am all for developing alternative sources of energy, energy conservation, and drilling in Alaska, but you need to do all of that before pulling out of the Middle East. So as soon as you get all that done, I am right there with you on getting out of that mess. That will probably get 95% of those Arabs off of our back. Bin Laden is part of the other 5% though. Don't knock the theory - a gov't that can sacrifice 59,000 of its own for no real reason is capable of about ANYTHING. No doubt, but the fact is we import 50% or more of our oil, and our society would not function [i]right now[/i] without it. Autarky is the obvious solution, but (1) it is costly and (2) nobody is doing anything about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 9:00:28 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: Uhhhh, well, when you are at war with another nation (as the Arabs have been with the USA for years, for reasons stated above) then, uhhh, YES, killing the enemyies uniformed personnel is a legitimate activity in times of war. So are you saying the attack on the Pentagon was legitimate, as they are at war with us? I am not sure if I am reading you right on this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 9:03:34 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: Do not EVEN try to lable me a racist because I was sympathetic to JBR's frustration. then likewise, do not EVEN try to label me as PC or sympathetic to the enemies' causes because i enforce rules here on this board that stop you or anybody else from calling them hateful, derogatory names. it works both ways. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 9:10:27 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: THAT is where you and I differ. I reject the notion that the ends justifies the means. That thinking is EXACTLY what justifies killing civilians in the minds of thee terrorists, because of what they deem as an appropriate "end.". But this is exactly why you are saying the killings at Hiroshima and Dresden were OK. We are or were at war with the Japanese, Germans, and Arabs. We intentionally bombed German and Japanese civilian target. The Arabs bombed our civilian targets. What precisely is the difference using your reasoning? We should be attacking the ends they seek to attain, not the means. Our ends in WWII was just, but theirs are not. Regarding whether they will leave us alone if we leave them alone, I am just going by what they say. I do not disrespect your attitude and expectation that if you leave someone else alone, they will leave you alone. That is part of what America is all about: "leave me alone." That should be our national motto. But there are just too many bad people out there (Stalin and Hitler to name a few choice examples) who unfortunately want to kill those who have done them no harm. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 9:19:10 AM EDT
[#29]
BTW, although this has gotten wildly off topic, thanks to DavidC for posting the article. We are in a terribly difficult situation, and I hope GW has the wisdom to solve it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 9:41:51 AM EDT
[#30]
You want to know how the Muslims really feel just turn on the news and look at the antiAmerican protests in Pakistan,Egypt,Saudi Arabia and of course Afghanistan.This coupled with the celebrations of our dead gives me a pretty good idea.Other than Bahrain,Kuwait and Turkey we have very few Muslim allies.The Syrians and Iranians are throwing a bitch now too.I thought the Iranians hated the Taliban but I guess they hate us more.
SOPMODM4A3 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 10:13:48 AM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: Quoted: ........but both my parents came from Cuba. [size=4][red]Gusanos???[/red][/size=4][:D] [size=4][b]ESACTAMENTE, HERMANO! DAMN PROUD OF IT, TOO! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 10:32:15 AM EDT
[#32]
Look at it this way:
It is their house. If you want to play, stay off the furniture and no swearing or hitting. Follow the rules! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 10:35:27 AM EDT
[#33]
Quoted: Post from ArmdLbrl - What I learned some years ago, and was a revilaton to me, was that racism was a invention and a fairly new one at that. Created for the purpose of supporting slavery, which was considered vital to the economies of the various coloinal powers. Racism a recent invention? I don't think so. The following is a little referenced clip from the Old Testament - "And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married; for he had married an Ethiopian woman." [i]Numbers[/i], 12:1. At this point the Lord caused leprosy to come upon Miriam, until Moses beged the Lord to restore his sister, and the Lord relented and allowed the leprosy to remain only seven days. Now if that ain't racism, to speak against the miscegenation of your brother, I don't know what is! And seeing as how the date of this occurrence is appproimately 1300 BC, I hardly think that racism is a new sin invented by the slavetraders. Post from Stealth - As for those that cheered.... screw 'em. Let them live in fear after we take out the rest. Yes, indeed, but let them also be the least of our concerns when dealing with Israel. Let them be the recipients of no further American charity. Let them be as a pariah in our world at least! Eric The(Forget?Hell!)Hun[>]:)] This partiuclar Ethiopian was not a Jew. This was the reason for the illness, not because it is assumed she was black. Prior to racism, religious faith was used as a justification for slavery. In theory, Christians could not be enslaved by Christians, or Moslems by Moslems. But war captives of the other faith, or "heritics" from the faith could be used. Prior to the invention of racism, Jews, Christians and Muslims used each others war captives, as slaves, justified as they were non believers. Racism was invented to support colonialism, when Africans and Native Americans started to learn that they could get out of bondage by embracing the Christian faith. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 10:38:57 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted: Racism was invented to support colonialism, when Africans and Native Americans started to learn that they could get out of bondage by embracing the Christian faith. SOooo, THIS is where the "Lbrl" part of "ArmdLbrl" shows itself. Actually, black Africans started racism as they sold those of their OWN race to another race, in exchange for black molasses by which they could make rum. [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 10:47:38 AM EDT
[#35]
Quoted: This partiuclar Ethiopian was not a Jew. This was the reason for the illness, not because it is assumed she was black. Prior to racism, religious faith was used as a justification for slavery. In theory, Christians could not be enslaved by Christians, or Moslems by Moslems. But war captives of the other faith, or "heritics" from the faith could be used. Prior to the invention of racism, Jews, Christians and Muslims used each others war captives, as slaves, justified as they were non believers. Racism was invented to support colonialism, when Africans and Native Americans started to learn that they could get out of bondage by embracing the Christian faith. Uh,when did Jews ever enslave Christians or Muslims? SOPMODM4A3 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 10:52:50 AM EDT
[#36]
Quoted: Quoted: Racism was invented to support colonialism, when Africans and Native Americans started to learn that they could get out of bondage by embracing the Christian faith. SOooo, THIS is where the "Lbrl" part of "ArmdLbrl" shows itself. Actually, black Africans started racism as they sold those of their OWN race to another race, in exchange for black molasses by which they could make rum. [:D] Slavery was not a African invention. The Anglo Saxon world had bondsmen too. But these debt slaves could not be used for more than household work, not heavy work in mines and such. They were Christians too and were under the protection of the Church. If a Master was abusive they could flee to the Church. A slave could not be kept in bondage his whole life, nor could it be hereditary on his offspring. The Slave traders of Africa were either Moslem or Pagan and the were trading war captives from enemy tribes for manufactured goods like guns and gunpowder. But the Colonial powers wouldn't have bothered to trade with them if they didnt need labor to run their New World plantations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 10:56:56 AM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: Then how does that explain all the Caribs, Aztecs, Mixtecs, Inca, Maya, and other tribes that were enslaved by the Spanish and made to work in the mines of the Americas untill their races were all but exterminated? The Spanish hated everybody. Its not racism when you hate everybody equally. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 11:01:41 AM EDT
[#38]
Quoted: Quoted: Then how does that explain all the Caribs, Aztecs, Mixtecs, Inca, Maya, and other tribes that were enslaved by the Spanish and made to work in the mines of the Americas untill their races were all but exterminated? The Spanish hated everybody. Its not racism when you hate everybody equally. If you are of English Protestent decent, its easy to come to that conclusion. Since they enslaved all the English seamen they could lay hands upon during this time period. But the Spanish didnt hate other Roman Catholics. It was in this period that the Jesuit Order had to be suppressed by the Pope, under pressure from the Kings of Spain and Portugal, for the crime of teaching slaves the Gospel and the Spanish language, and even under Spanish and Portuguese law it was impossible to keep someone who was a Roman Catholic in perpetual slavery. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 11:04:22 AM EDT
[#39]
Quoted: If you are of English Protestent decent, its easy to come to that conclusion. Since they enslaved all the English seamen they could lay hands upon during this time period. But the Spanish didnt hate other Roman Catholics. . Then it wasn't racism - it was religious persecution using the guise of "religion" - in this case Catholicism. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 11:14:46 AM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: Quoted: If you are of English Protestent decent, its easy to come to that conclusion. Since they enslaved all the English seamen they could lay hands upon during this time period. But the Spanish didnt hate other Roman Catholics. . Then it wasn't racism - it was religious persecution using the guise of "religion" - in this case Catholicism. In the case of the English and Dutch they enslaved yes. The difference for the Black and American slaves was that their slavery was perpetual, their offspring were also slaves, that their slavery was based on their ancestry and the color of their skin. By the 1700s it didnt matter if a Black slave could recite the Bible forewards and back- in Latin- by then he was "a decendant of Ham" not a full human, and his words would be considered no more than a trained parrot mimiking human speech. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 11:21:45 AM EDT
[#41]
Quoted: The difference for the Black and American slaves was that their slavery was perpetual, their offspring were also slaves, that their slavery was based on their ancestry and the color of their skin. By the 1700s it didnt matter if a Black slave could recite the Bible forewards and back- in Latin- by then he was "a decendant of Ham" not a full human, and his words would be considered no more than a trained parrot mimiking human speech. I guess this is why all those repressed slaves, so mistreated, beaten, abused, belittled, even having seen their fellow slaves MURDERED by their evil white masters..... decided to stay on the plantations even after they were emancipated. Maybe it wasn't as bad as we have been led to believe. Did abuses occur? Yes. Were they anything like the Leftist class struggle exploiters tell you they were like? Nah. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 11:29:18 AM EDT
[#42]
Where would they go?
All they knew was farming, they had to stay where the land was. And what you are describing only applies to the US. Most Spanish and Portuguese colonies were made independant by slave revolts so their emancipation was immediate and they took over the plantations. They stayed at the same work, most of them, because they could find no other. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/21/2001 2:34:58 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted: I dont beleave in guilt by association. I do beleave in guilt by [i]acclimation[/i] Those who publicly demonstrated their joy at these attacks were identifying themselves in league with the killers. They WANTED to be seen, they would not have done their celebrating in the streets otherwise. The educated Mulsims living in the West, like Matrix, have got to understand this. There were Moslims on the planes, there were Moslims in the buildngs that were hit. In the eyes of the killers they were NOT Moslims because they were living and working amongst the enemy. In the eyes of those who cheered on the streets in happiness, they were now part of the OTHER, and their lives weren't even worth consideration. All because you were living in peace, if not harmony, with non Muslims and had worked to make a living for yourself and were not living in poverty like them. A poverty that exists because their intolerance for other cultures keeps them from working with the Western world, which is where the money and markets are. As long as a sizeable portion of the Muslim world, and especally the Arab muslim world, sees secularization on the Turkish pattern as betraying Islam there can be no peace. Those people who cheered in Beruit were no more innocent than those Germans who gathered around Nazi party rallys and cheered for Hitler. They aren't guilty because they were ethnically German. They arent guilty caused they cheared. They voted, they gave money to him, they gave consent to his operations. The only Germans who were guiltless were those Hitler condemmned to the camps and silenced. makes sense [:E] |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
