portia wrote:Please list the differences. I would be interested to see what you think are differences.
Storyteller wrote:portia wrote:Please list the differences. I would be interested to see what you think are differences.
Let's start with the shorter list. Please list the similarities.
Minardil wrote:Storyteller wrote:portia wrote:Please list the differences. I would be interested to see what you think are differences.
Let's start with the shorter list. Please list the similarities.
They are Human Beings, in need, fleeing war and violence, and we have the ability to help them.
What other effing "simularities" do you need???
portia wrote:First, We didn't know that the Jewish refugees were facing genocide. No one would have believed such a charge, so you are playing cynical games with history in adding that in.
Second: if a building or a bomb, falls on you, you are dead, and you are just as dead as if you were gassed.
More similarities. The refugees are being endangered because of their religion. If they do not subscribe to ISSI's idea of Islam, they might as well be Christians. Trying to paper over the differences by calling them all Muslims is, again, cynical.
There does not seem to be a place of safety for them, in their homeland.
portia wrote:Even as some of the camps were being found, there was widespread doubt that these were extermination camps. The fact that SOME PEOPLE knew of Kristallnacht is irrelevant, as it was not widely known nor the consequences understood. ("Surely the civilized Germans could not be thinking of these things.")
You are deliberately missing the point. How is someone whose building blows up and kills him any better off that someone whose is gassed? The consequences are the same.
portia wrote:We cannot be sure how deliberate the extermination of Muslims is in Syria. Is, but who cares--the dead are just as dead.
Would you please decide whether there is or is not an extermination campaign? your internally inconsistent comments are confusing me.
Other than the people who may need to investigate the deaths, the only only ones who want or need to make political capital are interested in why they died. That is not a need that affects the dead.
portia wrote:What makes you think that there is no extermination campaign against Syrian Muslims? If they do not adopt the ISIS idea of Muslims--what happens to them? extermination?
Storyteller wrote:portia wrote:What makes you think that there is no extermination campaign against Syrian Muslims? If they do not adopt the ISIS idea of Muslims--what happens to them? extermination?
When Germans did not adopt the Nazi beliefs, a lot of bad things could happen to them. Was Hitler running an extermination campaign against ethnic Germans?
ISIS is Muslim. The population living under their rule is Muslim. The parts of that population which reject ISIS ideas may be coerced but are not subject to extermination the way the Yazidis were targeted for extermination.
portia wrote:Storyteller wrote:Some of the ethnic Germans were targeted.
"Some of them were targeted" vs. "there was a genocide aimed at eradicating them". Are you really not getting the difference?I am not aware of any evidence that exempts Syrian Muslims---and why do you single them out?
Storyteller wrote:I am not aware of any evidence that exempts Syrian Muslims---and why do you single them out?
portia wrote:A better question is why have you singled them out, repeatedly? You have drawn some sort of distinction between them and other Muslims. Why?
How many times have you been asked to give more information on this, but not given it. Glittering generalities in response to questions for detail (We'll manage it" etc) make you sound more like Donald Trump that anyone else.
Storyteller wrote:Back to your original subject, "evolution of terrorism". It would be interesting, in light of the Paris attacks, to revisit the post-9/11 discussions and the widely expressed view that terrorism was to be treated as a form of crime rather than a form of warfare, and fought with police measures and "intelligence" (usually unspecified) rather than military ones. It seems pretty commonly accepted now that terrorism as practiced by radical Islamists is a form of warfare, and that the correct response is taking the battle to the radical Islamists' home turf. Anyone rethinking their past beliefs yet?
Storyteller wrote:portia wrote:Well, I am astounded that Story thinks there are no values that a Western person would be willing to die for. We have thousands who signed up for the military and other projects who can easily prove him wrong.
portia wrote:Storyteller wrote:portia wrote:Well, I am astounded that Story thinks there are no values that a Western person would be willing to die for. We have thousands who signed up for the military and other projects who can easily prove him wrong.
Would those be the same people commonly discounted by a typical American Democrat or European... anyone as hawkish, warmongering right wing nationalists representing a regrettable stain on their otherwise progressive society?
And how many people in Europe - as opposed to the USA - sign up for the military for ideological reasons?Storyteller wrote:
When you have close relations that have spent more than 60 years in the USA military, since 1940, you might have some idea what their thinking is. In the meantime. . .
WOW! your information on American Soldiers is suffering from an enormous dose of erroneous stereotypical thinking! Your head needs to be straightened out, quickly.
I have even less information on European thinking than you do, and who cares? If/when they sign up; they sign up. Their thinking is not much to the point, is it?
portia wrote:And that is the effect of 14 plus years passage of time. Just as the fight against terrorism has changed, so have the terrorists methods and tactics. To think that the two would not change together is strange. The 2011 and pre- terrorists were a world apart from what we have now.
WOW! your information on American Soldiers is suffering from an enormous dose of erroneous stereotypical thinking! Your head needs to be straightened out, quickly.
Storyteller wrote:Please do correct me. Last I checked, the US army servicemen and veterans' voting patterns overwhelmingly favored Republicans, whom you routinely file under " hawkish, warmongering right wing nationalists representing a regrettable stain on their otherwise progressive society". So what am I so terribly misunderstanding?
portia wrote:Intellectually, I understand that various sects have started fighting one another. But, "emotionally" I have no understanding of it. Why anyone should fight over religion, particularly when it is a closely related religion, is a mystery.
Sometimes, I compare it to being for a particular sports team. Although the loyalty to the team is not based on much (geography?) nevertheless it is very enthusiastic. Is it just based on resentment of someone elses differing loyalties? If I cannot understand --or imagine--what the differing loyalties are based on I clearly am not likely to be any help in negotiations. Good thing no-one is likely to ask.
portia wrote:Storyteller wrote:Please do correct me. Last I checked, the US army servicemen and veterans' voting patterns overwhelmingly favored Republicans, whom you routinely file under " hawkish, warmongering right wing nationalists representing a regrettable stain on their otherwise progressive society". So what am I so terribly misunderstanding?
Who the H are you saying characterizes soldiers that way??? Not me. Not ever me. Please stop making up regrettable quotes and then attributing them to other people.
Are you becoming as nuts as Trump??
Return to Philosophy: Councils of Manwë
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests