Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8945 total)
40 online now:
AZPaul3, DrJones*, Faith, frako, jar, PaulK, Percy (Admin), ringo, ski zawaski, Tanypteryx (10 members, 30 visitors)
Newest Member: ski zawaski
Post Volume: Total: 865,175 Year: 20,211/19,786 Month: 608/2,023 Week: 116/392 Day: 29/87 Hour: 4/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is the media hurting the war?
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 10 of 145 (408122)
06-30-2007 7:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by taylor_31
06-29-2007 9:44 PM


Is the media hurting the war effort?

Am I missing something? What is wrong with undermining an unjust war? Would your friend have complained if the "media" had been undermining, say, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1980?


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by taylor_31, posted 06-29-2007 9:44 PM taylor_31 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by taylor_31, posted 06-30-2007 9:05 PM Chiroptera has responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 14 of 145 (408133)
06-30-2007 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by taylor_31
06-30-2007 8:55 PM


But are there scenarios where it might be necessary to our protection?

No. What scenarios are you talking about? The so-called "ticking bomb scenario" which, in the entire history of torture, has never occurred?


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by taylor_31, posted 06-30-2007 8:55 PM taylor_31 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by taylor_31, posted 06-30-2007 9:18 PM Chiroptera has responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 16 of 145 (408135)
06-30-2007 9:11 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by taylor_31
06-30-2007 9:05 PM


Many people - conservatives in particular - find it offensive or even treasonous when someone admits that America has made a mistake. They think that whatever America does, it must be the righteous thing to do.

Well, that's exactly the problem with having this sort of conversation with your friend. The war in Iraq is, in many respects, beside the important point, which is that Americans are no smarter nor more moral than anyone else in the world, and that Americans are just as likely to be manipulated by those in power to support nefarious ends.


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by taylor_31, posted 06-30-2007 9:05 PM taylor_31 has not yet responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 18 of 145 (408138)
06-30-2007 9:33 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by taylor_31
06-30-2007 9:18 PM


Would it be moral to use every tactic we have to obtain answers if the situation was critical?

No, because then it would be a label that would be automatically slapped on people who are to be tortured. We know that this will happen because torture that is actually occurring right now is already being justified by this very claim of imminent threat.

If people decided that preventing the murder of Santa Claus is justification for torture, then Guantanamo Bay and the prisons of Iran and North Korea would be filled with people suddenly accused of attempted santacide.


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by taylor_31, posted 06-30-2007 9:18 PM taylor_31 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by taylor_31, posted 06-30-2007 11:00 PM Chiroptera has responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 21 of 145 (408161)
07-01-2007 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by taylor_31
06-30-2007 11:00 PM


I would love to totally abolish torture, but I'm reluctant because I'm worried that it might be necessary at some tragic point.

I don't understand the problem. How is this different from any other time one evaluates and weighs risks in one's life? When I was in Africa, I was worried about the health risks that we knew were associated with the malaria prophylaxis that we were using. But I was more worried about the actual risks of actually getting malaria.

What we do is take the risks that maybe, perhaps, it is possible that it just might happen that one day, somewhere, there might be a suspect who knows about a ticking bomb and will divulge the information under torture even though such a thing has never yet happened in real life, and weigh it against the risks of people using a legal loophole to torture people as a means of terrorizing a subject populace which we know is actually occurring right this very minute in a great many different nations.

To me, this is obvious. One assumes risks that we know are very small in order to mitigate against risks that we know are great. Where in your life do you purposely put yourself at risk of a known, identifiable danger in order to protect yourself from a theoretical possibility that you read in a badly written spy novel? Why should we as a society put ourselves at risk from a common, existing danger in order to protect ourselves from cheap screen writers' fictitious fantasies?

Edited by Chiroptera, : tags


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by taylor_31, posted 06-30-2007 11:00 PM taylor_31 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by taylor_31, posted 07-01-2007 1:05 AM Chiroptera has responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 25 of 145 (408228)
07-01-2007 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by taylor_31
07-01-2007 1:05 AM


Thanks. I wasn't sure if I stated my opinion very clearly or not. McCain does say it a bit more eloquently than I did (although he has the advantage of being a professional politician, heh).

Getting back to the OP:

He said that the media has blurted out every policy and tactic that we propose; this is akin to "telling the defense what play the offense will run."

What examples does this clown your friend have in mind?

Edited by Chiroptera, : unspellcheckable grammar typo


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by taylor_31, posted 07-01-2007 1:05 AM taylor_31 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by taylor_31, posted 07-01-2007 11:04 AM Chiroptera has responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 30 of 145 (408237)
07-01-2007 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by taylor_31
06-29-2007 9:44 PM


One more point:

He also claimed that if America had had today's media during World War II, we would be "speaking German right now."

This is, of course, ridiculous. There is a lot of myths about exactly what threat Germany and Japan posed to the U.S., and exactly which American interests these two countries would have threatened. (But an actual invasion of North America was not one of these threats.)

Nonetheless, your retarded cousin friend does have a point. I just watched Grave of the Fireflies last night, a Japanese animated movie about the end of WWII from the viewpoint of a couple of Japanese orphans. There were two scenes showing U.S. bombers dropping incendiary devices on civilian residential areas (and one scene where a U.S. fighter is strafing civilians). It is known that the Allies adopted a policy of targeting civilians in order to weaken their resolve to carry on their war effort.

Now it is possible that if the U.S. media had a policy of accurately reporting the results of these terror campaigns (and presenting the nationals of these countries as human beings instead of inhuman beasts), the public may have developed an aversion to these policies and forced their leaders to cancel them. In that case, it might have been possible that the civilians in these countries would not have been as weary of the war, and perhaps the invasions of these countries would have been a bit harder to undertake.

But in a democracy, isn't it up to the electorate to weigh the risks and benefits of proposed policy decisions to determine what the proper policies should be? If our leaders can only carry out their policies by withholding information from the electorate, isn't that against the very principles of democracy?

-

Imagine having Normandy on the evening news across the country, he said. Would the people have supported the war effort?

Even if this were true, what does it mean? That there are limits to the sacrifices that people are willing to make? That your pet lemming friend is so smart that he can determine what sacrifices people should be required to make?

Your friend is an ass. Like most conservatives, your friend hates the very idea of democracy. Like most conservatives, he knows what is right and what is wrong, and he is willing to do whatever it takes to enact his ideology into policy, even it means lying to the voters, even if it means writing the rules to keep a minority in power, even if it means jailing and torturing dissidents.


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by taylor_31, posted 06-29-2007 9:44 PM taylor_31 has not yet responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 31 of 145 (408239)
07-01-2007 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by taylor_31
07-01-2007 10:45 AM


"We won that war, didn't we?"

Actually, we didn't. We were fighting against fascism, remember?


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by taylor_31, posted 07-01-2007 10:45 AM taylor_31 has not yet responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 33 of 145 (408241)
07-01-2007 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by taylor_31
07-01-2007 11:04 AM


"People don't like war," he says. "It's too dirty for them."

Well, then your friend is betraying his anti-democratic fascist beliefs. It is up to the people to decide whether or not a particular war, or even war in general, is worth fighting or worth continuing. F*** it! If the electorate, after carefully weighing the facts of the matter and engaging in informed debate, decide that it is better allow the Taliban to come into the U.S. and rule than it is to risk life and limb, then that is their decision! If your friend thinks that it is so important to kill people and risk being killed to prevent this, then it is up to him to go into the hills and fight.


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by taylor_31, posted 07-01-2007 11:04 AM taylor_31 has not yet responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 34 of 145 (408261)
07-01-2007 1:09 PM


This seems strangely relevant:


Click to enlarge


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 40 of 145 (408397)
07-02-2007 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by Hyroglyphx
07-02-2007 8:51 AM


Re: Military intelligence: Often an oxymron
The freedom of speech does not entail the freedom to do whatever the hell you want.

Maybe. But then it becomes problematic when a "watchdog" agency is set up to watch out for and punish "abuses" of freedom of press.

For example, many countries routinely use their libel laws to harass and punish journalists who displease those in power. Even a couple of Western European countries have been known to try this.

Besides, of "yellow journalism" were to be punished, I wonder how long Fox News would remain on air?

Added by edit:

Heh. Or those clowns who were trying to "Swiftboat" Kerry in the last election.

But I've always felt that the only remedy for the abuse of free speech is to make use of free speech yourself.

Edited by Chiroptera, : No reason given.


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Hyroglyphx, posted 07-02-2007 8:51 AM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Hyroglyphx, posted 07-06-2007 12:12 PM Chiroptera has responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 48 of 145 (408999)
07-06-2007 1:39 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Hyroglyphx
07-06-2007 12:12 PM


Re: Military intelligence: Often an oxymron
Hi, nem.

I was mostly commenting on what I thought was initial point:

However, if yellow journalism is detected, there should be steep penalties for it.

However, I might have misinterpreted what you said, as you now say:

They aren't stopping them from saying whatever they want. They are simply saying, "We are watching what you say. We'll expose you if you lie."

So, if by "steep penalties" you meant exposure and possible loss of credibility thereafter, then I have no problem with what you say. In fact, as you point out, we already have organizations dedicated to that task. (I already have FAIR's website bookmarked.)


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Hyroglyphx, posted 07-06-2007 12:12 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 51 of 145 (409009)
07-06-2007 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by taylor_31
07-06-2007 3:12 PM


I assume that you are currently serving in Iraq.

Tal claims that he works in military intelligence.

I'll let you read his previous posts and wonder whether someone in intelligence is really allowed to log onto anonymous message boards and brag about all this intelligence he has access to, which would knock all our socks off if only he could divulge it.


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by taylor_31, posted 07-06-2007 3:12 PM taylor_31 has not yet responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 61 of 145 (409997)
07-12-2007 5:27 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by taylor_31
07-12-2007 12:16 AM


BWAHAHAHA!
You obviously know more about this topic than I do....

You want to know how to fix that? Go to a library. After one afternoon, you will know far more about this subject (or any other) than Tal.


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by taylor_31, posted 07-12-2007 12:16 AM taylor_31 has not yet responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6810
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 75 of 145 (410766)
07-17-2007 8:16 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by crashfrog
07-13-2007 9:34 PM


Re: Money
crashfrog asks:
And you're in military intelligence?

Good question.

Tal responds to another post:
I hadn't read that story, thank you.

I've always found it strange that someone in military intelligence would be unaware of basic information that anyone with a library card can get a hold of.


Q: If science doesn't know where this comes from, then couldn't it be God's doing?

A: The only difference between that kind of thinking and the stereotype of the savage who thinks the Great White Hunter is a God because he doesn't know how the hunter's cigarette lighter works is that the savage has an excuse for his ignorance. -- jhuger


This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by crashfrog, posted 07-13-2007 9:34 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019