
> > And quite rightly I reckon.
> 
> Until it happens to you, I suppose.

Ill make sure I hide my AK47s and explosives and things of that nature so 
they cant get me....

reality check - Im sure that they only nab the guys who are nasty.

> 
> > I like the way the US approaches some things. The rules only apply in
> > times of peace. If you threaten their way of life directly, expect 
morals
> > and rules to be thrown out of the window.
> 
> In other words, we only have principles up to a point. In which case, 
why 
> pretend to have principles in the first place?

Cos it makes for a nicer world. :D

How many times would it take someone to punch you in the face before you 
hit back? Once for me. Maybe ten for you. But in the end we'd both give up 
our principles.

> 
> > They are literally the most powerful military force the world has
> > ever known.
> 
> > Dont piss them off. Quite simple really.
> 
> Bullying. Quite simple, really.

To a point, yes. But there are many instances of bullying and standover 
tactics in the world that are necessary. Even a mother/child relationship 
fits this to a degree.

Its not for me to second guess their tactics - as long as they work.

> 
> > As long as I dont have to witness the horror of a man being tortured, 
and
> > am allowed to continue in my own little peaceful world, I am forever
> > indebted to these people.
> 
> Now there's an interesting statement. 

In what way? They're willing to deal with the crap, Im willing to stick my 
head in the sand. Everyone is happy.

> > cant comprehend. They paid the price for our freedom.
> 
> Yes, but for the most part they did it _honourably_.

Crap. The allies were as nasty as the enemy. 

WWII - coldblooded killing (including children), torture, unnecessary 
destruction of property

Korea - more innocents killed, more torture

Vietnam - according to my mate, 'there were no rules'. He did things that, 
as I said, still cause him to wake up screaming. They basically killed 
anything that moved, and when it took their fancy, raped it then killed it.

> 
> > I take my hat off to all of them, and the current US action. If it 
means
> > that my daughter can grow up without worrying about being the target 
of a
> > terrorist attack, I back them fully.
> 
> Sadly, it doesn't.

but it will. If the US has their way, the war will last 50 years and by 
the end of it most of the middle east and some of asia will be completely 
destroyed. 

> 
> > The absolute truth is that I would prefer that 100 terrorists were 
killed
> > or tortured to my family suffering any harm whatsoever. I dont even 
mind
> > if some of them are wrongly accused.
> 
> Yeah? And if you yourself were one of the wrongly accused, would you 
still 
> feel that way?

How would I be wrongly accused? As I said in a previous email, make sure 
youre with the 'good guys' and youll be right.

> 
> >> Of course, if they're prepared to down such basic and obvious freedoms
> >> in the name of national security, are they going to blink at downing a
> >> freedom which allows Linux to flourish? [you just read the on-topic 
1%]
> 
> > Do you think Linux would flourish in a world run by terrorists?
> 
> No, which is why I object to the USA behaving like terrorists themselves.

Explain further? Im intrigued.


> 
> > They are *protecting* your freedoms, including the freedom to develop
> > linux.
> 
> No, they're protecting their own interests. If they happen to coincide 
with 
> mine (or yours), that doesn't excuse their methods.

I think it does. Or at least, in my eyes it does. Whatever gets the job 
done. If it means a reduced threat of terrorism and cheap oil, go go go!

> 
> > Personally I think the gonoeva convention is a crock. Its war. You 
want to
> > be nice, stay at home. Unless youre willing to commit completely to the
> > horror that is war, you dont care enough about the topic at hand.
> 
> On whose authority do you make that statement?

Its an opinion, therefore it is made by my own authority :D

You cant sanitise war. 

> 
> > If youre nice and
> > peaceful and good to your fellow man, then you have nothing to fear.
> 
> Nice theory. Do bear in mind that you're trying to apply it to the real 
world, 
> which is made up of real people.

Yes, and some of those people are on remote islands with electodes on 
their testicles. Im sitting in an airconditioned office.


> 
> > I find it interesting that someone (and Im not singling you out Leon, 
dont
> > get me wrong) can sit in a nice home, in a nice city, in a nice 
country,
> > playing on a nice computer, reading information on an unrestricted
> > internet connection, with a full stomach, and with little to no fear of
> > harm, all of which has been afforded them by the sacrifices of the 
many,
> > many people who have fought and died for these privileges, and come to 
the
> > conclusion that the people who are making those sacrifices are evil.
> 
> I'm not. You're blurring the distinction between honourable conflict and 
> amoral butchery. You're also blurring the distinction between a fair 
society 
> and a bully that for the moment appears to be on your side.

Just my point. There is no 'honourable conflict'. It is all amoral 
butchery. 

Killing someone is killing someone. We see '100 taliban were killed in the 
conflict'. The guys on the ground see blood, entrails and faeces. How 
honourable was it when my mate got covered in his mates brains in a 
Vietnamese jungle? Did he then act in a honourable way? No, he went and 
shot a whole bunch of people.

Fair society? what did you say about 'real world' and 'real people' again?

> 
> > I think the young people in this country need a good dose of national
> > service to wake them up - I dont want the next generation of leaders to
> > let the country become overrun with terrorists and extremists just to
> > avoid offending someone...
> 
> It may surprise you, but I do agree with this. It works for Switzerland.

You agree with me Leon? Gee, thats no fun! :D

