Explosions in Norway

#301
#301
nbakerld said:
Because it was a totalitarian regime that the US installed in Iran. If it weren't, I wouldn't have said it, and Iranians probably wouldn't be as mad about it.
Click to expand...

this assumption seems to be that the iranians don't want a totalitarian regime.

therealUT said:
When one advocates that the government should remove someone , they are advocating for the use of force and, ultimately, providing their permission for the use of deadly force (as force and resistance tend to escalate). Once that permission to the government has been implied, then the argument re: vigilantism centers itself not around morals but simply around legality, as the moral basis and permission for force against such persons has already been established and granted.
Click to expand...

you'd be in the ballpark if they guy went out and killed a bunch of muslims, but he didn't.
 
#302
#302
droski said:
this assumption seems to be that the iranians don't want a totalitarian regime.
Click to expand...

What persons have you ever encountered that want to be subjects in a totalitarian regime? The only persons that want a totalitarian regime are those persons who will directly benefit by playing a part in said regime.

droski said:
you'd be in the ballpark if they guy went out and killed a bunch of muslims, but he didn't.
Click to expand...

He does not have to kill Muslims; he is killing the persons who are allowing the Muslims to stay in Norway (according to his perception, this is the more effective way to reach the solution of getting rid of Muslims). I established this earlier and you continue to deny it. Why you deny this, I know not; however, it is enough for me to reach the conclusion that you do not want to deal with accepted premises in this discussion.
 
#303
#303
droski said:
this assumption seems to be that the iranians don't want a totalitarian regime.
Click to expand...

They don't want any kind of regime forced on them. Just like we wouldn't. Imagine that. The fact that it's totalitarian makes it worse in my eyes. I'll be careful with my adjectives next time so we can avoid another meaningless tangent.
 
#305
#305
therealUT said:
What persons have you ever encountered that want to be subjects in a totalitarian regime? The only persons that want a totalitarian regime are those persons who will directly benefit by playing a part in said regime.



He does not have to kill Muslims; he is killing the persons who are allowing the Muslims to stay in Norway (according to his perception, this is the more effective way to reach the solution of getting rid of Muslims). I established this earlier and you continue to deny it. Why you deny this, I know not; however, it is enough for me to reach the conclusion that you do not want to deal with accepted premises in this discussion.
Click to expand...

if they didn't want such a regime than why does every muslim country have one?

not sure how the perception of a mad man is relavant to the discussion.
 
#306
#306
nbakerld said:
They don't want any kind of regime forced on them. Just like we wouldn't. Imagine that. The fact that it's totalitarian makes it worse in my eyes. I'll be careful with my adjectives next time so we can avoid another meaningless tangent.
Click to expand...

then why haven't they and their fellow muslim citizens done something about it? why do they continue to support radical muslim groups?
 
#307
#307
droski said:
then why haven't they and their fellow muslim citizens done something about it? why do they continue to support radical muslim groups?
Click to expand...

1. Popular revolts are hard to assemble, harder to equip, and hardest to succesfully pull off: see Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. The only reason things "worked out" in Tunisia and Egypt (I think the military has taken over as the totalitarian regime) are due to surprise and lack of effective response by the sitting governments. Most popular revolts fail and lead to catastrophic suffering. Congratulations to you for being born in a place where you are privileged enough to not live under a totalitarian regime; do not belittle those that fortune frowned upon as not strong enough (you think the North Koreans really enjoy their miserable existence).

2. The regimes in said countries know the angst and frustration that exists. They then exploit the ignorance that they have created and turn that angst and frustration toward other targets.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#308
#308
Name the European leader who taught his countrymen to hate multiculturalism, who branded his religion and politics as the only way, and who sought to exterminate one other particular religion.
 
#309
#309
therealUT said:
1. Popular revolts are hard to assemble, harder to equip, and hardest to succesfully pull off: see Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Syria. The only reason things "worked out" in Tunisia and Egypt (I think the military has taken over as the totalitarian regime) are due to surprise and lack of effective response by the sitting governments. Most popular revolts fail and lead to catastrophic suffering. Congratulations to you for being born in a place where you are privileged enough to not live under a totalitarian regime; do not belittle those that fortune frowned upon as not strong enough (you think the North Koreans really enjoy their miserable existence).

2. The regimes in said countries know the angst and frustration that exists. They then exploit the ignorance that they have created and turn that angst and frustration toward other targets.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

you are ignoring the religious support of these regimes. north korea is not a valid comparison. i'd say that iraq is an excellent example of what happens when you "force" democracy on muslim countries.
 
#310
#310
droski said:
you are ignoring the religious support of these regimes. north korea is not a valid comparison. i'd say that iraq is an excellent example of what happens when you "force" democracy on muslim countries.
Click to expand...

The "religious support" is of mutual benefit. "Religious leaders" in these countries are used by those in power to stay in power; in return, these leaders receive their own power and wealth.

Christian leaders and political power figures had the same relationship in Western Europe until the very end of the Enlightenment and the beginning of the Industrial Age. Simply because one exploits religion does not mean tha the religion, in and of itself, is bad.

Kim Jung I'll certainly uses religious petexts to sustain his authority; to state otherwise is assinine.

I have never advocated "forcing democracy" on anyone; however, the individuals in Iraq want to control their own lives, they just have no idea of how to do so through a governing system, and their own ignorance is bein used against them by those who want power in Iraq. Thanks again for presenting another issue of which you know little to nothing about.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#311
#311
therealUT said:
The "religious support" is of mutual benefit. "Religious leaders" in these countries are used by those in power to stay in power; in return, these leaders receive their own power and wealth.

Christian leaders and political power figures had the same relationship in Western Europe until the very end of the Enlightenment and the beginning of the Industrial Age. Simply because one exploits religion does not mean tha the religion, in and of itself, is bad.

Kim Jung I'll certainly uses religious petexts to sustain his authority; to state otherwise is assinine.

I have never advocated "forcing democracy" on anyone; however, the individuals in Iraq want to control their own lives, they just have no idea of how to do so through a governing system, and their own ignorance is bein used against them by those who want power in Iraq. Thanks again for presenting another issue of which you know little to nothing about.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

nice. who said the religion is bad? fact remains that fundamental muslim leadership has broadbased support in those countries. is it due to lack of education? probably. not sure how that is arguing against me though.
 
#312
#312
droski said:
nice. who said the religion is bad? fact remains that fundamental muslim leadership has broadbased support in those countries. is it due to lack of education? probably. not sure how that is arguing against me though.
Click to expand...

You are a weasle who has done everything possible to stray from the topic. You posited that Muslims want totalitarian regimes; I will gladly deduce you view totalitarian regimes as "bad". From that, I will make the connection that you posit that Muslims want "bad things", at least in the form of government, which is a pretty large "thing".
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#313
#313
therealUT said:
You are a weasle who has done everything possible to stray from the topic. You posited that Muslims want totalitarian regimes; I will gladly deduce you view totalitarian regimes as "bad". From that, I will make the connection that you posit that Muslims want "bad things", at least in the form of government, which is a pretty large "thing".
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

of course they want bad things. they want places where women can't drive cars and adulterors are killed. is this even up for debate? the argument i don't have an answer for is if it's the religion or the culture.
 
#314
#314
droski said:
of course they want bad things. they want places where women can't drive cars and adulterors are killed. is this even up for debate? the argument i don't have an answer for is if it's the religion or the culture.
Click to expand...


Has some promise, imo.
 
#315
#315
Here is an interesting article;

Blog: Pandora's Box in Norway

The Left will manage to blame the usual scapegoats, the way it always does. In fact, it is the Left itself that has opened Pandora's Box by systematically destroying the pillars of Western civilization, even bringing in Muslim terror preachers to speed up the destruction of civilized life. Saul Alinsky dedicated Rules for Radicals to Lucifer.

Nothing better captures the destructive mind of the cultural Left, and we can see the results all around us.
-----------------------------------

In recent years Norway has become famous for two supreme absurdities of Political Correctness: Algore's Nobel Prize for spreading the biggest scientific fraud in history, and Obama's Peace Prize for getting elected President -- in effect, Europe's tribute to the most radical Leftist in American history, merely for running while black.

However, if Herman Cain is elected president next year the Norwegian Peace Prize Committee will sit on its hands, because in Norway the only good black people are Leftist black people. The Left's compassion for victims is only for the ones who vote for them.

The Land of the Fjords has now turned into another paradise of PC perversity.
-------------------------------

But Norway has no death penalty. Norwegian law can't even keep this murderous thug in jail for more than 21 years. Since the killer apparently dreams of starting a Knights Templar war against Islam and cultural Marxism, Norway's PC justice system will give him 21 years to write his manifesto while recruiting alienated skinheads for his cause. PC Norway may do itself in before it harms civilization much more.

Cultural Marxism is holding hands with the most malignant elements of radical Islam. What we saw last week was pure barbarism. I don't care how much this ruthless maniac claims to stand for European civilization, his actions make him a barbarian.
---------------------------------

Last week the pendulum swung back. The monsters of Europe's past are growling again. The enemies of Europe are not its peaceful critics, but they will be blamed, because the Left always needs scapegoats. That's how Obama operates, and he learned his craft from Saul Alinsky, who learned it from the hard Left going back to Karly Marx.

When we see mob media in this country scapegoating Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Clarence Thomas, and anyone who questions the power of the Left, remember that socialism is a European invention. Marx, Lenin, and Stalin were Euro-socialists.
Click to expand...
 
#316
#316
droski said:
of course they want bad things. they want places where women can't drive cars and adulterors are killed. is this even up for debate? the argument i don't have an answer for is if it's the religion or the culture.
Click to expand...

Do these things make Islam and/or that culture better or worse than Christianity and/or Western culture?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#319
#319
droski said:
worse. are you arguing they don't?
Click to expand...

They're subjective values. It's kind of hard to argue what's "worse". Depending on who you ask, pro-life is a moral or amoral stance*.

*because restricting freedom is viewed as amoral
 
#320
#320
nbakerld said:
They're subjective values. It's kind of hard to argue what's "worse". Depending on who you ask, pro-life is a moral or amoral stance*.

*because restricting freedom is viewed as amoral
Click to expand...

yes, but we are talking degrees here. is anyone arguing that nazi germany wasn't worse than the US? or south africa during apartheid?
 
#322
#322
droski said:
worse. are you arguing they don't?
Click to expand...

Women not being able to drive is not better or worse than eighteen year olds not being able to drink. Homosexuals being executed is no better or worse than drug dealers being incarcerated for thirty plus years or Mexicans being deported simply for working a low paying job.

You place values on certain things; however, it does not mean such values are universal or absolute. Muslims in Murfreesboro cannot even build a place of worship and you bring up a woman's "right to drive". I see both of these as injustices.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#324
#324
droski said:
yes, but we are talking degrees here. is anyone arguing that nazi germany wasn't worse than the US? or south africa during apartheid?
Click to expand...

Is that the same US that practiced forced segregation at the time? Had Japanese internment camps? Was allied with Stalin?

From a moral standpoint, I am not about to say that the US was definitively more moral than Nazi Germany.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#325
#325
therealUT said:
Women not being able to drive is not better or worse than eighteen year olds not being able to drink. Homosexuals being executed is no better or worse than drug dealers being incarcerated for thirty plus years or Mexicans being deported simply for working a low paying job.

You place values on certain things; however, it does not mean such values are universal or absolute. Muslims in Murfreesboro cannot even build a place of worship and you bring up a woman's "right to drive". I see both of these as injustices.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

you can't be serious. those things are far worse than what you listed.

being a free country i'm allowed to place my values on things. i frankly can't see how putting drug dealers in jail is just as bad as killing people for being gay. but each to their own.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top