is this the middle ages?

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
So if I wanted to kill you, and you were hanging out at a blow hardian drinking club but in the process of killing you, I also incinerated dozens of other innocent people who were in the vicinity I'm not guilty of murdering those other people ?

In your collectivist mind, those other people were not murdered because the owner of the blow hardian tavern didn't surrender you to my mighty wrath for your summary execution in my powerful hands?
A delusional fantasy masquerading as a threat

You’re pathetic.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
So if a person doesn't want to be forced to pay for your garbage pickup, you are okay with stealing their house then?

This is your example of the kind of "society" you like? Remove my garbage or I'll have these men with guns come and steal your house and shoot you if you resist?

Good squirrel....lick masters hand for your treat!

Rob, if you want to live in a cave in the woods and say it makes you free...knock yourself out. no one but you and a few other extremist want anything you want....
Society works for the vast majority of us...here's a real warning...not a personal warning..just something you should be aware of.
that vast majority will smash you like a bug if you threaten it. you can talk shit here all day long, but the minute you try to implement any of this idiocy, you'll be finished...
society does indeed have monumental problems...perhaps eventually fatal problems...but what you suggest died in the womb of your own imagination before you ever had the first contraction...your dreamland will never exist, in any reality....


and here's the thing Rob...I am ok with people facing consequences for making poor choices. if there are no consequences for poor choices, you get a lot of people fucking things up for a lot more people....because they can....so yes Rob...if you do something that is severe enough, you lose your house, your property, your freedom, or even your life......no one loses their house for not paying for trash pickup....most places it's not a separate charge, it's included in your taxes....but you can and should lose your house if you can't pay the taxes on it. usually people who have worked hard enough to buy some property have no trouble taking care of the taxes. most older or ill people can take out reverse mortgages if they have problems, basically selling their homes or property, after they die, for the means to remain on it till then....society isn't quite as full of monsters as you make it out to be...and we do try to protect ourselves...
 
Last edited:

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Rob, if you want to live in a cave in the woods and say it makes you free...knock yourself out. no one but you and a few other extremist want anything you want....
Society works for the vast majority of us...here's a real warning...not a personal warning..just something you should be aware of.
that vast majority will smash you like a bug if you threaten it. you can talk shit here all day long, but the minute you try to implement any of this idiocy, you'll be finished...
society does indeed have monumental problems...perhaps eventually fatal problems...but what you suggest died in the womb of your own imagination before you ever had the first contraction...your dreamland will never exist, in any reality....


and here's the thing Rob...I am ok with people facing consequences for making poor choices. if there are no consequences for poor choices, you get a lot of people fucking things up for a lot more people....because they can....so yes Rob...if you do something that is severe enough, you lose your house, your property, your freedom, or even your life......no one loses their house for not paying for trash pickup....most places it's not a separate charge, it's included in your taxes....but you can and should lose your house if you can't pay the taxes on it. usually people who have worked hard enough to buy some property have no trouble taking care of the taxes. most older or ill people can take out reverse mortgages if they have problems, basically selling their homes or property, after they die, for the means to remain on it till then....society isn't quite as full of monsters as you make it out to be...and we do try to protect ourselves...

translation = You hold and espouse contradictory beliefs like a confused person without any core principles.

Here's the proof...

First you correctly suggest that nonconsensual interactions with people who haven't or can't consent are wrong. Which implies you believe consent is a necessary ingredient to human interactions.

Then you flop to believing and wanting to enforce an opposite belief. You believe not all people are equal or should be equal and that a peaceful individuals consent doesn't matter when the gang has made their "choices" for them when it comes to funding things that you like. Why do you NOW champion nonconsensual methods where individual consent can be shit on?

You clearly believe in the impossible. That nonexistent rights can be delegated and aggregated into a positive sum, and that impossible belief and faulty math should be the basis for "society". Then you call me the weirdo living in a cave.

Which part of my post above would you like to rebut? I DON'T think you can stay on point and rebut any of it without reigniting your hypocrisy. Do try though...
 

zeddd

Well-Known Member
translation = You hold and espouse contradictory beliefs like a confused person without any core principles.

Here's the proof...

First you correctly suggest that nonconsensual interactions with people who haven't or can't consent are wrong. Which implies you believe consent is a necessary ingredient to human interactions.

Then you flop to believing and wanting to enforce an opposite belief. You believe not all people are equal or should be equal and that a peaceful individuals consent doesn't matter when the gang has made their "choices" for them when it comes to funding things that you like. Why do you NOW champion nonconsensual methods where individual consent can be shit on?

You clearly believe in the impossible. That nonexistent rights can be delegated and aggregated into a positive sum, and that impossible belief and faulty math should be the basis for "society". Then you call me the weirdo living in a cave.

Which part of my post above would you like to rebut? I DON'T think you can stay on point and rebut any of it without reigniting your hypocrisy. Do try though...
I hope your cave has WiFi, it would be tragic to miss your wisdom, circularity, straw men, and reductio ad absurdum .
 

primobozo

Well-Known Member
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-46145986


this happened just south of our border? our enlightened neighbors to the south just roasted two men on the say so of an asshole with a facebook account?.....i don't understand this....i've met a lot of mexicans, and none of them seemed stupid enough to participate in something like this....are they different when they're in mexico? it doesn't even matter if they were right, and both of these men were guilty as hell....
i'm shocked that something like this can happen in the civilized world.....perpetrated by civilized people....don't they realize that shit like this just gives trump and his asshole cadre ammunition in the fight against immigration......of course, if this is considered acceptable behavior by mexicans....maybe they should just stay in mexico.....
Mob mentality, I have seen it first hand several times, once at a concert in Dallas in 83, and again in late 90s in Chicago, when the bulls won, but it happens a lot. La riots. Crowds at stores on black Friday. A lot of people involved are decent people who would never do anything along the lines of the illeagle activity's that they find themselves a part of. Lawyers and doctor's were breaking our windows and looting right along with street thugs. It's a awsome and terrifying thing collectively to witness, but sadly, with very few arrested perpetrators.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Could you provide a source that explains “the war had already been won”. I’m not saying your wrong, because yes, all I’ve ever heard was that prolonging it would have cost many more US lives. If I had a beef with a “country” and the only way to stop that country from continuing to bomb my country was to bomb them, ya I would bomb the living fuck out of em. If the family next door was taking pot shots at you every time you went out doors and nobody was stopping them would you be justified in shooting back?
By the time the bombs were dropped, the Japanese were already making diplomatic overtures for peace.
 

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
By the time the bombs were dropped, the Japanese were already making diplomatic overtures for peace.
Is there legitimate sources that refute the fact Japan refused to surrender at any point before or after the first bomb was dropped? It is my understanding that if for not the bomb, a land invasion was going to be needed to bring the country to a surrender. I find it hard to believe the States needed to drop it to show its effect when Russia was building the same weapon. Not saying they didn’t do it for effect, they’ve done far worse.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Is there legitimate sources that refute the fact Japan refused to surrender at any point before or after the first bomb was dropped? It is my understanding that if for not the bomb, a land invasion was going to be needed to bring the country to a surrender. I find it hard to believe the States needed to drop it to show its effect when Russia was building the same weapon. Not saying they didn’t do it for effect, they’ve done far worse.
There is no refuting that nuclear bombs dropped by the USA killed tens of thousands of innocent women and children. That's murder btw.

If you or I kill an innocent person, we would be murderers...how is it that when a government does it, it isn't murder? (you won't answer this directly)
 

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
There is no refuting that nuclear bombs dropped by the USA killed tens of thousands of innocent women and children. That's murder btw.

If you or I kill an innocent person, we would be murderers...how is it that when a government does it, it isn't murder? (you won't answer this directly)
Yes I will answer it directly. Yes it is murder, is it justified given it saved lives of the country that was attacked? You remember pearl harbour right? If I was to use your utopian logic then there should be no wars, it’s a pretty obvious conclusion that war is a bad thing, so why as a collective whole, decided to not have wars? Should be an easy thing right? As for the casualties yup it’s unthinkable that the lives of innocent people are lost so again why do we have wars? Money? Prestige? Crazy MF’s leading the way, defence of life, the joy of killing? So I’ll ask again, tell me why with, what I believe is an easy decision for everyone, we collectively have not decided to end all war? Probably one of the first things your utopian world would decide, yet the world has not done this. Tell me what your solution would be to end all wars everywhere. Also my question to tty had nothing to do with your question, I never said the bombs didn’t kill innocent people, stay in topic please.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Yes I will answer it directly. Yes it is murder, is it justified given it saved lives of the country that was attacked? You remember pearl harbour right? If I was to use your utopian logic then there should be no wars, it’s a pretty obvious conclusion that war is a bad thing, so why as a collective whole, decided to not have wars? Should be an easy thing right? As for the casualties yup it’s unthinkable that the lives of innocent people are lost so again why do we have wars? Money? Prestige? Crazy MF’s leading the way, defence of life, the joy of killing? So I’ll ask again, tell me why with, what I believe is an easy decision for everyone, we collectively have not decided to end all war? Probably one of the first things your utopian world would decide, yet the world has not done this. Tell me what your solution would be to end all wars everywhere. Also my question to tty had nothing to do with your question, I never said the bombs didn’t kill innocent people, stay in topic please.

There is no justification for murder. Murder is killing by applying offensive force, it can't be justified. Don't try to. Thank you for surprising me and actually admitting it's murder though, I didn't think you would.

You (and millions of others) are guilty of collectivist thinking and inadvertently answered your own question why there are wars. It has to do with your unfailing obedience and reverence for false authority. Take your learned obedience etc. and scale it up a few million people and you have created the recipe for war. I could go into detail, why your indoctrinated mindset is the root of the problem, but I want to savor your trying to justify murder for a while.

Not trying to be a dick, but you have much to unlearn.
 
Last edited:

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
The blame for that rest solely on the Emperor himself.

  • He was told we had the bomb.
  • He was told the power it had.
  • He was told we'd use it if he didn't surrender.
He refused to surrender. That's on him, not us. It was us or them. It sure as shit wasn't going to be us. We didn't start the war, they did. They were given every opportunity to surrender and refused to do so.

And how fucking stupid were they? How little did they think of their own people? Even AFTER they saw the power of the first bomb, they REFUSED TO SURRENDER AGAIN!!!

That is, has always been and will always remain the fault of one man: Emperor Hirohito of Japan.

I doubt you will answer my question at the bottom...

Your enemy is holed up in a large HiRISE apartment building and refuses to come out, a few of his neighbors back his play and want to protect him, most of the people occupying the building though are innocent bystanders or unwilling captives to the situation, they just want to live their lives peacefully.

You nuke the entire building, you got the badguy and his supporters, but also killed everybody else in the building.

Have you committed murder? I say you have.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
By the time the bombs were dropped, the Japanese were already making diplomatic overtures for peace.
http://www.rollitup.org/t/enter-the-scrog-scroggers-united-post-page.515987/page-202#post-9130338

https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/

https://www.osti.gov/opennet/manhattan-project-history/Events/1945/surrender.htm

maybe.....maybe not....overtures for peace are not surrenders...overtures for peace where a clearly doomed foe continues to make unreasonable demands usually aren't taken very seriously....
i personally think it was a combination of wanting to show Russia that if they fucked with us, this was what they would be fucking with, and frustration with the Japanese attitude that they could still be dictating terms, when they were badly beaten, but refused to act with any humility....
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
As for the casualties yup it’s unthinkable that the lives of innocent people are lost so again why do we have wars?
population control, and financial vigor. we send young men off to die to lower the population, and boost the economy. nothing like a good wartime economy to make the rich bastards richer.
of course, removing some of the best genetics from the race stagnates the gene pool, which may be why we have so many trumptards at the moment......
 
Last edited:
Top