Clinton: Embracing Our Common Humanity

[nakedemperor]

What a shame that shining beacon of strength and decency, the U.N., couldn't lend a hand here. I guess they're too busy kissing tyrant ass, stealing money, and scoring 9-year-old trim.

Truth. Hindsight is 20/20...

 

[nakedemperor]

You just debated with the pop's you seem to never have had...grow up!You are a typical liberal suffering from a mental disease...how can you critique generals et al when you were never there...humm...round and round we go where we stop no one knows...your philosophy of life! Go back and read your comments...never addressing soldiers...are you blind as well or just forgot what you wrote? Also if you are in your twenties and you say you will only fight a war you feel is just...well please enlighten me as to what type of war you feel is just...geez!
Also ask your wonderful professors what war they feel is just and why they did not serve?And why shpould we the righteous parents send our kids and grandkids to be trained by them....yuk...I will pass on that one!

Typical liberal.. right. I'm sure you know all about me.

I don't understand: "How can you critique generals et al when you were never there?" It seems a fairly simple task to pass judgement on the decision to firebomb Dresden.

Also, I said: "I'm not talking about soldiers in my criticism"; you're right, I did REFERENCE soldiers ("There's a difference between cutting a soldier slack for shooting someone who may or may not have been a threat to him and criticizing the armchair decisions of products of elite university systems") but, if you'll exercise those critical reading skills (oops, did you skip the "experiental shortcut" that is college?) I was explicitly EXEMPTING soldiers from my criticism.

And two out of my five professors this year served in the Vietnam war in some capacity. One is a woman and one was not of combat age, and a third was not drafted.

 

[archangel]

Typical liberal.. right. I'm sure you know all about me.

I don't understand: "How can you critique generals et al when you were never there?" It seems a fairly simple task to pass judgement on the decision to firebomb Dresden.

Also, I said: "I'm not talking about soldiers in my criticism"; you're right, I did REFERENCE soldiers ("There's a difference between cutting a soldier slack for shooting someone who may or may not have been a threat to him and criticizing the armchair decisions of products of elite university systems") but, if you'll exercise those critical reading skills (oops, did you skip the "experiental shortcut" that is college?) I was explicitly EXEMPTING soldiers from my criticism.

And two out of my five professors this year served in the Vietnam war in some capacity. One is a woman and one was not of combat age, and a third was not drafted.

Simple task to decide to firebomb Dresden as a judgement...well golly gee Mr.Wizard...was any judgement passed by you or your professors in this diatribe about how Germany attacked London with high tech(for the time)rockets and put London under extreme fire conditions...not to mention the experimental medical procedures placed upon the Jews and others in the concentration camps....on and on...as i said the US and it's allies used what was appropriate for the time to stop the Nazi push to conquer the world using any means they had at their disposal...sorry charlie it worked and we won...no matter how you critique it...as for your two professors who served...good for them..I will not take away from their service...as for you...are you a liberal or are you just playing "Devils Advocate" You seem to be avoiding the question!

 

[William Joyce]

Embracing common humanity, my arse. That's the sort of thing that gets us into more trouble than it gets us out of. The only thing common to humanity is that human beings are generally shitty. They just display their shittiness in a variety of different ways.

Meanwhile, liberals like Bill also love to prattle about "embracing our diversity" and "celebrating difference." Well, guys, what's it going to be? Embrace our commonality or our difference?

I have an idea. Let's recognize that the big green ball is populated by lots of different types of people-groups. Usually, they hate each other's guts. So it's a good idea to keep them in separate places as much as practical.

Humanity doesn't need a common embrace. It needs a separate space.

 

[Merlin1047]

I don't know which is worse - having to suffer through the agonies and terror of fighting a war or coming home to have smug, smarmy, pseudo-intellectual assholes make a career out of second-guessing what was done.

I guess we all contribute what we can.

 

[Stephanie]

People still stand in line for FIVE HOURS, to see this man. I think he's really a leader of a cult, and he's got all these people brainwashed, STILL.... :teeth: :duh3:

 

[William Joyce]

Well, when you say things like, "I'm so happy that whites are going to be a minority in America," as Bill Clinton once said at a graduation speech on the west coast, you become very popular.

 

[dilloduck]

People still stand in line for FIVE HOURS, to see this man. I think he's really a leader of a cult, and he's got all these people brainwashed, STILL.... :teeth: :duh3:

I'm guessing that they think that any man who can get a woman on her knees in the Oval Office must be pretty damn magical ! :teeth:

 

[nakedemperor]

Simple task to decide to firebomb Dresden as a judgement...well golly gee Mr.Wizard...was any judgement passed by you or your professors in this diatribe about how Germany attacked London with high tech(for the time)rockets and put London under extreme fire conditions...not to mention the experimental medical procedures placed upon the Jews and others in the concentration camps....on and on...as i said the US and it's allies used what was appropriate for the time to stop the Nazi push to conquer the world using any means they had at their disposal...

Again, if you let your enemy dictate whether or not crimes against humanity can be utilized to win an all-out war, you lose the moral highground; there's a reason we didn't murder all the German POWs we captured (even though this would have made it easier to win the war), unlike the German's executing thousands of Russian combatants.

"Well yeah but they did it..." Doesn't fly for me at all.

 

[Stephanie]

Again, if you let your enemy dictate whether or not crimes against humanity can be utilized to win an all-out war, you lose the moral highground; there's a reason we didn't murder all the German POWs we captured (even though this would have made it easier to win the war), unlike the German's executing thousands of Russian combatants.

"Well yeah but they did it..." Doesn't fly for me at all.

MORAL highground, during a time of WAR!!!! Pleeeezzzz tell me I just didn't hear this from one of our own children, after his forefathers before him, and his father's genaration after, fought for him to spill this CRAP. OMG :baby:
What the hell do you think AlQuida is doing to us right now, by cutting our and their own peoples heads off, blowing them up, they are giving a damm about humanity. Grow up, and get in the real world. :bangheads Or continue to sit your ivy league tower and put down you oun country,

 

[musicman]

Besides, I think there's a lot of Euros sitting around with nothing else to do!

Exactly! What the hell good are they, other than offering (unbidden, and in a hateful, condescending tone) advice to us from the peanut gallery, lining their pockets, and covering scandals?

 

[nakedemperor]

MORAL highground, during a time of WAR!!!! Pleeeezzzz tell me I just didn't hear this from one of our own children, after his forefathers before him, and his father's genaration after, fought for him to spill this CRAP. OMG :baby:

Hi Stephanie, don't believe I've talked to you before.

The moral highground we have, that is more stringent morals than historical enemies such as the genocidal Nazis, the terrorist Islamic fundamentalists, and the genocidal communists, is what seperates our tactics. There is a reason that Nazis executed POWs and we didn't. Why? Our moral highground; this isn't something we innately have,its something we need to "maintain"; we are certainly capable of doing immoral things, like any other nation. The spectre of war doesn't make us incapable of immoral acts, unless you dont believe in the concept of war crimes. Therefore such decisions such as firebombing Dresden are *immoral* acts into which there was not enough thought put.

What the hell do you think AlQuida is doing to us right now, by cutting our and their own peoples heads off, blowing them up, they are giving a damm about humanity.

The implication here is that we need to fight fire with fire, so to speak. Your logic is: look at them doing X; X requires us to do Y, and legitimizes and moralizes the decision to do Y. This is false logic.

Grow up, and get in the real world. :bangheads Or continue to sit your ivy league tower and put down you oun country,

How, praytell, are you defining the "real world"? A place upon entrance into which the wisdom that every act of war we've ever taken is legitimate because of the context of war is granted? I certainly hope not.

And please tell me how I'm "putting down" my country? Is it "puttingdown" my country to point out my country's mistakes towards a constructive end (like not ignoring Darfur)? What if I were to criticize Clinton's decision not to go into Rwanda? Is second guessing a democratic president also considering "putting down" my country? Based on your disparaging comments, I think you need to seperate me from the liberal you have in your mind's eye, you might find I'm not actually him/her. Moreover, I'm not sure what or why you've implied that colleges are "ivory tower" institutions; certainly they can be abused as such, but without any knowledge of what I'm learning and how I employ my knowledge, your ridicule is unwarranted and unfounded.

 

[OCA]

Does this presuppose the infallability of the armed services in conflict? I can only hope you don't mean this. There's a difference between cutting a soldier slack for shooting someone who may or may not have been a threat to him and criticizing the armchair decisions of products of elite university systems, who have somewhat more time to deliberate and hence a higher level of accountability. Did it save American lives to firebomb and kill ~500,000 women, children, elderly, and wounded soldiers in Dresden? A city 60 miles from military installations? Did it save a proportional number? Your response is vastly reductive.

Yes it did and it was full of weapons munitions plants. Learn your history yourself not just what lib professors try to rewrite and tell you wha was history.

 

[nakedemperor]

Yes it did and it was full of weapons munitions plants. Learn your history yourself not just what lib professors try to rewrite and tell you wha was history.

You assume I've learned anything about WWII from "liberal professors". In actuality, most of what I know is from the History Channel and independent research (mostly historical texts and historo-journalistic texts).

Secondly, your assertion that it was bombed because it was "full of weapons muntitions plants" isn't true. The RAF decision to firebomb the city was justified thusly by Secretary State for Air Sir Archibald Sinclair:

"The Air Staff have now arranged that, subject to the overriding claims of attacks on enemy oil production and other approved target systems within the current directive, available effort should be directed against Berlin, Dresden, Chemnitz and Leipzig or against other cities where severe bombing would not only destroy communications vital to the evacuation from the east, but would also hamper the movement of troops from the west."

At the time of the bombing of Dresden, extensive aerial bombardments of munitions facilities had already been carried out by ehte USAF and the RAF. The main goal was, as stated above, to hinder movement and communications. The total destruction of residential communities was the result, including but not limited to:

Out of 28,410 houses in the inner city of Dresden, 24,866 were destroyed. An area of 15 square kilometers was totally destroyed, among that: 14,000 homes, 72 schools, 22 hospitals, 19 churches, 5 theaters, 50 bank and insurance companies, 31 department stores, 31 large hotels, and 62 administration buildings. In total there were 222,000 apartments in the city. 75,000 of them were totally destroyed, 11,000 severely damaged, 7,000 damaged, 81,000 slightly damaged.

I would assert the negligence involved in such planning criminal; the logic of the procedure was divorced from reality. Estimates range from 200,000-500,000 civilians deaths. Even in total-war, you cannot dismiss such actions with the oft-repeated "war is hell". Indeed it is. But Dresden was a literal hell, with temperatures approaching 1200 degrees during the burning of the city.

Anyway, I gotta go learn my history. Peace.

 

[dilloduck]

You assume I've learned anything about WWII from "liberal professors". In actuality, most of what I know is from the History Channel and independent research (mostly historical texts and historo-journalistic texts).

Secondly, your assertion that it was bombed because it was "full of weapons muntitions plants" isn't true. The RAF decision to firebomb the city was justified thusly by Secretary State for Air Sir Archibald Sinclair:

"The Air Staff have now arranged that, subject to the overriding claims of attacks on enemy oil production and other approved target systems within the current directive, available effort should be directed against Berlin, Dresden, Chemnitz and Leipzig or against other cities where severe bombing would not only destroy communications vital to the evacuation from the east, but would also hamper the movement of troops from the west."

At the time of the bombing of Dresden, extensive aerial bombardments of munitions facilities had already been carried out by ehte USAF and the RAF. The main goal was, as stated above, to hinder movement and communications. The total destruction of residential communities was the result, including but not limited to:

Out of 28,410 houses in the inner city of Dresden, 24,866 were destroyed. An area of 15 square kilometers was totally destroyed, among that: 14,000 homes, 72 schools, 22 hospitals, 19 churches, 5 theaters, 50 bank and insurance companies, 31 department stores, 31 large hotels, and 62 administration buildings. In total there were 222,000 apartments in the city. 75,000 of them were totally destroyed, 11,000 severely damaged, 7,000 damaged, 81,000 slightly damaged.

I would assert the negligence involved in such planning criminal; the logic of the procedure was divorced from reality. Estimates range from 200,000-500,000 civilians deaths. Even in total-war, you cannot dismiss such actions with the oft-repeated "war is hell". Indeed it is. But Dresden was a literal hell, with temperatures approaching 1200 degrees during the burning of the city.

Anyway, I gotta go learn my history. Peace.

Shit--I knew we shoulda used those "smart" bombs.---Oh ya--we didn't have em.

 

[OCA]

You assume I've learned anything about WWII from "liberal professors". In actuality, most of what I know is from the History Channel and independent research (mostly historical texts and historo-journalistic texts).

Secondly, your assertion that it was bombed because it was "full of weapons muntitions plants" isn't true. The RAF decision to firebomb the city was justified thusly by Secretary State for Air Sir Archibald Sinclair:

"The Air Staff have now arranged that, subject to the overriding claims of attacks on enemy oil production and other approved target systems within the current directive, available effort should be directed against Berlin, Dresden, Chemnitz and Leipzig or against other cities where severe bombing would not only destroy communications vital to the evacuation from the east, but would also hamper the movement of troops from the west."

At the time of the bombing of Dresden, extensive aerial bombardments of munitions facilities had already been carried out by ehte USAF and the RAF. The main goal was, as stated above, to hinder movement and communications. The total destruction of residential communities was the result, including but not limited to:

Out of 28,410 houses in the inner city of Dresden, 24,866 were destroyed. An area of 15 square kilometers was totally destroyed, among that: 14,000 homes, 72 schools, 22 hospitals, 19 churches, 5 theaters, 50 bank and insurance companies, 31 department stores, 31 large hotels, and 62 administration buildings. In total there were 222,000 apartments in the city. 75,000 of them were totally destroyed, 11,000 severely damaged, 7,000 damaged, 81,000 slightly damaged.

I would assert the negligence involved in such planning criminal; the logic of the procedure was divorced from reality. Estimates range from 200,000-500,000 civilians deaths. Even in total-war, you cannot dismiss such actions with the oft-repeated "war is hell". Indeed it is. But Dresden was a literal hell, with temperatures approaching 1200 degrees during the burning of the city.

Anyway, I gotta go learn my history. Peace.

Oh well, war is hell someone once said...pacifist.

 

[nakedemperor]

Shit--I knew we shoulda used those "smart" bombs.---Oh ya--we didn't have em.

Or conventional bombs. The allies used incendiary bombs literally meant to raze the [entire] city to the ground.

 

[Yurt]

hehe, you said embrace and clinton in the same sentence...

 

[Merlin1047]

Or conventional bombs. The allies used incendiary bombs literally meant to raze the [entire] city to the ground.

Oh, so in your warped world it is acceptable to blow people into shredded barbeque chunks, but you can't roast them. How stupid is that?

And how many more of our people would you kill in order to win a war in a manner acceptable to your delicate sensibilities? You really are thoroughly disgusting.

Here's something you and your aging hippie professors are obviously overlooking. When you're fighting a war where the survival of the nation is at stake (as was the case is WWII), then the civilian populace of the enemy nation becomes a legitimate target. The civilian populace of the enemy nation manufactures and otherwise supports the war machine. As such, they are just as much of a legitimate target as the ball bearing plant or the refinery in which they work.

I know that's a hard pill for you leftist idealogues to swallow, but it's the plain, unvarnished and undeniable truth. Deal with it.

 

[manu1959]

Or conventional bombs. The allies used incendiary bombs literally meant to raze the [entire] city to the ground.

so what ... the germans started it ...... they got what they deserved