|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
 Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 9:25 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| I answered your question, now it's your turn. If a terrorist attack did occur in America in the near future as a result of pulling out of Iraq before it is stable are you willing to bear ANY blame at all for espousing the pullout? |
This is clearly delusional and just plain, "Forrest Gump" logic. There is no correlation between being in Iraq and fighting so called, "Al Qaeda" and the lack of terrorist attacks and America being more protected. More the other way....she is more vulnerable and watering lots of little terrorists.
It is precisely this thinking and the thinking of one poster above about Afghanistan and it being so good at stopping the Taliban and terrorists, that is precisely why America is in the fcked up state it is with this administration. They got it all wrong, first play of their playbook on this "response" to 9/11
I got to just shake my head when I hear on the news of the "war on terror" and taking it to them.......so much skummdrudgery and simpleheadedness. Not the way. Hear , listen to Bobby who advises America on what to do after the death of Martin Luther King Jr. ..... America should have taken this path......
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/rfkonmlkdeath.html
| Quote: |
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I'm only going to talk to you just for a minute or so this evening, because I have some -- some very sad news for all of you -- Could you lower those signs, please? -- I have some very sad news for all of you, and, I think, sad news for all of our fellow citizens, and people who love peace all over the world; and that is that Martin Luther King was shot and was killed tonight in Memphis, Tennessee.
Martin Luther King dedicated his life to love and to justice between fellow human beings. He died in the cause of that effort. In this difficult day, in this difficult time for the United States, it's perhaps well to ask what kind of a nation we are and what direction we want to move in. For those of you who are black -- considering the evidence evidently is that there were white people who were responsible -- you can be filled with bitterness, and with hatred, and a desire for revenge.
We can move in that direction as a country, in greater polarization -- black people amongst blacks, and white amongst whites, filled with hatred toward one another. Or we can make an effort, as Martin Luther King did, to understand, and to comprehend, and replace that violence, that stain of bloodshed that has spread across our land, with an effort to understand, compassion, and love.
For those of you who are black and are tempted to fill with -- be filled with hatred and mistrust of the injustice of such an act, against all white people, I would only say that I can also feel in my own heart the same kind of feeling. I had a member of my family killed, but he was killed by a white man.
But we have to make an effort in the United States. We have to make an effort to understand, to get beyond, or go beyond these rather difficult times.
My favorite poem, my -- my favorite poet was Aeschylus. And he once wrote:
Even in our sleep, pain which cannot forget
falls drop by drop upon the heart,
until, in our own despair,
against our will,
comes wisdom
through the awful grace of God.
What we need in the United States is not division; what we need in the United States is not hatred; what we need in the United States is not violence and lawlessness, but is love, and wisdom, and compassion toward one another, and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our country, whether they be white or whether they be black.
So I ask you tonight to return home, to say a prayer for the family of Martin Luther King -- yeah, it's true -- but more importantly to say a prayer for our own country, which all of us love -- a prayer for understanding and that compassion of which I spoke.
We can do well in this country. We will have difficult times. We've had difficult times in the past, but we -- and we will have difficult times in the future. It is not the end of violence; it is not the end of lawlessness; and it's not the end of disorder.
But the vast majority of white people and the vast majority of black people in this country want to live together, want to improve the quality of our life, and want justice for all human beings that abide in our land.
And let's dedicate ourselves to what the Greeks wrote so many years ago: to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world. Let us dedicate ourselves to that, and say a prayer for our country and for our people.
Thank you very much. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The_Conservative
Joined: 15 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
| Quote: |
| I answered your question, now it's your turn. If a terrorist attack did occur in America in the near future as a result of pulling out of Iraq before it is stable are you willing to bear ANY blame at all for espousing the pullout? |
This is clearly delusional and just plain, "Forrest Gump" logic. There is no correlation between being in Iraq and fighting so called, "Al Qaeda" and the lack of terrorist attacks and America being more protected. More the other way....she is more vulnerable and watering lots of little terrorists.
] |
What are you on about? Logic? I posed a hypothetical question. I did not say that America WOULD be attacked, only asked for a response should this situation occur.
But think about it. We've killed lots of their friends, sons, and relatives. If America pulls out do you really think they'll be content with that? That's what we thought about Afghanistan and look what happened there. Should we pull out of Saudi too? Heck we should pull out of the Mid East all together, let Israel get slaughtered and go back to heating our homes and fueling our industries with coal. And let's replace our cars with horse and buggies as well.
If I went overboard in the last paragraph it's because I'm trying to make a point. Realistically we can NOT afford to disengage from the M.E anytime soon.
Period. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mosley
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 12:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, Conservative, you'll notice that Bobster has visited CE today but hasn't bothered to answer your(reasonable) request for a response. I wouldn't hold my breath, either.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 1:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'll answer and believe I did indirectly by using Bobby Kennedy's speech.
We realistically can afford BUT to disengage from the M.E. , militarily. Not in other ways but militarily it is a NO brainer IF the military is meant to serve the real needs of all human beings, not just America and thus, America continues to lead the human race in the direction of freedom and justice.
The military on the ground there, only serves the terrorists.
What to do? Pursue extremists through intelligence, through the bottom up and not top down -- by supporting through education and development the needs of these nations and respecting their own development as nations towards democracy. NOT shoving it down their throats (as in Iraq and wished elsewhere). Of course, stop terrorists through their access to weaponry (and yes, the U.S. is a culpable for the spread of armnaments as many nations -- in my belief even more so) and through their soil -- denying them believers.
I won't go on, this is a long discussion which involves pluralism, cultural tolerance and bringing extremists into the governing process in a slow and winning manner.
Please read Bobby again and replace certain people's with others. Different time and place but same issue and same response needed.....
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Location: Nearly in NK
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 3:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bobby Kennedy one of the great winners in the nepotism sweepstakes. Made Attorney General by his brother. I would expect a better example than that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 3:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bobby Kennedy?
We're not talking about Joseph McCarthy's right hand man are we?
In December 1952, at the behest of his father, he was appointed by Republican Senator Joe McCarthy as assistant counsel of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.[1] He resigned in July 1953 but "retained a fondness for McCarthy."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kennedy#Career_until_1960
Didn't he kill Marilyn Monroe?
cbc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mosley
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
What cbclark said: 
"Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?" Great way to teach your students simple present vs. pres. perfect, BTW.
Ah, the Kennedys. Anyone for a dip at Chappaquidick(sp?)? Ted? ddeubel? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 5:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bobster wrote:
| Quote: |
| Do YOU want your son, daughter, sister or brother to be the last one to die in a war that serves not the slightest benefit to the country they were born in? |
Glad you noticed that McGarrett always looked people in the eye. So did the actor who played him. So do I.
You've posed a LOADED question.  What if I asked you:
"Do YOU want your son, daughter, sister or brother to be the last one to die in a traffic accident?"
That's how your question sounds.
NO ONE wants their beloved to die in war. But if they went to war and believe in the cause or in their duty to go, I wouldn't moan over it.
Your assumption is that the war has no purpose. I disagree. That doesn't mean I agree with the Bush policy or want to plant a big wet kiss on Donald Rumsfeld's face, either.
As I said and you conveniently ignored, most of the families don't share your fatalism.
Now run along and play marbles with ddeubel. But hurry, he's lost a lot of them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
The_Conservative:
| Quote: |
If a terrorist attack did occur in America in the near future as a result of pulling out of Iraq before it is stable are you willing to bear ANY blame at all for espousing the pullout?
Because according to you people who support the war bear the blame for the deaths that are occuring, so I'm wondering if the same logic applies for those on the other side. |
You know, it's a halfway fair question - only halfway fair, but I'll go the full mile and give you the real answer, and here it is.
Yes, I'll take that blame, if ever such a thing will occur, or I will at least run the risk of it, ... because I know the risk is either minimal or nonexistent. There just has never been any concrete evidence shown to the world that terrorism on American soil came from Iraq - and the world has been asking for exactly that evidence ...
Show me some truth. You know very good and well I can can show you a LOT of lies from this govt. If you are honest, you KNOW I can show you those lies. You stilll want to believe them? Why? No one else does.
These are lies that kill people.
Last edited by The Bobster on Thu May 31, 2007 7:14 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Location: Nearly in NK
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Iraq was not a payback for 9/11 Iraq was a don't f with us message to Islam. The message gor sidetracked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Bobster wrote: |
The_Conservative:
| Quote: |
If a terrorist attack did occur in America in the near future as a result of pulling out of Iraq before it is stable are you willing to bear ANY blame at all for espousing the pullout?
Because according to you people who support the war bear the blame for the deaths that are occuring, so I'm wondering if the same logic applies for those on the other side. |
You know, it's a halfway fair question - only halfway fair, but I'll go the full mile and give you the real answer, and here it is.
Yes, I'll take that blame, if ever such a thing will occur, or I will at least run the risk of it, ... because I know the risk is either minimal or nonexistent. There just has never been any concrete evidence shown to the world that terrorism on American soil came from Iraq - and the world has been asking for evactly that evidence ...
Show me some truth. You know very good and well I can can show you a LOT of lies from this govt. If you are honest, you KNOW I can show you those lies. You stilll want to believe them? Why? No one else does.
These are lies that kill people. |
Sounds like the Micheal More argument.
| Quote: |
hat Iraq under Saddam had never attacked or killed or even threatened (his words) any American. I never quite know whether Moore is as ignorant as he looks, or even if that would be humanly possible. Baghdad was for years the official, undisguised home address of Abu Nidal, then the most-wanted gangster in the world, who had been sentenced to death even by the PLO and had blown up airports in Vienna* and Rome. Baghdad was the safe house for the man whose "operation" murdered Leon Klinghoffer. Saddam boasted publicly of his financial sponsorship of suicide bombers in Israel. (Quite a few Americans of all denominations walk the streets of Jerusalem.) In 1991, a large number of Western hostages were taken by the hideous Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and held in terrible conditions for a long time. After that same invasion was repelled�Saddam having killed quite a few Americans and Egyptians and Syrians and Brits in the meantime and having threatened to kill many more�the Iraqi secret police were caught trying to murder former President Bush during his visit to Kuwait. Never mind whether his son should take that personally. (Though why should he not?) Should you and I not resent any foreign dictatorship that attempts to kill one of our retired chief executives? (President Clinton certainly took it that way: He ordered the destruction by cruise missiles of the Baathist "security" headquarters.) Iraqi forces fired, every day, for 10 years, on the aircraft that patrolled the no-fly zones and staved off further genocide in the north and south of the country. In 1993, a certain Mr. Yasin helped mix the chemicals for the bomb at the World Trade Center and then skipped to Iraq, where he remained a guest of the state until the overthrow of Saddam. In 2001, Saddam's regime was the only one in the region that openly celebrated the attacks on New York and Washington and described them as just the beginning of a larger revenge. Its official media regularly spewed out a stream of anti-Semitic incitement. I think one might describe that as "threatening," even if one was narrow enough to think that anti-Semitism only menaces Jews. And it was after, and not before, the 9/11 attacks that Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi moved from Afghanistan to Baghdad and began to plan his now very open and lethal design for a holy and ethnic civil war. On Dec. 1, 2003, the New York Times reported�and the David Kay report had established�that Saddam had been secretly negotiating with the "Dear Leader" Kim Jong-il in a series of secret meetings in Syria, as late as the spring of 2003, to buy a North Korean missile system, and missile-production system, right off the shelf. (This attempt was not uncovered until after the fall of Baghdad, the coalition's presence having meanwhile put an end to the negotiations.) |
Let the record show that Saddam did in fact support terrorism. and that he wouldn't give up his war.
Tell us Bobster is their anything in this passage that is not so.
Letting Business as usual go on in the mideast is the reason for 9-11. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cbclark4
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Location: Masan
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Bobster wrote: |
The_Conservative:
| Quote: |
If a terrorist attack did occur in America in the near future as a result of pulling out of Iraq before it is stable are you willing to bear ANY blame at all for espousing the pullout?
Because according to you people who support the war bear the blame for the deaths that are occuring, so I'm wondering if the same logic applies for those on the other side. |
You know, it's a halfway fair question - only halfway fair, but I'll go the full mile and give you the real answer, and here it is.
Yes, I'll take that blame, if ever such a thing will occur, or I will at least run the risk of it, ... because I know the risk is either minimal or nonexistent. There just has never been any concrete evidence shown to the world that terrorism on American soil came from Iraq - and the world has been asking for evactly that evidence ...
Show me some truth. You know very good and well I can can show you a LOT of lies from this govt. If you are honest, you KNOW I can show you those lies. You stilll want to believe them? Why? No one else does.
These are lies that kill people. |
The orginal arguement is "there were no terrorists in Iraq!"
And then we show you Abu Nidal.
(Shane, do you remember Pan am 103, Dick Tracey)
Asylum in Iraq!
You lie, do you kill people.
It is people such as you who find justification in Munich Olympics Massacre and Pan Am 103.
cbc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The_Conservative
Joined: 15 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Bobster wrote: |
The_Conservative:
| Quote: |
If a terrorist attack did occur in America in the near future as a result of pulling out of Iraq before it is stable are you willing to bear ANY blame at all for espousing the pullout?
Because according to you people who support the war bear the blame for the deaths that are occuring, so I'm wondering if the same logic applies for those on the other side. |
You know, it's a halfway fair question - only halfway fair, but I'll go the full mile and give you the real answer, and here it is.
Yes, I'll take that blame, if ever such a thing will occur, or I will at least run the risk of it, ... because I know the risk is either minimal or nonexistent.
There just has never been any concrete evidence shown to the world that terrorism on American soil came from Iraq - and the world has been asking for evactly that evidence ...
. |
What about terrorism against Americans or American property in other parts of the world?
And even assuming that terrorism on American soil NEVER came from Iraq...does not rule out the possibility that it MAY occur in the future.
But anyway thanks for answering the question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 7:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Conservative wrote: |
| And even assuming that terrorism on American soil NEVER came from Iraq...does not rule out the possibility that it MAY occur in the future. |
Personally, I'd LOVE to see you explain the morality of murder and torture and collateral damage (i.e., dead women and children) for the mere possibility that something "MAY occur in the future"...
Iraq had no connection to Al-Queda, no connection to the WTC and 9/11. At the time of the invasion, there were no WMDs anywhere in that country, and Iraq posed no danger to America.
These are the lies Casey Sheehan was told, and these lies are why he died. He believed them and now he is dead. He died for nothing. This is what Cindy was saying, and she was correct : "No more needless gravestones. No more wasted lives."
If you can't feel sad about that ... well, I don't know what to say.
She's left public life for the moment, because she was being asked to play ball and compromise her message, and start talking about "timetables" and "benchmarks," when this is what is true, and this is what we need to look at :
This thing is whack. It's bad for America. End it. End it now.
There's a Democratic majority in Congress right now, and that wasn't true when Cindy first stood up and opened her mouth - anyone REALLY want to say the Uglicans wouldn't still be running things if people like Cindy hadn't stood up and started the talk they started?
REALLY?
Last edited by The Bobster on Sat Jun 02, 2007 1:39 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Looks like The Bobster is still bobbing his head on his car dashboard trying to think of a comeback. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
