tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post4526915983038667795..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: Moral Weakness or HypocrisyAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-70944639096907884712010-11-27T11:37:17.227-07:002010-11-27T11:37:17.227-07:00It IS the gods fault:::They manage planet earth th...It IS the gods fault:::They manage planet earth through their clone hosts and, being the control freaks they are, everything is PRECISELY as they wish.<br />True, in most 99% of cases it is their primary tool, Artificial INtelligence, doing all the work. But events like this Situation is when they get personally involved and we get a glimpse into their true pathology.<br />Yes, some of it could be misleading temptation. So it's ok to be evil as long as the ends justify the means??<br />Immoral hypocrites.<br />crab $5,95 a pound.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-29493421774024926102007-09-13T21:28:00.000-06:002007-09-13T21:28:00.000-06:00"I am concerned about the potential morale boost t..."I am concerned about the potential morale boost that al-Qaeda can get from an American withdraw."<BR/><BR/>Sorry to over-comment here. But I did want to mention that this is a lame rationalization for occupying Iraq. A much more solid concern is the potential for genocide in Iraq.<BR/><BR/>To see what probably boosts Al Qaeda moral, see the HBO film "Alive Day" which can be streamed directly over the internet.<BR/>http://www.hbo.com/aliveday/?ntrack_para1=feat_main_imageSheldonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03743116454273042629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-54008580608657010122007-09-13T21:12:00.000-06:002007-09-13T21:12:00.000-06:00"Item 2: The 'non-partisan' experts that I referre..."Item 2: The 'non-partisan' experts that I referred to are the Iraq Study Group and the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the military."<BR/><BR/>Alonzo,<BR/>It is precisely that group of people who I think we should be skeptical of. They may be non-partisans across the Democrat-Republican divide, among U.S. elites, but they are not disinterested observers in the goal of resolving the Iraqi conflict. They are what I meant by "partisans for empire". And soldiers are soldiers, they generally do what is expected of them. <BR/><BR/>I guess that we approach the subject of Iraq with very different premises and assumptions.<BR/><BR/>It is frustrating to me because I think 90% of what you write makes sense. Yet, from my perspective, when it comes to Iraq you throw skepticism to the wind. However, I certainly recognize that I could be wrong about many things.<BR/><BR/>And a clarification. I did not claim that just because somebody is scorned by the mainstream, that we simply accept their positions and arguments as true and valid. Of course you must evaluate their credibility and the info. and arguments they put forth.<BR/><BR/>And I did give an explicit example in Scott Ritter. Former UNSCOM inspector in Iraq. When the mainstream media were cheering us into war, and Congress was not asking tough questions, Ritter was telling us what we now know to be true, but he was marginalized, and still is.<BR/><BR/>Socio-Political issues are not like biology or physics, where one can reliably consult the popularly accepted experts.Sheldonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03743116454273042629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-78574138376869085702007-09-11T22:24:00.000-06:002007-09-11T22:24:00.000-06:00SheldonItem 1: It does not matter whether al-Qaeda...<B>Sheldon</B><BR/><BR/>Item 1: It does not matter whether al-Qaeda is the primary actor in the insurgency. Any public relations firm will tell you that it is perceptions that matter. Al-Qaeda and other Muslim fundamentalists will be able to advertise an American withdraw as proof that Allah is on the side of those fighting America.<BR/><BR/>It could be argued that an American withdraw will not help al-Qaeda. However, that makes my point. People are making decisions based on incomplete information - asserting certain knowledge of effects they cannot know. I am concerned about the potential morale boost that al-Qaeda can get from an American withdraw. Yet, my position is still to trust the experts in the field.<BR/><BR/>Ultimately, I don't think anybody can give qualified advice on the best course of action to take in Iraq who does not have a top secret military clearance and has used it to study the best information available on the subject.<BR/><BR/>Item 2: The 'non-partisan' experts that I referred to are the Iraq Study Group and the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the military. Each member of the Iraq Study Group was partisan, but the group itself was set up to be non-partisan. And I think that the Joint Chiefs of Staff can be considered reasonably qualified to discuss different military strategies.<BR/><BR/>Merely being disliked by conservatives and liberals alike is not a qualification. Nazis are disliked by conservatives and liberals alike, but they are not the model of intellectual integrity.<BR/><BR/>Item 3: I pretty much predicted what would happen as well. However, I still would not argue that I am a master of mid-east politics and, thus, can be trusted to design the perfect strategy for America's future in Iraq. Maybe I just got lucky.Alonzo Fyfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-49625187183632340412007-09-11T21:26:00.000-06:002007-09-11T21:26:00.000-06:00"My complaint is with Democrats who argue that we ..."My complaint is with Democrats who argue that we should pull our troops out of Iraq even though the only thing they know about the situation is what they hear on the news."<BR/><BR/>Gosh Alonzo, you actually seem to be one of the people who actually buy into the premises that is supported by mainstream news.<BR/><BR/>First is your acceptance of the assumption (promoted by gov. propaganda) that Al Qaeda is the weighty and primary actor in the insurgency. And that if the U.S. pulls out, then this equals a victory for Al Qaeda. Dig a little deeper beyond alleged "credible" news sources, and you will find that Al Qaeda is not so much the powerful political military force in Iraq. It could be just as easily argued that a U.S. withdrawl might result in taking the winds out of Al Qaeda's sails.<BR/><BR/>Second, who are these alleged "non-partisan experts" who you think know best about what to do in Iraq? I don't really give a rats ass about their party affiliation, which is not neccessarily a good indication of their non-partisanship. There are plenty of so-called independents, liberal Democrats, or Republicans that are still partisans of U.S. empire. Much Democrat anti-war posturing is only a politics of convenience, they can see which way the wind blows. These so-called "liberals" caved in with a lack of skepticism when Bush and Co. made their case for war. Meanwhile there was abundant evidence to the contrary of Bush and Co.'s claims. Looking for experts? Scott Ritter. Want a guide to choosing your experts when it comes to war and politics? Look for the guy that is scorned and dismissed by mainstream conservatives and liberals alike, because they question the acceptable premises. Like Scott Ritter, Noam Chomsky, and others. <BR/><BR/>"These people assert that the Bush Administration is morally culpable for not checking its assumptions, while these people express no moral objection to check their own assumptions."<BR/><BR/>Alonzo, I question your assumptions, that accepts the prevailing wisdom, that somehow U.S. military presence in Iraq is somehow preventing a disaster. When in fact, it is the U.S. presence that opened the Pandora's box of disaster, and exacerbates that disaster.<BR/><BR/>"At the very least, they recklessly believed that the Iraq invasion would be over quickly and have a very low cost."<BR/><BR/>Well, I was never one of "those liberals". With my relatively amatuerish study of the situation, I predicted very much what has happened. Not because I am that smart, I just consulted the experts that are scorned and dismissed by the mainstream.<BR/><BR/>Pardon my rant, I just seem to choke on your musing on the Iraq situation.<BR/><BR/>Here is a link to an article that take a different perspective on the Iraqi crisis. Cheers.<BR/><BR/> http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/62042/Sheldonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03743116454273042629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-63456724194970080102007-09-11T06:01:00.000-06:002007-09-11T06:01:00.000-06:00ThayneActually, I have not argued that we should n...<B>Thayne</B><BR/><BR/>Actually, I have not argued that we should not pull our troops out of Iraq. My position has always been to go with the judgment of experts in the field - non-partisan scholars whose life has been dedicated to the study of such issues.<BR/><BR/>My complaint is with Democrats who argue that we should pull our troops out of Iraq even though the only thing they know about the situation is what they hear on the news. They mentally filter the news, hearing what they want to hear and disregarding the rest, the same way that Bush did with Iraq.<BR/><BR/>I do not need to show that their conclusions are wrong to accuse them of hypocrisy. All I need to show is that they are basing their conclusions on incomplete and unvetted information. Thus, they are condemning others of intellectual recklessness while they are guilty themselves.Alonzo Fyfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-23550760454531509362007-09-11T00:26:00.000-06:002007-09-11T00:26:00.000-06:00Alonzo --I don't think liberal Democrats who accus...Alonzo --<BR/><BR/>I don't think liberal Democrats who accused Bush of intellectual wrecklessness in leading us into Iraq and who also support withdrawl from Iraq is a good example of hipocrisy.<BR/><BR/>For one thing, I think you're constructing a strawman -- liberal Democrats who argue both that there are no dangers in withrawing the troops and the only way to win a war is to vanquish the enemy.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps there is somebody who is a Democrat and makes these claims, but I don't think it paints an accurate picture of prominent Democratic leaders.<BR/><BR/>Most liberal Democrats who support withdrawl would probably claim one or both of the following:<BR/><BR/>1. There is no enemy we could defeat that will result in a peaceful Iraq.<BR/><BR/>2. We cannot prevent civil war in Iraq. We can perhaps delay it, but eventually, it will happen. If so, why waste our time, money, and troops lives stalling the enevitable?<BR/><BR/>Now, one could take issue with these claims, but I don't think they are comparable to the absurd assumptions made by Bush in the lead up to the war, or the lack of planning that went into the war itself and the aftermath.<BR/><BR/>Finally, how are you certain that pulling the troops, apparently no matter how it is done, will <I>certainly</I> increase al-Queida recruits and funding? Surely our continued presence in Iraq itself has these effects. Are you certain that removing the troops can only lead to even greater funding and recruiting?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com