NONE of the revolutionary examples you cite were revolts against _religious_fanatic_ masters.
BTW I'm not inciting revolution. I'm observing what is required to displace ruthless people who are inspired by an imaginary celestial friend.
The Iranians aren't going anywhere, because Iran is far too comfortable for revolt. Revolutions don't usually happen when there is no freedom, they happen when there isn't enough food. Nothing to see here.
I don't care if Iran revolts or not. Democracy would just make them a more efficient enemy of non-Islamic nations. They don't "want to become Europe", they just want a piece of the current pie.
I don't confuse these people with secular humans. They were chanting "God is Great" during their protests. Invoking superstition isn't progress.
"I don't have a problem with them releasing the documents, but they should have redacted names first."
They are sophisticated enough to know that revolutionary movements would (and logically, _should_) murder anyone who collaborates.
Such outcomes are obvious and foreseeable. It's a reasonable tactic for Assange to assist the Taliban and call that something else because it furthers his goals.
Look for Pfc Manning to be prosecuted based on the results of Taliban exploitation his data. He could have redacted collaborator names, but that would have meant reviewing the info instead of dumping it. Attention-whoring has its price, but won't make him a sympathetic figure at his Court Martial.
"Regime change isn't very effective when you have the Keystone Kops trying to carry it out for you."
Regime change isn't going to happen due to a few protesting students, and the mullocracy can choose to kill them off if they threaten Islamic control of government.
The people who want to change Iran will have to display a greater will to power than the Islamocracy. That's a very tough act to follow. It would require a Maoist level of ruthlessness, not the trifling discontent of a few young people.
"But presumably, it isn't difficult making a name for yourself enough to create a small, but sustainable presence if what you seek to do is make a living through live performance?"
One can do much, much more than that through live performance.
"Impossible! People have no power over their own lives. They need organizations and government protections to thrive. Only through rules, regulations, laws, taxes, unions, corporations and big government can people be expected to be well."
"Already, this should suggest to you that "sexual harassment" covers more than you think it does -- after all, we were given a guide to avoiding it, not just told to show respect to our coworkers."
I use the military "senior NCO self-defense" method though I'm now retired. I don't speak to female co-workers unless it's pure business, I don't socialize with female co-workers, and I'm flawlessly polite to them. I avoid being unaccompanied with them in the same room, but do it subtly. I ensure they are assigned and evaluated fairly, but given the choice I'd rather keep females at the workplace far enough away to avoid any perception of conflict-of-interest.
Military-origin Protip: Keep at least one kickass female supervisor around to discipline other females. Bonus if that female is non-White. There are plenty of good females who want to do their job, but the game is what it is and it doesn't respond favorably to resistance.
"Out of interest, has anyone ever done a study on whether the effort and money put into firstly creating the laws, secondly enforcing the laws, and thirdly coming into compliance with the laws has ever come anywhere near break even with regard to increased ability of the disabled back into the community? "
That was never the objective. The objective is to make everyone else pay to support disabled access no matter what the cost or actual situational necessity.
The classic example I've seen was the Handicapped parking spaces next to a fighter squadron Ops building. There are no handicapped F-16 fighter pilots.
"Who feels that is their right these days? I've never heard someone say "it's my right to drink and drive".
How many lushes do you talk to? The drunks (who love the "disease" model of their favored sport because they despise responsibility) are all about themselves, and demonstrate they don't care who they kill by driving impaired in the first place.
Tight BAC limits are quite reasonable IMO. As I'd tell my Motorcycle Safety Foundation classes (back when drinking was not Politically Incorrect in the USAF) "I may drink until I'm as fucked up as a concrete bicycle., but I don't ride, and when I party we take the keys and everyone has a place to pass out." 12 hours between bottle and throttle ensures operators aren't impaired by tiredness from partying even if they have a low BAC.
BTW, the best solution may be public transportation. In Germany, one can visit Oktober-and-many-other-fests where tens of thousands of people may be totally hammered. They arrive and depart by bus and rail. No problem. When I was there, we were briefed that the Polizei could take blood samples by force. They take no shit, and the happpy outcome is a country with wonderful booze and fast cars co-exist peacefully.
"it could conceivably be the better choice of two horrific choices."
It needn't be considered horrific. The inability to make judgement calls is a new custom that is being drilled into the public by advocates of Political Correctness.
I could as easily make the call to use torture on an appropriate enemy as I could disinfect a toilet seat. There is no need to treat some enemies as other than objects to be manipulated as necessary. "Torture" could be made more practical by being made less dramatic and more clinical.
It need not involve beating or obviously injuring the subject.
Just as the death penalty is made acceptable by lethal injection, appropriate technology could assist information extraction with less stress on the people doing the interrogating.
Not a word from you about what their ideology produces, just that you met some nice people.
Albert Speer was a nice fellow too, but the society he enabled was not so nice. It doesn't matter that he wasn't a zealot.
Muslims support Islam by being Muslim. I've seen the finest Islamic societies in history. They are theocratic, oppressive, and deserve to perish, along with the "nice" Muslims who MAKE THEM FUNCTION.
Fuck religion, secular societies don't need Muslims. When "Muslims" renounce their religion and regain their humanity, then they might be worthy of my respect. I literally regard the only good Muslim to be one that isn't breathing.
"Question: did you visit one? If not, just how do you know?"
I've visited several,and on a very FRIENDLY basis. I have social skills and use them, along with a smooth, low-key canned anti-Zionist spiel to curry favor.:)
I deployed to KSA, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Abu Dhabi multiple times.
Got along fine with the locals, but that isn't the point. These societies are utterly loathsome, unless one likes monotheism and repression. They are the best that Islam has ever produced.
Not with the right mindset. If you play in-character, you know you are expendable, expect paradise as a reward, and your ops are simple. Instead of planning ingress/attack/egress, all you have to do is get close and detonate yourself or fight quickly to the death.
These ideas have precedent. Bushido comes to mind.
"It yields statements which the victim thinks you want to hear, even if they're entirely false"
Not necessarily. There is no logical reason that professional interrogation combined with torture cannot achieve useful results.
Given that it is proven possible to break highly trained and committed people (such as US flyers in the Hanoi Hilton), torture coupled with sufficiently specific questioning and used in conjunction with other intel sources could extract useful info which could then be verified using non-tortuous means.
If one is willing to contemplate professional, clinical, non-sadistic torture instead of stereotypical torture, it becomes a reasonable tactic. (Especially so when used against Communists, Jihadists, and others not worthy of preservation.)
Paul Aussaresses used torture to good effect in Algeria. (Had De Gaulle not sold out the loyal Algerians and French colonists, Algeria could well have remained French.) He also had the balls to document it in his autobiography, usefully adding to literature on the subject.
Hatred toward Islam, as the most toxic by far of all desert superstitions, is quite reasonable. All believers are either extremists or enablers thereof. Visit an Islamic society and unless you are Muslim, you will appreciate just how toxic unfettered Islam is.
The idea that supersition/religion deserves respect, is not reasonable. Religion is nonsense, and Islam is the worst of a bad lot. Why people who believe in secular freedom try to defend a religion which is completely opposed to that concept is curious. It won't make Muslims into anything different.
If enough anti-Muslim sentiment can be fanned to drive some out of the US and deter others from infesting it, fine with me. They belong in the desert where their pan-Arabist nonsense originated.
MEXICANS are causing the bloodbath. The cartels can buy more than enough weapons internationally, or (because a basic machine shop can churn out tons of firearms) simply contract them locally as easily as they buy drugs for resale.
What they need is a Pinochet or other dictator to restore order, because conventional democracy cannot be made to function without preparatory war. Kill the cartel members, confiscate their property, and run all prisons instead of letting prisoners run them. If the prisoners misbehave, kill them.
One thing Mao had right was the methods he used to remove the warlords of China. In that situation, nothing else works.
Your demographics are much different. When people have nothing in common they don't care about each other and act tribally.
Bonus rebuttal number two:
People stealing TVs from an occupied residence thereby demonstrate their willingness to destroy any opposing humans therein. Therefore, shooting them is reasonable. They can avoid the whole situation by behaving themselves. I don't invade the homes of others, and therefore remain happily unshot!
They depreciate dramatically, but people who like them can afford to trade them in before they die. They bring little at dealer auctions if anything major is wrong with them.
Slashdot Mirror
NONE of the revolutionary examples you cite were revolts against _religious_fanatic_ masters.
BTW I'm not inciting revolution. I'm observing what is required to displace ruthless people who are inspired by an imaginary celestial friend.
The Iranians aren't going anywhere, because Iran is far too comfortable for revolt. Revolutions don't usually happen when there is no freedom, they happen when there isn't enough food. Nothing to see here.
I don't care if Iran revolts or not. Democracy would just make them a more efficient enemy of non-Islamic nations. They don't "want to become Europe", they just want a piece of the current pie.
I don't confuse these people with secular humans. They were chanting "God is Great" during their protests. Invoking superstition isn't progress.
"Oh no! Duct tape, electrical tape or pink duct tape on the built in webcam! Problem solved!"
Why give up the security aspect? Crowdsource the monitoring to 4chan instead.
"I don't have a problem with them releasing the documents, but they should have redacted names first."
They are sophisticated enough to know that revolutionary movements would (and logically, _should_) murder anyone who collaborates.
Such outcomes are obvious and foreseeable. It's a reasonable tactic for Assange to assist the Taliban and call that something else because it furthers his goals.
Look for Pfc Manning to be prosecuted based on the results of Taliban exploitation his data. He could have redacted collaborator names, but that would have meant reviewing the info instead of dumping it. Attention-whoring has its price, but won't make him a sympathetic figure at his Court Martial.
"Regime change isn't very effective when you have the Keystone Kops trying to carry it out for you."
Regime change isn't going to happen due to a few protesting students, and the mullocracy can choose to kill them off if they threaten Islamic control of government.
The people who want to change Iran will have to display a greater will to power than the Islamocracy. That's a very tough act to follow. It would require a Maoist level of ruthlessness, not the trifling discontent of a few young people.
"But presumably, it isn't difficult making a name for yourself enough to create a small, but sustainable presence if what you seek to do is make a living through live performance?"
One can do much, much more than that through live performance.
The Grateful Dead certainly did.
"Impossible! People have no power over their own lives. They need organizations and government protections to thrive. Only through rules, regulations, laws, taxes, unions, corporations and big government can people be expected to be well."
Nancy Pelosi, is that you?
"Already, this should suggest to you that "sexual harassment" covers more than you think it does -- after all, we were given a guide to avoiding it, not just told to show respect to our coworkers."
I use the military "senior NCO self-defense" method though I'm now retired. I don't speak to female co-workers unless it's pure business, I don't socialize with female co-workers, and I'm flawlessly polite to them. I avoid being unaccompanied with them in the same room, but do it subtly.
I ensure they are assigned and evaluated fairly, but given the choice I'd rather keep females at the workplace far enough away to avoid any perception of conflict-of-interest.
Military-origin Protip:
Keep at least one kickass female supervisor around to discipline other females. Bonus if that female is non-White. There are plenty of good females who want to do their job, but the game is what it is and it doesn't respond favorably to resistance.
"Out of interest, has anyone ever done a study on whether the effort and money put into firstly creating the laws, secondly enforcing the laws, and thirdly coming into compliance with the laws has ever come anywhere near break even with regard to increased ability of the disabled back into the community? "
That was never the objective. The objective is to make everyone else pay to support disabled access no matter what the cost or actual situational necessity.
The classic example I've seen was the Handicapped parking spaces next to a fighter squadron Ops building. There are no handicapped F-16 fighter pilots.
"Who feels that is their right these days? I've never heard someone say "it's my right to drink and drive".
How many lushes do you talk to? The drunks (who love the "disease" model of their favored sport because they despise responsibility) are all about themselves, and demonstrate they don't care who they kill by driving impaired in the first place.
Tight BAC limits are quite reasonable IMO. As I'd tell my Motorcycle Safety Foundation classes (back when drinking was not Politically Incorrect in the USAF) "I may drink until I'm as fucked up as a concrete bicycle., but I don't ride, and when I party we take the keys and everyone has a place to pass out." 12 hours between bottle and throttle ensures operators aren't impaired by tiredness from partying even if they have a low BAC.
BTW, the best solution may be public transportation. In Germany, one can visit Oktober-and-many-other-fests where tens of thousands of people may be totally hammered. They arrive and depart by bus and rail. No problem. When I was there, we were briefed that the Polizei could take blood samples by force. They take no shit, and the happpy outcome is a country with wonderful booze and fast cars co-exist peacefully.
"it could conceivably be the better choice of two horrific choices."
It needn't be considered horrific. The inability to make judgement calls is a new custom that is being drilled into the public by advocates of Political Correctness.
I could as easily make the call to use torture on an appropriate enemy as I could disinfect a toilet seat. There is no need to treat some enemies as other than objects to be manipulated as necessary. "Torture" could be made more practical by being made less dramatic and more clinical.
It need not involve beating or obviously injuring the subject.
Just as the death penalty is made acceptable by lethal injection, appropriate technology could assist information extraction with less stress on the people doing the interrogating.
Not a word from you about what their ideology produces, just that you met some nice people.
Albert Speer was a nice fellow too, but the society he enabled was not so nice. It doesn't matter that he wasn't a zealot.
Muslims support Islam by being Muslim. I've seen the finest Islamic societies in history. They are theocratic, oppressive, and deserve to perish, along with the "nice" Muslims who MAKE THEM FUNCTION.
Fuck religion, secular societies don't need Muslims. When "Muslims" renounce their religion and regain their humanity, then they might be worthy of my respect. I literally regard the only good Muslim to be one that isn't breathing.
"Question: did you visit one? If not, just how do you know?"
I've visited several,and on a very FRIENDLY basis. I have social skills and use them, along with a smooth, low-key canned anti-Zionist spiel to curry favor. :)
I deployed to KSA, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Abu Dhabi multiple times.
Got along fine with the locals, but that isn't the point. These societies are utterly loathsome, unless one likes monotheism and repression. They are the best that Islam has ever produced.
"That would be so depressing."
Not with the right mindset. If you play in-character, you know you are expendable, expect paradise as a reward, and your ops are simple.
Instead of planning ingress/attack/egress, all you have to do is get close and detonate yourself or fight quickly to the death.
These ideas have precedent. Bushido comes to mind.
"It yields statements which the victim thinks you want to hear, even if they're entirely false"
Not necessarily. There is no logical reason that professional interrogation combined with torture cannot achieve useful results.
Given that it is proven possible to break highly trained and committed people (such as US flyers in the Hanoi Hilton), torture coupled with sufficiently specific questioning and used in conjunction with other intel sources could extract useful info which could then be verified using non-tortuous means.
If one is willing to contemplate professional, clinical, non-sadistic torture instead of stereotypical torture, it becomes a reasonable tactic. (Especially so when used against Communists, Jihadists, and others not worthy of preservation.)
Paul Aussaresses used torture to good effect in Algeria. (Had De Gaulle not sold out the loyal Algerians and French colonists, Algeria could well have remained French.) He also had the balls to document it in his autobiography, usefully adding to literature on the subject.
Hatred toward Islam, as the most toxic by far of all desert superstitions, is quite reasonable. All believers are either extremists or enablers thereof. Visit an Islamic society and unless you are Muslim, you will appreciate just how toxic unfettered Islam is.
The idea that supersition/religion deserves respect, is not reasonable. Religion is nonsense, and Islam is the worst of a bad lot. Why people who believe in secular freedom try to defend a religion which is completely opposed to that concept is curious. It won't make Muslims into anything different.
If enough anti-Muslim sentiment can be fanned to drive some out of the US and deter others from infesting it, fine with me. They belong in the desert where their pan-Arabist nonsense originated.
Thanks to the internet, I know that many people would not only welcome _real_ dickwolves, but would like to _be_ them.
The real-world version is a bit more expensive, but has been an excellent investment:
http://www.irwin.army.mil/Pages/default.aspx
American soldiers often "play" the enemy during training, and don't feel guilt for playing OPFOR.
Have some (BIG) OPFOR:
http://www.irwin.army.mil/Pages/default.aspx
"The problem lies in that most US people seem to equal justice with revenge."
There being insufficient order, turning up the pain until there is order is reasonable.
I for one am amazed at our reasonably-priced lawyer overlords!
Never ascribe to malice what can easily be explained by religion.
Instant election loss to Bible Thumpers would follow.
MEXICANS are causing the bloodbath. The cartels can buy more than enough weapons internationally, or (because a basic machine shop can churn out tons of firearms) simply contract them locally as easily as they buy drugs for resale.
What they need is a Pinochet or other dictator to restore order, because conventional democracy cannot be made to function without preparatory war.
Kill the cartel members, confiscate their property, and run all prisons instead of letting prisoners run them. If the prisoners misbehave, kill them.
One thing Mao had right was the methods he used to remove the warlords of China. In that situation, nothing else works.
Bonus rebuttal number one:
Your demographics are much different. When people have nothing in common they don't care about each other and act tribally.
Bonus rebuttal number two:
People stealing TVs from an occupied residence thereby demonstrate their willingness to destroy any opposing humans therein.
Therefore, shooting them is reasonable. They can avoid the whole situation by behaving themselves. I don't invade the homes of others, and therefore remain happily unshot!
They depreciate dramatically, but people who like them can afford to trade them in before they die. They bring little at dealer auctions if anything major is wrong with them.