So are you saying it's OK to END A LIFE over a nebulous concept like virginity? You are a sick, sick person. We're talking about a LIFE here. Someone's child. You can't just murder them over something as transient as a rape.
What if the rapist has AIDS? What if he intends to kill his victim so she can't testify against him? The very act of raping someone places them in danger of death -- thus deadly force is justified in response to rape. You might also want to look up the definition of murder:
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
Or had the weapon taken from her and ended up a victim of murder as well as rape. Sounds like a great idea!
So it's better to lie back and take it then fight back and run the risk of losing the fight? What if the rapist has AIDS? What if he intends to kill you so there isn't a witness to testify against him? For those reasons (and many others) women are perfectly justified in using deadly force to resist rape.
In my view, if even one of those thousands of civilians was against attacking the US, the bombing was not worth it.
So we should have invaded them instead? Take a look at what the Japanese civilians on Saipan did when confronted with defeat and tell me that less of them would have died if we had invaded the Japanese home islands.
But when you retaliate a sneak attack on a military base with an attack that causes more than 100x as many deaths, many of them civilians, then you've overstepped your right. That's a criminal act.
War isn't supposed to be pretty. When you mobilize the entire resources of your nation to fight said war then the entire resources of your nation become legitimate targets. Call it criminal all you want but we didn't start the war. We just ended it as quickly as possible.
If you want to argue about the size of our arsenal that's one thing. I was responding to the flower child that thinks we should get rid of all of our nuclear weapons -- which is clearly not going to happen under even the rosiest of scenarios.
If you want to talk about arsenal reduction I would start by getting rid of our land based ICBM force. There's no reason to keep them around when submarines are basically invulnerable to attack and now have warheads that are as accurate as the land based ones.
The Chinese and Russians are every bit as barbaric as Americans
What you call barbarism I call self-defense. You don't respond to a terrorist attack by filing a lawsuit -- you respond by killing and/or imprisoning those responsible.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." -George Orwell
How does nuking thousands of Japanese civilians un-nazi the world?
Well, how many sneak attacks did they launch prior to having their asses handed to them vs how many they've launched since? It wasn't just Pearl Harbor you know -- virtually every war of aggression they launched came without a Declaration of War. It's not our fault they bit off more than they could chew when they attacked the United States. They should be thankful the war ended before the Soviets had a chance to get really involved -- imagine if Japan had been divided like Germany?
This is the equivallent of telling a rape victim to lay back and enjoy it.
That's what the flower child liberals do. If you want to give them a real conniption fit suggest that if the rape victim had been armed she could have used deadly force to end the assault against her.
Scorched fucking earth in Afghanistan. The American people called for retaliation, and they got it.
That's generally what happens when you provide logistical support and a base of operations to a terrorist organization that attacks a Great Power. You think Afghanistan would have come out better if Bin Ladin had murdered ~3,000 Chinese or Russians instead of ~3,000 Americans?
It always seems like the political figures take Sean Connery's line from The Untouchables to heart:
For better or worse that's how the world works. The only reason we don't see more of it is because nuclear weapons made total war too horrible to contemplate.
To my knowledge we've never tested a live ICBM but we DID test a SLBM during Operation Dominic. The USS Ethan Allen launched a Polaris Missile and the RV came down somewhere near Christmas Island and had an airburst detonation. Check out this site and search for "Frigate Bird" for some pictures.
How about you just decommission the warheads and missiles?
Sure. Right after the rest of the World agrees to do so. Oh, you mean Russia and China won't give up their nukes just because Americans want to behave like flower children? Aww shucks, I guess we'll have to keep our nuclear deterrent then......
And people wonder why I think the best way to secure peace is to get rid of the US...
You think the US is the only country that would respond in kind? Newsflash: Both the British and the French have reserved the right to respond to terror attacks with nuclear weapons. I suspect the Russians or Chinese would do so as well.
So will the Libertarian Party get equal access? How about David Duke? Will the KKK get equal access? Or does some Government bureaucrat get to decide which views are popular enough to deserve "equal" access?
Name them. You're saying a Democratic Congressman is trying to bring back the Fairness Doctrine, so surely you can actually name this congressman, right? Right?
And why is Rush Limbaugh (or any other controversial figure) allowed to have a radio show? Because of a little thing called 'The First Amendment', which protects his right to speak his own views, no matter whether you agree with them or not.
Tell that to the Democratic Congressman who are trying to bring back the so-called "Fairness Doctrine"
That's not what I said. I just question how "accountable" they are when they have a 95% chance of being re-elected as long as they pander to the party base. In the final analysis the only way you can hold a politician accountable is to vote them out of office. Via gerrymandering and pork they've rigged the game to make this virtually impossible. Do you see the problem?
What good is accountability when most Congressional Districts are drawn in such a way that the real election winds up being during the primary where only the most rapid party supporters (typically 10-15% of those eligible) turn out to vote?
It's kind of hard to say "continue, please" louder than by slapping such an enormous fine.
What are the odds of the employers who illegally used said database being fined or punished in some way? Punish the people who used the database and you'll find that the next time someone offers up illegal information for sale they'll have a much harder time finding customers.
This just proves that fact that politicians are freaking idiots.
You needed further proof?
I take exception to the fucking summary though. "Always on the lookout for more votes" sounds funny but fails to take note of the fact that in Illinois only the dead vote. Is Pluto covered with graveyards that we don't know about or something?
Slashdot Mirror
So are you saying it's OK to END A LIFE over a nebulous concept like virginity? You are a sick, sick person. We're talking about a LIFE here. Someone's child. You can't just murder them over something as transient as a rape.
What if the rapist has AIDS? What if he intends to kill his victim so she can't testify against him? The very act of raping someone places them in danger of death -- thus deadly force is justified in response to rape. You might also want to look up the definition of murder:
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
Self-defense != murder
Or had the weapon taken from her and ended up a victim of murder as well as rape. Sounds like a great idea!
So it's better to lie back and take it then fight back and run the risk of losing the fight? What if the rapist has AIDS? What if he intends to kill you so there isn't a witness to testify against him? For those reasons (and many others) women are perfectly justified in using deadly force to resist rape.
In my view, if even one of those thousands of civilians was against attacking the US, the bombing was not worth it.
So we should have invaded them instead? Take a look at what the Japanese civilians on Saipan did when confronted with defeat and tell me that less of them would have died if we had invaded the Japanese home islands.
But when you retaliate a sneak attack on a military base with an attack that causes more than 100x as many deaths, many of them civilians, then you've overstepped your right. That's a criminal act.
War isn't supposed to be pretty. When you mobilize the entire resources of your nation to fight said war then the entire resources of your nation become legitimate targets. Call it criminal all you want but we didn't start the war. We just ended it as quickly as possible.
How DARE we fund Al Queda
Citation?
If you want to argue about the size of our arsenal that's one thing. I was responding to the flower child that thinks we should get rid of all of our nuclear weapons -- which is clearly not going to happen under even the rosiest of scenarios.
If you want to talk about arsenal reduction I would start by getting rid of our land based ICBM force. There's no reason to keep them around when submarines are basically invulnerable to attack and now have warheads that are as accurate as the land based ones.
The Chinese and Russians are every bit as barbaric as Americans
What you call barbarism I call self-defense. You don't respond to a terrorist attack by filing a lawsuit -- you respond by killing and/or imprisoning those responsible.
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." -George Orwell
It's believed that Iran got Sunburns via China a few years ago.
What makes you think Aegis can't defend against them? What makes you think that we can't hit the launchers before they fire?
How does nuking thousands of Japanese civilians un-nazi the world?
Well, how many sneak attacks did they launch prior to having their asses handed to them vs how many they've launched since? It wasn't just Pearl Harbor you know -- virtually every war of aggression they launched came without a Declaration of War. It's not our fault they bit off more than they could chew when they attacked the United States. They should be thankful the war ended before the Soviets had a chance to get really involved -- imagine if Japan had been divided like Germany?
This is the equivallent of telling a rape victim to lay back and enjoy it.
That's what the flower child liberals do. If you want to give them a real conniption fit suggest that if the rape victim had been armed she could have used deadly force to end the assault against her.
Scorched fucking earth in Afghanistan. The American people called for retaliation, and they got it.
That's generally what happens when you provide logistical support and a base of operations to a terrorist organization that attacks a Great Power. You think Afghanistan would have come out better if Bin Ladin had murdered ~3,000 Chinese or Russians instead of ~3,000 Americans?
It always seems like the political figures take Sean Connery's line from The Untouchables to heart:
For better or worse that's how the world works. The only reason we don't see more of it is because nuclear weapons made total war too horrible to contemplate.
To my knowledge we've never tested a live ICBM but we DID test a SLBM during Operation Dominic. The USS Ethan Allen launched a Polaris Missile and the RV came down somewhere near Christmas Island and had an airburst detonation. Check out this site and search for "Frigate Bird" for some pictures.
How about you just decommission the warheads and missiles?
Sure. Right after the rest of the World agrees to do so. Oh, you mean Russia and China won't give up their nukes just because Americans want to behave like flower children? Aww shucks, I guess we'll have to keep our nuclear deterrent then......
And people wonder why I think the best way to secure peace is to get rid of the US...
You think the US is the only country that would respond in kind? Newsflash: Both the British and the French have reserved the right to respond to terror attacks with nuclear weapons. I suspect the Russians or Chinese would do so as well.
So will the Libertarian Party get equal access? How about David Duke? Will the KKK get equal access? Or does some Government bureaucrat get to decide which views are popular enough to deserve "equal" access?
Name them. You're saying a Democratic Congressman is trying to bring back the Fairness Doctrine, so surely you can actually name this congressman, right? Right?
My own Congressman is one of them.
And why is Rush Limbaugh (or any other controversial figure) allowed to have a radio show? Because of a little thing called 'The First Amendment', which protects his right to speak his own views, no matter whether you agree with them or not.
Tell that to the Democratic Congressman who are trying to bring back the so-called "Fairness Doctrine"
That's not what I said. I just question how "accountable" they are when they have a 95% chance of being re-elected as long as they pander to the party base. In the final analysis the only way you can hold a politician accountable is to vote them out of office. Via gerrymandering and pork they've rigged the game to make this virtually impossible. Do you see the problem?
What good is accountability when most Congressional Districts are drawn in such a way that the real election winds up being during the primary where only the most rapid party supporters (typically 10-15% of those eligible) turn out to vote?
Nationalize google!!!!
That would never happen. We only subsidize failure. We tax the hell out of success to discourage others from attempting it though ;)
Umm, where did I say that?
It's kind of hard to say "continue, please" louder than by slapping such an enormous fine.
What are the odds of the employers who illegally used said database being fined or punished in some way? Punish the people who used the database and you'll find that the next time someone offers up illegal information for sale they'll have a much harder time finding customers.
This just proves that fact that politicians are freaking idiots.
You needed further proof?
I take exception to the fucking summary though. "Always on the lookout for more votes" sounds funny but fails to take note of the fact that in Illinois only the dead vote. Is Pluto covered with graveyards that we don't know about or something?
It might not be all that easy to sue a doctor.
Which explains why malpractice insurance is so cheap. Wait a minute......
This guy had a carrier shot out from under him.
For those wondering, he was a crew member of the USS Lexington, which was lost at the Battle of the Coral Sea.
That used to be called "sultry" in B.P.C. (Before Political Correctness)
Hahahaha, BPC? I love it!
Of course smoking used to be cool in movies. Now organizations count the number of light-ups in each film. "Good. Bad. I'm the guy with the cough.".
Yeah, god forbid somebody enjoys doing something that might be bad for them. We'll have to unleash the vice cops on them :)