Assasinate your head of state, or die for your Country?
Neil
P.S. : Conspiracy Theaoy?
Printable View
Assasinate your head of state, or die for your Country?
Neil
P.S. : Conspiracy Theaoy?
KILL TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE, ASSASSINATE THE HEAD OF STATE AND LET HIM DIE FOR HIS COUNTRY. :blink: BILLYFRIDGE.
yesQuote:
Originally posted by Neil__@1 August 2003 - 23:57
or die for your Country?
The object of war is not to die for your country, but to let the other bastard die for his.
Thank you IceyQuote:
Originally posted by SodiumChloride@2 August 2003 - 09:25
The object of war is not to die for your country, but to let the other bastard die for his.
The words of a true PATRIOT.
Neil
id kill the head to avoid war. anyone who does otherwise is stupid
Another true patriot.Quote:
Originally posted by TheDave@2 August 2003 - 17:18
id kill the head to avoid war. anyone who does otherwise is stupid
If the democratic route fails and you cannot move country and my country tried to force me to die for it.
Maybe it's time for a revolution.
Thank you Dave.
Neil
Another true patriot.Quote:
Originally posted by Neil__+2 August 2003 - 17:29--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Neil__ @ 2 August 2003 - 17:29)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-TheDave@2 August 2003 - 17:18
id kill the head to avoid war. anyone who does otherwise is stupid
If the democratic route fails and you cannot move country and my country tried to force me to die for it.
Maybe it's time for a revolution.
Thank you Dave.
Neil [/b][/quote]
What country would that be?
Revolution didn't work out for us in Iraq, as we had hoped. Saddam was just too good at what he does best.
It's called a hypothetical question hobbes.
Or at worst another banal conspiracy theory.
Neil
To pose a workable hypothetical question, you must define your parameters.Quote:
Originally posted by Neil__@2 August 2003 - 17:52
It's called a hypothetical question hobbes.
Or at worst another banal conspiracy theory.
Neil
There is a great gap between being forced to fight a war you oppose, lest you be shot by your own government versus objecting to a war, and moving away if your point of view is rejected by the majority.
The first scenario calls for revolution.
The second, a real estate agent.
:angry:
And never the twain shall meet.Quote:
Originally posted by hobbes@2 August 2003 - 18:03
:angry:
So you do get my point.
Neil.
wtf?
Those are completely different questions.
Someone that will not fight to defend a society, does not deserve the defence that the society gives.
As to the first question....it depends, read my answer to the 2nd question above.
Rat Faced.Quote:
Originally posted by Rat Faced@2 August 2003 - 18:22
Someone that will not fight to defend a society, does not deserve the defence that the society gives.
As to the first question....it depends, read my answer to the 2nd question above.
So It just depends on the nature of said "society"?
Neil
In my opinion, assassination can be SAID to be protecting a society.
Look around at all the despots in the world.
A "society" is not a head of state.
Dou you concider the fact that you are British means tou can say that without real prejudice.Quote:
Originally posted by Rat Faced@2 August 2003 - 18:47
In my opinion, assassination can be SAID to be protecting a society.
Look around at all the depots in the world.
A "society" is not a head of state.
It isn't a crime to see mention the assisination of our leader.
As for blair his future has a differebt direction from P.M.
Maybe he's after Kofi Annan's job.
That aside I think it's only a citezen that has the right to decide the death of their world leader.
If it isn't your country then you better have a bloody good reason to act.
Either way.
Neil
Look at my 1st post on the subject.
I certainly would not consider assassinating the head of a different country....thats not my "society", they have their own fools to do it.
si si.Quote:
Originally posted by Rat Faced@2 August 2003 - 19:38
Look at my 1st post on the subject.
I certainly would not consider assassinating the head of a different country....thats not my "society", they have their own fools to do it.
Neil.
http://ghostdepot.com/rg/images/roya...train%20pc.jpgQuote:
Originally posted by Rat Faced@2 August 2003 - 18:47
Look around at all the depots in the world.
What should I be looking for? :blink:
you mean salty rather than icey surely?Quote:
Originally posted by Neil__@2 August 2003 - 17:14
Thank you Icey
The words of a true PATRIOT.
Neil
:blink:
anyway, i think i would die for my coutry, however, it is easy to say that whilst sitting at home infront of a computer.
on the field of battle, things are a little different...
you mean salty rather than icey surely?Quote:
Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+2 August 2003 - 20:50--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 2 August 2003 - 20:50)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Neil__@2 August 2003 - 17:14
Thank you Icey
The words of a true PATRIOT.
Neil
:blink:
anyway, i think i would die for my coutry, however, it is easy to say that whilst sitting at home infront of a computer.
on the field of battle, things are a little different... [/b][/quote]
And thats the choice.
Will "you" defend your libities whatever it takes?
Neil
Edit: Remember relocation before you give up on democracy.
That's a quote from Benjamin Franklin (at least i think it was him...) you see it every now and then when you get shot and die in Operation FlashpointQuote:
Originally posted by SodiumChloride@2 August 2003 - 01:25
The object of war is not to die for your country, but to let the other bastard die for his.
Whats that? Running like a pussy?Quote:
What country would that be?
Revolution didn't work out for us in Iraq, as we had hoped. Saddam was just too good at what he does best.
I am against all killing. I also don't believe dying for your country makes much sense. Perhaps dying for your principles makes a little sense, if there is someone left to defend them.Quote:
Originally posted by Neil__@2 August 2003 - 00:57
Assasinate your head of state, or die for your Country?
Neil
P.S. : Conspiracy Theaoy?
Recently, a certain Pim Fortuyn, was assasinated in the Netherlands. I considered it an attack on democracy. I might add I was against many of his views. My democratic right to vote against his politics, was brutaly infringed.
There are so many crazy people running around, taking the law into there own hands, never looking inwards at their own faults. They, if caught, very often expect a fair trial.
With regards to 'the conspiracy theory" click on the following link.
http://www.cjnetworks.com/~cubsfan/conspiracy.html
I think the question needs more details. It can get good!!! <_<
NO FUCKING WAYQuote:
Originally posted by Neil__@1 August 2003 - 22:57
Assasinate your head of state, or die for your Country?
Neil
P.S. : Conspiracy Theaoy?
those ppl who do are either idiots or mentally retarded
That's a quote from Benjamin Franklin (at least i think it was him...) you see it every now and then when you get shot and die in Operation Flashpoint [/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by SodiumChloride+2 August 2003 - 23:38--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SodiumChloride @ 2 August 2003 - 23:38)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SodiumChloride@2 August 2003 - 01:25
The object of war is not to die for your country, but to let the other bastard die for his.
Gen. George S. Patton, I think.
Edit: Punctuation
I see.Quote:
Originally posted by nigel123@3 August 2003 - 04:42
I am against all killing.
Making such a statement would surely stay the hand of someone attempting to kill you, Nigel123.
Would you not act to save your own life, or that of a loved one?
Honestly, if that is your stance, I suggest you, and anyone who feels similarly, seek to exclusively populate an island somewhere so that the despots of the world might work out their angst and aggression by taking turns subjugating you and yours; and by virtue of this activity save the rest of us the trouble.
The U.N. could be in charge of scheduling.
This particular brand of naivete ought to serve some purpose.
I too am against all killing.
Just because it is (in a few very rare cases) a necessity, doesn't mean we have to embrace it.
Nobody said anything about embracing it, Liam; as a necessity (as you say), yes-the fact it is not as "rare" as we would like it to be is often beyond our control.Quote:
Originally posted by Lamsey@12 August 2003 - 11:11
I too am against all killing.
Just because it is (in a few very rare cases) a necessity, doesn't mean we have to embrace it.
As re: your Depots:
Watch for the telltale color red, particularly with soot stains; the sight of bricks is another dead giveaway.
When I say I am against all killing, then I do mean ALL killing. I do not differentiate, when I make such a statement. All life has a right to life. If you feel the need to kill, then go ahead. I would stongly advise you against such thoughts.Quote:
Originally posted by nigel123@3 August 2003 - 11:42
I am against all killing.
If someone wants to kill me or my family, how could I stop them? By killing them before they had the chance? I am quite sure that such a person is not going to send me an e-mail, in advance, of his/hers intent.
If someone did murder one of my children, what would I gain by revenge? It would not return my loved one. It would only consolidate the misery.
Finally, I feel your attack on what I believe in is mainly to justify your views. I could be wrong of course.....
My attack?Quote:
Originally posted by nigel123@12 August 2003 - 12:33
Finally, I feel your attack on what I believe in is mainly to justify your views. I could be wrong of course.....
What attack?
If I disagree, and point out what I believe to be the absurdity of your stance, and seek to demonstrate my perception of your absurdity by being commensurately absurd, this constitutes an attack?
Would that all attacks were so mild, Nigel.
Not only 'could you be wrong', Nigel, you are wrong; how have I offended so greatly as to warrant leap-frogging over such words as "difference of opinion", or "disagree", among many others?
Why is the first inclination to elicit any available pity from the gallery be claiming to have been ATTACKED?
As my colleague JPaul would say, "it does you no credit" to react in such fashion; I've seen your stuff, and you usually do much better. ;)
My attack?Quote:
Originally posted by j2k4+12 August 2003 - 20:03--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 12 August 2003 - 20:03)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-nigel123@12 August 2003 - 12:33
Finally, I feel your attack on what I believe in is mainly to justify your views. I could be wrong of course.....
What attack?
If I disagree, and point out what I believe to be the absurdity of your stance, and seek to demonstrate my perception of your absurdity by being commensurately absurd, this constitutes an attack?
Would that all attacks were so mild, Nigel.
Not only 'could you be wrong', Nigel, you are wrong; how have I offended so greatly as to warrant leap-frogging over such words as "difference of opinion", or "disagree", among many others?
Why is the first inclination to elicit any available pity from the gallery be claiming to have been ATTACKED?
As my colleague JPaul would say, "it does you no credit" to react in such fashion; I've seen your stuff, and you usually do much better. ;)[/b][/quote]
Well we all have our off days you know and I was not looking for any credit. You picked on one word (attack) and become blind for the rest. I feel that that you feel personally attacked for your patriotisme. You do indeed do your best to clarify your position. More often than not there then appears a weak spot in your attempts to clarify, that is often used against you. I think that is what clocker meant when he said give it up. I had to agree with him. Not because I disagreed with you.
In this world there will always be individuals or groups with different ideas. If you have read more of my posts then you will have realized that I follow the boedhhist way of thinking although I would not call myself a boedhhist. The idea of having respect for all creatures right to live, a boedhhist philosophy, I reached independently. I love life and all life forms and defend their right to existence. Although some may believe me to be naive in my thoughts, beliefs etc. I am not ashamed of then.
Considering who is running (ruining?) the U.S.A. at this point and time, I'd do it gladly. But first I'd need a signed letter from God informing me I'll be going to heaven when I die, and a letter from the Federal Government of the U.S.A. pardoning me for what surely would be a "mercy-killing," somewhat akin to putting down an insane mutt.
Do you mean "Buddhist", alternatively, Nigel?Quote:
Originally posted by nigel123@12 August 2003 - 13:44
In this world there will always be individuals or groups with different ideas. If you have read more of my posts then you will have realized that I follow the boedhhist way of thinking although I would not call myself a boedhhist. The idea of having respect for all creatures right to live, a boedhhist philosophy, I reached independently. I love life and all life forms and defend their right to existence. Although some may believe me to be naive in my thoughts, beliefs etc. I am not ashamed of then.
If so, I apologize for not being familiar with your spelling of it-
Yes, certainly, to each his own belief-system, but I, as an observer of your persecution, would render aid unbidden, and you would need a quality of geographic remoteness (an island, perhaps) to avoid my help.
What then? Would you refuse me?
An aggressor, a protector/defender, and a pacifist-how does this one shake out, Nigel? :huh:
Bad odds, there.Quote:
Originally posted by chalkmongoose@12 August 2003 - 14:06
Considering who is running (ruining?) the U.S.A. at this point and time, I'd do it gladly. But first I'd need a signed letter from God informing me I'll be going to heaven when I die, and a letter from the Federal Government of the U.S.A. pardoning me for what surely would be a "mercy-killing," somewhat akin to putting down an insane mutt.
I'd pass. ;)
Oh right that was a slip of the pen... it's dutch for budhhist.
It is often a good idea to leave a spelling mistake in as it gives the 'opposition' something to grasp when he/she is in danger of 'losing' the argument.
I think that I will take clockers advice here and "Give it up." As I have in other threads explained why I am against violence and revenge.
It still does not change my position; I would not kill or assasinate anyone. Which is the topic of this thread.
Good enough, then. ;)Quote:
Originally posted by nigel123@13 August 2003 - 02:57
Oh right that was a slip of the pen... it's dutch for budhhist.
It is often a good idea to leave a spelling mistake in as it gives the 'opposition' something to grasp when he/she is in danger of 'losing' the argument.
I think that I will take clockers advice here and "Give it up." As I have in other threads explained why I am against violence and revenge.
It still does not change my position; I would not kill or assasinate anyone. Which is the topic of this thread.