What to do in the event of a Peace Rally

[allieram 0]

What to do if you happen upon a peace rally, and how to teach them why
force is sometimes necessary:
1) Approach dumb rich ignorant student talking about "peace" and saying
there should be, "no retaliation."
2) Engage in brief conversation, ask if military force is appropriate.
3) When he says "No," ask, "Why not?"
4) Wait until he says something to the effect of, "Because that would just
cause more innocent deaths, which would be awful and we should not cause
more violence."
5) When he's in mid sentence, punch him in the face as hard as you can.
6) When he gets back up to punch you, point out that it would be a
mistake and contrary to his values to strike you, because that would, "be
awful and he should not cause more violence."
7) Wait until he agrees that he has pledged not to commit additional
violence.
8) Punch him in the face again, harder this time. Repeat steps 5 through
8 until they understand that sometimes it is necessary to punch back.

[diver123 0]

That's right!!!
"pull high! It's lower than you think..."

[billvon 2,466]

> 8) Punch him in the face again, harder this time. Repeat steps 5 through
> 8 until they understand that sometimes it is necessary to punch back.
Perhaps you could just kill his children. No doubt that would get your point across even more effectively. If you're lucky, you could get him to kill your kids, and all would be well.
-bill von

[FallingMarc 0]

...didn't want to, but now I can't stop myself...

Quote

Perhaps you could just kill his children. No doubt that would get your point across even more effectively. If you're lucky, you could get him to kill your kids, and all would be well.

They've already killed our children. And our parents, and brothers and sisters. They threw the first punch. We're the ones who need to punch back.
And if you're hellbent on using your analogy... better that a few children die in the process of destroying these people's ability to terrorize, than many MORE children die because we *don't* stop it from happening.
Unless you like the idea of letting murderers go unpunished, then by all means, continue hugging trees, or practicing yoga, or whatever it is pacifists do.
Marc

[Schroeder 0]

great, now I can't resist.
Bill has a point. Hidden under many layers of sarcasm (<--- there's sarcasm in there too!) he's trying to say that the only thing retaliation will bring, is more retaliation. It would be foolish to think that we'd be able to completely extinguish any anti-western sentiment and haltered BY KILLING EVEN MORE PEOPLE. If you were "them", wouldn't that just piss you off even more?
You can kick a guy's ass in self-defense, and think "there, that taught him", and 2 weeks later, he'll shoot you on your walk home. The thing that has got to be done, in my humble opinion, is to stop the violence and settle the problem by bringing the parties involved together, and understanding their motives, mind-sets, etc. Bush said that Americans will not change their way of live no matter what, but that's the problem to the people in the east, they see Americans as being too self-centered and greedy; and after enough of that, they will eventually see the west as evil, which would justify, in their minds, an attack.

[MarkM 0]

Quote

Bush said that Americans will not change their way of live no matter what, but that's the problem to the people in the east, they see Americans as being too self-centered and greedy; and after enough of that, they will eventually see the west as evil, which would justify, in their minds, an attack.

Then they'll just have to learn to live and let live.
Peaceful protest only works among those that respect life. Example: Ghandi's crusade to remove the British from India. But peaceful demonstrations wouldn't have helped the Jews in Germany during WW2.
Japanese totaliaritism and Nazi fanatacism were responded to by force and defeated. The countries remain, the people remain, but they were reformed around Western principles of democracy which generally respects the rights of others to behave as they choose.
IMHO, the problem in the middle east isn't the average middle eastern citizen, they could care less about America. It's with a few Islamic Fundamentalists, who like the Nazis, use a campaign of hate mongering(down with the evil America) to rally an economically downtrodden people around their cause.
Some people say we can't defeat that, and I've yet to hear why. We defeated Nazism. We fended off Japanese suicide attackers. Not only defeated, but rebuilt both into free societies who today are close allies.
To ignore the Taliban would be to ignore the suffering they've not only caused on US soil, but the suffering they've caused on their own populations.

[wingnut 0]

3 words.... mutually assured destruction...... the whole reason nuclear war has not happened yet....and i say yet!.......

"up my noooossseee"- wingnut, at first euro dz.com boogie

[bill2 0]

Each of these posts has a valid point. Some of the people out there saying there should be no retaliation forget that this is not the first time we have had terrorist attacks (The '93 bombing at the World Trade Center, the Navy ship just a short while ago, etc) and that if we don't retaliate in some sort of way they will just keep doing it. Please don't take this to mean that we should "bomb Afghanastan back to the stone age". That's an absurd idea; most of the people there have been suffering for decades. I live in in the bay area CA and many Afghans live here, they would be overjoyed at the Taliban being kicked out but they certainly don't want the entire population wiped out. As for the statement that they are jealous of us, yes they are but not retaliating is not the answer. People who do these things need to realize that there will be a dreadful cost to them for the misery they have called. The Islamic fundamentalists who do this really do hate out society, it's not just jealousy. They don't like the fact that women control their own lives, they don't like the fact our society is so open and uncontrolled, and they would like to see us destroyed. As has been mentioned many times in literature they have put out. In a rather roundabout way, I'm saying that retaliation is a necessary part of being a nation, but we should do it where and when necessary, not indiscriminately. Finally, I would sort of like to see some of these people saying no retaliation at all, get punched several times as you mentioned in your scenario. Might be interesting to see their reaction.

[skybytch 259]

This was sent to me by a friend....
-----
Here's a creative solution for how to deal with Osama Bin Laden:

Killing him will only create a martyr.

Holding him prisoner will inspire his comrades to take hostages to
demand his release.

Therefore, I suggest we do neither.

Let the Special Forces, Seals or whatever covertly capture him, fly him
to an undisclosed hospital and have surgeons quickly perform a complete
sex change operation. Then we return her to Afghanistan to live as a
woman under the Taliban.
-----
Violence and retaliation are the only things terrorists really understand, but unfortunately we'd have to kill them all to stop terrorism completely. We can stop some (most?) of their funding though - how? Legalize drugs. Remove the huge profit margin from illegal opium, heroin, cocaine, etc. and a large part of the money they use to kill innocent people would dry up. No money, no guns, no explosives, no airplane tickets, no pilot training....
pull and flare!
"I feel so alive, for the very first time, and I think I can fly" - P.O.D.

[billvon 2,466]

>And if you're hellbent on using your analogy... better that a few children die in the process of destroying these people's ability
> to terrorize, than many MORE children die because we *don't* stop it from happening.
If your theory worked, the Middle East would now be the most peaceful place in the world. Since it isn't, I think there are a few problems with your theory.
>Unless you like the idea of letting murderers go unpunished, then by all means, continue hugging trees, or practicing yoga,
> or whatever it is pacifists do.
No, actually, I prefer killing the murderers, rather than all the people around them. We have a pretty good system in the US to deal with things like murder. It's not perfect, but it works pretty well, all things considered.
-bill von

[FallingMarc 0]

Quote

If your theory worked, the Middle East would now be the most peaceful place in the world. Since it isn't, I think there are a few problems with your theory.

How so? Nobody's gone in with the full intent of destroying the terrorists yet. People are getting killed left and right over there, yes, but it's mostly victims of the same thing we're fighting.
Don't get me wrong. I don't think we should bomb the hell out of anybody, or kill indescriminately, or any of that. We're not at war with a country. We're at war with an organization, wherever it may be. So let's go kill the murderers, just like you said.
But if the only way to do that involves some "collateral damage", to use the PC term, then so be it. Minimize it, yes. But hold back our retaliation because of it? No.
Marc

[skymedic 0]

Bytch, If you leglize drugs...that means I am gonna be working ALOT harder....and I dont want to work any harder than I have to, to save those degenerates who want to poison themselves with this shit!!!!
Marc
Because I fly, I envy no man on earth

[wingnut 0]

Quote

and I dont want to work any harder than I have to, to save those degenerates who want to poison themselves with this shit!!!!

medic,
don't worry, natural selection will come into play in that matter....it would be fun though..........if done right.............

"up my noooossseee"- wingnut, at first euro dz.com boogie

[skymedic 0]

I know natural selection helps. but problem is everytime somebody calls....I HAVE to respond. even though I have this one guy in town where I have intubated this guy on a weekly basis!!!! its not even funny. it just gets very tiring to waist taxpayer money on these people who dont have health insurance and cause hospital bills and everything after that. really a big pain in my ass!!
Marc
Because I fly, I envy no man on earth

[wceviper 0]

They all say peace, put there asses on the front line and tell them they aren't gonna get any weapons.
How many do you think would go?

Would you stand on the front lines without weapons?
Uhm, Sure. I believe in Peace! they won't shoot a guy with a picket sign!
Not sure, isn't that the same as suicide?
Hell No, not without somthing that shoots!

[allieram 0]

Hey, I got an idea of what to do with all those pacifists -
They say there is a better way without violence. We hear it from them but we don't see them "walk the walk"; heck, we don't even know what their plan is. So, let's give them the chance. They could pack their bags, and we could give them free flights to that region of the world, drop them off, say "Adios - we will be back when you have achieved peace - don't call us until you do."
How long does anyone think it will take? (Sarcasm)

[Michele 1]

Wouldn't it help the airline industry, all that peaceful publicity??
hahahahahaha
ciels-
Michele
"What of the dreams that never die? Turn to your left at the end of the sky".
~e e cummings~