Where were you 40 years ago When President Kennedy was shot?

[jediron1]

General MaCarthur said:

"It is my earnest hope - indeed the hope of all mankind - that from this solemn occasion a better world shall emerge out of the blood and carnage of the past, a world found upon faith and understanding, a world dedicated to the dignity of man and the fulfillment of his most cherished wish for freedom, tolerance and justice."


- General Douglas Macarthur

"In war there is no substitute for victory."

- Gen Douglas MacArthur

1968 said:
There are other quotes in which Gandhi states "I do not consider Hitler to be as bad as he is depicted" and "Roosevelt and Churchill are no less war criminals than Hitler and Mussolini".

You really believe Hilter was not as bad as he was depicted a ( demonical maniac)? Come on! This unbelievable!:hammer:

[Spexvet]

There are other quotes in which Gandhi states "I do not consider Hitler to be as bad as he is depicted" and "Roosevelt and Churchill are no less war criminals than Hitler and Mussolini".

You really believe Hilter was not as bad as he was depicted a ( demonical maniac)? Come on! This unbelievable!:hammer:

Did I say that?

[Spexvet]

No, it was your point was that the peace did not last long, but mine was that for some “living in peace” is not synonymous with acquiescing to totalitarianism.

Then don't interpret a quote and apply that interpretation to me.

I’ll answer you as I would answer anyone who thinks totalitarianism can better their life: If you choose to acquiesce to a totalitarian state, then I won’t stop you. If you attempt to force me to acquiesce to a totalitarian state, then I will stop you… or die trying. The concept of peace existing in a totalitarian state is an oxymoron.

Even though the quote applies to the dead, homeless, andorphaned, and not you, I'll address your point.

You prove my point. If you weren't killed in the struggle, but imprisoned, their victory would be short - you would start fighting as soon as you were able, right? And if you died in the struggle, what would it matter that you fought totalitarianism, you'd be dead.

I'm not supporting totalitarianism, I'm supporting using means other than violence to resolve conflict. If your neighbor puts up a fence one foot on your side of the property line, do you shoot him dead? There are absolutely times when violence is necessary, but we should leave it as the last resort. "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent".

[Chris Ryser]

On Sunday I watched Oswald being transfered when he was shot by Jack Ruby. It was surreal-no one could believe the events of the past 3 days. Even today I can feel the shock.

I also watched the same thing in a make shift shack, named Gate 10, at the Toronto Airport while waiting for a plane going to Winnipeg.

Every time I go through the new modern version of the Toronto Airport I remember that day, sitting there with about 30 other passengers on row benches, warmed by infra red heaters hanging on the ceiling as did the TV hanging on a bracket.

[1968]

1968 said: There are other quotes in which Gandhi states "I do not consider Hitler to be as bad as he is depicted" and "Roosevelt and Churchill are no less war criminals than Hitler and Mussolini".

You really believe Hilter was not as bad as he was depicted a ( demonical maniac)? Come on! This unbelievable!:hammer:

Er...NO. Learn to follow the thread. Steve asked what Gandhi's views on World War II were. I gave him a couple of Gandhi quotes that I found.

[1968]

Then don't interpret a quote and apply that interpretation to me.

I didn't. You made a point, then I made one. If your idea of a discussion is to make a point without hearing rebuttle, then so be it.

You prove my point. If you weren't killed in the struggle, but imprisoned, their victory would be short - you would start fighting as soon as you were able, right? And if you died in the struggle, what would it matter that you fought totalitarianism, you'd be dead.

Things "matter" only to the living, not the dead. So your point proves mine: Some people would rather die than live under totalitarianism.

[chip anderson]

Spexvet:

Do you concider the founding fathers of this country to be incompetent? We did have a rather violent beginning. We did save the world in WWI, and WW2, save ourselves in the war of 1812 with a bit of violence.


Concidering the rulings our courts have been handing down of late, debate, legislation and the law aren't haveing a very good record of saving anything.


Chip

[jediron1]

1968 said:

Er...NO. Learn to follow the thread. Steve asked what Gandhi's views on World War II were. I gave him a couple of Gandhi quotes that I found.

Well I am sorry 1968 apparently I am not as smart as you are in following threads. If you don't believe the quotes why quote them? I know Steve wanted to know more of what Gandhi thought about war, but if your going to defend Gandhi's views then I would assume that you also believe his quotes, thereby if you quote him I have a right to assume that you also thought that Hilter was not as bad as he was depicked as Gandhi had said. Now if you adhear to his statements then you need to stop being hypocritical. Either you believe them or you don't, you can't have it both ways!:hammer:

[1968]

1968 said: Er...NO. Learn to follow the thread. Steve asked what Gandhi's views on World War II were. I gave him a couple of Gandhi quotes that I found.

Well I am sorry 1968 apparently I am not as smart as you are in following threads. If you don't believe the quotes why quote them?

I just told you. Steve asked what Gandhi's views on World War II were, so I gave him a couple of quotes that I thought might help him out.

I know Steve wanted to know more of what Gandhi thought about war, but if your going to defend Gandhi's views then I would assume that you also believe his quotes, thereby if you quote him I have a right to assume that you also thought that Hilter was not as bad as he was depicked as Gandhi had said. Now if you adhear to his statements then you need to stop being hypocritical. Either you believe them or you don't, you can't have it both ways!:hammer:

You assume an awful lot, starting with your assumption that I defend Gandhi’s views. If you assumed that my correction of your factual error (in which you said that “55 million that died in WWII to keep freedom and democracy”) meant that I defend Gandhi’s views, then you need to check your assumptions… or at least follow the thread and pay attention to the discussion I have been having with Spexvet.

[Spexvet]

Spexvet:

Do you concider the founding fathers of this country to be incompetent? We did have a rather violent beginning. We did save the world in WWI, and WW2, save ourselves in the war of 1812 with a bit of violence.


Concidering the rulings our courts have been handing down of late, debate, legislation and the law aren't haveing a very good record of saving anything.


Chip

Chip,
Can't you think of anything we have accomplished without violence?

The fall of the USSR?
The Camp David Peace Accords?
Cuban missile crisis?
Olympic success?
The motion picture industry?
McDonald's

I have no idea what you mean about the courts. Perhaps you could explain.

Spexvet

[Spexvet]

I didn't. You made a point, then I made one. If your idea of a discussion is to make a point without hearing rebuttle, then so be it.

That wasn't so much a rebuttal as an entirely new thought.

Things "matter" only to the living, not the dead. So your point proves mine: Some people would rather die than live under totalitarianism.

Be my guest.

Peace be with you,
Spexvet

[Bev Heishman]

2 nd grade..Miss Connor's room, South Lebanon Elementary School in Iona, PA. She was crying and telling us what was happening.

[chip anderson]

The fall of the USSR and the Cuban Missile Crisis were both solved only because we let it be quite appearent that we were prepared to commit violence. Even Nuclear Violence if needed.

Chip

[1968]

Some people would rather die than live under totalitarianism.

...

Be my guest.

Perhaps your answer wouldn't be so blase if you had any idea how many people died in Stalin's purges.

[jediron1]

1968 said my facts were wrong on the deaths. Your right 1968 only 50 million died.

according to: www.worldwidewebfind.com/encyclopedia/en/wikipedia/w/wo/world_war_ii.h...

These included the massacre of millions of Chinese and Korean nationals by Japan, internal mass killings in the Soviet Union, and the bombing of civilian targets in German and Japanese cities by the Allies, and bombing of European cities by Germany. In total, World War II produced about 50 million deaths (about 2% of the population of the world), more than any other war to date (see the List of World War II casualties by country).

[Spexvet]

...

Perhaps your answer wouldn't be so blase if you had any idea how many people died in Stalin's purges.

That's your arguement, not mine.

[Spexvet]

The fall of the USSR and the Cuban Missile Crisis were both solved only because we let it be quite appearent that we were prepared to commit violence. Even Nuclear Violence if needed.

Chip

And yet, we didn't. Hmmmm
And we were still successful. Hmmmm, Hmmmm

[chm2023]

And yet, we didn't. Hmmmm
And we were still successful. Hmmmm, Hmmmm

Yeah but that's so 20 Century. Now we rush to use violence and don't succeed. But we never waiver, so there's that.:hammer:

Well, here's hoping come January there's a man in the WH as least as intelligent as I am (not, as you all know, a particularly high bar)!!!

[1968]

1968 said my facts were wrong on the deaths. Your right 1968 only 50 million died.

Actually what I said was that your assertion that 55 million people died in World War II "to keep freedom and democracy" was wrong. [See posts #65 and #68.]

according to: www.worldwidewebfind.com/encyclopedia/en/wikipedia/w/wo/world_war_ii.h...

These included the massacre of millions of Chinese and Korean nationals by Japan, internal mass killings in the Soviet Union, and the bombing of civilian targets in German and Japanese cities by the Allies, and bombing of European cities by Germany. In total, World War II produced about 50 million deaths (about 2% of the population of the world), more than any other war to date (see the List of World War II casualties by country).

These look pretty close to the figures I gave you in post #68. Perhaps you should share them with Spexvet. He seems to think totalitarianism is acceptable.

[Spexvet]

Actually what I said was that your assertion that 55 million people died in World War II "to keep freedom and democracy" was wrong. [See posts #65 and #68.]

These look pretty close to the figures I gave you in post #68. Perhaps you should share them with Spexvet. He seems to think totalitarianism is acceptable.

Can't you follow the thread? I never said that.

Show the numbers to 1968, he revels in killing.

[chip anderson]

Spextex: We didn't because were resolute and the other side backed down. We probably wouldn't ever have to go to war if our enemies thought we were resolute and any attack would be met by something swift and terrrible.

If that's diplomacy, I am all for it.

Chip

[Spexvet]

Spextex: We didn't because were resolute and the other side backed down. We probably wouldn't ever have to go to war if our enemies thought we were resolute and any attack would be met by something swift and terrrible.

If that's diplomacy, I am all for it.

Chip

Actually, Chip, that's exactly what I call diplomacy. There ARE times when violence/war is unavoidable, but to resolve conflict without voilence/war is always preferable to me. The diiference we may have is that you and I may not agree on when violence/war is unavoidable.

Spextex

[1968]

Can't you follow the thread? I never said that [totalitarianism is acceptable].

My mistake. I'm glad to see that the three of us (i.e. you, me, and jediron1) now agree that acquiescing to totalitarianism is not acceptable.

Show the numbers to 1968, he revels in killing.

Actually, it's just the opposite. That's why I oppose pacificism when it means acquiescing to totalitarianism.

[Spexvet]

My mistake. I'm glad to see that the three of us (i.e. you, me, and jediron1) now agree that acquiescing to totalitarianism is not acceptable.

Actually, it's just the opposite. That's why I oppose pacificism when it means acquiescing to totalitarianism.

I'm relieved, you had me going there for a while.:cheers:

[jediron1]

1968 I stand by my number 83 quote. You can't have it both ways. Either you believe the quotes or stop quoting them.:finger: