Dakryn's Batshit Theory of the Week

[Prismatic Sphere]

The POTUS still has the responsibility of leading the government.

Yet only in a limited, business sense. If the company known as "Government" fails to defend our individual rights and private property, they should be shitcanned and replaced.

We lead ourselves. Either the government is free or we are. There is not and can never be a middle ground.

When we people finally wake up to that concept, look out: REAL HUMAN PROGRESS.

 

[LightingFlash]

Can war itself really be considered a war crime?

It actually is unless it's a defensive war, defensive being meant literally like "We were invaded by the Russians and fought back" not existentially like "We must defeat the ideology of Communism by killing all the Russians."

What makes the invasion and occupation of Iraq itself a war crime is that it was a war of aggression.

What makes this inquest significant is that these prisoners represent sinister influences that will lurk in the world long after their bodies have returned to dust. And let me make clear that while this law is first applied against German aggressors, the law includes, and if it is to serve a useful purpose it must condemn, aggression by any other nations, including those which sit here now in judgment...

The central crime in this pattern of crimes, the kingpin which holds them all together, is the plot for aggressive wars. The chief reason for international cognizance of these crimes lies in this fact.

-- The Nuremberg Trials

 

[Pessimism]

Fuck that. It's obvious that the intentions behind wars like Iraq and Vietnam were wrong, but once we're there, it's war. Maybe you have a different perspective as a military man, but I believe that warfare is no-holds-barred, and anything goes. The original intention of warfare was to define a winner, but with rules of engagement and the Geneva Convention, that gets thrown out the window. Now it's perpetual skirmishing without a clear winner, which is far more inhumane IMO than isolated incidences of massacre and torture.

I find it odd that one can talk about inhumane actions while at the same wanting war to be a no-holds-barred event. Things are different now, and most governments have the ability to not only destroy entire populations, but destroy the entire surrounding areas said population lives in. Granted, the "perpetual skirmish" is a terrible thing - but I don't think it is any different when we get right down to it than a no-holds-barred form of war (both soldiers and civilians are killed en masse, the only difference here is the rate of death and how much pain is endured).

I may be wrong in this thought, but was not the Geneva convention originally convened in part because we, as humans, do not know how to control ourselves - especially in regards to our level of technology?

I mean, the rate of both military and civilian casualties would be catastrophically high if we continued to have a no-holds-barred form of war. Honor doesn't exist naturally after all, and the only thing stopping another country from chemically nuking its own (and others) populations is the flaky hands of the UN (not as a military force, but as a social force in a globalized world).

 

[Dak]

Well why even have "less inhumane" wars? War in any fashion is bad if illegitimate, which is basically all wars.

 

[Pessimism]

That's my point though, there is no such thing as a good war from a humane perspective. Even if you are fighting for a cause you believe in, unless you are able to convince your enemies to live and let live, you are going to ultimately hack them to pieces.

 

[Einherjar86]

It actually is unless it's a defensive war, defensive being meant literally like "We were invaded by the Russians and fought back" not existentially like "We must defeat the ideology of Communism by killing all the Russians."

What makes the invasion and occupation of Iraq itself a war crime is that it was a war of aggression.

Where do you place preemptive attacks/invasions? Are they defensive or aggressive?

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

You know what? I've had enough and I'm fucking sick to death of many of you guys' self-"informed" cute little schticks. To put it perfectly bluntly; fuck all of you who hate Ayn Rand.

But what you can't deny or take away is the fact that Ayn Rand was the first person in history to start ripping mysticism out of philosophy.

Now either you get that or get fucked.

If you prefer the tranquility of servitude to the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. But I still wholeheartedly hope you die. Slowly. And in front of my face.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

You know what? I've had enough and I'm fucking sick to death of many of you guys' self-"informed" cute little schticks. To put it perfectly bluntly; fuck all of you who hate Ayn Rand.

But what you can't deny or take away is the fact that Ayn Rand was the first person in history to start ripping mysticism out of philosophy.

Now either you get that or get fucked.

If you prefer the tranquility of servitude to the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. But I still wholeheartedly hope you die. Slowly. And in front of my face.

And if you still harbor some resentment toward mysticism, whether it be church or state, you should all lick her shriveling twat in gratitude.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

wat

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

wat

What part didn't you understand?

 

[Dak]

That post made me think of PS as some sort of robot who is over-heating.

ERROR......ERROR.....MYSTICISMMYSTICISMMYSTICISM.....ERROR....

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

That post made me think of PS as some sort of robot who is over-heating.

ERROR......ERROR.....MYSTICISMMYSTICISMMYSTICISM.....ERROR....

No. Just drunk.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

That post made me think of PS as some sort of robot who is over-heating.

ERROR......ERROR.....MYSTICISMMYSTICISMMYSTICISM.....ERROR....

But point out to me a more legitimate cause for evil among humanity. Then we'll talk.

 

[Dak]

Women.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

Women.

Fair play.

You know, funny you brought that up. Going part and parcel with bicameral theory, I have my own pet theory on women. I think why a lot of women don't achieve equal wages in the marketplace is because women are evermore reliant on external authority to define their existence.

Think about it.

Women are basically and solely slaves to their looks. And they look to any ideal "role model" to define their sanguinehood. When in fact it's too bad that there can never be a role model for that or ANY other human faculty. Add to that the almost 2000 years of guilt and shame foisted upon them by religion and you start to get the point.

But the real criminal shame is that with their newly found "independence", most women don't get right the fuck out of the household and start achieving what they can achieve when it's just so much easier to drive the kids to day care and prepare for the next soccer game.

 

[Dak]

The greatest achievement one can have in life is properly raising the next generation. Men and women massively drop the ball on that one.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

The greatest achievement one can have in life is properly raising the next generation.

I'd infinitely rather raise a beer to my lips.

 

[Dak]

So would almost everyone else in Western Civ. Case in point.

 

[Prismatic Sphere]

So would almost everyone else in Western Civ. Case in point.

You and I aren't as different as you'd like to think Dakryn.

 

[Badbird]

You know what? I've had enough and I'm fucking sick to death of many of you guys' self-"informed" cute little schticks. To put it perfectly bluntly; fuck all of you who hate Ayn Rand.

But what you can't deny or take away is the fact that Ayn Rand was the first person in history to start ripping mysticism out of philosophy.

Now either you get that or get fucked.

If you prefer the tranquility of servitude to the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. But I still wholeheartedly hope you die. Slowly. And in front of my face.

But you hate Noam Chomsky, so I can't take your opinion serious on Ayn Rand.