|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 1:38 pm: |
*wolf, rolling on the floor*
This thread is just to funny.
sorry...back tou your usual programming...
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 1:23 pm: |
Your implication that Allende didn't have an electoral right to rule because he didn't have an overall majority is nonsense. The point is that he had a larger share of the vote than other contenders and therefore had the right to rule. More Chileans voted for Allende than for his competitors. The vast majority of governments in the UK have been elected with less than 50% of the vote. Are you saying that someone who received a smaller share of the vote than Allende (but who wasn't Marxist) had a greater right to form a government?
The Chilean voters who did not vote for Allende did not vote against him, they voted for the candidates of their choice and the candidates of their choice lost. The ballot papers did not say "For Allende" "Against Allende".
The point is that under the agreed electoral rules of Chile, Allende was legitimately and fairly elected. He was chosen democratically. Chile was a soverign nation with a right to self-determination and the USA simply had no right to back the overthrowal of a democratically elected government simply because it did not like the form of government chosen by the Chilean people.
Does the USA have the moral right to veto the choice of government made democratically by the people of a nation outside of its own? So much for defending democracy. More like, "We'll defend the right of the people to choose their own government so long as we agree with their choice".
Is it the case that no people on this planet have the right to democratically choose a left-wing government?
And I'm not claiming Allende was an angel (he was a politician afterall) but he was a damn site less evil than Pinnochet. Kissinger on the other hand completely condoned Pinochet's barbarism in Chile. He words to Pinochet at the time were "In the United States, as you know, we are sympathetic with what you are trying to do here." What was Pinnochet doing? Concentration camps, torture centres, disappearances of many thousands, death squads, rape dogs, all sorts of inhuman atrocities. Allende was not even remotely close to being in the same league as the evil butcher General Pinnochet. But then at least he wasn't a leftie so that makes everything OK.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 1:08 pm: |
When did you drink absinthe for the first time ?
Something tell`s me you`r still a newbie (I`m not saying it in a pejorative or condescending way).
At the beginning it`s all mysterious but eventually you learn enough (through drinking and historical research) that yes, absinthe is mainly just another booze with a fancy ritual and interesting story.
Poets drank it...like everybody else in France in this era ! I wish I could have a scan of this painting with the ugly guy who have a cork in his mouth. (will post ref. later when I get home) That painting made me understand many things about absinthe in it`s golden years. For one thing it was not always so golden at all...
I understand your romanization of absinthe but it`s reducing the big picture to less than 1% of the absinthe drinkers of that era.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 1:02 pm: |
Artemis and Marc are both cool as hell.
You got to seperate the invective from the people. This is an online forum, and a post provides only a leetle tiny picture of what a person is like. After hundreds or thousands of posts, you will have a better, but still flawed, view.
And there are technical reasons you cannot blame a soldier for killing people that shouldn't have been killed. In fact, NO, you should NOT blame low ranking Nazis.
When you are in a situation where somebody might have to get killed to save the other members of your group, might have to be ordered to die and follow the order, knowing what is about to happen, you cannot afford to have people questioning things. If you do, you will lose, and the odds are your entire group is going to die.
In other words, to be effective soldiers, they must put aside a large part of thier instincts, their moral judgements, etc. There is no time for debate.
That is why people who question orders in combat situations have generally been executed on the spot.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 12:41 pm: |
So absinthe is just booze with an interesting history, eh? Does everyone here agree with that?
It's pretty simplistic to dismiss its effect on literature, art and thought in general as "an interesting history." I guess you could say French painting has "an interesting history"
Just booze? Why then would one drink it rather than Anisette? Or rather than beer? Don't get me wrong, I like beer but absinthe is a whole other experience. I, admittedly with a good amount of pretence, imagine I appreciate the unique effects of absinthe. However I honestly don't know a great deal about absinthe-drinkers, that is why I have started posting here after reading for months. Personally I was introduced to absinthe by some European art history students who certainly held it in higher regard than "just booze." They are very interesting people, as I assume others who go to such trouble to acquire this "booze" are. :> Artemis and Marc excluded (from what I've seen).
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 12:27 pm: |
Hey, what can I say, I admit to being highly uneducated about Artemis and Marc, but damn, their words seem to paint an ugly picture, and that is all I've got to go on, except for a little bit of history that some forum members have been kind enough to mail me (also not too complimentary I'm afraid). How many assumptions have been made about me so far? LOL, even my physical stature.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 11:54 am: |
Haha, you make me laugh !
Absinthe is booze with an interesting history. It's not a counterculture, it's a counter culture.
hahaha you funny you ...
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 11:49 am: |
I refuse to believe that these two made-in-the-USA automatons represent those enamored with the green fairy.
and that was my point. it illustrates how little you know either "those two" or the forum in general. it is almost laughable the assumptions you've made about those of whom you know nothing.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 11:30 am: |
You have intuited that I am a midget eh? Sorry Miss Cleo but your psychic powers are waning.
As to Absinthe, you are right, I haven't even mentioned it. How stupid of me! Here we are in a conversation about the military and I have failed to take the absinthe factor into account.
Well, since you haven't made any attempt to put forward even the most basic argument about anything we've been discussing I guess this thread is about over. And since you also somehow know that I have no familiarity with absinthe, I will just go back to drinking my way through the remainder of my dwindling stash of Wolvie's sweet nectar.
My god, if Artemis and Marc are any measure then the average absinthe drinker is just yer average American. With his wife and his dog and his car, luvin his country and hating our enemies, watchin the football game, beatin his wife, oh yeah and gettin smashed on absinthe and listening to some heavy metal. How counterculture can you get? I refuse to believe that these two made-in-the-USA automatons represent those enamored with the green fairy.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 11:17 am: |
"Soul like a Lucifer, black and cold like a piece a lead ......... "
Oh, Arty, how sad. You believed the Christian propaganda...
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 9:35 am: |
Misguided angel hangin over me
Heart like a Gabriel, pure and white as ivory
Soul like a Lucifer, black and cold like a piece a lead .........
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 9:04 am: |
hrm, if I had two angels ...
Artemis would be the angel on my left, and Marc would be the angel on my right.
... and Head would be the devil in my pocket.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 7:46 am: |
I think what has happened here and on a couple of other forums I recently had to abandon is a perfect object lesson in why socialism and socialized systems will never work. Even if the vast majority try to respect and maintain a communal resource, it only takes a small handfull of assholes to muck it up for everyone. As resources go, net forums are more fragile than most - one or two cretins with diarrehea of the keyboard can quickly dominate the landscape and make it an emabarassing, inhospitable place.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 4:27 am: |
> Don, Titan of enlightened discourse!
You wouldn't make a boil on Don's ass, and everybody here knows it without him or me saying a word. As for me, I have farted more eloquently and intelligently than anything you've said here or could hope to say, midget. I invite anyone to search the archives for your "contributions" to this forum. Absinthe? You've said nothing on the subject because you know nothing about it. In fact, apart from your little anti-military rant from behind your momma's apron, you haven't said much of anything. You're nothing but the latest of a thousand short-lived gnats that have buzzed in the ear of this forum. Go volunteer for something more suited to your ability and inclination, such as changing Hillary Clinton's maxipad. Now that's SERVICE you can handle.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 3:08 am: |
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 3:02 am: |
you'll be very comfortable here.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 2:06 am: |
If you guys really want to see what the military is all about, just watch "military diaries".
Another load of shit to try and profit from the post 9/11 paranoia.
When I was in I found that people joined the military for 2 basic reasons:
1-to make a better future for themselves. (these are the people who became cooks, mechanics, etc... they also were the ones who came from the most underprivilaged group in america.
2-for the adventure (these are the people who went into infantry, armor, cav scouts etc... fully half of these guys were from the middle and lower middle class)
So, those guys dying over in Afghanistan or some other armpit of the world, most of them are combat arms. They joined for the opportunity to go there. Alot of guys stay in the army for 20 years for the opportunity to just once, just 1 time lead an infantry charge against an enemy bunker. Or be in a tank battle. Or jump into a hot LZ.
Point is, yes, they are serving our country. Admirably. And they deserve our respect. But they arnt fucking saints, and they dont need to be worshipped.
They are people who knew the consequences when they signed the dotted line.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 1:29 am: |
I hope you weren't referring to me (or anyone else here as far as I can see) when you made your little attack against the "homophobic mouthbreathing punks." I am certainly not homophobic. I do however enjoy calling the cards of repressed gung-ho machomen like Artemis, who would profess to "hate fags" but probably also get excited during some very masculine semi-nude wrestling with his "bros." On the other hand I don't like all homosexuals. I'm not too fond of the "Gay Republican Gun-Club" types.
Now as to your pretentious criticism of the contributions of valued members of this forum. Let's see the hypocrisy in action. You said other members are "bringing the forum down" with such vulgarity that you wouldn't bring your wife or your "Manhattan absinthe friends" (what an exclusive sounding club) to a meeting with such lowlifes. Hmmm, here is a message of yours:
"why is Don gone and these braindead assholes still allowed to foul this place with their assinine bullshit? This place has been taken over by a bunch of homophobic mouthbreathing punks.
It really is a shame.
Now, I ask you, Dr. Etiquette, do you have a PhD in English? How else could you achieve such a level of literary sophistication? The rest of us can only watch and humbly try to learn from you.
Don't play the highbrow with us, we've got anklebones higher than your missing-link browridge. So do as you promised and piss-off, you pompous prat.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 1:02 am: |
Just thought I'd mention this for anyone interested. "Don" sent me a private message (apparently he watches from the shadows). It is indeed a pity that his brilliant contributions are banned. He sent me an exceedingly insightful message entitled "FUCK YOU!!!" with the total content consisting of his stating that he wouldn't like to agree with Artemis about anything ever but that I (Roq) am a worthless piece of shit. I don't remember the exact words but I have probably inadvertantly rendered it slightly more eloquent here than in its original incarnation. What a sad loss to the forum. Bring back Don I say, raise the standard of conversation in here! No more of this vulgar bickering, herald the return of Don, Titan of enlightened discourse! :>
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 12:52 am: |
Rabid, I could never disagree with anything in your message. Of course you can't label all soldiers as being smart or stupid, good or bad. It's the Artemis variety that deserve the ridicule of anyone with real morality or intelligence. In any case, it is the very soldiers who BELIEVE in what they are doing and willingly do whatever they are ordered to that are rendering the greatest disservice to their country and the world. A pawn who is "just following orders" is surely as guilty as his commander, or commander-in-chief as it may be. Wasn't this question settled by the world court? Come now, LEAVE THEM OUT OF IT??? The exact same argument could have been made about low-ranking Nazi officials, soldiers and others who are ordered to do evil. Or here is a more poignant example, do not the suicide bombers far surpass soldiers in their belief that their actions are righteous and holy, in fact that they are doing the work of God to fight the evil of the infidel? And does their ultimate sacrifice not far surpass the danger that US soldiers place themselves in during their "service?" How could anyone deny that OBJECTIVELY, without making use of cultural or religious mores, there is no ethical difference between our justifications for killing THEM, and their justifications for killing US?
Thus I find it untenable to rail against the leaders and sympathize with their volunteer army regulars. Of course they may be too ignorant, too poor, too desperate to find an alternative but I think few are "forced" into the armed forces in the US. At what point does the young soldier's "ignorance" of his position, of the way he is manipulated, become a willing ignorance and a choice to serve not some noble ideality but rather those who pull the strings, without knowing, or wanting to know, who these overseers are or what hidden aims they have. Of course genuine morality is totally disregarded (by the lowly soldier) in this picture.
I think the "service" that is referred to here remains ill-defined. It is a service in the sense of a burger-flipper performing a service for the McDonalds corporation. Perhaps the employee or soldier performs this service to the best of his ability and beleiving it to be for the greater good. That hardly increases its moral value.
Of course in PRACTICE, at this moment in history if you are in power you almost certainly must kill people to protect the public. However I don't view our current position in a vacuum. The assholes got us into this and know they want to get us out of it, and make a nice little profit and global power-grab for good measure. I reject the notion that just because I live here I have to fulfil my "civil duty" to mentally and physically support the tangled power struggles of some elite that cares little for the "peasants" that they rule over.
|Posted on Thursday, May 30, 2002 - 12:31 am: |
you're really bringing this forum down. The constant dick jokes are pathetic. How have you managed to live in Manhattan while still maintaining this high school mentality? I enjoy sex jokes and shit, but you're stuff is so witless and sophmoric. And I'm not just referring to this thread. I'm happy that you're bonding with your fellow mouthbreathers, its just a shame that it has to occur here. Have you thought about instant messaging or some other format where you can spare the rest of us from your pathetic blather. At one time, I was thinking of attending the New York gathering, but based on what I'm reading in this and the other threads, I would be uncomfortable bringing my wife or recommending that some of my Manhattan absinthe friends attend.
But, I hope you videotape it. You can probably sell it on latenight tv. Footage of a bunch drunk guys with their faces painted green and absinthe spoons tied to their peckers. WHEN ABSINTHE FIENDS GO WILD. Maybe a spring break episode for MTV.
|Posted on Wednesday, May 29, 2002 - 11:23 pm: |
Salvador Allende was elected by a minority -- that's right, a minority -- of Chilean voters: 36.3% in a three-way race. In other words, 63.7% -- a clear majority -- of all voting Chileans voted AGAINST Allende.
A couple of US presidents have been chosen by Congress after failing to gain an electoral majority, and our present leader didn't get a popular majoriy, and secured his electoral win by only a handful of votes. Democracies don't always mean "majority rules". But they do mean that there is a set of rules, rooted in popular consent, by which leaders are chosen, and these rules are followed. Less than a quarter of people eligible to vote, chose to vote for our sitting president, but according to the rules of our democracy, ratified by consent of the people, he won.
No amount of backpeddling or claiming it was for the best alters the fact that we interfered with the democratic process in Chile. It does not matter if it was "for the best".
|Posted on Wednesday, May 29, 2002 - 11:16 pm: |
Goodbye Marc, surely someone as enlightened as you doesn't belong here amongst us braindead asshole assanine serfs, right? So be gone, thats the only real way you can be just like Don now anyway, right?
If we make irreverant jokes, we are frat boys. If we speak our mind, even if we are only 50% incorrect, we are braindead assholes. You're obviously casting your pearls of wisdom before swine here. Oh, lordy, what happened to the good ol' belle epoch where charmed but tortured artists indulged and created godlike works which are so superior to the drivel of today? Well, I think that our romantic notion of the Belle Epoch is a load of horse shit and I think Toulouse Latrec (based on what I've read) would have loved fart jokes and playing devils advocate as much as he loved pontificating about the value of the military. I don't pretend to equate myself with any of these comic book characters of the Belle Epoch, but I don't have any problem with people speaking their mind on this forum, even if I disagree with them. But if somebody is just going to come on here and bitch and moan about the very forum in which they post at least 4 times a day, then they should get the fuck out and do themselves and everyone else a favour. It's like being that sap at the concert that's booing the band that everyone else is trying to listen to. Do yourself and us a favour and be gone. Sorry to be so blunt, and in some ways I'd like you to stay because I enjoy a good debate, but if we're just all shit to you, then you might as well be shit to us.
|Posted on Wednesday, May 29, 2002 - 10:57 pm: |
why is Don gone and these braindead assholes still allowed to foul this place with their assinine bullshit? This place has been taken over by a bunch of homophobic mouthbreathing punks.
It really is a shame.
|Posted on Wednesday, May 29, 2002 - 10:57 pm: |
I know a few soldiers. I don't really have anything in common with them, but I don't really have a problem with them either. They all seem to have a very different idea of America than I do, and I think Aroquentin brings up an interesting point, that if the politicians didn't have a bunch of people who were willing to go to any country and kill anyone they were told to, that America might be a very different place. However, I am glad that they are willing to serve so I don't have to. Being a soldier is a very very tough position to be in, which I don't feel comfortable judging them. Do you decide not to kill the taliban guy with the gun pointed at you because he is human? If you don't kill that guy, he could be responsible for the deaths of many other people. Not a position I would want to be in, and I'm glad I'll probably never have to because our military will do it for me. However, I also acknowledge how foolish our middle east policy is, and that it has gotten into a lot of terrible danger becuase our fuckface politicians just thought it would be dandy to sell everybody lots of weapons and pretend that it would not have any consequences for us. Why don't the terrorists attack Canada? Because they don't fuck with the rest of the world like we do. And that's why Canada doesn't need tons of citizens who are willing to kill or die for their country. I respect our soldiers for their willingness to serve, but they could do a better job of realizing isn't a battle between good and evil like our moron president is painting it out to be, its a battle of evil against eviler.