The Atrocities of humankind, this DVD and The Blessings of A Free Society..

[Achtung Bubba]

Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
No Bubba, I am still not your opinion.

Um, pardon?

Yes, maybe "a picture in the head" is a metaphor. But whether I use this metaphor, or I say, "look what thoughts you connect with those two descriptions" leads to a meaningless discussion.
Because those things mean the same.

But when you say: -

Second, the U.S. showed itself willing to fight a war with ITSELF (oh my god! also the biiiiig letters) to purge this atrocity -

instead of:

- In the American Civil war, part of the nation.... etc. -

There IS a difference, and not only the difference of using a sweet little metaphor. With your first description, I connect the thought that, well... ummm... in every nation slavery has happened, but we were, in compare to others, also such a GREAT nation that we fought against our blood, or even better "that the country fought against itself". Like a poor Uncle Sam scratching his head, and then thanks to God finally going the right way.

And what, may I ask, is wrong in asserting that the United States was one of the few nations on Earth willing to go to war to settle the issue of slavery? Even if slavery wasn't the central reason the war was started, Lincoln's Gettysburg Address made it clear that slavery was why the war was continued - why the Union didn't just let the Confederacy go on its merry way.

The assertion IS accurate, so what's your problem?

And if we´re already at it: Who are you to mention what is equivalent to what? How can you be so blind to compare pain with other pain? Oh, I also did this - one time - , but I mentioned my mistake beforehand, giving everyone a chance to see that in reality this kind of argument is shaky. Who do you believe to be, to freely compare millions of deaths to other millions of deaths?

Who am I? I'm a simple human being who has an innate (albeit fallible) sense of morality and a fearless willingness to use it.

Let me make this clear: some things are bad, and some things are worse.

Accidentally killing somebody (e.g., vehicular manslaughter), through the result of your own negligence is bad. Intentionally killing somebody in a blind rage (after, say, finding the guy in bed with your wife) is worse. Planned, premeditated murder is worse still. A planned premeditated murder that follows hours of torture is even worse. And a systematic series of tortures and murders - the work of a serial killer - is even more horrible.

This sort of thing should be clear, and the same sort of clarity should be seen in comparing world events.

In the case of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the United States dropped bombs on cities of a enemy country in the midst of a war - a war propigated by the enemy country - on the eve of probably a very bloody ground campaign. The bombings resulted in the deaths of about 250,000 people - a quarter million, so I'm not comparing "millions of deaths" to "millions of deaths."

In the case of the Nazi Holocaust, individual citizens were dragged from their homes, suffered in prison camps, and were gassed to death - all because they were Jews, gypsies, or other "undesirables." The Holocaust resulted in the deaths of six million.

Numbers aside, we're comparing bombings within the context of war and the attempted genocide of an entire race. Numbers included, the Nazi Holocaust also caused about 25 times more deaths.

It should be obvious to anyone that the Nazi Holocaust was worse.

[oliveu2cm]

Originally posted by diamond
The tape showed prisoners in Iraq getting limbs amputated for stealing TVs ect,,
In our country PRISONERS complain if they DONT have a color TV in their cell

Whats up w that.?

Some countries put you before a firing squad if you are caught drunk driving; others will drive the person miles out of town and make them walk home.

While I think our drunk driving laws are too loose, at least we have a) regulated laws and b) do not KILL people because they drive drunk.

There are many ways we are very very lucky. I wouldn't want to live anywhere else.

Thanks Diamond for the reminder.
Also, this is why I like to go to the parades- to clap for all the men and women who do my dirty work, while I "sleep in the comfort of my freedom."

[diamond]

Thanks Olive

I ACTUALLY threw up after watching only 2/3rds of this.
This is how DISTURBING this was to me

It covered Tito's brutality in Yukoslavia
to
The recent Bosnian crisis
to
Mafia Executions In Russia
to
Recent Palestian Terror ect ect ect.

Made me puke.

I love my country.
I HATE ppl who KILL the innocent wmalice.

DB9
:idea:

[Stories for Boys]

*sigh*

on one hand, i feel very blessed to live in such a free country, but on the other hand, i feel like i don't deserve it. i mean, i was born in argentina, and they've had lots of troubles as well...listen to 'mothers of the dissappeared'.....anyway, i feel like there are so many wonderful people who are oppressed so much, and they should be here, learning and living.....i mean, i feel like there's not much we can do to truly help.....it's sad that there's so much pain and injustice that we can't do anything about................the world tends to be a horrible place.........and i can only hope for a better life to come......

[hiphop]

Originally posted by Achtung Bubba




The assertion IS accurate, so what's your problem?



Who am I? I'm a simple human being who has an innate (albeit fallible) sense of morality and a fearless willingness to use it.

Let me make this clear: some things are bad, and some things are worse.

Accidentally killing somebody (e.g., vehicular manslaughter), through the result of your own negligence is bad. Intentionally killing somebody in a blind rage (after, say, finding the guy in bed with your wife) is worse. Planned, premeditated murder is worse still. A planned premeditated murder that follows hours of torture is even worse. And a systematic series of tortures and murders - the work of a serial killer - is even more horrible.

This sort of thing should be clear, and the same sort of clarity should be seen in comparing world events.

In the case of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the United States dropped bombs on cities of a enemy country in the midst of a war - a war propigated by the enemy country - on the eve of probably a very bloody ground campaign. The bombings resulted in the deaths of about 250,000 people - a quarter million, so I'm not comparing "millions of deaths" to "millions of deaths."

In the case of the Nazi Holocaust, individual citizens were dragged from their homes, suffered in prison camps, and were gassed to death - all because they were Jews, gypsies, or other "undesirables." The Holocaust resulted in the deaths of six million.

Numbers aside, we're comparing bombings within the context of war and the attempted genocide of an entire race. Numbers included, the Nazi Holocaust also caused about 25 times more deaths.

It should be obvious to anyone that the Nazi Holocaust was worse.

Hey, JUDGE!

You don´t want to answer me, right? That´s ok. Go on comparing Nazis and nuclear bombs if you like to. I´m not going to waste my time with blah.


God only knows all the trouble that grows
Deep beneath my soul dealing with you....
Dré, pass me the glass of wine
So I can pour it over my homies grave and mine
For all those who fallen and answered when God was calling
Jump in my ragtop and get all in
I´m the bomb planted in your car, why you´re frozen
Pop the tape in ignite the Xplosion
The world is mine, the world is yours, the world is ours,
The world is lost, the world is fossed...

B-Real on Xplosion

[Achtung Bubba]

Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
Hey, JUDGE!

You don´t want to answer me, right? That´s ok. Go on comparing Nazis and nuclear bombs if you like to. I´m not going to waste my time with blah.

What question did I not answer?

[hiphop]

*sigh*

We were discussing about the validity of metaphors, not about Nazis vs. nuclear bombs and what is worse (which is a really ridiculous argument). Are you stoned, Judge? No, you don´t have to answer this. Tell me about the metaphor and if, for you, there is really absolutely no difference between:

Second, the U.S. showed itself willing to fight a war with ITSELF to purge this atrocity.

and:

In the American civil war, part of the nation tried to secede and form its own nation, and the other part tried to prevent that happening - and the conflict came to violence.

*goes back to sleep*

[rafmed]

Maybe the holocaust is not comparable to the nuclear bombs, I think the holocaust is more comparable to the extermination of the American Indigenans.

[Lemonite]

Originally posted by Stories for Boys
*sigh*

on one hand, i feel very blessed to live in such a free country, but on the other hand, i feel like i don't deserve it. ...anyway, i feel like there are so many wonderful people who are oppressed so much, and they should be here, learning and living

The Perfect Justification for allowing yourself to sleep well at night while you go out the next day and order a 32 Oz Prime Rib Cut.. Then come home .. feel guilty about the fact that you got to buy that juicy steak, because you only needed 12 oz of it and that other 20 Oz could go to a starving child in Africa... Then you fall asleep feeling good about yourself because you 'care'. Please. Spare us your Guilt Ridden Panderous Disclaimers. Take Nyquil if you're having that much trouble getting shut-eye.

I find it funny that people are shitting upon the Atom Bomb as a Mistaken Mark in our History.. Or maybe the greater atrocity would have been the 60,000 American lives that would have been lost otherwise.

L.Unplugged

[Achtung Bubba]

Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
*sigh*

We were discussing about the validity of metaphors, not about Nazis vs. nuclear bombs and what is worse (which is a really ridiculous argument). Are you stoned, Judge? No, you don´t have to answer this. Tell me about the metaphor and if, for you, there is really absolutely no difference between:

Second, the U.S. showed itself willing to fight a war with ITSELF to purge this atrocity.

and:

In the American civil war, part of the nation tried to secede and form its own nation, and the other part tried to prevent that happening - and the conflict came to violence.

*goes back to sleep*

There is a difference: The first focused on the fact that the war revolved around slavery, the second statement did not.

Otherwise, there is no substantial difference.

And - I mentioned this in a different thread, but it bears repeating - stop calling me "Judge."