- Joined
- Aug 22, 2005
- Messages
- 3,412
- Reaction score
- 8
- Location
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
http://www.violencebegetsviolence.org/There is something about human nature that perpetrates violence.
America has been blessed with a history almost devoid of violence perpetrated against innocent citizens despite the wholesale violence the American government and American controlled corporations have perpetrated against millions of innocent civilians across the globe.
The terrible act of revenge perpetrated against thousands of innocent Americans during the attack on The World Trade Towers, is an act of terrorism which those who have been victims of American violence justify as appropriate revenge.
Evil is evil in any form and violence toward any of God’s children, in any biological form is evil.
ETHICIANS denounce violence and revenge regardless of its source or origin. Some of the violence which America and Americans have been responsible for either directly or indirectly are as follows:
1. Millions of women, children, senior citizens and other innocents were victims of the Viet Nam War which was nothing more than ‘money making business’ for napalm makers, helicopter manufacturers, and body bag factories. How could anyone be surprised if the survivors harbored resentment.
2. Tens of thousands of Guatemalan peasants and Indians were murdered by American backed ‘Death Squads’ bent on acquiring their lands, minerals, and forests.
3. We have repeatedly armed and supported dictators, tyrants, robber corporations, and other entities which have been responsible for the deaths of additional millions of earth’s peoples as well as gene-o-cide on a horrific scale.
4. When the Nation of Israel was established in what had been the Nation of Palestine we failed to see to it that the displaced persons were treated with respect, compensated, and provided with new homes and quality lives. We will suffer the consequences for our inhumanity until we learn to treat all peoples equally and fairly.
Yes, violence begets violence and until we stop committing violent acts against God’s human children and against God’s Creation we are going to suffer from the violence of retaliation from the abused whether in the form of terrorism from humans or floods, hurricanes, desertification, and other forms of natural violence caused by our destruction of Creation.
Until our government and our corporations develop an ethic which respects all of God’s children and all Creation we will be faced with those who will retaliate against the violence which we have perpetrated against them.
ETHICIUS I
Iriemon said:I agree with the concept violence begets violence; I beleive there is truth to it. Sometimes you have to fight, but when you do not have to fight, this rule is one (of many) good reason why you should not.
I find it ironic that conservatives, who stereotypical are Christians, are (again stereotypically) the biggest supporters of war. Christians' (and I am one) Lord lived His life urging His followers to be lovers of peace. He said things like (paraphrasing) love one another, due onto others as you'd have them do unto you, when someone strikes you turn the other cheek, and blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the sons of God.
ProudAmerican said:if you are unable to see the difference in violence as a method of conquering, and aquiring land......and violence as a method of self defense, and preventing future violence against innocent American civilians, then nothing anyone says.......and nothing written in any book.......will make you understand it.
kal-el said:Ok, so what's your point?:lol: Violence as a method of self-defense is understandable. But I guess your hinting at Iraq? That was anything but self-defense. 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudis. None were Iraqi. Iraq did nothing to warrant an invasion and occupation. It was all pre-emtion.
ProudAmerican said:one could certainly argue that attacking Al Queda pre 9-11 would not have been self defense......but one can also only wonder if we had started agressively persuing Al Queda years ago would 3,000 future innocent lives have been spared.
and nothing anyone ever says. no ammount of facts or evidence anyone ever puts forth, will be enough to help you figure it out.But Iraq, I still can't figure that one out.
aquapub said:"The terrible act of revenge perpetrated against thousands of innocent Americans during the attack on The World Trade Towers, is an act of terrorism which those who have been victims of American violence justify as appropriate revenge." Kal El
We have protected ourselves and our allies against bloodthirsty Muslim psychos for generations upon generations. They would do the same. There is nothing controversial about it. "Victims of American violence" is nauseating spin. Nazi Germany was a "victim" of American violence. So was Saddam, the Taliban, the Kaiser, and a whole bunch of others who more than earned it. Spinning it as America being a Disney Villain out to pick on innocent sovereign states is dishonest and I will call you out on it every time.
And as Democrats have proven repeatedly, it is not violence that needs to be avoided to prevent violence. When Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter appeased North Korea, it emboldened them, and they demanded more. Now they are nuclear. When Democrats let Al Queda attack us with impunity for nearly a decade, Al Queda clawed its way up to hero status in the Muslim world and fortified their footing. Al Queda will now never be fully possible to destroy.
Peace is usually not the answer, war is.
I think liberals deserve a special round of applause from all of us for creating the incredibly dangerous world we now live in. I sure am glad we have people who are too good to have to read those pesky history books and avoid repeating history by retreating from and appeasing the enemy. :2wave:
kal-el said:O man, you seriously need help if you believe this diatribe. I'll admit, sometimes war is necessary, but those times are far and few. War is not the answer. It's drastically clear that violence only brings more violence, and this situation in Iraq sadly proves it. "Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword" Violence has a snowball effect to it, once it starts it dosen't stop, and when we (the US) step in and get involved, we are obligated to carry on even more.
You talk about reading history books, well if they've been written right, they would include chapters upon chapters of pacifists like Jesus and Gandhi, and only give a few pages to violent villans like Hitler and Napolean.
SKILMATIC said:Violence begets violence is very disturbingly asymetrical.
This world isnt even asymetrical. Humans arent even perfectly asymetrical. So to say that a human action to another human is going to be asymetrical is wrong. For instance, there are people that bully young kids now do they have the same symetrical response? Nope. So that concludes it as not being asymetrical and therefore violence doesnt beget violence. When someone threatens Ghandi would ghandi treat that individual the same way he just got treated? No, so again violence doesnt always beget violence.
Also every action sometimes doesnt have a equally oppostie reaction. Terrorists ran planes into 2 buildings that eneded up collapsing and we ended up dropping enough ordinance on places that made Hiroshima look like kindergarden color day.
kal-el said:Huh?
Actually, the kids that are being bullied, do show violent behavior. They might not retaliate violently, but the act of being bullied will in turn, start a vicious cycle. Because Gandhi was above reproach. He was a total pacifist. He would turn the other cheek. Much like Jesus.
My point exactly. Violence leads to even more violence.
No I beleive your point was violence begets violence which is asymetrical. When it is asymetrical both outcomes are congruent to each other. In this case it is not congruant.My point exactly. Violence leads to even more violence.
SKILMATIC said:Well I got punked very much when I was growing up you dont see me going everywhere killing people. How do you explain people like Manson and Domer? Both had estute upbringings.
No I beleive your point was violence begets violence which is asymetrical. When it is asymetrical both outcomes are congruent to each other. In this case it is not congruant.
Also violence doesnt always beget itself. Voilence is much like any other action. And actions are always controlled by its emitter. Thus human beings. You also didnt awknolwdge the Ghandi scenario. I wonder why? Is it becasue it makes that argument go right down the toilet? I guess it does. Next argument please.:2wave:
First of all, its "astute"; second of all it shouldnt be in the sentence. Unless you are trying to say they had "clever upbringings" I think you have the wrong word.Both had estute upbringings.
I'm sure Manson and Daumer were belittled alot during their childhoods.
Both outcomes are not "congruent" or identical of eachother.
I aknowledged the Gandhi scenario, I said Gandhi was above reproach; he would "turn the other cheek". Violence isn't necessarily equivelent to every other action.
First of all, its "astute"; second of all it shouldnt be in the sentence. Unless you are trying to say they had "clever upbringings" I think you have the wrong word.
SKILMATIC said:Can you please submit a link for your sureness? Now remember what we've learned. Here's your chance to get a win here. Perfect opportunity. Now lets see it.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/notorious/tick/abuse_3.htmlChildhood abuse may not be the sole excuse for serial killers, but it is an undeniable factor in many of their backgrounds.
Halelujah!!! Now someones getting it. You are on a roll tonight.
Bingo! Which in your own admission violence doesnt always beget violence now does it? Thanks for being on a roll tonight. You have seriosuly done very well. I now :applaud you.
Every outcome is not identical.
Not in all circumstances. Some people are above violent behavior. Over 2,000 years ago, Jesus overturned merchants stalls in the temple, right? And I dare anyone to say that Jesus was violent, yet he did chase out the merchants. I think Muhammed was exiled from his arab country, but he returned with a sword, although non-violent, but he got respect, didn't he?
SKILMATIC said:This is exactly what I am saying.
This is exactly what I am talking about. Every action doesnt beget itself. So this violence begets violence thing is a sham all in itself and by your own admissions.
Violence begets violence 9 times out of 10. Everytime, it does have a reaction,( as every action has a reaction), sometimes violent, sometimes, non-violent, depending on the circumstances and the said person.
SKILMATIC said:Awwe there we go. Music to my ears. Now you understand. Violence doesnt always beget violence. You forget people have a choice and they aren't destined for this outcome.
kal-el said:
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?