[Grizzly]

What we need is a virus that selectively kills only stupid people...that would solve 99% of the worlds problems.

#4753 +(14464)- [X]

<xterm> The problem with America is stupidity. I'm not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

Yes, that plan is simpler.
But a lot of idiots are probably gonna survive, since such accidents don't lead to death to often.
Therefore, the virus is more efficient...unless of course it mutates and starts killing smart people too. But then it would do the job it was supposed to do, since obviously the smart people weren't actually smart if they unleashed something like that in the first place.

I think it is an rather inefficient plan. The dumb people don't read those safety labels anyway, or even do what the labels say you shouldn't do, while the smart people do. If the labels get removed, more smart humans will die, while the death rate of dumb people stays the same.

Therefore, just make much more dangerous things, and put safety labels on them.

[Shade]

(God knows if anyone will get the reference.)

Probably not. After all, we're only hunam.

[Fearless Leader]

Honestly? Sitting back looks pretty darn attractive. Hey, i'm still more likely to get struck by lightning than killed by a terrorist, so it's not like i'm taking a major risk here.

sitting back got us the USS Cole bombing, and the 9-11-01 attacks.

sitting back gets large amounts of people killed. They want us dead.

[Mefustae]

sitting back got us the USS Cole bombing, and the 9-11-01 attacks.

sitting back gets large amounts of people killed. They want us dead.

What, and knee-jerk retaliations won't? People are going to die anyway, it's a fact of life. Let's go with the option that kills the fewest people possible, rather than some moronic 'eye for an eye' bull****.

Don't get me wrong, i'm not advocating all nations end all anti-terror operations immediately. Far from it! Counter-terror organizations have some of the best people available working around the clock thwarting really gnarly **** we never even hear about, and they are effective. But it's sentiments like "they bombed us, so we need to pay them back 10,000 time worse!!" that allow the Suits to use that fear and pointless hostility to justify starting wars.

[Fearless Leader]

yes, fear, they are afraid to attack us because we will s*** on them.

[Mefustae]

yes, fear, they are afraid to attack us because we will s*** on them.

I'm going to go have a boxing match with a brick wall, at least i'll have a slightly better chance of winning there than I will against the likes of you.

[Flipside]

Dune was right, Fear really is the mind-killer.....

[NGTM-1R]

Dune was right, Fear really is the mind-killer.....

Fear is the mind-enhancer. Terror is the mind-killer. (And I don't mean terrorists.) So is vengence.

[Shade]

yes, fear, they are afraid to attack us because we will s*** on them.

No, they're not. Because you can't. Sure, you can attack some random muslim country, but that doesn't hurt the terrorists one bit - Hell, it just doubles their recruitment base every time you do it. Also, there has been a greater frequency of terrorist attacks following the start of the so-called War on Terror than before.

The fear is yours, the terror is yours. Only a scared nation reacts the way the United States has reacted in the recent years, and in reacting so, it has only made more enemies. Indeed, in reacting so, it has so far allowed the terrorists to get closer to their goal than they could possibly have dreamed of. Why? They cannot destroy your society through terrorist attacks - The loss of life from them, while tragic, is trivial. Fewer people have died from such attacks in total from 9/11 onward than die in a single month from traffic accidents. So the effect is, or rather should be, non existent. But right now, you are letting them win. Because while they cannot destroy your society, you can. And you're doing it, by giving up the freedoms that you've fought so hard to attain in fear of something that is significantly less likely to happen than getting struck by lightning.

[Flipside]

Dune was right, Fear really is the mind-killer.....

Fear is the mind-enhancer. Terror is the mind-killer. (And I don't mean terrorists.) So is vengence.

I'm not so sure, fear enhances senses, but I don't think it enhances intelligence, if anything, it shuts down higher functions so that your reactions are as fast as possible when the suspected threat arrives. So yes, you do think faster when you are afraid, but your thinking is directed along very specific non decision-based lines.

[Fearless Leader]

No, they're not. Because you can't. Sure, you can attack some random muslim country, but that doesn't hurt the terrorists one bit - Hell, it just doubles their recruitment base every time you do it. Also, there has been a greater frequency of terrorist attacks following the start of the so-called War on Terror than before.

The fear is yours, the terror is yours. Only a scared nation reacts the way the United States has reacted in the recent years, and in reacting so, it has only made more enemies. Indeed, in reacting so, it has so far allowed the terrorists to get closer to their goal than they could possibly have dreamed of. Why? They cannot destroy your society through terrorist attacks - The loss of life from them, while tragic, is trivial. Fewer people have died from such attacks in total from 9/11 onward than die in a single month from traffic accidents. So the effect is, or rather should be, non existent. But right now, you are letting them win. Because while they cannot destroy your society, you can. And you're doing it, by giving up the freedoms that you've fought so hard to attain in fear of something that is significantly less likely to happen than getting struck by lightning.

The US is not falling apart any more than it has in any other war, we are giving up fewer freedoms than we did in other wars, there is no forced service, no massive internment camps filled with immigrants, no rationing of food gas or medicine, and we are still free.

There is a difference between scared and enraged. And as far as lousing friends, what good is a fair weather friend? That will back you up when everyone likes you and you are on top, and  as soon as you have problems and your back is against the wall, they leave you to hide in the safety of their homes.

Car accidents are in fact accidents, and IMO being struck by lightning is an act of fate, if that many people were being murdered by one organization then it would not be insignificant.
When men and women blow them selfs up, or plant a bomb to murder innocents, people do not say "that was a bad accident".

Terrorists killing fewer people than car accidents or lightning is a good thing, it means we are winning.

[Shade]

The US is not falling apart any more than it has in any other war, we are giving up fewer freedoms than we did in other wars, there is no forced service, no massive internment camps filled with immigrants, no rationing of food gas or medicine, and we are still free.

Except of course for the fact that the US is not at war. If the US was at war then the US government would not be able to break the Geneva conventions as blatently as they do now. If you claim the US is truely at war, then the US government is filled with war criminals and should be tried accordingly. The whole 'War on Terror' nonsense is probaganda designed to marginalise opposition to the government's handling of the situation. Something at which it has sadly been very successful. So as it stands you're losing freedoms and rights and letting your government commit acts towards other peoples that would have the american public up in arms were it brought to bear on them - the word concentration camp is not all that wrongly applied when used for the Guantanamo prison, for example - despite the fact that there is no war.

There is a difference between scared and enraged. And as far as lousing friends, what good is a fair weather friend? That will back you up when everyone likes you and you are on top, and  as soon as you have problems and your back is against the wall, they leave you to hide in the safety of their homes.

You seems to have gotten your facts mixed up here. The US did not lose friends because the US came under attack. The US lost friends because the US pushed them away. France was one of the first and the strongest supporters of the US following the 9/11 attacks, but were demonised by your government when they opposed the Iraq invasion because they believed your reasons were bogus. Which, history has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, they were. Have they recieved an apology for their treatment at the hands of the US now that they've been proven corect? Nope. Small wonder you're not so popular there or in many of the other countries who were scorned for calling the lies they were presented with. The friends of the US did not leave, they were pushed away.

Terrorists killing fewer people than car accidents or lightning is a good thing, it means we are winning.

Actually, the fact that terrorist attacks are up significantly since the start of the '"war" would seem to imply that you're losing. Badly. Terrorists have never been any major factor in loss of life, even before you started the so-called war. Even back when the US was actively sponsoring terrorists and insurgents as long as they were mostly targeting their cold war enemies (which, incidentally, is how Bin Laden got into the business. He's very much an american creation). You really need to start looking at facts instead of probaganda if you intend to be taken seriously in a discussion.

[Fearless Leader]

Well, I guess you are right, there is no war, we are not having military conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan, we should just chill out and forget about it all. <-SARCASM

France isn't a fair weather friend? They just left us when we needed them, when we weren't doing the popular thing, when it wasn't clean and proper, when every other nation in Europe was not also behind us. If that isn't a fair weather friend, then I don't know what is.
They apposed us invading Iraq because they didnt want us to see the French writing on their weapons, or maybe it was because of the bunkers.

History proved what? How about you wait for the facts to come out. When this whole mess is over and done with, then history can speak, because this chapter is not finished yet.

Yes, I realize Ossama Bin Laden was originally funded, by the US, in the cold war so he could fight the Soviet Union (a government that executed more people than Hitler did) I never said he wasnt. What does it have to do with anything now?
Attacks are up "significantly" because they are fighting for their lives now, thats what a war is, two sides fighting. However since you belive there is now war, then I guess you might be alramed by it.

Gee wiz, the way you make it sound we are being attacked every day, and dieing by the hundreds, unable to speak out because of our government taking our freedoms, while the terrorists go home to milk and cookies.

[Flipside]

France isn't a fair weather friend? They just left us when we needed them, when we weren't doing the popular thing, when it wasn't clean and proper, when every other nation in Europe was not also behind us. If that isn't a fair weather friend, then I don't know what is.

Because they believed that you were barking up the wrong tree and like any friend, told you so, but chose not to join you in making the mistake. Just like if you had a friend who wanted to try drugs, or thought that 'hobo-kicking' was a fun sport, you'd tell them they thought they were wrong, and you wouldn't join in doing it.

You seem to think France and the rest of Europe 'abandoned' the US,  apparently when the US does something that flies in the face of Europes' opinion, it is 'resolution' and 'determination', but when Europe does something that offends America, they are 'Fair Weather Friends'?

To be honest, it's more a case of the US being a 'fair weather friend' to the UN, only accepting their ruling when it agrees with what the US was going to do anyway, and, if not, doing it anyway regardless. Now, the US is far from the only country to do that, but 'fair weather friend' is like 'If you are not with us, you are against us', and that's a dangerous route to take.

[karajorma]

France isn't a fair weather friend? They just left us when we needed them, when we weren't doing the popular thing, when it wasn't clean and proper, when every other nation in Europe was not also behind us. If that isn't a fair weather friend, then I don't know what is.
They apposed us invading Iraq because they didnt want us to see the French writing on their weapons, or maybe it was because of the bunkers.

And why were you right to invade Iraq? The simple fact is that America didn't have any good reason to invade. You've made the mistake of believing The Big Lie that Bush's government have been so happily pushing out. You really should read the facts on the subject rather than going on the bull**** you're hearing.

What you seem to forget is that the whole of Europe was on your side after 9/11. America pushed them away with their stupidity over Iraq.

[MP-Ryan]

Interesting...

The US has actually given up more freedoms and democratic rights since 9/11 as a result of the paranoia over terrorism than it gained by "fighting" them.

1.  Border security - despite the US government's claims, border security has not been enhanced since 9/11.  Rather, more money is being spent, more resources in manpower and equipment hours expended, and more intelligence attention is being misdirected at a threat that did not exist in the first place.  The resources of USCBP on the USA-Canada border more than tripled in the last seven years - yet, not a single terrorist has ever been identified as having crossed into the US from Canada.  All of the 9/11 hijackers came in directly from overseas flights.

2.  The Patriot Act - fundamentally opposes the principles of the Constitution.  Has now been in effect for seven years.  Sweeping powers applied to the federal government and law enforcement to combat terrorism.  Oddly enough, none of those powers have been used against terrorists.  Rather, most of the effects of the Patriot Act have actually fallen onto regular domestic crime issues.

3.  Expanding national security powers - this includes wiretapping, electronic surveillance, interception, and the increase in operational capacity of programs like the FBI's Carnivore.  All came after 9/11.  None have been linked directly to prevention of another terrorist attack.

4.  Restriction of legal rights - nevermind the de-facto suspension of habeas corpus for the folks stuck in Guantanamo, US intelligence agencies have openly admitted to deporting SUSPECTS (not convicted terrorists or criminals, but suspects) to countries which actively use torture prohibited by the Geneva conventions and several UN Charters in order to gain information.  We also have the continued use of practices such as waterboarding for intelligence purposes, a practice that would never be condoned by legitimate court systems on US soil if US citizens were involved.  Which brings us also to the use of military tribunals for the trial of terrorism suspects as the conditions of treatment and evidence available would not be acceptable to a civilian court.

Lastly - the US is not formally at war any longer.  "The detainees" in US custody are being treated as terrorists, not prisoners of war (POWs).  This is actually why US intelligence agencies can get away with waterboarding.  With a formal state of war, any person captured as an enemy combatant in Iraq or Afghanistan would have to be considered a POW and treated according to the Geneva Conventions (to which the US is a signatory).  Torture and stress treatments would become illegal under international law.

Now, I'm not a conspiracy theorist so I don't believe in a master government plot to eliminate freedoms, but rather I see a nation which has become fearful and paranoid trying to cope with an enemy it doesn't understand and in doing so unwittingly doing exactly what that enemy wants.

Osama wasn't out to just kill Americans - he was out to disrupt the way of life in the United States.  And the US people have allowed him to succeed.  You altered the entire structure of your legal protections toward a state-protection model in order to combat a threat which never credibly existed.  The US clamped down on itself - and that's why the terrorists are winning.  Every piece of more restrictive legislation applied to policing, protection, and enforcement that simultaneously chips away at traditional liberties in the name of "security" is a victory for the fear-mongers and killers and a loss for anyone who truly cherishes their right to a free life.

My favorite recent example of this lunacy is the liquid ban on aircraft.  I can no longer take a bottle of water onto  an airplane because it is a security risk.  One potential plot, and that basic ability is gone across the entirety of North America.  Now really, who's winning this "war"?

[Shade]

Oh, this will be fun.

Well, I guess you are right, there is no war, we are not having military conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan, we should just chill out and forget about it all. <-SARCASM

No, you're not having a military conflict in Iraq. That ended years ago with the fall of Saddam's regime - Remember Bush in front of that big victory banner? That was it. What you're having there now is a cluster**** of a rebuilding operation brought on by the unwillingness of the US government to make any real plans for what was going to happen after they had won. Afghanistan is definitely a military conflict, but it's not the War on Terror^TM. It was back when the Taleban were harbouring bin Laden, and you'll notice that the Afghanistan war actually had US backing and that the UN was (and still is) supported by many other countries (your so-called fair weather friends among them), but it is not anymore. Now it's a mess of tribal warlords all wanting to be the next big guy on the block.

France isn't a fair weather friend? They just left us when we needed them, when we weren't doing the popular thing, when it wasn't clean and proper, when every other nation in Europe was not also behind us. If that isn't a fair weather friend, then I don't know what is.
They apposed us invading Iraq because they didnt want us to see the French writing on their weapons, or maybe it was because of the bunkers.

They didn't support you on Iraq because you lied, decieved, threatened and bullied. That's not the way to keep your allies around. But that has already been covered nicely by other posters (and, hell, by myself in earlier posts), so I'll just offer this:  See This Picture? That's from operation Enduring Freedom - Among the ships in that fleet are the FS Surcouf, FS De Grasse and FS Charles de Gaulle, also known as FS Fairweather 1, 2 and 3 in your terminology. Funny how they didn't shy away when the cause was actually just and the US government didn't lie to their face, isn't it?

History proved what? How about you wait for the facts to come out. When this whole mess is over and done with, then history can speak, because this chapter is not finished yet.

No WMDs were found in Iraq, despite the US government having allegedly identified many sites before the war. No ties existed between Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, despite US claims to the contrary. Indeed, there was no presence of his organization at all in Iraq prior to Saddam's fall... he was by no means a devout muslim, so he kept them out - They were a threat to him, too. They only moved in after the US failed miserably at creating some semblence of order once the war was won. Those are the reasons presented by the US government for the Iraq war. Both were lies. What more playing out needs to be done?

Yes, I realize Ossama Bin Laden was originally funded, by the US, in the cold war so he could fight the Soviet Union (a government that executed more people than Hitler did) I never said he wasnt. What does it have to do with anything now?
Attacks are up "significantly" because they are fighting for their lives now, thats what a war is, two sides fighting. However since you belive there is now war, then I guess you might be alramed by it.

Do I really need to point out the fallacy in the argument that someone who is willing to blow himself up is fighting harder because he's afraid he might die? They're fighting harder because they have the means to fight harder, handed to them on a silver platter by president George W. Bush himself when he decided to invade Iraq. That place in its current state in a terrorist's dream, easy access to every toy you could ever want, except of course WMDs since Iraq didn't have any. But maybe they can buy from North Korea which does, and with which the US has for some reason decided to forego any response. Probably because they aren't as helpless and could actually fight back a little bit, which wouldn't be so good for public opinion as a nice, easy war against little Saddam.

Gee wiz, the way you make it sound we are being attacked every day, and dieing by the hundreds, unable to speak out because of our government taking our freedoms, while the terrorists go home to milk and cookies.

No, that's the thing. There aren't many attacks. Attacks are up since the War on Terror^TM started, but there still aren't many of them. Which is why the response by the US government is all the more extreme - They could save 50 times as many american lives with 1% of the money spent on that so-called war if they simply applied it towards health care or making roads safer. But those things don't keep a president in his job. Wars do. Especially if it's against an enemy you can't see (and thus can't fight, but they don't tell you that part).

[Mefustae]

Look guys, he's clearly too far gone to try to dissuade. I believe we should start thinking about euthanasia.

[Shade]

Oh come on, we haven't even gotten to the part where he accuses us of hating America and its citizens, despite the fact that we actually like americans and all we're actually attacking is the US Government and its fearless (and clueless!) leader, George W. Bush. Thread isn't done until that has happened.

[Fearless Leader]

Look guys, he's clearly too far gone to try to dissuade. I believe we should start thinking about euthanasia.

Please, it would be a relief.

Oh come on, we haven't even gotten to the part where he accuses us of hating America and its citizens, despite the fact that we actually like americans and all we're actually attacking is the US Government and its fearless (and clueless!) leader, George W. Bush. Thread isn't done until that has happened.

I can understand what you are saying, and why you are saying it, based on the information you have been exposed to, I would believe the same thing. Its ok, keep to your stereo types, believe what you are told, leave your head in the sand, never risk anything, and you will have a long happy life. Then sit back in your comfy chair, criticize what you dont understand, and mock what you will be to afraid to ever do.