Thread: Suicide Bombing

Originally Posted by American1984

Pacifist means you will not resist tyranny. If someone dopes you with fluoride you will just take it. That is pacifism! I guess many Americans are pacifist because they say or do nothing. A pacifist doesn't want to say their friends are wrong about something because then they won't be liked. They are really not against violence they just don't have the gallbladder to go against the flow.

You have no place in this discussion, clearly.

Originally Posted by Donkey_Left

Is suicide bombing wrong? Please note that suicide bombing does not necessarily mean that civilians are killed. Whether or not collateral is wrong is a different story, so please try to keep it out of the thread.

So, is using yourself as the delivery device for explosives wrong?

Discuss.

Russians did this to German tanks while under attack. They would run under the tanks loaded with bombs and explode their tanks to protect their family and homeland. In that case suicide bombing is an acceptable defense but it also can be religious whackery. A person can be brainwashed into doing something the is fanatical but that is not necessarily right. It just depends. I'm not advocating it but if you were a Russian in WWII and you had no chance to invaders that were going to rape your people and land of all rights you would do it. Of course you wouldn't do it lol your a pacifist eh.

Originally Posted by Donkey_Left

You have no place in this discussion, clearly.

Well, I'm not sure if he is saying this but...

You say your wouldn't resort to violence unless you are threatened. I take this to mean that if someone is attacking you, you wouldn't just take it, like Ghandi, but would fight back possibly injuring or killing your assailant. Now what would you do if someone was attacking your neighbor? What would you do if someone was attacking your town, state, country.....

PS. Sorry, off-topic.

Originally Posted by American1984

Pacifist means you will not resist tyranny. If someone dopes you with fluoride you will just take it. That is pacifism! I guess many Americans are pacifist because they say or do nothing. A pacifist doesn't want to say their friends are wrong about something because then they won't be liked. They are really not against violence they just don't have the gallbladder to go against the flow.

You're confusing pacifist with pushover. An absolute pacifist, which by my understanding is the only true definition of the word, will never resort to violence, which does not always equate to resistance. Passive resistance is perfectly acceptable and even encouraged in pacifistic philosophies.

Originally Posted by fishjoel

Well, I'm not sure if he is saying this but...

You say your wouldn't resort to violence unless you are threatened. I take this to mean that if someone is attacking you, you wouldn't just take it, like Ghandi, but would fight back possibly injuring or killing your assailant. Now what would you do if someone was attacking your neighbor? What would you do if someone was attacking your town, state, country.....

PS. Sorry, off-topic.

Depends, I guess. I mean, if some fool is mugging me, that doesn't mean I let him do it. But I would like to think that I'd stand shoulder to shoulder with Gandhi and take the abuse. That's kind of the point.

It's hard to say, you know?

Originally Posted by Donkey_Left

You have no place in this discussion, clearly.

Oh and you say your a pacifist? You sound more like one that incites. I think you should rephrase what you are. A pacifist would not incite something. If you didn't like what I said you would say nothing so you are not a pacifist and certainly one that DOESN'T represents peace - senseless arguing with people isn't peace. Clearly you are insulted easily and can't take any criticism. You called Lou Dobbs scum of the earth in another thread so I'm get a sense of what your about although I don't like to prejudge people. Are you a racist? You seem to attack certain types.. Telling me what my place is no that's not a way to talk to someone and I think your trying to talk down to me. You opened yourself to criticism not I. I'm merely responding to your outlandish comments which you subjected yourself to.

Originally Posted by Donkey_Left

Depends, I guess. I mean, if some fool is mugging me, that doesn't mean I let him do it. But I would like to think that I'd stand shoulder to shoulder with Gandhi and take the abuse. That's kind of the point.

It's hard to say, you know?

Definitely, it's hard to know what you'd do in a certain situation to stick to your principles. I am against the death penalty but if someone killed my wife or kids would I be able to keep to this belief?

True pacifism is definitely not an easy road to haul. Fortunately, you probably won't have to discover the extent of your beliefs, in the USA.

Originally Posted by fishjoel

Well, I'm not sure if he is saying this but...

You say your wouldn't resort to violence unless you are threatened. I take this to mean that if someone is attacking you, you wouldn't just take it, like Ghandi, but would fight back possibly injuring or killing your assailant. Now what would you do if someone was attacking your neighbor? What would you do if someone was attacking your town, state, country.....

PS. Sorry, off-topic.

Not off topic. Your exactly right. A pacifist is a self centered coward that eludes confrontation.

Originally Posted by American1984

Not off topic. Your exactly right. A pacifist is a self centered coward that eludes confrontation.

Now, that's a good steaming pile of bullshit.

It takes as much (if not more) bravery to peacefully stand your ground in the face of violence than to react with more violence. Violence is often the result of cowardice.

Originally Posted by pramjockey

Now, that's a good steaming pile of bullshit.

It takes as much (if not more) bravery to peacefully stand your ground in the face of violence than to react with more violence. Violence is often the result of cowardice.

I did not say violence is the answer to everything so don't jump to conclusions. Your talking about more about being a feminized man. A mans role sometimes (sometimes see the key distinction) is to stand up fight if they have to. If you can't win it doesn't make you less of a man. If someone try's to physically force poison down your throat you have a right to kill them. Cowards hide behind laws to defend their own cowardly ways. Corrupt cops for example ruff up people and if they fight back they get charged with hitting an officer.

I turned incredible violent and fought off 2 attackers one time. I was critically hit and if they got me on the ground they would have killed me. Am I a coward sir?

Originally Posted by Donkey_Left

Is suicide bombing wrong? Please note that suicide bombing does not necessarily mean that civilians are killed. Whether or not collateral is wrong is a different story, so please try to keep it out of the thread.

So, is using yourself as the delivery device for explosives wrong?

Discuss.

So let's discuss suicide bombing.......but not the kind we see in the news almost every day.

No. Devoid of context, using yourself as a delivery vehicle for explosives is not inherently wrong.


Given the limits with which the topic is framed I guess there is nothing else to discuss.

Originally Posted by American1984

I did not say violence is the answer to everything so don't jump to conclusions. Your talking about more about being a feminized man. A mans role sometimes (sometimes see the key distinction) is to stand up fight if they have to. If you can't win it doesn't make you less of a man. If someone try's to physically force poison down your throat you have a right to kill them. Cowards hide behind laws to defend their own cowardly ways.

I turned incredible violent and fought off 2 attackers one time. I was critically hit and if they got me on the ground they would have killed me. Am I a coward sir?

They rolled double sixes?

Anyway, you clearly don't understand pacifism, but that is not what this thread is about.

Originally Posted by TheLastBoyScout

So let's discuss suicide bombing.......but not the kind we see in the news almost every day.

No. Devoid of context, using yourself as a delivery vehicle for explosives is not inherently wrong.


Given the limits with which the topic is framed I guess there is nothing else to discuss.

Well, you answered the question then.