‹ First  < 4 5 6 7 8 > 
 
   
 

A Hateful Thread

 
bbearren
 
Avatar
 
 
bbearren
Total Posts:  3905
Joined  20-11-2013
 
 
 
28 April 2019 18:12
 
Nhoj Morley - 07 April 2019 08:47 PM

I am having a problem with all of this. I’m not being a whiny admin here, just a whiny poster. For the sake of the forum, for the sake of all forums, I will do what no one wants to do, including me. I will concede and admit all. I am a fake.

Probably just me, but this thread seems to have gone way off into the weeds.

 
 
LadyJane
 
Avatar
 
 
LadyJane
Total Posts:  3520
Joined  26-03-2013
 
 
 
29 April 2019 05:41
 

I’m just thankful that wasn’t a ‘No Dumping’ sign.

 
 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6538
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
29 April 2019 12:43
 

Good points. Consider warfare and how a modern nation carries it out. Modern armies are level-headed and apply a reasoned measure of violence. Training is extensive. Hate is not necessary.

We did not send troops to Afghanistan to hate the Taliban. If a soldier shoots someone simply because they believe in violent jihad, that is not an act of hate. If the troops get emotionally invested in carrying out our political will, we say they are gung ho. We say they are full of patriotism and the fighting spirit. We never say they are full of hate.

We smash things and kill people for somber and considered reasons and often after a vote. It is a terrible thing to consider that those who engaged in considered violence are drawing on something other than hate. Are patriotism and the fighting spirit exclusive to the good guys?

 
 
unsmoked
 
Avatar
 
 
unsmoked
Total Posts:  9024
Joined  20-02-2006
 
 
 
29 April 2019 13:02
 
bbearren - 28 April 2019 06:12 PM
Nhoj Morley - 07 April 2019 08:47 PM

I am having a problem with all of this. I’m not being a whiny admin here, just a whiny poster. For the sake of the forum, for the sake of all forums, I will do what no one wants to do, including me. I will concede and admit all. I am a fake.

Probably just me, but this thread seems to have gone way off into the weeds.

Way off into the weeds?  Like the biography of Jesus?  In his book, ‘LETTER TO A CHRISTIAN NATION’ Sam Harris writes:

“Consider the recent deliberations of the Roman Catholic Church on the doctrine of limbo . . . Though limbo had no real foundation in scripture, and was never official Church doctrine, it has been a major part of the Catholic tradition for centuries . . . Now the great minds of the Church have convened to reconsider the matter . . . Can we even conceive of a project more intellectually forlorn than this?  Just imagine what these deliberations must be like.  Is there the slightest possibility that someone will present evidence indicating the eternal fate of unbaptized children after death?  How can any educated person think this anything but a hilarious, terrifying, and unconscionable waste of time? . . .   The whole enterprise begins to exude a truly diabolical aura of misspent human energy.”  -  Sam Harris, 2006

Think of the ‘hilarious, terrifying, and unconscionable’ things most of us were spoon-fed as kids - the millions who never come up to the surface of reality for the rest of their lives!  A baby born from a virgin?  Let’s discuss the possibility of this for 2 thousand years.  A dead man in his tomb coming back to life after a photo of his corpse is printed by God on his burial shroud? 

From my perspective, Nhoj’s TRIOON is reminding us of the ‘spellbinding’ effect of gobbledygook.  https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/gobbledygook

 
 
nonverbal
 
Avatar
 
 
nonverbal
Total Posts:  1900
Joined  31-10-2015
 
 
 
29 April 2019 13:22
 
unsmoked - 29 April 2019 01:02 PM
bbearren - 28 April 2019 06:12 PM
Nhoj Morley - 07 April 2019 08:47 PM

I am having a problem with all of this. I’m not being a whiny admin here, just a whiny poster. For the sake of the forum, for the sake of all forums, I will do what no one wants to do, including me. I will concede and admit all. I am a fake.

Probably just me, but this thread seems to have gone way off into the weeds.

Way off into the weeds?  Like the biography of Jesus?  In his book, ‘LETTER TO A CHRISTIAN NATION’ Sam Harris writes:

“Consider the recent deliberations of the Roman Catholic Church on the doctrine of limbo . . . Though limbo had no real foundation in scripture, and was never official Church doctrine, it has been a major part of the Catholic tradition for centuries . . . Now the great minds of the Church have convened to reconsider the matter . . . Can we even conceive of a project more intellectually forlorn than this?  Just imagine what these deliberations must be like.  Is there the slightest possibility that someone will present evidence indicating the eternal fate of unbaptized children after death?  How can any educated person think this anything but a hilarious, terrifying, and unconscionable waste of time? . . .   The whole enterprise begins to exude a truly diabolical aura of misspent human energy.”  -  Sam Harris, 2006

Think of the ‘hilarious, terrifying, and unconscionable’ things most of us were spoon-fed as kids - the millions who never come up to the surface of reality for the rest of their lives!  A baby born from a virgin?  Let’s discuss the possibility of this for 2 thousand years.  A dead man in his tomb coming back to life after a photo of his corpse is printed by God on his burial shroud? 

From my perspective, Nhoj’s TRIOON is reminding us of the ‘spellbinding’ effect of gobbledygook.  https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/gobbledygook

If trioon doesn’t fit your perspective, is it necessarily gobbledygook for those who find it to be thought provoking? Have I been tricked by an extended-metaphorist?

 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3494
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
29 April 2019 14:03
 
Nhoj Morley - 29 April 2019 12:43 PM

Good points. Consider warfare and how a modern nation carries it out. Modern armies are level-headed and apply a reasoned measure of violence. Training is extensive. Hate is not necessary.

We did not send troops to Afghanistan to hate the Taliban. If a soldier shoots someone simply because they believe in violent jihad, that is not an act of hate. If the troops get emotionally invested in carrying out our political will, we say they are gung ho. We say they are full of patriotism and the fighting spirit. We never say they are full of hate.

We smash things and kill people for somber and considered reasons and often after a vote. It is a terrible thing to consider that those who engaged in considered violence are drawing on something other than hate. Are patriotism and the fighting spirit exclusive to the good guys?

The politicians and generals may be level-headed, but a certain amount of hate, or at least a disdain for the enemy, might be necessary for the soldier.  We don’t say that they are full of hate because we want to gloss over what war is, to make heroes, to deny inhumanities. 

Derogatory terms for the enemy are meant to make them less human so that they can be killed, by soldiers who have a conscience and therefore could not do what they were sent to do otherwise.  Does there not have to be hate to see your enemy as less deserving of living than you are?  Or perhaps it’s just apathy for the ‘other’ – hard to tell.

The “considered violence” of the order-givers is a terrible thing to consider, but the propaganda of fear and hate – ‘your country is in danger from a horrible enemy’ – plays a role in getting soldiers to enlist and serve during times of conflict.

... and without him all this killing can’t go on.

 

 
 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6538
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
29 April 2019 15:21
 

No need for a tussle, lads. Some will simply have to believe that I’m spoofing. Someday, when the ‘serious people’ catch up, it won’t look like gobbledygook anymore. I don’t do g-gook and certainly not under the Harris banner. If some feel duty bound to warn the world of a con job, let them. The only other explanation for their frustration with it is too terrible to consider. Trioon was born here and you are all its unwitting godparents.

I can feel a smidge of connection even with a mere suspicion of content. Don’t worry about it.

Evidence of the senses is also evidence of the senses.
The Matrix was thought provoking. The sequels were g-gook.

 
 
nonverbal
 
Avatar
 
 
nonverbal
Total Posts:  1900
Joined  31-10-2015
 
 
 
29 April 2019 17:32
 
Jan_CAN - 29 April 2019 02:03 PM
Nhoj Morley - 29 April 2019 12:43 PM

Good points. Consider warfare and how a modern nation carries it out. Modern armies are level-headed and apply a reasoned measure of violence. Training is extensive. Hate is not necessary.

We did not send troops to Afghanistan to hate the Taliban. If a soldier shoots someone simply because they believe in violent jihad, that is not an act of hate. If the troops get emotionally invested in carrying out our political will, we say they are gung ho. We say they are full of patriotism and the fighting spirit. We never say they are full of hate.

We smash things and kill people for somber and considered reasons and often after a vote. It is a terrible thing to consider that those who engaged in considered violence are drawing on something other than hate. Are patriotism and the fighting spirit exclusive to the good guys?

The politicians and generals may be level-headed, but a certain amount of hate, or at least a disdain for the enemy, might be necessary for the soldier.  We don’t say that they are full of hate because we want to gloss over what war is, to make heroes, to deny inhumanities. 

Derogatory terms for the enemy are meant to make them less human so that they can be killed, by soldiers who have a conscience and therefore could not do what they were sent to do otherwise.  Does there not have to be hate to see your enemy as less deserving of living than you are?  Or perhaps it’s just apathy for the ‘other’ – hard to tell.

The “considered violence” of the order-givers is a terrible thing to consider, but the propaganda of fear and hate – ‘your country is in danger from a horrible enemy’ – plays a role in getting soldiers to enlist and serve during times of conflict.

... and without him all this killing can’t go on.

In my thoughts about the rare legitimate (healthy) applications of hatred, it never occurred to me to consider soldiers and their battle opponents. You’re probably correct.

On the other hand, what if soldiers do rely on their inner hating beast for deadly inspiration? They very well might feel at least sort of okay about their war activities for the rest of their lives. But what if they discover at some future point in their maturation that those who they participated in killing had actually been every bit as properly human as they see themselves to be? I pose this as a question because I don’t know. What I do know is that no soldier can declare war. And soldiers tend to be young enough to have yet to develop mature ethical stances.

I have a strong feeling you’re correct, but other sides to these kinds of issues can always be found, wouldn’t you say?

 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3494
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
29 April 2019 18:30
 
nonverbal - 29 April 2019 05:32 PM
Jan_CAN - 29 April 2019 02:03 PM

The politicians and generals may be level-headed, but a certain amount of hate, or at least a disdain for the enemy, might be necessary for the soldier.  We don’t say that they are full of hate because we want to gloss over what war is, to make heroes, to deny inhumanities. 

Derogatory terms for the enemy are meant to make them less human so that they can be killed, by soldiers who have a conscience and therefore could not do what they were sent to do otherwise.  Does there not have to be hate to see your enemy as less deserving of living than you are?  Or perhaps it’s just apathy for the ‘other’ – hard to tell.

The “considered violence” of the order-givers is a terrible thing to consider, but the propaganda of fear and hate – ‘your country is in danger from a horrible enemy’ – plays a role in getting soldiers to enlist and serve during times of conflict.

... and without him all this killing can’t go on.

In my thoughts about the rare legitimate (healthy) applications of hatred, it never occurred to me to consider soldiers and their battle opponents. You’re probably correct.

On the other hand, what if soldiers do rely on their inner hating beast for deadly inspiration? They very well might feel at least sort of okay about their war activities for the rest of their lives. But what if they discover at some future point in their maturation that those who they participated in killing had actually been every bit as properly human as they see themselves to be? I pose this as a question because I don’t know. What I do know is that no soldier can declare war. And soldiers tend to be young enough to have yet to develop mature ethical stances.

I have a strong feeling you’re correct, but other sides to these kinds of issues can always be found, wouldn’t you say?

Yes, I think there are very many sides to these kinds of issues, some of which only a veteran would understand.

 
 
nonverbal
 
Avatar
 
 
nonverbal
Total Posts:  1900
Joined  31-10-2015
 
 
 
29 April 2019 19:00
 

This place has had some vet contributors, but I’m guessing not many. I remember one who had an unusually ambitious, ammunition-friendly style about him, but he didn’t stay long, unfortunately. Smart dude, though. Another military guy was a lawyer who lived with his young family close to where I live. We tried to get together once, but it didn’t quite work out. He taught me the most significant lesson I’ve learned as a result of interacting on this forum: that it doesn’t pay to accept the legitimacy of arguments that skip over the argument at hand. He was a brilliant military attorney who impressed the hell out of me. I don’t remember his name, and he only posted for a few months. His posts are probably still among the zillions of old posts here, buried in the enormous heap of . . . something!

This is all your fault, Jan—you got me started!

 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3494
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
29 April 2019 19:46
 
nonverbal - 29 April 2019 07:00 PM

This place has had some vet contributors, but I’m guessing not many. I remember one who had an unusually ambitious, ammunition-friendly style about him, but he didn’t stay long, unfortunately. Smart dude, though. Another military guy was a lawyer who lived with his young family close to where I live. We tried to get together once, but it didn’t quite work out. He taught me the most significant lesson I’ve learned as a result of interacting on this forum: that it doesn’t pay to accept the legitimacy of arguments that skip over the argument at hand. He was a brilliant military attorney who impressed the hell out of me. I don’t remember his name, and he only posted for a few months. His posts are probably still among the zillions of old posts here, buried in the enormous heap of . . . something!

This is all your fault, Jan—you got me started!

It sounds like there’ve been some interesting contributors here that I’ve missed, but I’m glad you had the chance to interact with them.  I’d be interested in looking up this poster you mention in the archives should you remember his name.

Heh it’s fun starting things up; I think Nhoj will forgive a little detour.

[ Edited: 30 April 2019 02:00 by Jan_CAN]
 
 
Nhoj Morley
 
Avatar
 
 
Nhoj Morley
Total Posts:  6538
Joined  22-02-2005
 
 
 
29 April 2019 23:32
 

I don’t remember the name but I remember the avatar. It was his business face.

Jan_CAN - 29 April 2019 02:03 PM

The politicians and generals may be level-headed, but a certain amount of hate, or at least a disdain for the enemy, might be necessary for the soldier.  We don’t say that they are full of hate because we want to gloss over what war is, to make heroes, to deny inhumanities. 

Derogatory terms for the enemy are meant to make them less human so that they can be killed, by soldiers who have a conscience and therefore could not do what they were sent to do otherwise.  Does there not have to be hate to see your enemy as less deserving of living than you are?  Or perhaps it’s just apathy for the ‘other’ – hard to tell.

The “considered violence” of the order-givers is a terrible thing to consider, but the propaganda of fear and hate – ‘your country is in danger from a horrible enemy’ – plays a role in getting soldiers to enlist and serve during times of conflict.

 

That may have been wholly true of times gone by when dumb-as-rocks farm boys were quickly trained to shoot things at sub-human caricatures. Today’s army grunt may be working toward a degree in sociology. The famous image of a coalition soldier calming Iraqi prisoners comes to mind. “Chill out, man. We’re only here to kick your ass.”

I suspect that today’s barracks is a mixed bag of views from the extremely religious, where hate can have a place, to the fully secular sciencie types, where hate may have a harder time fitting in.

All the emotional ground can be covered by other words. Fear and anger take the lead. I say hate is what happens when a political spin is added to fear and anger. We don’t talk as much about humiliation as other cultures do, mostly because we are comfortably on top. Hate is a handy vernacular but it not good science.

[ Edited: 29 April 2019 23:34 by Nhoj Morley]
 
 
unsmoked
 
Avatar
 
 
unsmoked
Total Posts:  9024
Joined  20-02-2006
 
 
 
30 April 2019 11:48
 
Nhoj Morley - 29 April 2019 11:32 PM

I don’t remember the name but I remember the avatar. It was his business face.

Jan_CAN - 29 April 2019 02:03 PM

The politicians and generals may be level-headed, but a certain amount of hate, or at least a disdain for the enemy, might be necessary for the soldier.  We don’t say that they are full of hate because we want to gloss over what war is, to make heroes, to deny inhumanities. 

Derogatory terms for the enemy are meant to make them less human so that they can be killed, by soldiers who have a conscience and therefore could not do what they were sent to do otherwise.  Does there not have to be hate to see your enemy as less deserving of living than you are?  Or perhaps it’s just apathy for the ‘other’ – hard to tell.

The “considered violence” of the order-givers is a terrible thing to consider, but the propaganda of fear and hate – ‘your country is in danger from a horrible enemy’ – plays a role in getting soldiers to enlist and serve during times of conflict.

 

That may have been wholly true of times gone by when dumb-as-rocks farm boys were quickly trained to shoot things at sub-human caricatures. Today’s army grunt may be working toward a degree in sociology. The famous image of a coalition soldier calming Iraqi prisoners comes to mind. “Chill out, man. We’re only here to kick your ass.”

I suspect that today’s barracks is a mixed bag of views from the extremely religious, where hate can have a place, to the fully secular sciencie types, where hate may have a harder time fitting in.

All the emotional ground can be covered by other words. Fear and anger take the lead. I say hate is what happens when a political spin is added to fear and anger. We don’t talk as much about humiliation as other cultures do, mostly because we are comfortably on top. Hate is a handy vernacular but it not good science.

When Trump threatened ‘Little Rocket Man’ (Kim Jong Un) with fire and fury and total destruction he had probably forgotten, (or more likely never learned) that when he (Trump) was in knee-pants the U.S. did totally destroy North Korea and killed about a million civilians, men, women, and children - hundreds of thousands burned with napalm.  The civilian carnage boggles the mind.  MacArthur was all for crossing the Yalu River into China, using atomic bombs, and starting WW3.

https://weta.org/tv/program/korea-never-ending-war  See this new 2-hour PBS documentary here.  It mentions that when U.S. veterans returned home, many asked where they had been.  Korea?  Where’s that?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_North_Korea_1950-1953  (I wonder if anyone here can read this without holding their forehead and saying, “Oh my God!”

“In June 1952, as part of a strategy to maintain “air pressure” during armistice negotiations, FEAF’s Fifth Air Force selected seventy-eight villages for destruction by B-26 light bombers.

In August 1951, war correspondent Tibor Meráy stated that he had witnessed “a complete devastation between the Yalu River and the capital.” He said that there were “no more cities in North Korea.” He added, “My impression was that I am traveling on the moon because there was only devastation—every city was a collection of chimneys.”

Napalm was widely used. In John Ford’s 1951 documentary, This is Korea, footage of napalm deployment is accompanied by a voice-over by John Wayne saying, “Burn ‘em out, cook ‘em, fry ‘em”; the New York Herald Tribune hailed “Napalm, the No. 1 Weapon in Korea”.  Winston Churchill, among others, criticized American use of napalm, calling it “very cruel”, as the US/UN forces, he said, were “splashing it all over the civilian population”, “tortur[ing] great masses of people”. The American official who took this statement declined to publicize it.”

[ Edited: 01 May 2019 11:56 by unsmoked]
 
 
unsmoked
 
Avatar
 
 
unsmoked
Total Posts:  9024
Joined  20-02-2006
 
 
 
02 May 2019 12:05
 
Nhoj Morley - 29 April 2019 03:21 PM

No need for a tussle, lads. Some will simply have to believe that I’m spoofing. Someday, when the ‘serious people’ catch up, it won’t look like gobbledygook anymore. I don’t do g-gook and certainly not under the Harris banner. If some feel duty bound to warn the world of a con job, let them. The only other explanation for their frustration with it is too terrible to consider. Trioon was born here and you are all its unwitting godparents.

I can feel a smidge of connection even with a mere suspicion of content. Don’t worry about it.

Evidence of the senses is also evidence of the senses.
The Matrix was thought provoking. The sequels were g-gook.

In that case, I wonder if TRIOON is related to speaking in tongues?  Or is it related to my going to an Okkyung Lee cello concert expecting to hear Bach?  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zc4Bct5m3c

Maybe it’s just that, for the life of me, I can’t understand a single poem in any issue of the New Yorker:

“The spread of sunshine
inside that onion
or the turrets inside the lemon
do not dim although hidden.”  -  Lee Upton (one stanza from poem, ‘PRIVACY’,  in the April 29 New Yorker)

Emerson said something about this, but I forget what it was.

Image Attachments
 
134_3469-2.JPG
 
 
 
nonverbal
 
Avatar
 
 
nonverbal
Total Posts:  1900
Joined  31-10-2015
 
 
 
02 May 2019 12:57
 
unsmoked - 02 May 2019 12:05 PM
Nhoj Morley - 29 April 2019 03:21 PM

No need for a tussle, lads. Some will simply have to believe that I’m spoofing. Someday, when the ‘serious people’ catch up, it won’t look like gobbledygook anymore. I don’t do g-gook and certainly not under the Harris banner. If some feel duty bound to warn the world of a con job, let them. The only other explanation for their frustration with it is too terrible to consider. Trioon was born here and you are all its unwitting godparents.

I can feel a smidge of connection even with a mere suspicion of content. Don’t worry about it.

Evidence of the senses is also evidence of the senses.
The Matrix was thought provoking. The sequels were g-gook.

In that case, I wonder if TRIOON is related to speaking in tongues?  Or is it related to my going to an Okkyung Lee cello concert expecting to hear Bach?  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zc4Bct5m3c

Maybe it’s just that, for the life of me, I can’t understand a single poem in any issue of the New Yorker:

“The spread of sunshine
inside that onion
or the turrets inside the lemon
do not dim although hidden.”  -  Lee Upton (one stanza from poem, ‘PRIVACY’,  in the April 29 New Yorker)

Emerson said something about this, but I forget what it was.

When I don’t understand something, I don’t wonder if I don’t understand it.

 
 
‹ First  < 4 5 6 7 8 >