Capitulation

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
From another thread
chcr said:
Typically, in my experience, fanatics of any stripe hate those who disagree with them. Murder and fear mongering are generally the accepted tools of the muslim extremists. That's the main difference (and it is a big one). This is why I keep saying that changing our lifestyle in response to them and overstating the threat they pose is tantamount to giving them exactly what they want. We seem, as a society, bent on doing exactly that, regardless of which interchangeable party wins the next election.

He & I are in the same book but not the same page.

Changing our society is what the terrorists wish to do. They'll do it in any manner they see fit. They've been doing it for 35 years (in its current formula). America & Britain (and several other allies) have decided to end the pussyfooting around & take the fight to them. In turn, several nations have gone out of their way to undermine our effort. That has been discussed & rehashed, ad nauseum, here & everywhere else.

Before & since a few cartoons caused such an uproar, the nations that are avoiding taking a stance have begun doing exactly what chcr rants about. They are going out of their way to avoid upsetting a small, but growing, minority. Call it diversity, call it acceptance, call it anything you want. Just make sure you call it capitulation. In the end that is all it is.

Another fine example.

About the only thing less pleasing than having to sit through Hans Neuenfels's production of Mozart's 1781 opera "Idomeneo" is the news that Berlin's Deutsche Oper, citing an "incalculable" security risk from enraged Muslims, has decided to cancel its scheduled showing of the piece.

So, instead of performing a fictional musical piece written 200 some odd years ago, it's decided to shut down production. Granted, in proper 21st century style, the director takes the piece & adds his own warped twists & turns. However, it is still just a piece of fiction.

They make us feel uncomfortable in our own house and in theirs. They demand actions that they are unwilling to return. They demand we change our lifestyle to be like theirs.

We need to refuse their demand.

Refuse or capitulate. The choice you make changes the future.

WSJ
 

spike

New Member
fanatics of any stripe hate those who disagree with them. Murder and fear mongering are generally the accepted tools of the muslim extremists.

Changing our society is what the terrorists wish to do.

the nations that are avoiding taking a stance

Fear mongering is what the US government is engaging in to try to silence those that disagree with them.

Changing our society is what the US government wants to do through fear mongering.

We need to take a stance against the current administration and not capitulate to an agenda that is destroying the American way of life.
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Spike...could you find it even remotely possible to get off the I HATE GW bandwagon for one instant? There can not be a free excahnge of ideas when you only have one answer.

chcr...as has happened, repeatedly, there are some limitations placed upon the US populace during a time of war. Every freedom givent during those times of crisis has been restored after hostilities ceased.

If we're afraid to run certain editorials or cartoons or media stories or plays or movies because of the potential threat of internal violence by a group of radical extremists, then yes, we've taken the wrong road. IS that the case in the US? ATM, I'm not recalling (short of the standard PC crap).

It seems that France & Denmark & Spain (to name but a few) are on the run & bending over backwards, not the US.


edit...it would be nice to have a conversation about the facts of the war & terrorism & damned near everything else without getting it dragged through the anti-Bush theme. We, (alright I) have had to spend more time defending a President who, without the war, would have been a one dimensional loser. He was the right man for the job at this moment in history. Time will tell about his legacy. But, son-of-a-bitch, it's getting old only ging down one path.
 

spike

New Member
Spike...could you find it even remotely possible to get off the I HATE GW bandwagon for one instant? There can not be a free excahnge of ideas when you only have one answer.

If you could come up with something besides the republican fear mongering bandwagon which has been nothing but a total mess.

People have been changing entertainment for year and bending over backward to please "the offended".

Who's the biggest group that receives capitulation? Christians. Damn just look at all the radio DJs and TV shows scared to death that a curse word might get on air accidently lately because of the FCC.

You want to make a real difference? Quit capitulating to christians.
 

chcr

Too cute for words
Sorry, Gonz but this administration is giving the extremists exactly and specifically what they want. I can only hope its through ineptitude.

Note that as I have stated before, I seriously doubt any replacement administration would do anything substantially differently.
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
Who's the biggest group that receives capitulation? Christians. Damn just look at all the radio DJs and TV shows scared to death that a curse word might get on air accidently lately because of the FCC.

Comparing a fine to riots & murder & arson. Yep, that's comparable.
 

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
I can think of several reasons why the 'war on terror' isn't going as well as hoped.

1. Not enough troops. In order to alleviate that, we'd have had to start a draft. The Libs's, who are against anything military, BTW, would've been all over the front page screaming for "Peace at any price" before the first shots were fired in Afghanistan...oops. Already happened...:shrug:
2. Not enough backing at home. Just take a peek at one person, in particular, who showed the real root of the problem..."I voted for the funds, but then I voted against them..." (ad libbed)...indecisiveness on the part of the leadership gets more people killed in war than any bullet fired, or bomb dropped. If you weren't/aren't sure, say no, and stop trying to garner votes for your next campaign.
3. Too many people with little, or no, military experience having an opinion on how the war should be fought. If you're going to have a war, have a war. This is nothing more than a 'police action'...and always was. A war needs soldiers crawling over the enemy like locusts in a wheat field...and doing the exact same thing. Destroying every 'legal' target in their path...You can't win a war by half-measures, but that's what the public wants. Hell...they even want to see non-lethal weapons on the battlefield, so instead of having a dead enemy who will cause you no problems later, you have a live, albeit stunned, enemy who can come up with another plan later...:rolleyes:
 

2minkey

bootlicker
I can think of several reasons why the 'war on terror' isn't going as well as hoped.

1. Not enough troops. In order to alleviate that, we'd have had to start a draft. The Libs's, who are against anything military, BTW, would've been all over the front page screaming for "Peace at any price" before the first shots were fired in Afghanistan...oops. Already happened...:shrug:
2. Not enough backing at home. Just take a peek at one person, in particular, who showed the real root of the problem..."I voted for the funds, but then I voted against them..." (ad libbed)...indecisiveness on the part of the leadership gets more people killed in war than any bullet fired, or bomb dropped. If you weren't/aren't sure, say no, and stop trying to garner votes for your next campaign.
3. Too many people with little, or no, military experience having an opinion on how the war should be fought. If you're going to have a war, have a war. This is nothing more than a 'police action'...and always was. A war needs soldiers crawling over the enemy like locusts in a wheat field...and doing the exact same thing. Destroying every 'legal' target in their path...You can't win a war by half-measures, but that's what the public wants. Hell...they even want to see non-lethal weapons on the battlefield, so instead of having a dead enemy who will cause you no problems later, you have a live, albeit stunned, enemy who can come up with another plan later...:rolleyes:

in #3 you should clarify. it's not the public, with "little or no military experience" that matters. they didn't make decisions here. in fact hardly anybody made decisions except those within the bush admin. and they are the ones who half-assed it and tried to do it on the cheap, and denied, possibly to themselves as well as the country, the real and total costs of the "war." it really doesn't matter what the public thinks.
 

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
in #3 you should clarify. it's not the public, with "little or no military experience" that matters. they didn't make decisions here. in fact hardly anybody made decisions except those within the bush admin. and they are the ones who half-assed it and tried to do it on the cheap, and denied, possibly to themselves as well as the country, the real and total costs of the "war." it really doesn't matter what the public thinks.

Sounds like a voter apathy to me. Public opinion can make, or break, any policy decision by any President/Representative/Senator. Why do you think they didn't declare a war? They didn't want the responsibilities attached to the term, that's why. It's all about the folks in power wanting to stay in power, so they put off any real/important decisions until its either too late, or too little.
 

chcr

Too cute for words
Sounds like a voter apathy to me. Public opinion can make, or break, any policy decision by any President/Representative/Senator. Why do you think they didn't declare a war? They didn't want the responsibilities attached to the term, that's why. It's all about the folks in power wanting to stay in power, so they put off any real/important decisions until its either too late, or too little.

As it's doing.
 

BB

New Member
mmm ... my point exactly .... er- i'm too tired and pissed (english version) to accvurately state which one ;) .... but look at Spain after the bombings ..oooh la la ...gettaz de troops outta dere ... worra loverly message to encite terrorism!

London 7/7 ... go fuck yaselves.

yer the UK IS a diverse, largely tolerant and largely inclusive country - the ideal here is:

"We shall NOT be moved"

(also a football song! :grinyes: ) - seems to really work well against the southern European teams!! ;)

anyway- the point here is more - nope, fuck ya- you wanna kick off -OK ...but we ain't changing fer ya

I DO wonder though, how much the US is reactionary and paranoid- and i mean that not in terms of not having a good, strong and, fairplay, active response - but more in terms of being too narrowly telecopically focused on it's aim .... sometimes not seeing the trees for the wood - and curtailing the very freedoms that the terrorists want it to.

my view is piss em (terroists and extremists) off- extend those freedoms!! , not curtail them - but be clever about it and go after the nutters SAS style - pick em off, one by one, rather than blundering around accidently recruiting them en masse.

Hold true to what you hold true and let that be the Rock that you stand and fight on. Do not lower the base denominator to the level of your enemy.
 

2minkey

bootlicker
Sounds like a voter apathy to me. Public opinion can make, or break, any policy decision by any President/Representative/Senator. Why do you think they didn't declare a war? They didn't want the responsibilities attached to the term, that's why. It's all about the folks in power wanting to stay in power, so they put off any real/important decisions until its either too late, or too little.

in #3 you should clarify. it's not the public, with "little or no military experience" that matters. they didn't make decisions here. in fact hardly anybody made decisions except those within the bush admin. and they are the ones who half-assed it and tried to do it on the cheap, and denied, possibly to themselves as well as the country, the real and total costs of the "war." it really doesn't matter what the public thinks.

notice the "here" in my earlier statement, meaning specific situation, not something indicative of generalized voter apathy, though that certainly does exist in this country. bush and co ignore public opinion and take liberties with the law. now, that can be good, bad, or nuthin,' but in this case, it does diminish the impact of public opinion... while public opinion will impact subsequent elections, it's after the fact in this case. the money's spent, the damage is done.
 

spike

New Member
Comparing a fine to riots & murder & arson. Yep, that's comparable.

I'm comparing capitulation to capitulation. Where do most of the demands and changes to everyday life come from?

Self-righteous christians.
 

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
I'm comparing capitulation to capitulation. Where do most of the demands and changes to everyday life come from?

Self-righteous christians.

Naah...from lazy people who have no clue as to what's going on and, yet, cling to every poll which tickles their fancy, while ignoring eyewitness accounts. If that ain't self-righteous, I don't know what is...
 

spike

New Member
No, self righteous would be someone who talked to 15-20 people and claims to know the will of a population. A fool in other words.
 
Top