• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 11:36
CEST 17:36
KST 00:36
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47Code S RO12 Preview: Cure, Zoun, Solar, Creator4[ASL19] Finals Preview: Daunting Task30
Community News
Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0EWC 2025 Regional Qualifier Results26
StarCraft 2
General
Firefly do had match fixing CN community: Firefly accused of suspicious activities The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation How does the number of casters affect your enjoyment of esports? Serious Question: Mech
Tourneys
$3,500 WardiTV European League 2025 Bellum Gens Elite: Stara Zagora 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament SOOPer7s Showmatches 2025 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2)
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans? BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Mihu vs Korea Players Statistics BW General Discussion [BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals NA Team League 6/8/2025 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] ProLeague Bracket Stage - Day 2
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread What do you want from future RTS games? Armies of Exigo - YesYes? Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
LiquidLegends to reintegrate into TL.net
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Cognitive styles x game perf…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Poker
Nebuchad
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 21867 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4034

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 4032 4033 4034 4035 4036 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
SolaR-
Profile Blog Joined February 2004
United States2685 Posts
June 11 2016 00:40 GMT
#80661
I really liked when Trump said to target families of terrorists. I won't deny or pretend to act like it's wrong. The end justifies the means, and this is war not a fucking safe space. Sorry..

Besides many of these so called families harbor terrorists, and even some degree support their ideology.

All Trump is saying is that you have to fight fire with fire. You can't fight with your arms tied behind your back while you have terrorists directly targeting civilians and us deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members.
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
June 11 2016 00:43 GMT
#80662
On June 11 2016 09:40 SolaR- wrote:
I really liked when Trump said to target families of terrorists. I won't deny or pretend to act like it's wrong. The end justifies the means, and this is war not a fucking safe space. Sorry..

Besides many of these so called families harbor terrorists, and even some degree support their ideology.

All Trump is saying is that you have to fight fire with fire. You can't fight with your arms tied behind your back while you have terrorists directly targeting civilians and us deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members.

uh, we don't " deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members."
you're factually wrong there.
We readily accept collateral damage, both of family, and non-family members, while killing terrorists.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
SolaR-
Profile Blog Joined February 2004
United States2685 Posts
June 11 2016 00:45 GMT
#80663
On June 11 2016 09:43 zlefin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 11 2016 09:40 SolaR- wrote:
I really liked when Trump said to target families of terrorists. I won't deny or pretend to act like it's wrong. The end justifies the means, and this is war not a fucking safe space. Sorry..

Besides many of these so called families harbor terrorists, and even some degree support their ideology.

All Trump is saying is that you have to fight fire with fire. You can't fight with your arms tied behind your back while you have terrorists directly targeting civilians and us deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members.

uh, we don't " deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members."
you're factually wrong there.
We readily accept collateral damage, both of family, and non-family members, while killing terrorists.


Okay, well you get the point. If we can gain an advantage by specifically targeting their family members, we should take it.
iPlaY.NettleS
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
Australia4329 Posts
June 11 2016 00:45 GMT
#80664
On June 10 2016 22:09 Plansix wrote:
But I want Warren in the senate and not the VP spot. She has way more power to regulate and deal with banks in the Senate.

So Bill Clinton deregulated the banks by scrapping Glass-Stegal while president and you think things will be any different under his wifes administration?

It's going to be business as usual for the big banks and wall street!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7PvoI6gvQs
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
June 11 2016 00:49 GMT
#80665
On June 11 2016 09:45 SolaR- wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 11 2016 09:43 zlefin wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:40 SolaR- wrote:
I really liked when Trump said to target families of terrorists. I won't deny or pretend to act like it's wrong. The end justifies the means, and this is war not a fucking safe space. Sorry..

Besides many of these so called families harbor terrorists, and even some degree support their ideology.

All Trump is saying is that you have to fight fire with fire. You can't fight with your arms tied behind your back while you have terrorists directly targeting civilians and us deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members.

uh, we don't " deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members."
you're factually wrong there.
We readily accept collateral damage, both of family, and non-family members, while killing terrorists.


Okay, well you get the point. If we can gain an advantage by specifically targeting their family members, we should take it.

no, we shouldn't. That you oppose the geneva conventions on warfare is quite troubling. It's quite feasible to win without resorting to such tactics, and we're far better off in the long run for not using such reprehensible methods.
Also, part of my point is that you're not well-versed on the topic.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
BallinWitStalin
Profile Joined July 2008
1177 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-11 00:51:07
June 11 2016 00:49 GMT
#80666
On June 11 2016 09:45 SolaR- wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 11 2016 09:43 zlefin wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:40 SolaR- wrote:
I really liked when Trump said to target families of terrorists. I won't deny or pretend to act like it's wrong. The end justifies the means, and this is war not a fucking safe space. Sorry..

Besides many of these so called families harbor terrorists, and even some degree support their ideology.

All Trump is saying is that you have to fight fire with fire. You can't fight with your arms tied behind your back while you have terrorists directly targeting civilians and us deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members.

uh, we don't " deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members."
you're factually wrong there.
We readily accept collateral damage, both of family, and non-family members, while killing terrorists.


Okay, well you get the point. If we can gain an advantage by specifically targeting their family members, we should take it.


This is evil, man. Like, actual literal evil.

Targeting innocent individuals because of a connection to an enemy is morally wrong, and people advocating for it are evil.

Terrorists who engage in that (i.e. suicide bombers who blow themselves up around kids, civilians, etc.) are rightly considered evil by broader society. The amount of cognitive dissonance necessary to categorize their actions as evil while advocating doing *the exact same thing* is astounding.
I await the reminiscent nerd chills I will get when I hear a Korean broadcaster yell "WEEAAAAVVVVVUUUHHH" while watching Dota
WhiteDog
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
France8650 Posts
June 11 2016 00:53 GMT
#80667
Corrupted means usually corrupt the ends too.
"every time WhiteDog overuses the word "seriously" in a comment I can make an observation on his fragile emotional state." MoltkeWarding
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
June 11 2016 00:55 GMT
#80668
On June 11 2016 09:45 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 10 2016 22:09 Plansix wrote:
But I want Warren in the senate and not the VP spot. She has way more power to regulate and deal with banks in the Senate.

So Bill Clinton deregulated the banks by scrapping Glass-Stegal while president and you think things will be any different under his wifes administration?

It's going to be business as usual for the big banks and wall street!

actually read her platform please
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
June 11 2016 00:57 GMT
#80669
On June 11 2016 09:40 SolaR- wrote:
I really liked when Trump said to target families of terrorists. I won't deny or pretend to act like it's wrong. The end justifies the means, and this is war not a fucking safe space. Sorry..

Besides many of these so called families harbor terrorists, and even some degree support their ideology.

All Trump is saying is that you have to fight fire with fire. You can't fight with your arms tied behind your back while you have terrorists directly targeting civilians and us deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members.

why listen to actual on the ground military and intelligence experts when it feels right. this trump stuff is recruiting terrorists as we speak
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
SK.Testie
Profile Blog Joined January 2007
Canada11084 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-11 01:06:50
June 11 2016 01:01 GMT
#80670
On June 11 2016 09:49 BallinWitStalin wrote:This is evil, man. Like, actual literal evil.

Targeting innocent individuals because of a connection to an enemy is morally wrong, and people advocating for it are evil


Time for this question again:
Would you have dropped the bomb on Japan? No pussying out. Which answer is better. Which answer saved more lives.

Poll: Drop the nuke on Japan in WW2?

Yes (11)
 
65%

No (6)
 
35%

17 total votes

Your vote: Drop the nuke on Japan in WW2?

(Vote): Yes
(Vote): No



Really depends on which method is going to cause less suffering and less deaths overall over there. Will terrorists be less likely to go to Jihad if they know their family is a target?

Geneva conventions? What country is currently following those other than the USA which is trying to desperately. iirc China recently roasted some Muslim jihadis like marshmallows with flamethrowers. Talking to forces in Iraq they say they went to extreme lengths to not harm the general populace.

We know the "Train and equip" type programs are utterly expensive failures.

The drone strikes often don't kill their intended target and almost always have collateral damage. 35 out of 200 targets in the last report I linked were the intended targets. So 165 innocents. And frankly, they kill far too few considering the #'s ISIS has and the support it often has.

Is drawing a conflict out over decades and decades the ideal situation? Is that the aim or goal? To just always live with, "Hey they beheaded some more people. Drowned em. Lit em on fire. Dipped them in acid." etc? Just.. decades of that?
Do you trust the USA / CIA's estimate on the # of ISIS fighters? They claim about 20-25,000 atm.
Kurds say 200k, Russia says 70k. etc.

Because they control a lot of territory (even if it has shrunk in iraq/syria) yet gained in others. (Libya / Yemen) etc. While still minor there it's sprung up.

Then you have Al-Nusra and other groups as well.
It's quite the lovely cluster fuck.

I don't think Obama's approach to radical Islam is good. It's capitulation and weak. Too afraid to even say radical Islam and even actively censors it yet we have so much damning poll data and evidence and terrorist attacks that it's insane for 'oh a plane went down, let's not jump to conclusions.. aaaaaaaaand it's radical Islam'.

I don't think a single person (ok we know there's some somewhere) that relishes in the idea of murdering terrorists families or holding them accountable for their radical sons crimes (mostly sons, sometimes daughters but we'd assume 99% sons).
Social Justice is a fools errand. May all the adherents at its church be thwarted. Of all the religions I have come across, it is by far the most detestable.
SolaR-
Profile Blog Joined February 2004
United States2685 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-11 01:02:54
June 11 2016 01:01 GMT
#80671
On June 11 2016 09:49 BallinWitStalin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 11 2016 09:45 SolaR- wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:43 zlefin wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:40 SolaR- wrote:
I really liked when Trump said to target families of terrorists. I won't deny or pretend to act like it's wrong. The end justifies the means, and this is war not a fucking safe space. Sorry..

Besides many of these so called families harbor terrorists, and even some degree support their ideology.

All Trump is saying is that you have to fight fire with fire. You can't fight with your arms tied behind your back while you have terrorists directly targeting civilians and us deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members.

uh, we don't " deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members."
you're factually wrong there.
We readily accept collateral damage, both of family, and non-family members, while killing terrorists.


Okay, well you get the point. If we can gain an advantage by specifically targeting their family members, we should take it.


This is evil, man. Like, actual literal evil.

Targeting innocent individuals because of a connection to an enemy is morally wrong, and people advocating for it are evil.

Terrorists who engage in that (i.e. suicide bombers who blow themselves up around kids, civilians, etc.) are rightly considered evil by broader society. The amount of cognitive dissonance necessary to categorize their actions as evil while advocating doing *the exact same thing* is astounding.


What if torturing a terrorist's family saved the lives of a million innocent civilians. Is it evil then? Evil is relative, and most of the time the end justifies the means.
Djabanete
Profile Blog Joined May 2008
United States2786 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-11 01:10:48
June 11 2016 01:05 GMT
#80672
Trump's "idea" is a strictly worse version of what the Obama administration has been doing for years, which is already morally grey.

Currently we carry out drone assassinations of suspected terrorists with only partial regard for innocent lives taken. The upside of drone assassination, in principle, is that terrorists are killed. The downside is that this act of violence generates more hatred against the US, especially when innocent lives are taken. Again, we've been doing this for years and will certainly continue to do it in a Clinton administration.

Trump's "idea" is simply to remove the upside.

In addition to being a war crime, it's plain stupid.

Edit: If Trump has ideas on how to reduce corruption in unstable regimes, cut off funding sources of terrorist groups, or get women educated in backwards countries, I'd listen. If we could do these things we would reduce terrorism. But of course he doesn't have any useful ideas because there is scarcely a subject under the sun in which he has any expertise or even common sense.
May the BeSt man win.
OuchyDathurts
Profile Joined September 2010
United States4588 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-11 01:07:39
June 11 2016 01:06 GMT
#80673
I'm pretty sure deliberately targeting family members of terrorists violates some sort of international law for starters.

If you think you can shoot terrorism to death it shows you have zero understanding of how any of this actually works. If you think killing family members is going to help you destroy terrorism I'm afraid you've missed the boat entirely. It's almost as if you're actively trying to create more terrorism.

On June 11 2016 10:01 SolaR- wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 11 2016 09:49 BallinWitStalin wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:45 SolaR- wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:43 zlefin wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:40 SolaR- wrote:
I really liked when Trump said to target families of terrorists. I won't deny or pretend to act like it's wrong. The end justifies the means, and this is war not a fucking safe space. Sorry..

Besides many of these so called families harbor terrorists, and even some degree support their ideology.

All Trump is saying is that you have to fight fire with fire. You can't fight with your arms tied behind your back while you have terrorists directly targeting civilians and us deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members.

uh, we don't " deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members."
you're factually wrong there.
We readily accept collateral damage, both of family, and non-family members, while killing terrorists.


Okay, well you get the point. If we can gain an advantage by specifically targeting their family members, we should take it.


This is evil, man. Like, actual literal evil.

Targeting innocent individuals because of a connection to an enemy is morally wrong, and people advocating for it are evil.

Terrorists who engage in that (i.e. suicide bombers who blow themselves up around kids, civilians, etc.) are rightly considered evil by broader society. The amount of cognitive dissonance necessary to categorize their actions as evil while advocating doing *the exact same thing* is astounding.


What if torturing a terrorist's family saved the lives of a million innocent civilians. Is it evil then? Evil is relative, and most of the time the end justifies the means.


You've watched way too much 24.
LiquidDota Staff
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18821 Posts
June 11 2016 01:07 GMT
#80674
"Kill their families" is not a good facet of a foreign policy
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
Aquanim
Profile Joined November 2012
Australia2849 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-11 01:13:40
June 11 2016 01:10 GMT
#80675
What are you going to do, kill every Muslim in the Middle East? Until you get to that point, for each random family member of a terrorist you shoot you're just generating a dozen more terrorists.

Completely putting aside the moral implications, it's not a winning strategy.

(Unless you are in fact willing to commit genocide.)

EDIT: The winning strategy is to neutralise the support among "civilians" for terrorists by a means which doesn't just piss more people off.
OuchyDathurts
Profile Joined September 2010
United States4588 Posts
June 11 2016 01:13 GMT
#80676
On June 11 2016 10:10 Aquanim wrote:
What are you going to do, kill every Muslim in the Middle East? Until you get to that point, for each random family member of a terrorist you shoot you're just generating a dozen more terrorists.

Completely putting aside the moral implications, it's not a winning strategy.

(Unless you are in fact willing to commit genocide.)


This is exactly what you'd end up having to do. Commit literal genocide and even then that wouldn't stop it. What if some random dude in Thailand who is totally disconnected from the situation sees the US committing genocide. You don't think you could plant the seed of terrorism in a guy totally unrelated to the situation because he sees atrocities being committed? You've just spread it across the planet at an exponential rate.
LiquidDota Staff
SolaR-
Profile Blog Joined February 2004
United States2685 Posts
June 11 2016 01:17 GMT
#80677
On June 11 2016 10:06 OuchyDathurts wrote:
I'm pretty sure deliberately targeting family members of terrorists violates some sort of international law for starters.

If you think you can shoot terrorism to death it shows you have zero understanding of how any of this actually works. If you think killing family members is going to help you destroy terrorism I'm afraid you've missed the boat entirely. It's almost as if you're actively trying to create more terrorism.

Show nested quote +
On June 11 2016 10:01 SolaR- wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:49 BallinWitStalin wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:45 SolaR- wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:43 zlefin wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:40 SolaR- wrote:
I really liked when Trump said to target families of terrorists. I won't deny or pretend to act like it's wrong. The end justifies the means, and this is war not a fucking safe space. Sorry..

Besides many of these so called families harbor terrorists, and even some degree support their ideology.

All Trump is saying is that you have to fight fire with fire. You can't fight with your arms tied behind your back while you have terrorists directly targeting civilians and us deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members.

uh, we don't " deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members."
you're factually wrong there.
We readily accept collateral damage, both of family, and non-family members, while killing terrorists.


Okay, well you get the point. If we can gain an advantage by specifically targeting their family members, we should take it.


This is evil, man. Like, actual literal evil.

Targeting innocent individuals because of a connection to an enemy is morally wrong, and people advocating for it are evil.

Terrorists who engage in that (i.e. suicide bombers who blow themselves up around kids, civilians, etc.) are rightly considered evil by broader society. The amount of cognitive dissonance necessary to categorize their actions as evil while advocating doing *the exact same thing* is astounding.


What if torturing a terrorist's family saved the lives of a million innocent civilians. Is it evil then? Evil is relative, and most of the time the end justifies the means.


You've watched way too much 24.


You watch too much 24, if that is your frame of reference to real world examples. Situations like that happen everyday, a lot of them we probably don't even hear about. Killing a few to save the lives of more is always the best option. If killing families is the easiest and quickest way to exterminate ISIS it is totally worth it.

Good or Evil doesn't matter. Power is the only currency of humanity.
kwizach
Profile Joined June 2011
3658 Posts
June 11 2016 01:18 GMT
#80678
On June 11 2016 07:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 11 2016 06:37 xDaunt wrote:
On June 11 2016 05:26 biology]major wrote:
Well I'm not just voting for trump because of his personality or character lol, I agree with his positions on immigration, trade and terrorism. My point is I would outright reject a candidate who I feel is not trust worthy, doesn't matter what they say why should I believe them?

Don't you just love the contortions that Hillary supporters have to go through to whitewash her past and explain away her duplicitous nature?


It is pretty funny. Like how Kwiz links an article about how "honest" she is but it doesn't even mention Bosnia which was the clear and blatant fabrication that I used as reference.

The articles I linked assess her overall honesty, which is what the discussion is about. She's not the dishonest person you try to paint her as, she's as honest as anyone else in the Democratic party, and she's not less honest than Sanders.

With regards to Bosnia, while her description of what happened was factually false, cognitive psychology tells us there are perfectly legitimate reasons as to why she may have honestly remembered the event the way she did. She may not have been lying at all, if you consider it necessary to have an intent to deceive for one to be lying. She may simply have reconstructed the memory in a way that had her convinced what she said truly happened. And there are plenty of clues as to why that might be the case. See the following two testimonies from her speechwriter and from ambassador Hill, who were both with her during the trip:

I was on the plane with then First Lady Hillary Clinton for the trip from Germany into Bosnia in 1996. We were put on a C-17 — a plane capable of steep ascents and descents — precisely because we were flying into what was considered a combat zone. We were issued flak jackets for the final leg because of possible sniper fire near Tuzla. As an additional precaution, the First Lady and Chelsea were moved to the armored cockpit for the descent into Tuzla. We were told that a welcoming ceremony on the tarmac might be canceled because of sniper fire in the hills surrounding the air strip. From Tuzla, Hillary flew to two outposts in Bosnia with gunships escorting her helicopter.

[During the landing at Tuzla], I ventured over to listen to a member of the security detail briefing the first lady and her team on the situation we would likely encounter on the ground. As she did for every briefing she received, she listened attentively, glancing at her reading material as he talked and talked.

I found myself almost rolling my eyes as the briefer went on and on about the possibility of snipers and what the plan of action would be (essentially, making a beeline to the armored vehicles parked nearby). As the briefing continued for what seemed like half an hour, one of the journalists, a little worried, asked me if it was going to be that dangerous.

I explained I was not going to contradict the briefer, but, whispering, I told him I seriously doubted we would encounter any such threat. For heaven’s sake, I explained, it was a U.S. military base with thousands of troops, where there had not been a single such incident in the three months they had set up camp. He was relieved, but those more attentively listening to the briefer were not, as they contemplated that soon they could be running for their lives across an open tarmac a la “sniper alley” in Sarajevo.

There were of course no snipers, and as the nervous passengers exited from the rear of the aircraft off an enormous steel ramp that could handle tanks and other tactical vehicles, we were greeted by a group of Bosnian children in colorful native dress. Hope none of them is a sniper, I thought. They presented Mrs. Clinton with bright bouquets of spring flowers that were quickly gathered up by aides while the first lady patted the children on the head … The visit seemed over before it began by the time we made our way back to the airstrip and boarded the C-17 for the flight to Germany. But the threat of snipers seemed to be all most people could remember.

It may seem like a bit step to go from "there is a threat of sniper fire" to "we were actually under sniper fire", but as I said cognitive psychology has shown it is not unusual at all for our memories to be distorted in such a way, especially regarding stressful situations. That's a very possible explanation of why she recollected the event that way. She may simply have remembered it wrong, and she truly thought she was being honest.

But of course, you will read this and it won't have the slightest impact on your opinion of her or of her statements, because you have already decided that she's the worse person in politics, and that everything negative you hear about her must be true. You don't have even the slightest hint of objectivity when discussing her, and you're not even interested in being objective.

On June 11 2016 07:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
As for her apologies, they are textbook BS apologies. She either doesn't say she's sorry/ I apologize or she does crap like this:

"I am sorry that this has been confusing to people and has raised a lot of questions, but there are answers to all these questions,”

She's not apologizing for what she did, she's apologizing that people don't understand why her decisions were acceptable.

False. You cherry-picked one quote, while she's apologized sincerely in the past for mistakes that she had made. But again, you're not interested in telling the truth, and at looking at her in a nuanced way (which would not prevent one from pointing out her flaws -- I certainly don't deny their existence and she's far from my ideal candidate). You're only interested in pushing a narrative, namely that she's dishonest.

On June 11 2016 07:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
I mean Trump supporters are jumping through their fair share of hoops to make him seem like a reasonable candidate, but from a right leaning perspective, it's easy for me to see how in a "lesser of two evils" contest, he beats her.

It depends on what you mean by right-leaning perspective. If you mean people who are ignorant and delusional about reality, policy, and the candidates, then sure. When it comes to defending progressive values and causes, being competent and knowledgeable, being experienced, and yes, being honest, she beats him handily.
"Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions." -- Stephen Colbert
Aquanim
Profile Joined November 2012
Australia2849 Posts
June 11 2016 01:19 GMT
#80679
On June 11 2016 10:17 SolaR- wrote:...If killing families is the easiest and quickest way to exterminate ISIS it is totally worth it.

If killing families were the easiest and quickest way (whatever easiest means) to "exterminate" ISIS, then maybe we could have a talk about whether it's morally justified.

Since it's not even a solution to the problem, I don't see the point in having that conversation.
OuchyDathurts
Profile Joined September 2010
United States4588 Posts
June 11 2016 01:20 GMT
#80680
On June 11 2016 10:17 SolaR- wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 11 2016 10:06 OuchyDathurts wrote:
I'm pretty sure deliberately targeting family members of terrorists violates some sort of international law for starters.

If you think you can shoot terrorism to death it shows you have zero understanding of how any of this actually works. If you think killing family members is going to help you destroy terrorism I'm afraid you've missed the boat entirely. It's almost as if you're actively trying to create more terrorism.

On June 11 2016 10:01 SolaR- wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:49 BallinWitStalin wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:45 SolaR- wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:43 zlefin wrote:
On June 11 2016 09:40 SolaR- wrote:
I really liked when Trump said to target families of terrorists. I won't deny or pretend to act like it's wrong. The end justifies the means, and this is war not a fucking safe space. Sorry..

Besides many of these so called families harbor terrorists, and even some degree support their ideology.

All Trump is saying is that you have to fight fire with fire. You can't fight with your arms tied behind your back while you have terrorists directly targeting civilians and us deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members.

uh, we don't " deliberately not attacking known terrorists because we are scared to kill some of their family members."
you're factually wrong there.
We readily accept collateral damage, both of family, and non-family members, while killing terrorists.


Okay, well you get the point. If we can gain an advantage by specifically targeting their family members, we should take it.


This is evil, man. Like, actual literal evil.

Targeting innocent individuals because of a connection to an enemy is morally wrong, and people advocating for it are evil.

Terrorists who engage in that (i.e. suicide bombers who blow themselves up around kids, civilians, etc.) are rightly considered evil by broader society. The amount of cognitive dissonance necessary to categorize their actions as evil while advocating doing *the exact same thing* is astounding.


What if torturing a terrorist's family saved the lives of a million innocent civilians. Is it evil then? Evil is relative, and most of the time the end justifies the means.


You've watched way too much 24.


You watch too much 24, if that is your frame of reference to real world examples. Situations like that happen everyday, a lot of them we probably don't even hear about. Killing a few to save the lives of more is always the best option. If killing families is the easiest and quickest way to exterminate ISIS it is totally worth it.

Good or Evil doesn't matter. Power is the only currency of humanity.


Situations like torturing a terrorist's family and saving millions of lives have never happened in the real world. Your hypothetical situation means literally ZERO. Your delusions of grandeur from Bond movies and espionage television hold no basis here. That's kids table stuff.
LiquidDota Staff
Prev 1 4032 4033 4034 4035 4036 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 8h 24m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Hui .269
ProTech113
StarCraft: Brood War
Rain 10899
EffOrt 1403
Horang2 856
Stork 663
Snow 401
firebathero 205
sorry 113
Sea.KH 94
Sharp 87
Pusan 76
[ Show more ]
sSak 70
Barracks 67
Sacsri 64
Movie 46
Hyun 37
Terrorterran 31
Rock 24
Backho 20
Shine 15
Bale 8
sas.Sziky 8
Dota 2
Gorgc7690
qojqva3061
syndereN444
League of Legends
Dendi2175
Counter-Strike
fl0m4745
FunKaTv 128
rGuardiaN93
Super Smash Bros
Mew2King76
Other Games
singsing1907
B2W.Neo1581
hiko861
Beastyqt657
Lowko503
ArmadaUGS191
Liquid`VortiX101
QueenE59
Trikslyr50
KnowMe47
Organizations
StarCraft: Brood War
Kim Chul Min (afreeca) 10
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Adnapsc2 37
• poizon28 20
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• Rasowy 6
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 4580
League of Legends
• Nemesis8071
• TFBlade1159
Upcoming Events
Replay Cast
8h 24m
Replay Cast
18h 24m
WardiTV Invitational
19h 24m
WardiTV Invitational
19h 24m
PiGosaur Monday
1d 8h
GSL Code S
1d 17h
Rogue vs GuMiho
Maru vs Solar
Online Event
2 days
Replay Cast
2 days
GSL Code S
2 days
herO vs Zoun
Classic vs Bunny
The PondCast
2 days
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
3 days
WardiTV Invitational
3 days
OSC
3 days
Korean StarCraft League
4 days
CranKy Ducklings
4 days
WardiTV Invitational
4 days
Cheesadelphia
4 days
GSL Code S
5 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
ECL Season 49: Europe
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.