EPT+ Show Spoiler +
Iranian protests - Page 35
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Trezeguet
United States2656 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
| ||
|
Railz
United States1449 Posts
On June 28 2009 04:01 Boblion wrote: How can people shoot unarmed civilians ... It's been going on since the dawn of time. Nothings changed but the corrupt people getting better at it. | ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
On June 28 2009 04:01 Boblion wrote: How can people shoot unarmed civilians ... I recall a certain benevolent King of France who once held the same scruples, and who was eventually murdered along with his friends and family for them. | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On June 28 2009 06:37 MoltkeWarding wrote: I recall a certain benevolent King of France who once held the same scruples, and who was eventually murdered along with his friends and family for them. ahahah Please stop making stupid comparison between a random police dickhead in Iran in 2009 shooting unarmed civilian in the head and a king who was tried for high treason in 1792 and executed in 1793. Although i'm not a partisan of the death penalty, it wasn't a murder. It was a trial and an execution. | ||
|
Draconizard
628 Posts
On June 28 2009 08:03 Boblion wrote: ahahah Please stop making stupid comparison between a random police dickhead in Iran in 2009 shooting unarmed civilian in the head and a king who was tried for high treason in 1792 and executed in 1793. Although i'm not a partisan of the death penalty, it wasn't a murder. It was a trial and an execution. Eh, it really wasn't much of a trial; they were kind of in a rush to chop off his head. | ||
|
{ToT}Strafe
Thailand7026 Posts
| ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
On June 28 2009 08:03 Boblion wrote: ahahah Please stop making stupid comparison between a random police dickhead in Iran in 2009 shooting unarmed civilian in the head and a king who was tried for high treason in 1792 and executed in 1793. Although i'm not a partisan of the death penalty, it wasn't a murder. It was a trial and an execution. I was comparing no such thing. The utter want of patience on your part completely precluded any rational reading of my actual allusion. I do not know whether the state of republican propaganda in France is so strong that her citizens have come to automatically regard any violence against her ideological enemies to constitute "justice", or whether the state of historical education in your country is so deplorable, that the trial of Louis XVI is considered legally defensible, rather than seen for the political show trial it was. The fact that you seem to take the charge of "high treason" seriously against the King of France, the man who was treasoned against, shows that your bizarre word play matches that of Jacobin propaganda. This monarch, who had not broken a single law, who permitted radical reformers concession after concession, who overturned the ancient constitution of France to satiate mob appetites, who was placed in extreme duress and practical imprisonment by that national assembly who illegally usurped authority, whose family was exposed for over three years to the most appalling slander and humiliations, whose servants were indiscriminantly slaughtered by lynch mobs. Executed for high treason. A bad joke? I suppose you also believe that Marie Antoinette pursued an incestuous relationship with her son, since the accusations of the national convention seem to be as good as historical fact in your eyes. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
| ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
| ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
However, moltke, I am curious. Are you suggesting that the iranian mobs not protest? Or that getting shot should be an accepted risk of such protest? Or are you simply trying to say that people shouldn't apply elevated importance to a protester getting shot? Anyways, I would think that it is much healthier for the government to fear the people than the other way around. | ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
However, moltke, I am curious. Are you suggesting that the iranian mobs not protest? Or that getting shot should be an accepted risk of such protest? Or are you simply trying to say that people shouldn't apply elevated importance to a protester getting shot? I was not making a political observation but an epistemological one. One can trivialize the fate of the entire human race as the outcome of nature, or one can sentimentalize a single instance of human emotion, and magnify its meaning. One can see the world with Rousseau's eyes, or with Wordworth's. I am not much bothered about what is happening in Iran, but at the same time I would not trivialize the issue for other people. That would be like saying upon someone's mother dying: "thousands of mothers die in Africa every day." True, but is it really useful? | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
So why are you posting about Louis XVI ? On June 28 2009 08:35 MoltkeWarding wrote: The utter want of patience on your part completely precluded any rational reading of my actual allusion. Nah you just wanted to troll with your pompous prose. On June 28 2009 06:37 MoltkeWarding wrote: I do not know whether the state of republican propaganda in France is so strong that her citizens have come to automatically regard any violence against her ideological enemies to constitute "justice", No he wanted to flee to Austria On June 28 2009 08:35 MoltkeWarding wrote: or whether the state of historical education in your country is so deplorable, that the trial of Louis XVI is considered legally defensible, rather than seen for the political show trial it was. On today standart it was clearly a biased trial. However in comparison with the trials through the history of monarchy in France it was clearly a fair trial. I don't want to be mean with you so i will avoid further references to people tortured by kings or nobles. On June 28 2009 08:35 MoltkeWarding wrote: The fact that you seem to take the charge of "high treason" seriously against the King of France, the man who was treasoned against, shows that your bizarre word play matches that of Jacobin propaganda. So why he tried to fled to Austria ? On June 28 2009 08:35 MoltkeWarding wrote: This monarch, who had not broken a single law, He lied about his intentions. On June 28 2009 08:35 MoltkeWarding wrote: who permitted radical reformers concession after concession, who overturned the ancient constitution of France to satiate mob appetites, No he did that because he would have died otherwise. On June 28 2009 08:35 MoltkeWarding wrote: who was placed in extreme duress and practical imprisonment Poor boy like 95% of the population lived in worse conditions than him. On June 28 2009 08:35 MoltkeWarding wrote: by that national assembly who illegally usurped authority, Since when an absolute monarch "de droit divin" is legitimate ? On June 28 2009 08:35 MoltkeWarding wrote: whose family was exposed for over three years to the most appalling slander and humiliations, whose servants were indiscriminantly slaughtered by lynch mobs. I never said that i agree with this kind of behviour. Lot of cruel things happened during this era but well i still fail to understand your comparison with this video about Iran in 2009... Oh wait i see you are trolling. On June 28 2009 08:35 MoltkeWarding wrote: Executed for high treason. A bad joke? I suppose you also believe that Marie Antoinette pursued an incestuous relationship with her son, since the accusations of the national convention seem to be as good as historical fact in your eyes. I have to admit that the trial of Marie Antoinette was unfair. And ? You really think that i approve everything that happened during the revolution ? You are just trying to make me mad. However i'm really relaxed. I don't have posters of Robespierre in my bedroom and i'm against death penalty. You failed. | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On June 28 2009 08:55 MoltkeWarding wrote: And such risks also naturally attend people who protest in Iran. Except the King of France was first, the King and France and secondly, a privately honourable, mild and decent man, whatever his intellectual or political shortcomings, which is more than I can say for the Iranian mobs. Moltke are you scared for Khamenei and Ahmadinejad lives ? | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On June 28 2009 09:10 travis wrote: However, moltke, I am curious. Are you suggesting that the iranian mobs not protest? Or that getting shot should be an accepted risk of such protest? Or are you simply trying to say that people shouldn't apply elevated importance to a protester getting shot? Moltke is a royalist. He thinks that democracy is a perversion because people are less educated than kings. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
On June 28 2009 09:10 travis wrote: I don't think he's trolling. He's awesome, says stuff no one else would ever think of or say. I mean I guess it's possible that's trolling, but if so it is very very subtle. You're right, no one else would see an unarmed civilian in the 21st century get shot by riot police and then compare it to an 18th century monarch. It's not some profound viewpoint, he's a history buff that just wants to talk about history. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11562 Posts
| ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
|
Xeris
Iran17695 Posts
| ||
| ||
