Locutus of Bored wrote:
Sorry Randomfan, but I've been making some pointless references to boy bands because I wanted to dodge your points. Let me address what I think of FDR and Lincoln.
FDR and Lincoln are war criminals that should be punished. Lincoln immorally killed thousands of civilians by purposely destroying their food and homes. He was fighting a war? Screw that, and screw all the blacks he might have been thinking about. What about those poor children he killed? MY FAVORITE MOMENT IN THE MOVIE WAS WHEN BOOTH SHOT HIM.
FDR was an immoral individual for what he did. He should be tried for war crimes and I'M GLAD HE DIED OF POLIO AS A WRETCHED OLD MAN. THAT WAS MY FAVORITE MOMENT OF THE WAR. HE GOT WHAT HE DESERVED!!!111 The old bastard got what was coming to it. Forget that he was dealing with an unprecedented situation in the history of his civilization.
Furthermore add Obama to that list. I condemn him too. He refuses to investigate the previous administration. He also continues the practice of rendition...sending detainees to meaner intelligence agencies where in some cases THEY ARE RAPED. There's even been a case of where an INNOCENT person, not participating in genocide of individuals or anything have been RAPED. Furthermore his spokesman said in reference to the administration killing a 16-year old US citizen "he should've had a better father."
Context is meaningless....so Lincoln Park!
Also, HITLER HITLER HITLER......HITLER!!!11
Furthermore, I think you're engaging in dastardly straw-manning..this claim is baseless of course, but I'm going to lazily straw-man you anyway. Booyah.
Did you just call Linkin Park a boy band? I mean, I know they suck, but they're not a "boy band" apart from being made up of all dudes. Don't be one of those people who are totally out of touch with modern music because they're too busy using the final five fingers to resurrect the trouser Cylon in a milky white puddle to their calendar of sexiest real and fictional dictators and homicidal maniacs (see, keeping it on topic).
How have I dodged your points? I've literally addressed them again and again, and in response I simply had them repeated back at me like they were a new argument. You're a broken record. Or to keep this topical to BSG, "All of this has happened before, and it will happen again." Finally, after the last iteration I just decided to break the cycle of taking you seriously since I was just being jerked around by you anyway. Your arguments have been a joke.
Context does matter. However, it's not a historical get out of jail (or criticism) free card. Criticizing some of Lincoln's, FDR's, and Obama's actions doesn't mean I took pleasure in their deaths in the first two cases or would want anything to happen in the third. Nor have I expressed any such happiness at their demise or even Cain's demise in the thread. Others have, but I haven't. But who cares? She's fucking fictional. Why are you so invested in giving her a passionate (yet incredibly shitty) defense as if she was actually on trial for war crimes?
I voted for Obama. I don't agree with all of his policies, though, especially regarding indiscriminate drone strikes, rendition, indefinite detention in Guantanamo, the drug war, concealment of torture information, and excessive law enforcement and intelligence surveillance activities to name a few things. It would be the height of stupidity to write a president --any president-- a blank check full of excuses like you've done here for leaders both real and imagined. You have a serious lack of perspective.
Also, while Lincoln's and FDR's actions are colored by the morals of the era they lived in, actions that might have been considered acceptable by some then are not considered acceptable by the vast majority of people now. Well, you seem perfectly content with looking the other way, but you're clearly an outlier. Colonial society is supposed to be a parable for our own, with the exception of some remarkable technological advancements. Their morals should be judged the way we would judge our own were we under similar circumstances, because they're written by modern human writers who share our society's general morals. If you find what Admiral Cain did acceptable even in time of war, you've got a fucked up sense of morality.
Finally, I never mentioned Hitler as an example in any of my arguments, I just got sick of your continued laziness in incorrectly screaming "Godwin!" every five minutes based on one person making a Hitler/Nazi comparison when it's actually relevant to the topic at hand. It's almost as annoying as your repeated misuse and abuse of "Strawman!" Learn what the fuck those terms mean if you're going to toss them around so casually.
Are we done here? Because you've been a colossal waste of my fucking time, and it just feels like I'm getting screwed with. If that's the case, I insist that you at least buy me dinner first.
Sad to see the level of conversation has devolved into sophomoric memes now, but not surprising given your last post, and the general poor quality of your arguments. You feel I am screwing with you and am a waste of your ever so precious time, yet you continue to respond and bitch about it afterward? You should look up the definition of insanity. What a fucking clown. Once again you are impugning my motives without cause. If you feel so strongly about being supposedly fucked with and/or your time being wasted, then there's a really really simple solution:
Otherwise, do try to whine less about my motives and your precious time and I'll continue to address your points.
Analogizing to Hitler IS intellectual laziness. You can keep defending it and bringing it up all you'd like...go ahead mention it again and then lament its cycling in the next round
I do sincerely apologize with what I put in with my last post about the "Lincoln being shot was the best part of the film", etc. You did not indeed say that.
I am touchy about Cain because like I said, I see her as a proxy for America's (the country of my citizenship) attitude about war and power: "In the face of duty, honor is meaningless."
"If you find what Admiral Cain did acceptable even in time of war, you've got a fucked up sense of morality."
You do not even need to go back to colonial time to find that the US President seems to find Admiral Cain's behavior acceptable. Look at Cheney/Obama. The torture and rape is far more pervasive under those two than it was under Cain. There's even been innocent people that have been tortured and raped.
I do not "look away" at the abuses of FDR and Lincoln. I just point out what the facts are. The fact is that either by fiat (Lincoln) or traditional law (Roosevelt), those abuses have been okayed. History has followed suit because they showed great leadership during the most trying times in the history of this country.
I bring all this up to say the US during its wars has resorted to activities that can be looked at as way worse than Cain's. I would disagree with you that they (FDR and Lincoln) are a function of the era. I think they are more a function of circumstance than era. Full-scale war and national crisis transcends any era.
"It would be the height of stupidity to write a president --any president-- a blank check full of excuses like you've done here for leaders both real and imagined. You have a serious lack of perspective."
No I don't think I have the lack of perspective. You libertarians/liberals (correct me if I'm wrong) think you have the high ground in this area but you don't.
The fact is the US constitution gives the President a de facto blank check during war-time. I suggest you read John Yoo's book The powers of war and peace
. This has been upheld by fiat, the courts, as well as Presidential deference (for example, Obama unwilling to look at the previous administration's practices). Obama is the heir to Lincoln, Cheney and FDR's legacy among others in the area of Presidential war powers.
They set the legal as well as moral precedent by pushing the boundaries and being absolved from any consequences. He's also set the precedent for his successors with his "drone memos". From a practical perspective, you want your executive to have as many tools as he can in the tool box when it comes to war no matter what party you're in.