Thread: A question on the constitution

Originally Posted by gssixgun

The only argument here is that they do not abide by the Geneva Convention, but on that note we knew that when they attacked on 9/11 ... so they way I am reading it the only "Rights" they have are the ones we choose to give them...

The gray area comes not from the terrorists but by the way US conducts its wars. It fought the Afganistan and Iraq armies and defeated them, at that point there is no longer the excuse of 'these terrorists are confusing us and endangering civilians'. At this point US is an occupier of a foreign country and as such is responsible for the population's safety. If it chooses to not afford lawful process it is on US, but at this point terror attacks and insurgency are not a war they are criminal acts from the population against the ruling government.

Just like 9/11 is not some sovereign country invading US. It's a lot more like Tim McVeigh bombing Oklahoma City than Perl Harbor.

I think this whole 'war on terror' language is just pulling the wool over people to confuse things.

Originally Posted by gugi

Yeah, but in historical timescale that's a comparatively recent worldview. One of the most celebrated cases in the history of free thought is of a guy named Giordano Bruno - he was burned alive in 1600 and as recently as 2000 the position of the Roman Church was that while it was 'sad episode' the inquisitors 'had the desire to serve freedom and promote the common good and did everything possible to save his life.'

We didn't get here by killing off all the bloodthirsty 'do gooders' among our ancestors, we changed by overtime starting to value the lives of our fellow humans over the differences we have with them.

We both are so far apart from the point in my post Gugi. Don't cloud or read into my very simple, yet precise statement that you quoted by injecting history. History made by individuals who were as incompetent as many we have in charge today.

Evil has not a single element (and you are familiar with elements, I do believe) in common with sin. History is documented with examples of both. I would not have called your example of Giordano Bruno as evil. "Bloodthirsty" is a tossed about term,,,, usually tossed out by the losing side of a battle or the spectators from afar.

Your statement : "We didn't get here by killing off all the bloodthirsty 'do gooders' among our ancestors, we changed by overtime starting to value the lives of our fellow humans over the differences we have with them." is a great topic for discussion, but again off point from my original statement you quoted. We got here by killing more of them, than they were able to do to us. How many examples in this past 120 years do I need to give you.

Again, we are talking about two different things Gugi.

The beheadings , burning of human beings we have recently seen & all the ones we have not, staking of children,,, has not a thing to do with politics, ideology, frustration of economic conditions, it is the result of men who have entered that dark room, that we all have possessed from birth. That room that most of us never see & most don't know it exists. Evil resides there,, sin which can be forgiven, dares not enter either.

I have seen evil in person, you can't give it a lawyer, call it a priest,, you can't change it, because it is in us all & beyond our understanding/science.
When seen in it's physical form, man it has to be put down.

Originally Posted by Hirlau

I have seen evil in person, you can't give it a lawyer, call it a priest,, you can't change it, because it is in us all & beyond our understanding/science.
When seen in it's physical form, man it has to be put down.

This can not be Described or Explained you either know it or you don't it is that simple... until somebody faces it they will never understand it...

Well put

When I hear people say things like Sanctions and Talks when people are being burned alive and worse, I realize there is no reasoning with them we are way to far apart.. We will never understand each other..

Yes, thank God most don't have to see it

Originally Posted by gssixgun

When I hear people say things like Sanctions and Talks when people are being burned alive and worse, I realize there is no reasoning with them we are way to far apart.. We will never understand each other..

Just for clarification, do you mean no reasoning with the sanction talkers or the burning/beheading thugs? If you mean the later, yes there really is no talking to do with them. That is very clear at least to me.

Bob

Originally Posted by BobH

Just for clarification, do you mean no reasoning with the sanction talkers or the burning/beheading thugs? If you mean the later, yes there really is no talking to do with them. That is very clear at least to me.

Bob

Honestly ?? I mean both

Obviously you cannot reason with ISIS and Boko Harum that is a given or at least it is to me, so once you realize that, then talking about sanctions, and diplomatic solutions with them become an exercise in futility...

Which brings us back to our early discussion about who is sent there to simply hunt them down and kill them ????

I am familiar enough with medieval history to know that beheadings and live burnings used to be essentially what TV is nowadays.

Were our ancestors evil and if they were how did we get from taking our children to watch quarterings on sunday morning to considering those same acts as the most despicable thing a human being can do?

Or perhaps we all have that inside of us and certain conditions make it come out? Perhaps trying to exterminate that evil by killing others only makes it grow in ourselves?

I know of the shows, feeding of the lions, beheadings,,,,,,we got to this point in time simply by surviving,,, but I know that is not what you are asking me.
I do believe that not all the people in the medieval times, were on board with the "torture of the week". I also know that your knowledge of the books, on most all subjects, far exceeds mine.

Evil is not something that you "progress" from,,,, we don't learn it, understand it, then prevent it or control it. Are there certain conditions that lead us into that dark room, of course. What these conditions are & how to control them, I feel is still far beyond our best minds.

This statement "Perhaps trying to exterminate that evil by killing others only makes it grow in ourselves?" You don't exterminate evil, unless all mankind is removed. But you can limit it's spread by removing the individuals overcome with it.

Everyday I battle with sin, I want to & try to walk a better path in life. I visit places that are morally wrong & bad for my soul, but I know there is help for me on this path, it reaches out to me from many good sources, I just have not fallen hard enough yet.
But,,, I know there is a door at the far end of my path that I do not want to open & I know that sin is not what is waiting for me behind it.

Originally Posted by Hirlau

This statement "Perhaps trying to exterminate that evil by killing others only makes it grow in ourselves?" You don't exterminate evil, unless all mankind is removed. But you can limit it's spread by removing the individuals overcome with it.

But what good is removing those individuals if your removal process creates ten times more to take their place? I think that's the question here - not whether beheading people is evil, but how to stop it.

I think we've had a good run with the strategy of 'just start a war kill a bunch of them, capture and torture a bunch'. I'd say we're in a worse place today than when we were at 9/11.

A couple of weeks ago three young men in Mississippi were sentenced from 7 to 50 years in prison for beating to death a black man. That was caught on video so the truth came out, but they were characterized by their friends as good and compassionate people, good mannered, loving, kind-hearted etc. even going as far as explicitly stating that they are not criminals who should be incarcerated. It took almost 4 years to be brought to justice.
In my mind their actions are worse than a beheading, but apparently a lot of the people who know them personally do not think so.

I believe that a reasonable legal process is crucial in defeating evil and resorting to vengeance and rhetoric of the type 'these animals do not have any rights' is counter productive, and I think our recent experience supports that.

For example at a certain point in the Iraq War AlQaeda lost the support of the local population and they were driven out. ISIS is strong only because they offer protection of the sunni population from the atrocities and the violence that they used to suffer from the shia militias because the shia dominated government did not protect them.

We see an image on the TV, hear the story somebody tells us, and our first reaction is to cry 'kill those animals'. Perhaps it's time to stop, take a second look and try to understand what is going on, whether that story is superficial and does not really explain what is happening. Because unless we do the chances that we'll help a positive outcome are slim.

Earlier in the thread Jericho was brought up and with the help of somebody I found what that is about. The exact quote is from the book of Joshua Chapter 7, verse 21

They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.

I mean if that is supposed to be the solution how is it any better than what we're supposedly getting rid of?