War with Russia

[Mr Whippy]

I agree.

The problem is the system has been created today to mean we can't protest about it or stop it in the future if they are used for other purposes.

It's like nuclear bombs. They can't be un-invented.



Right now the systems in place appear benign, and used as they are currently is ok, but this is a best case scenario. The negative uses of these systems are truly terrible to imagine.

The systems and laws in place now (ambiguous as they are) allow any future government to just impose whatever draconian laws or limits on people and the people can't even begin to discontent, dissent or fight against them.




I still don't understand though why terrorism is seen as so bad to spend so much time, effort, money, law changes, and loss of potential freedoms and liberties to protect against.

It's like it serves some ulterior purpose that we can whip people into a frenzy over it and do these things.

Why aren't people going crazy over stopping smoking, or eating unhealthy foods, or banning guns in the USA? People love those things and the freedoms to have them, even if it may mean a premature end to their life.

But heaven forbid premature ending of their life from 'terror', as hugely unlikely as it is.


The entire lot just seems illogical from start to finish.

If the USA wanted terrorists to win, then they allowed them to, indeed they helped them to win by drumming up the apparent threat to 11 all the time!


Dave

[Liokault]

Mr Whippy said:

If the USA wanted terrorists to win, then they allowed them to, indeed they helped them to win by drumming up the apparent threat to 11 all the time!


Dave

Define win Dave.


I guess the fact that no one has flown a plane into a tower block killing thousands for quite a long time, or indeed any real big loss of life on US soil is kind of a win, isn't it?

Or maybe "terrorists" have decided to cut the USofA some slack, you know, leave them alone a bit.

[toppstuff]

Mr Whippy said:

I agree.

The problem is the system has been created today to mean we can't protest about it or stop it in the future if they are used for other purposes.

It's like nuclear bombs. They can't be un-invented.



Right now the systems in place appear benign, and used as they are currently is ok, but this is a best case scenario. The negative uses of these systems are truly terrible to imagine.

The systems and laws in place now (ambiguous as they are) allow any future government to just impose whatever draconian laws or limits on people and the people can't even begin to discontent, dissent or fight against them.




I still don't understand though why terrorism is seen as so bad to spend so much time, effort, money, law changes, and loss of potential freedoms and liberties to protect against.

It's like it serves some ulterior purpose that we can whip people into a frenzy over it and do these things.

Why aren't people going crazy over stopping smoking, or eating unhealthy foods, or banning guns in the USA? People love those things and the freedoms to have them, even if it may mean a premature end to their life.

But heaven forbid premature ending of their life from 'terror', as hugely unlikely as it is.


The entire lot just seems illogical from start to finish.

If the USA wanted terrorists to win, then they allowed them to, indeed they helped them to win by drumming up the apparent threat to 11 all the time!


Dave

Your whole case is built around the idea that the "systems" the security services have built to "protect us" , COULD be used against us.

You are also unaware of how extensive these "systems" are and if in fact they have helped us already

It MAY be that the systems that make you so uncomfortable have already saved your life or the lives of people you love. The 'systems" may have prevented a bombing or a shooting that could have affected you.

You are therefore making a judgement against something perceived rather than real, without actually having any knowledge about it.

This is the problem with keeping people safe in the modern world. They have to be secret if they are to protect us. But because they are secretive, they make some of us paranoid and uncomfortable in case they are "used against us". Its a tricky conundrum.

[Mr Whippy]

Liokault said:

Mr Whippy said:

If the USA wanted terrorists to win, then they allowed them to, indeed they helped them to win by drumming up the apparent threat to 11 all the time!


Dave

Define win Dave.


I guess the fact that no one has flown a plane into a tower block killing thousands for quite a long time, or indeed any real big loss of life on US soil is kind of a win, isn't it?

Or maybe "terrorists" have decided to cut the USofA some slack, you know, leave them alone a bit.

The clue is in the name, terror.

People must be terrified for the US government to have done everything it's done in response to it over the years, and continue to do.


But lets not forget the thousands of innocent people that the USA has blown up in other countries 'fighting' terror... but also creating a load of it themselves too.


It's drifting off topic a bit now.

[Mr Whippy]

toppstuff said:

You are therefore making a judgement against something perceived rather than real, without actually having any knowledge about it.

This is the problem with keeping people safe in the modern world. They have to be secret if they are to protect us. But because they are secretive, they make some of us paranoid and uncomfortable in case they are "used against us". Its a tricky conundrum.

Or they could just release the information to people.

Why do they have to be secret to protect us?


It is a conundrum indeed, but given the system is only righteous if we have faith, then that isn't reassuring.

To have faith you need to trust, and trust is earned. And too much trust has been misplaced to have faith in my view.


The arguments for tin foil hattery of the most excessive silliness, are just as reasonable as those for absolute faith based on believing everything you hear from today onwards.


Personally in these situations I prefer to be open minded and accept either possibility, which means assuming the worst as well as the best outcomes.


Just because the worst outcome grates against your sensibilities doesn't mean it's not valid or that I'm crazy. I'm just saying it's a possible outcome that could now occur with much more likelihood than people would have ever imagined pre 2001.




To throw stones at Russia and China over governments that the USA is only also a stones throw away from today doesn't vilify the argument that Russia and China are evil and the USA are the goodies as strongly as it would have done back in the 90's or earlier... when I'd have backed you up 100%

Dave

[skyrover]

Another "revealing" intercept by Ukrainian Intelligence. Details of Russian involvement and co-ordination/instructions for the so called "rebels"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSIqJcSGJ_o

[Mr Whippy]

skyrover said:

Another "revealing" intercept by Ukrainian Intelligence. Details of Russian involvement and co-ordination/instructions for the so called "rebels"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSIqJcSGJ_o

There is 'revealing' stuff to support both sides, depending on which side you want to sit.


It's a bit like which religion is right, you'll never sway someone who wants to believe just one thing, rather than the atheists who believe none of them.

Dave

[skyrover]

Mr Whippy said:

skyrover said:

Another "revealing" intercept by Ukrainian Intelligence. Details of Russian involvement and co-ordination/instructions for the so called "rebels"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSIqJcSGJ_o

There is 'revealing' stuff to support both sides, depending on which side you want to sit.


It's a bit like which religion is right, you'll never sway someone who wants to believe just one thing, rather than the atheists who believe none of them.

Dave

Well I personally sit on the "don't invade your neighbor, seize territory than try to cover it up/obfuscate" shelf.

[Mr Whippy]

skyrover said:

Mr Whippy said:

skyrover said:

Another "revealing" intercept by Ukrainian Intelligence. Details of Russian involvement and co-ordination/instructions for the so called "rebels"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSIqJcSGJ_o

There is 'revealing' stuff to support both sides, depending on which side you want to sit.


It's a bit like which religion is right, you'll never sway someone who wants to believe just one thing, rather than the atheists who believe none of them.

Dave

Well I personally sit on the "don't invade your neighbor, seize territory than try to cover it up/obfuscate" shelf.

Me too.

Either the USA caused a coup and took over by political efforts, in order to expand their geopolitical power, and then Russia responded to protect the Crimean Russians interests.

Or Russia caused a coup and caused unreset as a pretence to invade Crimea or possibly the entire of Ukraine in order to expand their geopolitical power. And USA/NATO wants to run in to protect a non-NATO, non-EU country.


Unless you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, which is tough to do given the histories of all governments in lying and deceiving the public they represent, that one is true, then they are both just as valid realities or misconceptions.


To apply a moral high ground to either side is liable to be wrong so it's best to not apply any morality to either side given both sides have proven they often exercise none.


Dave

[Jimbeaux]

toppstuff said:

Mr Whippy said:

I agree.

The problem is the system has been created today to mean we can't protest about it or stop it in the future if they are used for other purposes.

It's like nuclear bombs. They can't be un-invented.



Right now the systems in place appear benign, and used as they are currently is ok, but this is a best case scenario. The negative uses of these systems are truly terrible to imagine.

The systems and laws in place now (ambiguous as they are) allow any future government to just impose whatever draconian laws or limits on people and the people can't even begin to discontent, dissent or fight against them.




I still don't understand though why terrorism is seen as so bad to spend so much time, effort, money, law changes, and loss of potential freedoms and liberties to protect against.

It's like it serves some ulterior purpose that we can whip people into a frenzy over it and do these things.

Why aren't people going crazy over stopping smoking, or eating unhealthy foods, or banning guns in the USA? People love those things and the freedoms to have them, even if it may mean a premature end to their life.

But heaven forbid premature ending of their life from 'terror', as hugely unlikely as it is.


The entire lot just seems illogical from start to finish.

If the USA wanted terrorists to win, then they allowed them to, indeed they helped them to win by drumming up the apparent threat to 11 all the time!


Dave

Your whole case is built around the idea that the "systems" the security services have built to "protect us" , COULD be used against us.

You are also unaware of how extensive these "systems" are and if in fact they have helped us already

It MAY be that the systems that make you so uncomfortable have already saved your life or the lives of people you love. The 'systems" may have prevented a bombing or a shooting that could have affected you.

You are therefore making a judgement against something perceived rather than real, without actually having any knowledge about it.

This is the problem with keeping people safe in the modern world. They have to be secret if they are to protect us. But because they are secretive, they make some of us paranoid and uncomfortable in case they are "used against us". Its a tricky conundrum.

Very true. Many attacks have been prevented over the years. Most cannot be crowed about as it would alert others as to the methods, etc.

[Mr Whippy]

Jimbeaux said:

Many attacks have been prevented over the years. Most cannot be crowed about as it would alert others as to the methods, etc.

You can crow about them all you like.

We managed to hear step by step reports, video coverage, and all sorts of information around how they managed to finally kill Osama Bin Laden.

I really don't buy it as it stands. Only a gullible person would accept half of what they are told.

If the rest is on faith then that is fine, but to use your faith in it to justify that the system is in fact questionable (WMD's in Iraq as a simple example) isn't fair if you will then justify it as a reason to say Russia are 'more' bad than the USA, therefore in this case, the USA government are telling the truth, despite being wrong in the past, and the Russians are the baddies.


But hey, nothing wrong with blind faith and belief. It's just odd to see them applied to governments.

All praise our great and glorious leader who never lies, and would jump in front of a bus to save us, Obama!

[toppstuff]

Mr Whippy said:

You can crow about them all you like.

We managed to hear step by step reports, video coverage, and all sorts of information around how they managed to finally kill Osama Bin Laden.

I really don't buy it as it stands. Only a gullible person would accept half of what they are told.

Killing Bin Laden was a mission in another place. Given the background of 911, it is not surprising that it was made public.

This is absolutely not the same as preventing terrorist attacks on home ground. The security services use all sorts of means to identify terror risks in our own countries and neutralise them before they harm anyone. If it was common knowledge how they did it, they would not be able to do it so well.

When you hear on the news about some guy arrested for terrorism offences with a load of home made explosives in his back room, we have no idea how the security services found him and tracked him down. It probably has to stay that way if they are to be effective.

[Mr Whippy]

toppstuff said:

When you hear on the news about some guy arrested for terrorism offences with a load of home made explosives in his back room, we have no idea how the security services found him and tracked him down. It probably has to stay that way if they are to be effective.

The last one we had in the UK, it was someone in the dorm room nearby acting suspiciously iirc.

Maybe there are others, and maybe the systems they use are amazingly sophisticated to the point that merely going into details about them would blow their entire cover about how they are caught.

But once again, without evidence then they may as well not exist.


You'd be foolish to believe anything you can't verify in some shape or form, or read independent and trusted peer reviews of.


If you have blind faith in the US government to never lie to you then that is great. But given you have a two horse race and both horses share the same stables and are fed and watered by the same caretakers (US corporates and super rich), then I'd question why they'd actually want to tell you the truth about anything ever.
Stringing you all along and keeping you working away to increase the wealth of the few seems to be their primary goal given the current growing wealth gap.

Dave

[Jimbeaux]

Mr Whippy said:

Jimbeaux said:

Many attacks have been prevented over the years. Most cannot be crowed about as it would alert others as to the methods, etc.

You can crow about them all you like.

We managed to hear step by step reports, video coverage, and all sorts of information around how they managed to finally kill Osama Bin Laden.

I really don't buy it as it stands. Only a gullible person would accept half of what they are told.

If the rest is on faith then that is fine, but to use your faith in it to justify that the system is in fact questionable (WMD's in Iraq as a simple example) isn't fair if you will then justify it as a reason to say Russia are 'more' bad than the USA, therefore in this case, the USA government are telling the truth, despite being wrong in the past, and the Russians are the baddies.


But hey, nothing wrong with blind faith and belief. It's just odd to see them applied to governments.

All praise our great and glorious leader who never lies, and would jump in front of a bus to save us, Obama!

I do not trust Obama one lick. Those who make a career of protecting the nation I have more faith in. Those things you mentioned are for public consumption, trust me, most are not...and there has been much more.

[scherzkeks]

Mr Whippy said:

You can crow about them all you like.

We managed to hear step by step reports, video coverage, and all sorts of information around how they managed to finally kill Osama Bin Laden.

Truth be told, even that was rather flimsy. No photos of the body, and in a case of laughable irony, a bizarre story of how it was immediately disposed of at sea in order to avoid "angering the Islamic world." Yeah, sounds plausible.

[Jimbeaux]

scherzkeks said:

Mr Whippy said:

You can crow about them all you like.

We managed to hear step by step reports, video coverage, and all sorts of information around how they managed to finally kill Osama Bin Laden.

Truth be told, even that was rather flimsy. No photos of the body, and in a case of laughable irony, a bizarre story of how it was immediately disposed of at sea in order to avoid "angering the Islamic world." Yeah, sounds plausible.

That is somewhat open-ended wasn't it?

[Mr Whippy]

scherzkeks said:

Mr Whippy said:

You can crow about them all you like.

We managed to hear step by step reports, video coverage, and all sorts of information around how they managed to finally kill Osama Bin Laden.

Truth be told, even that was rather flimsy. No photos of the body, and in a case of laughable irony, a bizarre story of how it was immediately disposed of at sea in order to avoid "angering the Islamic world." Yeah, sounds plausible.

Well what struck me was that they were very open about it all, and you could imagine all counter-terrorist actions being covered like this. A positive spin to reassure people that "the war against terror" (tt) is working.

But everything else is cloak and dagger. Surely a positive side in tt, would be to show people how these systems are working and helping protect them.

And as soon as Bin Laden was gone, ISIS appear. And then lone wolf terrorists all of a sudden.



If you keep following the logical path of how society reacts to these increasingly hard to stop acts of terrorism, it won't be long until you have cameras in your house, and curfews, and no cash to buy bomb making equipment without leaving a trace, or whatever else.

But it's all ok, because you're still free, and if you don't do anything wrong you have nothing to fear.



I'll pray it doesn't happen, but it seems plenty in the USA are happy for the system for it to happen be built around them, but be used for other purposes.

Dave

[Jimbeaux]

And the new XJ Flyer is...............?!?

[Mr Whippy]

Well I can go the other way if you'd like

I can talk just like the mainstream media in the USA do, and talk about how everything is so damn awesome in the USA right now. They're gonna be running fusion powered flying cars that create endangered species as they fly around.

The wealth gap is closing fast, soon we'll all be equally wealthy. Obamacare will be free for all!

Taxes will be fair and equal for all.

The government will create millions of new jobs for society. A big military, FEMA, police, DHS, etc... one big public funded body.

Everyone will be given a job for life if they want one, no one has to go unemployed.

A fair, future looking society!


Welcome to the USSA, and our glorious leader Barack Obama!







But honestly. The USA were pretty damn awesome in the past. Their cocky attitude in all those 80's action films was justified. I was in awe as a child at the U S fkin' A!

But the image really has been tarnished of late. I do worry about those poor 'average' Americans these days.

Dave

[Jimbeaux]

Mr Whippy said:

Well I can go the other way if you'd like

I can talk just like the mainstream media in the USA do, and talk about how everything is so damn awesome in the USA right now. They're gonna be running fusion powered flying cars that create endangered species as they fly around.

The wealth gap is closing fast, soon we'll all be equally wealthy. Obamacare will be free for all!

Taxes will be fair and equal for all.

The government will create millions of new jobs for society. A big military, FEMA, police, DHS, etc... one big public funded body.

Everyone will be given a job for life if they want one, no one has to go unemployed.

A fair, future looking society!


Welcome to the USSA, and our glorious leader Barack Obama!







But honestly. The USA were pretty damn awesome in the past. Their cocky attitude in all those 80's action films was justified. I was in awe as a child at the U S fkin' A!

But the image really has been tarnished of late. I do worry about those poor 'average' Americans these days.

Dave

Who are you listening to and what in the hell are you on about? In that order!