shadesofgrey

Reply to Is one man's freedom fighter another man's terrorist? in International JoeUser Forums

[quote]fighters wage war against their oppressors and terrorists avoid confrontations with their oppressors and target civilians[/quote] So, would you say that when the IRA went after government officials or the RUC, than they were acting as freedom fighters, but when they attacked civilians they were terrorist? Can an organizations have moments of both? or is it once a terrorist, always a terrorist? I'm not obsessively ignoring any

Reply to Is one man's freedom fighter another man's terrorist? in International JoeUser Forums

First of all, don't tell me what I am doing... I am not pretending to do anything and quite frankly your Holier-thantthou attitude is starting to anger me. I posed the question in an academic sense--it's not a treastise for terrorists. For the last time--NEVER do I say that either the Palestinians or the IRA are freedom fighters--not once. I say they use violence, but I also state the governments use violence. I never say that I support suici

Reply to Is one man's freedom fighter another man's terrorist? in International JoeUser Forums

Articles like mine aren't going to encourage terrorism...I clearly state in the aritcle that "It's despicable, and I wish it wasn't true. It turns my stomach to even think about it, but it's a sad reality." Please don't put words into my mouth or make me out to be evil because I am trying to address a topic that you don't agree with. Last I checked, I have every right to discuss the apparent disparity between who we address as "freedom fighters" and

Reply to Is one man's freedom fighter another man's terrorist? in International JoeUser Forums

OG San: I do not believe that I have equated the IRA and Nationalists--I say that Nationalists and Republicans wanted self-determination and that the IRA took up the cause--not that they are the same--they clearly are not. Also, my blog is very surface level and would appear to equate the Troubles to simply being IRA v. British Government--however that was simply because of lack of time and/or willingness to devote the amount of time that it

Reply to Is one man's freedom fighter another man's terrorist? in International JoeUser Forums

Bakerstreet: Here is the post that I deleted at your request--I'm cutting and pasting it below...It was messing up the replies and I couldn't see anything... Bakerstreet's post from last night: No, the difference in a freedom fighter and terrorist is the targets. Look at the damn definition: [q

Reply to Is one man's freedom fighter another man's terrorist? in International JoeUser Forums

A few replies ago, terrorism wasnt war. Now it is? I didn't say that terrorism wasn't war--I said that the concept of war has changed in the past two-hundred years, and

Reply to Is one man's freedom fighter another man's terrorist? in International JoeUser Forums

Thanks to all the pig-headed, armchair thinkers for validating their methods with this kind of insipid supposition I would prefer not to be called names in my own blog. I was simply attempting to grapple with a concept that I think there isn't a clear line on. If you disagree, that is fine, but leave

Reply to Is one man's freedom fighter another man's terrorist? in International JoeUser Forums

I suppose my question back is why isn't Mandela considered a terrorist, he used violence and it landed him in Robben's Island? That's the point that I'm trying to get at--the shade of grey :) that permeates this issue. [quote]Shadesofgray, I would suggest to you that you have been shown a very one-sided view of events in the Middle East[/quote] I would retort that you would be mistaken. Clearly, my blog wasn't long enough, nor was it

Is one man's freedom fighter another man's terrorist? in International JoeUser Forums

A couple of years ago, this question was posed in one of my political science classes. How absurd I thought at the time, clearly there was some tangible set of criteria that placed terrorist i

Reply to Women Deserve Better Than Abortion in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote]Nothing is 100%. If people aren't going to try alternative styles of sex to avoid having children or try using multiple forms of birth control at once, then please don't pretend that they're responsible individuals that did all they could not to have a child. They chose to have the child as much as a drunk drivers choose to kill children. It's called negligence.You're more likely to get into an accident than have a baby because there are more pe

Reply to Women Deserve Better Than Abortion in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote]Yes, but I cited statistics about what "The" people think when they were polled about why they had abortions.[/quote] Those were not the statistics that I was questioning. I was questioning the extreme wording of the statistic claiming that 16% of Americans were in favor of abortion under any circumstances at any time in the pregnancy ---my comment was simply that most pro-choicer--including the leaders of the movement (prochoice

Reply to Women Deserve Better Than Abortion in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote]This is not an emotionally easy choice[/quote] I could not agree with you more!! Thanks for your posts!

Reply to Women Deserve Better Than Abortion in Politics JoeUser Forums

Oh, yes, that it does prove. I meant "lack of common sense," not "common sense." Oops I appreciated your support for my argument, even if it wasn't intentional!

Reply to Women Deserve Better Than Abortion in Politics JoeUser Forums

I think it's based on common sense. If a birth control method is 99% effective, then if you use it about a hundred times, it shouldn't surprise you when you get pregnant once. Do you have an accident every hundred times you drive? No, I don't. But that just proves that you are more likely to get p

Reply to Women Deserve Better Than Abortion in Politics JoeUser Forums

Considering the insane amount of birth control out there that could be used simoultaneously, and the many different ways of having sex (there are other orifices besides the vagina), yes, somebody who chooses to have sex does choose to have a child if they get pregnant, because they could have taken more precautions. It's like dri

Reply to Women Deserve Better Than Abortion in Politics JoeUser Forums

You can call whatever you like into doubt, but it helps to provide an alternative study rather than just what you think. Yes, but it is just what someone else thinks--you cited statistics about what people think...and all I'm saying is that statistics can be manipulated to suit whatever cause someone is

Reply to Women Deserve Better Than Abortion in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote]deleted VES[/quote] What does this mean? Did someone delete your post? If so, please repost it--while we have differing opinions, I do appreciate your point of view and like to hear what you have to say.

Reply to Women Deserve Better Than Abortion in Politics JoeUser Forums

[quote]You pro-CHOICE people only think about the choices AFTER becoming pregnant. You don't think about the choices people make that lead them into the situations they "find" themselves in. You make it seems like the woke up all of sudden a victim of circumstances entirely beyond their control. In the vast majority of instances, that's NOT the case. The women (and men the women CHOOSE) make specific decision that place them in specific circumstances t

Reply to Women Deserve Better Than Abortion in Politics JoeUser Forums

oh yea, one more thing vernmeister2u, i would like to call into doubt some of your statistics---we all know that numbers can be manipulated 1. 16% of Americans believe abortion should be legal for any reason at any time during pregnancy -- well, it's the "at any time during pregnancy" that makes this number so low, in my last post I quoted NARAL/Pro-choice America as saying that they don't oppose restrictions on post-viability aborti

Reply to Women Deserve Better Than Abortion in Politics JoeUser Forums

Just a couple of points: Super Baby, you asked "or is this another example of pro-choicers taking the minority and pretending it's the majority (as they do with the rape and mother's life cases in abortion)?" It may only be a minority that do not make the exception, but the Bush Admininstration's Ban on Partial Birth Abortions failed to make exception for the life and health of the mother. That is law. It's the first time that a Presid

Reply to A Historic Day in Iraq in Current Events JoeUser Forums

First, let's not delude ourselves into thinking that this was by any means a war of liberation...the Iraqi people may be better off now then they were a year ago, but they are still not wholly free as the term liberation implies--there is the minor detail of the current occupation by an outside army. Second, I refer to it as the US with the help of the UK because those are the two countries that gave it their all when it came to spinning the s

Reply to Listening to the arguments on gay marriage in Personal Relationships JoeUser Forums

Just a couple of thoughts: 1. If I am not mistaken, (and I could very well be) civil union comes from the Vermont legislature as a way to allow for gay unions without having to deal with the fact that the feds had declared marriage to be between a man and a woman (when Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act). I believe that a civil marriage service (ie. before the justice of the peace) is still considered marriage, not a union.

Reply to A Historic Day in Iraq in Current Events JoeUser Forums

Just because someone opposed the war in Iraq doesn't mean that they supported Saddam's government. I'm all for the fall of Saddam, and the realization of human rights and basic freedoms among Iraqi civilians. Yet, I'm still idealistic enough to believe that we have the United Nations for a reason and that the United States (with the help of the UK) does not have the authority to "remove" Saddam. If the war was truly fought because we were disgusted

Reply to Women Deserve Better Than Abortion in Politics JoeUser Forums

The offensiveness of the campaign is that it does not deal with the issue, but rather relies on misleading slogans and the concept that pro-choicers can be swayed by "chic gen Xers." If they wanted present a solid argument as to why the right to choose should be reversed, I would be all ears...but that is not what it does.

Reply to Iraq: One Year On in International JoeUser Forums

Once again, my position is not "anti-war Europe." I, along with many other American's I know--some who have even travelled to Iraq to break the sanctions and deliver medicine-- opposed the sanctions because they didn't work. We are arguing the same point here...I said that the sanctions were doing little harm to Saddam and his inner circle, you said it was because he was allowed to cheat on them from day one...you aren't disagreeing with me, rather p