| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/24/2010 01:26:14 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
Originally posted by Mick:
I'm not a bit surprised. Somebody probably published a photo of the Sheikh getting his freak on, so he decided to outlaw cameras that allow large telephoto lenses. Of course, it's still okay for journalists to use them since he has them on a very short leash anyway.
If we Americans keep allowing politicians and bureaucrats to ignore our constitutional rights, then something similar will happen here in the near future. |
I truly doubt that very much. |
Yeah... I mean it's as likely as been fondled by the gov reps at airports... Oh wait..... Just look at some of the hassles photg get already for having an slr.....
If we continue to let paranoia run unchecked then you get all sorts of stupid crap happening in the name of "freedom". |
|
|
|
11/24/2010 01:29:36 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
You seem to be proposing war with Pakistan and the worldwide obliteration of the religion of Islam and of Muslims. |
No I propose giving them a choice...
Live in Peace or Perish. |
|
|
|
11/24/2010 01:37:31 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by photodude:
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
You seem to be proposing war with Pakistan and the worldwide obliteration of the religion of Islam and of Muslims. |
No I propose giving them a choice...
Live in Peace or Perish. |
Oh, dear god. It's Dirty bloody Harry now. |
|
|
|
11/24/2010 01:37:56 PM · #79 |
Originally posted by photodude:
Originally posted by clive_patric_nolan:
You seem to be proposing war with Pakistan and the worldwide obliteration of the religion of Islam and of Muslims. |
No I propose giving them a choice...
Live in Peace or Perish. |
I say we obliterate all organized religions. |
|
|
|
11/24/2010 01:39:54 PM · #80 |
Originally posted by mike_311:
Originally posted by wiesener:
Originally posted by mike_311:
When you attack Innocent civilians you are a terrorist.
When you attack and armed government, you are a rebel. |
Do you really find it that simple?
What do you think of attacks on armed Iraqi police officers today? How about under Saddam's rule?
Do you condone Palestinian attacks on Israeli soldiers?
Were the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during WW2 acts of terrorism? What about the bombing of Dresden?
I believe there are many shades of gray between black and white.
EDIT: Grammar |
actually you make a good point. Im having a hard time classifying the atom bombings. Since they were conducted on civilians, however the two countries were officially at war with each other. |
Actually, there were no civilians in Japan during WW2. I say this because, at the time, the Japanese people were all subjects of the emperor and they believed that to die fighting for the emperor was the most honorable death possible. Near the end of the war, the Japanese army trained the civilian population to fight with sharpened bamboo poles. They even trained young children to be suicide bombers. As for the cities themselves, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both prime strategic military targets.
Were the atomic bombings justified? That's for each individual to decide. Personally, I believe they were justified. It ended the war quickly and saved the lives of estimated millions of American and Japanese people. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it may be the best thing that ever happened to Japan. Look at the country now, then imagine what it would be like today if they had fought to the bitter end, to the last man, woman, and child as they had planned. Would Japan even exist as a country today?
Were the bombings a terrorist act? Of course they were. It doesn't matter whether you're a soldier fighting in a declared war or a rebel fighting for a cause, any use or threat of physical violence is using fear as a means to an end. You're saying, "Either do this or I'll kill you."
|
|
|
|
11/24/2010 04:35:14 PM · #81 |
Originally posted by photodude:
I stumbled across this posting I did in my photoblog on 9/11 four years ago.
Nothing has changed
I hope some of you will read it and at least contemplate the message.
Blog Link
Happy Thanksgiving |
I read your blog...and it truly saddens me to thing that you have so little respect for other people that you seemingly know nothing about.
Ray
Message edited by author 2010-11-24 18:15:29. |
|
|
|
11/24/2010 10:56:36 PM · #82 |
Originally posted by photodude:
I stumbled across this posting I did in my photoblog on 9/11 four years ago.
Nothing has changed
I hope some of you will read it and at least contemplate the message.
Blog Link
Happy Thanksgiving |
That "message" is the most ignorant pile of manure I've read in a long time.
Sad. |
|
|
|
11/25/2010 01:03:38 AM · #83 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
My point being that not all terrorists are Arabic or Muslim, and most certainly not all Arabs or Muslims are terrorists. |
Some of us got your point Melethia. A few fell under the Gandhi explanation post by Ray in another thread. :) |
|
|
|
11/25/2010 08:47:50 AM · #84 |
Originally posted by amsterdamman:
I'm always amazed how few muslims seem to mind when other muslims attack and blow up a mosque, even on a religious holiday, killing women and kids.
Can you imagine the world wide islamic condemnation and violent reaction if a western person or force blew up a mosque??
I would estimate some muslim group or another has blown up at least 100-150 mosques in the last few years, all in muslim countries. |
I believe that muslims do get somewhat peeved at other muslims attacking their mosques - it is just that their response is directed at the perpetrators (ie not you). This may be difficult to perceive if you believe that the world revolves around you.
|
|
|
|
11/25/2010 09:09:28 AM · #85 |
Originally posted by Matthew:
Originally posted by amsterdamman:
I'm always amazed how few muslims seem to mind when other muslims attack and blow up a mosque, even on a religious holiday, killing women and kids.
Can you imagine the world wide islamic condemnation and violent reaction if a western person or force blew up a mosque??
I would estimate some muslim group or another has blown up at least 100-150 mosques in the last few years, all in muslim countries. |
I believe that muslims do get somewhat peeved at other muslims attacking their mosques - it is just that their response is directed at the perpetrators (ie not you). This may be difficult to perceive if you believe that the world revolves around you. |
1st: I believe the world revolves around the sun.
2nd as you say, they get "somewhat peeved" at murder.
Threaten to, maybe, burn a book and they die in the streets in violent protest.
Kill women, kids and religious old men... somewhat peeved... |
|
|
|
11/25/2010 09:47:48 AM · #86 |
Originally posted by photodude:
No I propose giving them a choice...
Live in Peace or Perish. |
I agree with you.
Down with all military aggressors.
If unjustified military aggression was supported by a significant number of people in any large identifiable population then we should attack the whole population. The obvious righteousness of the proposition would justify individuals taking up arms in accordance with their fundamental human rights and taking direct action. It is the only way.
Long live Jihad against all Americans!
Or did you mean something else?
|
|
|
|
11/25/2010 10:40:31 AM · #87 |
Originally posted by Mick:
Originally posted by mike_311:
actually you make a good point. Im having a hard time classifying the atom bombings. Since they were conducted on civilians, however the two countries were officially at war with each other. |
Actually, there were no civilians in Japan during WW2. I say this because, at the time, the Japanese people were all subjects of the emperor and they believed that to die fighting for the emperor was the most honorable death possible. Near the end of the war, the Japanese army trained the civilian population to fight with sharpened bamboo poles. They even trained young children to be suicide bombers. As for the cities themselves, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both prime strategic military targets. |
I'm curious of what sorts of divine knowledge you possess that enables you to make such sweeping generalizations over an entire country. How on earth can you know what the individual Japanese people thought and felt about the war and their emperor? The fact that they were living under a totalitarian rule doesn't mean they were not opposed to it! Although I am sure there were individuals that truly believed in the honor codex that you describe, for each of them I am sure that you would have found many that simply abided out of fear of consequences.
As for the necessity of the bombs, no matter how many lives they potentially "saved" I feel it was unbelievably cowardly to let hundreds of thousands of civilians (by MY definition) suffer or die horrible deaths to save the lives of soldiers in combat, the latter at least being prepared (and some even having volunteered) for such a fate. |
|
|
|
11/25/2010 11:31:14 AM · #88 |
Originally posted by amsterdamman:
Threaten to, maybe, burn a book and they die in the streets in violent protest.
Kill women, kids and religious old men... somewhat peeved... |
I was using the word peeved ironically.
Tensions between Islamic sects (sunni/shia) is the primary cause of middle eastern tension and responsible for the majority of violence and deaths in the area. So somewhat more than "peeved".
//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni-Shia_relations
|
|
|
|
11/25/2010 12:17:50 PM · #89 |
I find it interesting that, when it comes to bombing atrocities, Hiroshima/Nagasaki always seem to take center stage. But what about the firebombing of Dresden, which killed an estimated quarter of a million people? There was absolutely no military justification for that one, except that Churchill wanted a show of strength to take to the Yalta conference. Dresden, during the war, was a hospital city, a refugee city. It was virtually undefended.
R. |
|
|
|
11/25/2010 12:29:35 PM · #90 |
| Thought I was looking at a thread on the DSLR ban in Kuwait. Sorry for interrupting. |
|
|
|
11/25/2010 12:31:19 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by cmcphee:
Thought I was looking at a thread on the DSLR ban in Kuwait. Sorry for interrupting. |
LOL, I was thinking the same thing! |
|
|
|
11/25/2010 01:37:58 PM · #92 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I find it interesting that, when it comes to bombing atrocities, Hiroshima/Nagasaki always seem to take center stage. But what about the firebombing of Dresden, which killed an estimated quarter of a million people? There was absolutely no military justification for that one, except that Churchill wanted a show of strength to take to the Yalta conference. Dresden, during the war, was a hospital city, a refugee city. It was virtually undefended.
R. |
Nowhere near correct Robt
The Bombing of Dresden was a military bombing by the British Royal Air Force (RAF) and the United States Army Air Force (USAAF) as part of the allied forces between 13 February and 15 February 1945 in the Second World War. In four raids, 1,300 heavy bombers dropped more than 3,900 tons of high-explosive bombs and incendiary devices on the city, the Baroque capital of the German state of Saxony. The resulting firestorm destroyed 15 square miles (39 square kilometres) of the city centre.[1]
A 1953 United States Air Force report written by Joseph W. Angell defended the operation as the justified bombing of a military and industrial target, which was a major rail transportation and communication centre, housing 110 factories and 50,000 workers in support of the Nazi war effort.[2] Against this, several researchers have argued that not all of the communications infrastructure, such as the bridges, were in fact targeted, nor were the extensive industrial areas outside the city centre.[3] It has been argued that Dresden was a cultural landmark of little or no military significance, a "Florence on the Elbe," as it was known, and the attacks were indiscriminate area bombing and not proportionate to the commensurate military gains.[4][5]
In the first few decades after the war, some death toll estimates were as high as 250,000, which are now considered unreasonable.[6][7][8] An independent investigation commissioned by the city council in 2010 reported a minimum of 22,700 victims with a maximum total number of fatalities of 25,000.[9]
In direct comparison with the bombing of Hamburg in 1943, which created one of the greatest firestorms raised by the RAF and United States Army Air Force,[10] killing roughly 50,000 civilians in Hamburg and practically destroying the entire city, and the bombing of Pforzheim in 1945, killing roughly 18,000 civilians,[11] the bombing raids over Dresden were not the most severe of World War II. However, they continue to be recognised as one of the worst examples of civilian suffering caused by strategic bombing, and have become exposed among the moral causes célèbres of the Second World War.[12] Post-war discussion, popular legends, historical revisionism and Cold War propaganda of the bombing includes debate by commentators, officials and historians as to whether or not the bombing was justified, and whether its outcome constituted a war crime.
Message edited by author 2010-11-25 13:39:11. |
|
|
|
11/25/2010 01:56:18 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by Sevlow:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
I find it interesting that, when it comes to bombing atrocities, Hiroshima/Nagasaki always seem to take center stage. But what about the firebombing of Dresden, which killed an estimated quarter of a million people? There was absolutely no military justification for that one, except that Churchill wanted a show of strength to take to the Yalta conference. Dresden, during the war, was a hospital city, a refugee city. It was virtually undefended.
R. |
Nowhere near correct Robt |
There's considerable dispute on this subject, but this thread isn't the place to pursue it. FWIW, my uncle was the pilot of one of those bombers and we discussed the mission at length, several times.
R. |
|
|
|
11/25/2010 02:00:39 PM · #94 |
[/quote]
There's considerable dispute on this subject, but this thread isn't the place to pursue it...
R. [/quote]
Agreed
|
|
|
|
11/25/2010 04:51:08 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by photodude:
I stumbled across this posting I did in my photoblog on 9/11 four years ago.
Nothing has changed
I hope some of you will read it and at least contemplate the message.
Blog Link
Happy Thanksgiving |
Contemplate the message of hate, misunderstanding, racism, and plain outright stupidity? Is that the message you want people to contemplate. It must be lonely in your world.
You should put a disclaimer on that page explaining how you know nothing about Pakistan, Islam or anything about terror and why it exists.
Are you for or against slavery? No need to answer. |
|
|
|
11/25/2010 05:13:29 PM · #96 |
Originally posted by Jac:
Originally posted by photodude:
I stumbled across this posting I did in my photoblog on 9/11 four years ago.
Nothing has changed
I hope some of you will read it and at least contemplate the message.
Blog Link
Happy Thanksgiving |
Contemplate the message of hate, misunderstanding, racism, and plain outright stupidity? Is that the message you want people to contemplate. It must be lonely in your world.
You should put a disclaimer on that page explaining how you know nothing about Pakistan, Islam or anything about terror and why it exists.
Are you for or against slavery? No need to answer. |
I don't think it's really much point contemplating the dude's message of weird stupidness seriously. It'll just make us shake our head in shame for our part in the human race. Reading that gibberish blog of his it seems like the the best thing the UK could have done with regards to the I.R.A decades ago was to go to war with Ireland. Bonkers.
Message edited by author 2010-11-25 17:16:35. |
|
|
|
11/27/2010 11:44:08 AM · #97 |
Come on Kumbaya people...
Where are you today?
If you are just waking up a naturalized Somali tried to blow up a tree lighting in Portland Oregon. Hundreds could have been killed.
We got lucky on defense again. I guess this guy couldn't make it as a pirate so he figured he would try terrorism.
How about this...
Since he is an American Citizen, let's try him for treason. We are at war with Islam and he was aiding the enemy. Give him a fair trial in an American court and if found guilty, stick a needle in his arm.
In the future, let's stop naturalizing Somali's, and letting any of them even come here to visit. Again, you can't tell the good from the bad.
And stop telling us that it's not the American way. |
|
|
|
11/27/2010 11:55:07 AM · #98 |
Originally posted by photodude:
We are at war with Islam... |
Wrong. Incorrect. False. Untrue.
Message edited by author 2010-11-27 11:57:36. |
|
|
|
11/27/2010 11:55:14 AM · #99 |
| Just out of curiousity, are you a Native American? |
|
|
|
11/27/2010 11:59:14 AM · #100 |
If you are asking if I was born in America, the answer is Yes.
If you are asking if I am of "American Indian" (which is now a Politically Incorrect Term) descent, the answer is No |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/31/2025 12:36:01 AM EDT.
