GET SOME!!

Que Fas et Gloria Ducunt.







Impressed the filter let that one through !

clonmahon wrote: »

I bowed respectfully out but I’m back because of this juvenile comment.

When I add this to

“Why don't you wind you neck in eh clonmahon?”

And

“the hypocrite's mask slips”

I’m seriously impressed by the standard of right wing intellect on this forum.

Highlight within the above post is mine, to follow after the below ...

clonmahon wrote: »

This is all true, but so what they are pirates, they are not pretending to be something their not. But the west constantly claims to operate on a higher moral plain. You cannot become barbaric because those you are fighting are also barbaric, and then claim there is no moral equivalence between you and the enemy. That is hypocrisy.

I am not applying the same moral standards to pirates as I do to sovereign western states. Pirates have not signed the UN charter on human rights. I expect pirates to behave like pirates I expect western states to measure up to the own rhetoric or else discard it.

The above ^^^ is why you are a total hypocrate. Nothing right-wing about it; you sir, are a hypocrite.

Why?

Despite your best (and utterly dishonest) protests at not applying the same moral standards between soveriegn states & pirates, you ARE trying to apply them. Trying to absolve one party of any sense of responsibility for what are acts that they have acted out of their own free will whilst pillorying the other party when taking to task is rank hypocrasy of the highest order.

So what that they are pirates. They're human beings right? That's your rallying cry isn't it? Well guess what, this group of human beings have decided that they're going to rob, intimidate, kidnap, kill, etc. for money, with perhaps a smattering of convenient extreme political or religious ideology married into the mix to "justify" it.

So what lets them off the hook? What makes them so different that when they point a gun at the naval team trying to bring them to task (much like any police force around the world with a criminal) they should be treated with kind words and kid gloves. If this were on land, you wouldn't give a sh*t because it'd be the local police handling the matter, but because it's "the west" you're out banging your drum. Hypocrite.


As for your two "questions"; one is contemptable, the other absurd in its obviousness. I'll let you figure out which is which

clonmahon wrote:

My first question is given that the economic and social damage the super rich and the bankers have done to the world economy is on a scale vastly greater than that caused by Somali pirates. Why the obsession with small time pirates. Simple question.

Simple question. But you've asked two questions, so which is it?

Simple answer #1: bankers & their ilk can be tackled with law and legislation by their respective countries.

Simple answer #2: "Small time" pirates that get multi million dollar ransoms on oil tankers and the like ..... they are a growing menace on the seas and have been for several years, with several very high profile hijackings and/or murders.

clonmahon wrote:

The second question I posed is given the cost of this naval operation, would it not be cheaper to buy off the pirates with cash.

I give you a single quote from history;

"Peace in our time".

Lemming wrote: »

The above ^^^ is why you are a total hypocrate. Nothing right-wing about it; you sir, are a hypocrite.

Despite your best (and utterly dishonest) protests at not applying the same moral standards between soveriegn states & pirates, you ARE trying to apply them. Trying to absolve one party of any sense of responsibility for what are acts that they have acted out of their own free will whilst pillorying the other party when taking to task is rank hypocrasy of the highest order.

Apologies for being pedantic but clearly hypocrite is not the word you are looking for here. You seem to be suggesting that my position on moral culpability is illogical. I am simply stating that western democracies use all kinds of high flying moralistic rhetoric but that their actions often fall short of their rhetoric. The gap between their stated position and how they often act, that is hypocritical.

I expect different standards of behavior from a sovereign western government than I do from a pirate gang. Don't you?

Lemming wrote: »

So what that they are pirates. They're human beings right? That's your rallying cry isn't it? Well guess what, this group of human beings have decided that they're going to rob, intimidate, kidnap, kill, etc. for money, with perhaps a smattering of convenient extreme political or religious ideology married into the mix to "justify" it.

You see this is where it's starting to get tedious. You guys keep trying to paint me as some kind of pirate apologist. I don't know how I can make this any clearer. I am not a representative of Somali pirates, I am not issuing any kind of "rallying cry" on their behalf or on anybody's behalf. I am attempting to understand the politics of the war on Somali pirates, that all. PIRATES ARE VERY VERY BAD PEOPLE I KNOW THIS. What part of this do you not understand?

Lemming wrote: »

So what lets them off the hook? What makes them so different that when they point a gun at the naval team trying to bring them to task (much like any police force around the world with a criminal) they should be treated with kind words and kid gloves.

Again getting tedious, who said let them off the hook, not I. I am asking are their bigger menaces than pirates, is this the most effective way to deal with them and why are they doing this. You guys keep building straw men and knocking them over.

Lemming wrote: »

If this were on land, you wouldn't give a sh*t because it'd be the local police handling the matter,

So now you know what I think, very impressive, given that you have never met me.

Lemming wrote: »

but because it's "the west" you're out banging your drum. Hypocrite.

This is the third time someone has suggested I am blaming the west, I have repeatedly used the phrase "developed world". Non western trawlers fished in Somali waters and non western forces have taken on Somali pirates. Straw men again, rebutting arguments I have not made while ignoring arguments I have.

Also I do not own a drum.

Lemming wrote: »

As for your two "questions"; one is contemptable, the other absurd in its obviousness. I'll let you figure out which is which

O your going all high brow and intellectual on me again

Lemming wrote: »

Simple answer #1: bankers & their ilk can be tackled with law and legislation by their respective countries.

Strangely enough wrecking economies does not appear to be against the law and the Banksters have the legislators in their pockets. Corporate money has destroyed our economies, our liberty and our democracy and I find this far more worrying than some two bit pirates.

And that is the core of my argument, not that small time pirates should be let off the hook, but that the big time pirates should be tackled first. The problem is that no matter how I state this argument, you guys keep hearing something completely different. And oddly enough none of you have at any point sought to clarify what I'm saying. You just keep building straw men, trying to paint me as some kind of pirate apologist.

The logic of what you guys as saying (and strangely enough ye are all touting the same kinds of arguments) is that if I refuse to see the pirates as some kind of cardboard cutout Hollywood villains, I am an apologist. And that guys is not an intellectual argument its just crude propaganda.

Lemming wrote: »

Simple answer #2: "Small time" pirates that get multi million dollar ransoms on oil tankers and the like ..... they are a growing menace on the seas and have been for several years, with several very high profile hijackings and/or murders.

I give you a single quote from history;

"Peace in our time".

First you are saying pirates are common criminals like burglars, now you appear to be comparing them to Nazi Germany. I don't understand.

iceage wrote: »

Que Fas et Gloria Ducunt.

Impressed the filter let that one through !

Dear Mr iceage - Please use your Latin spell check before engaging critique - the word you seek is 'Quo' [where], not 'Que [what]'.

Thank you.

tac

tricky D wrote: »

Strawman/logical fallacy fail.

This an answer to my point ? I point out that the banksters are robbing us all, you included and this is you reply. You write about a billion as big money, I point out the banksters have destroyed trillions and this your reply.

Somali pirates cost £10 billion a year. They often would kidnap entire crews and ransom them and their cargo, as well as anyone who they can kidnap.

clonmahon wrote: »

This is the first mention on this thread of what caused the Somali state to fail and how to fix the mess.

You slate me for mentioning the social and political apect.

clonmahon wrote: »

It is legitimate to question the social, political and economic context within which this war is being conducted

Then say its legitimate to mention the social and politicial aspect...

What do you actually want?
You are confusing me with the constant efforts to switch over to your anti-bankers agenda, which people here have no interest in listening to. If I want to have a chat about political, social and economic problems I'll head over to the politics forum. You accepted that this isn't the right place for such a debate, but one posters snide childish remark drew you back in. You were worse to rise to it.

discus wrote: »

Hi there. Discus is the name, Royal Artillery is my game.

And I love Spike Milligan; that's some coincidence:)

savagecabbages wrote: »

If I want to have a chat about political, social and economic problems I'll head over to the politics forum. You accepted that this isn't the right place for such a debate, but one posters snide childish remark drew you back in. You were worse to rise to it.

Your right

discus wrote: »

Savagecabbages - you thanked that childish comment! Don't think it was snide though. The military forum is constantly having people come in to criticise everything military, and relate everything back to the New World Order, or the bankers. I for one was sick of it.

Oh it wasn't. The thanks was over you slagging the other 2 for having their pissing contest.

The snide comment was:

alanmcqueen wrote: »

Very well thought out position and well defended Clonmahon. Well done.

Some people just have to have the last word on something:rolleyes:
I mean someone respectfully agrees that they wont get what they are looking for (after some persuasion) and agree to go somewhere else, then gets drawn back in by something silly like that...