so in the wake of thanksgiving festivities

[uh-oh]

its time to discuss the pillaging of the natives

on facebook and other social media outlets i'm sure we've all been inundated again with the whole christopher columbus was an asshole, white people committed genocide, blah blah we "stole" this country and all that other apologist soft talk.

how come people pick and choose what to be mad at.

whites conquered north america. what devils! they also conquered europe. no one cries for the celts. is it because its so far removed? how far must we travel in history before the conquest of north america is seen as a glorious act, bringing civilization to a savage land, instead of some barbarous notion that we murdered a bunch of less capable people?

but wait, there was TREACHERY! the white man made promises and broke them!

no shit. thats what we do. when caesar was conquering gaul his tactics mirrored what the whites in america did.

he would befriend X tribe to help in the fight of Y tribe. once Y tribe was defeated X tribe would get worried like hey maybe we shouldnt have dont that, so then X tribe gets with Z tribe to fight rome and avenge Y tribe. then they get defeated

same shit in the americas. when a native leader would try to unite the tribes like vercingetorix they would be defeated.

if you view the conquest of north america as some heinous act committed by murderers you have the mind of a child.

[Witty]

I just dislike the way the USA, as well as the UK, hold themselves up as these great peace bringers and moral authorities, when their history as well as current day activities suggest otherwise.

That is what pisses me off...but of course, many nations have committed great atrocities, including those you mentioned. That doesn't make the actions of the USA any less atrocious, it just shows life is not black and white, and unfortunately for all the wealth and power America has, people have to die. America is by no means alone in this...but America is the worst for trying to look like the white knight while raping the princess.

[Ghost1]

But dat princess pussy so much better wen u take it by force

[Witty]

And btw it was a heinous act committed by murderers....but you are right in saying that is how all great nations were built.

I agree with you, I also think you're dangerously callous in your dismissal of the atrocities committed.

My question to you - Given your stance on this, are ISIS justified in their attempt at domination of the West. Arent they just following in our footsteps? Are we hypocritical to label them as evil? Judging by your viewpoints they are not.

[Witty]

Originally Posted by Bags

But dat princess pussy so much better wen u take it by force

This makes me look at Super Mario in a very different light.

[uh-oh]

Word witty but thats all a part of the plan. If nations viewed america strictly as a conquering powerhouse set on controlling other nations to exploit there resources for their own personal gain it wouldnt work

Caesar was not only working in the interest of rome but also appearing to worm in the interest of the downtrodden of the tribes he was fighting so he c I uld levy troops from them exlloit there resources and further empower his own agendas. Im on my phine pooping so excuse fat thumb typos.

Right now american foreign policy works in the same way in largely tribal societies in the middle east. If you look at afghanistan for example the taliban is easily the largest most powerful force in the region so america backs a make believe afghanistan security force they installed made up of the people the taliban stepped on to gain power. Right now they are the auxillary army employed by rome to hold co trol of the region so it can be used by merica. Every now and then they need help from america and america bombs the fuck out of the Place hitting the wrong shit. But hey throughout history civilians die. Romans would put the torch to a whole village if they were supporting the opposition. They would apologise to their "allies" and be like hey we had intel the enemy was there. Our bad.

Its war.

Same shit with isis. We even have another world power involved its alot like spain during the punic wars. Carthage held control of the regions tribes and employed them alongside their troops in the fight of rome. When rome made strides in the region they levied their own spanish to fight carthage

In syria you have russia playing the role of carthage helping the established "king" keep his position while america and the EU are funding and backing rebels to destabilize the region all the while both are pretending to fight a force called isis

My main point is its business as usual. Tou can live your life hoping for peace and happiness but as im sure some ancient dude said with weird ancient grammar peace is had by the sword

[Witty]

There will never be complete peace, ever, human nature dictates it is impossible.

I just don't place as much of an emphasis on power as I think you do, I would rather we fought in defence when we had to, and not in offense because we want to. I say 'We' as in the allied forces. I think it is a case of 'if we don't do it, somebody else will, and then they'll crush us'...I have long ago decided War is based as much on paranoia as anything else. Not baseless paranoia tho, probably quite justified. You're honestly right in a lot of ways, it is a shame though that if we committed to peace, we would probably be crushed, because just because we are committed to it, doesn't mean others will be. It's a vicious cycle with no end in sight.

[uh-oh]

Originally Posted by Witty

And btw it was a heinous act committed by murderers....but you are right in saying that is how all great nations were built.

I agree with you, I also think you're dangerously callous in your dismissal of the atrocities committed.

My question to you - Given your stance on this, are ISIS justified in their attempt at domination of the West. Arent they just following in our footsteps? Are we hypocritical to label them as evil? Judging by your viewpoints they are not.

absolutely, but im a weirdo who believes "evil" is make believe. its all based upon a set of moralities put in place by people. there is no good or evil. there just IS.

isis is justified in the sense they have a set of beliefs they believe others should adhere too, the same way you have a set of beliefs that you believe others should adhere too.

the only person who is right, is the conquerer.

you want peace love and happiness, and rights for women and gays.

they want peace love and happiness, and the degradation of women, and the persecution of gays, and etc.


who is to say who is right?

you were raised in a society that molded your beliefs to make it SEEM evil to persecute gays and women and everything you think is wrong, when they were raised in a society that is opposite.

you both have strength and natural feelings built towards those ideas from a lifetime of reinforcement from the society you live in.

what we view as right isn't absolutely right. its what we BELIEVE is right.

[Chyeahhh!!!]

quit wit yer jiving...turkey.


dern yanks dunno what the freak yer talkin bout

[Witty]

I also believe 'evil' does not really exist.

What is considered evil changes over time and differs from culture to culture....therefore is a man made concept.

[uh-oh]

but hey bros

i'm gonna go to my mothers now and eat a shitty turkey with fake mashed potato's and pretend to enjoy it

i'm thankful for the whitemen who genocided the natives so that i can have 2 thanksgivings a year.

bring on the chocolate peanut butter pudding pie with graham cracker crusttttttt

[Destroyer]

barbaric conquest has always been as such, barbaric
there's no honor in it, nor has there ever been
but yeah, the fact that it's also the latest such conquest in history, probably gives it undeserved attention
but, there is nothing to be lauded in killing, pillaging and theft

[Witty]

Another question - when will America fall?

Because it will fall, whether in 10 years or 1000 years....all great nations do, and the USA won't be an exception. How? Why? When? And who will take over?

Also, how fucked will the peoples of America and and allied countries be, when this happens?

Hint: The answer to the last question js 'very'

[Inno]

But uh oh they raped the engines bro.

Unforgivable cuz

[Destroyer]

when?
I dunno
why?
because of the gap in wealth among the top and bottom

[Pharaohs Army]

writers

[oats]

one of the more coherent, less dumb posts from Pharaoh's Army. bravo

[uh-oh]

Originally Posted by Pharaohs Army

Gotta disagree here.
While certainly there is subjectivity involved; everything is relative.
As a human race if we are to define "right" and "wrong"-- with respect to morality-- based on what is beneficial to the health & well-being of humans (physically/mentally/emotionally), then certainly we can have a spectrum of what is (on the whole)"good" vs. "bad".

If the well-being of humans is not your main criterion, then of course that goes out the window. If that's the case I guess my next question would be: why isn't it?

I find the notion that the only person who is right is the conqueror to be flawed at best, and at worst offensive.
I think the word you may be looking for is "victorious"...the only person who is victorious is the conqueror.

Then we have the subjectivity of "what" is good for the well-being of mankind.. obviously not something which is easy to tackle.
However, it becomes clearer if you assign it to some sort of spectrum.
And here I'm admittedly paraphrasing some of Sam Harris's arguments that: It's clear that throwing acid in the faces of schoolgirls (for the crime of learning) would be on the far end of the spectrum of what is "not good" for humanity. It becomes rather objective when you think of it in terms of the girls' physical/mental/emotional well-being.
Same could go for mowing down hundreds of civilians in Paris with machine guns and explosives.
Is it "right" because it was successful? Or because they were indoctrinated from an early age that it was "right"? Hogwash sir.

That's not to say that "our" ideals are always right either... There are a lot of gray areas. But it's pretty easy to compare when you construct a "spectrum of well-being."

Basically what you're saying is human rights and liberties are "wrong" as long as they are "conquered" by force.
Na man.

thats not really what i am saying. if somehow the incompetent fanatical forces of isis took over the world, conquered the west and installed sharia law or some shit, they would be right. not because of some moral standing or whatever. but because they would be in control, so they would dictate what is right or wrong.

the hbo tv show rome, had a dope line. its a tv show but it resonates. julius caesar was visiting egypt securing grain shipments to feed the impoverished of rome. the then pharaoh/king kid or whatever disagreed with something, and said something to the effect of, "thats roman law" in the sense of this is egypt we have different laws. but caesar simply replied "is there any other?"

basically stating roman law is all there is. egypt was their vassal state. they can make laws all they want, but roman law is all that mattered.

its basically like that.

its not saying that morally they are right, but realistically they have the RIGHT to install whatever systems they see as right, because they have the power and control to enforce it

[uh-oh]

Originally Posted by Destroyer

barbaric conquest has always been as such, barbaric
there's no honor in it, nor has there ever been
but yeah, the fact that it's also the latest such conquest in history, probably gives it undeserved attention
but, there is nothing to be lauded in killing, pillaging and theft

without arguing the semantics of words like barbaric (i'm assuming you mean savages and not the literal definition of barbarians) i would claim you are wrong

its only wrong to the vanquished.

the "barbaric" conquests of rome were celebrated by triumphs, massive parades throughout the roman capitol, feasts and partying and usually punctuated by the public execution of members of the defeated enemy. there was no higher honor rome afforded then a triumph, and you only got one if you really fucked a people up in the name of your country

but rome was a civilized nation, if we go to more barbaric nations, and even later down the timeline, like the vikings for example. after they would murk shit they would be honored upon there arrival home

basically you are looking at the world with a new modern take. that viewpoint is very new based on world history. i blame the world wars and vietnam.

prior to the world wars, war itself was a much less bloody affair. and entire war could be won in a single battle between 40,000 guys to each side. the losing side might only lose 10,000 men, have 10,000 captured and enslaved, and 20,000 fleeing to safety. war over.

meanwhile the world wars hundreds of thousands would die in every single assault.

while the world wars brought casualty rates to insane heights, then you get a war like vietnam which is televised, and the "civilized" (soft) people at home got to see the ferocity and savagery of war, and became moralistically against it thanks to hippies

but my main point is your post is inherently wrong. throughout history there was always something to be lauded in killing, pillaging, and theft, as long as it benefitted YOUR NATION.

[oats]

Originally Posted by uh-oh

im a weirdo who believes "evil" is make believe

Originally Posted by uh-oh

its not saying that morally they are right, but realistically they have the RIGHT to install whatever systems they see as right, because they have the power and control to enforce it

you know these are two very different ideas, right?