Syrian people killed every day !!! where are you humans !!

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by Sinestra

Well Ronin i wont bite on this one. Ill just say this.

-No airstrikes by the US
-No Boots on the ground by the US
-No Invention by the US without a Coalition and even then a limited roll


You want freedom fight for it its not FREE it cost blood, sweat and tears and right now i dont see a coordinate resistance in Syria. Therefore i dont support any action other sanctions. I will not support something that is going to lead to all out war or other countries bitching that the US has again invaded another Muslim country.

so if you have all the answers how about you go to Syria and solve the problem yourself.

I understand you not supporting US intervention.

What I don't understand is your bitterness directed at the Syrian people who are trying to overthrow their tyranical dictator.

It actually comes accross as simple minded bigotry.

PS- There is a coordinated resistance in Syria or have you not noticed the HUNDREDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE PROTESTING?

Also elements of the military seem to be defecting at the moment so who knows.

So I don't know how much blood sweat and tears is required for freedom according to you. I mean is there a minimum requirement or are you just talking out of your ass?

[OHayou]

Originally Posted by Ronin4hire

Um How am I cherry picking?

Well, you both are using examples to support your theory based on a few instances in history. He used an example and you used a couple to prove your point. You accused him of 'cherry picking' while you 'cherry picked' a few moments in history to prove your point.

Originally Posted by Ronin4hire

I haven't put forward a theory on the way the world works.. just debunking Ryozorians theory using events that don't correspond with it or can you not read?

No need for the insult because I can read just fine. Ryozorian is simply stating how he views the world. It might not be how you view the world and events but that doesn't necessarily make it wrong or right. Would a peaceful movement have worked against the British when America was trying to break free? Would a violent resistance have worked in Egypt? Maybe, maybe not. Though the measures used in each situation were different both met with 'freedom'.

Ironically, the examples you gave kind of prove Ryozorian's point that the masses won't care until a party is named and winning against the tyrannical opponent. I'm going to go out on a limb and say most people in the United States didn't pay much attention to Egypt until the masses identified themselves, their objectives, and started to gain recognition for the possibility of [winning] overthrowing their government.

The only difference I see in your arguments is the way to go about protesting freedom: whether with violence or peaceful demonstration.

Originally Posted by Ronin4hire

And I did give facts.. or are you denying that the Indian independence movement, the Egyptian uprising and the US civil rights movement never happened? You can throw in the womans suffrage movement in for good measure too.

Yes, they did indeed happen! They were good points to bring up btw. Peaceful resistance can be much more effective than violence.

Originally Posted by Ronin4hire

As for your theory about the last 5000 years. It's just as bogus. I mean for a start what we imagine to be "freedom" is very recent so I'm not sure what sort of point you're trying to make.

It's funny how even in our great 'freedom' a lot of people still complain about being "controlled" by the corporate entities or government or caught in the "rat race". So freedom is a definition wide open and always changing.

My point was that peaceful resistance is relatively new as I see it. Fighting for 'freedom' has been around for 1000s of years and most freedoms were fought for.

Freedom 1000 years ago that villages, cities, etc fought for might not be the same freedom as we view it today but was freedom in that time period.

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by OHayou

Well, you both are using examples to support your theory based on a few instances in history. He used an example and you used a couple to prove your point. You accused him of 'cherry picking' while you 'cherry picked' a few moments in history to prove your point. .

Sorry what theory am I putting forward?

No need for the insult because I can read just fine. Ryozorian is simply stating how he views the world. It might not be how you view the world and events but that doesn't necessarily make it wrong or right.

Am I not allowed to challenge him on that?

Would a peaceful movement have worked against the British when America was trying to break free? Would a violent resistance have worked in Egypt? Maybe, maybe not. Though the measures used in each situation were different both met with 'freedom'.

You do realize that this is what I was implying right? Whether a revolution is successful or not depends on the circumstances of the time. Not on some bullsh*t trend that you've pieced together from unrelated cherry picked events. (What Ryozorian was doing)

The only difference I see in your arguments is the way to go about protesting freedom: whether with violence or peaceful demonstration.

It's the only point I really took issue with. There is more bullsh*t that spews from Ryozorian's keyboard that I didn't address though. (Like the idea that the Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt orchestrated the uprising) But I don't really want to chase that rabbit as in past experiences with him I've never reached the end usually coming back to the beginning because he has no conception of logic or reason. (Check out the other thread on 9/11 that has turned into a global warming debate because of him lol)

It's funny how even in our great 'freedom' a lot of people still complain about being "controlled" by the corporate entities or government or caught in the "rat race". So freedom is a definition wide open and always changing.

Agree

My point was that peaceful resistance is relatively new as I see it. Fighting for 'freedom'has been around for 1000s of years and most freedoms were fought for.

Agree.. and my point is that this is irrelevant.

Freedom 1000 years ago that villages, cities, etc fought for might not be the same freedom as we view it today but was freedom in that time period.

Agree

[Ryzorian]

Sigh, Freedom demands the blood of those who would be free. That's what I'm saying. Those who fought for freedom..REGAURDLESS of thier method, had to shed their blood to win it. By the way, very few "peaceful" atempts win..they useually get run over by tanks, like what happened in China.

Ronin, The Islamic Brotherhood is now directly tied to the Egyptian Military. They really are attacking coptic christians, they really are trying to forge connections with the islamic brotherhood in Lybia. This has been a goal of thiers for a long time. Haveing a rebuilt caliphate is thier utlimate goal...and at they rate they are going will achieve it in short order. They also plan to attack Isreal as soon as they are able.

This is happening right now, as we speak. Yet you choose to ignore the truth of the matter for some fantasy about "Arab Spring". It's not going to be what you think Ronnin. Forces are in play that you lack the understanding of.


As to France..the French and Britian were fighting in multiple wars dureing that period..In fact the French and Indian war wasn't that long ago from 1776. It was more like a period between rounds. So while they may not have been involved in a fighting war at the time..they VERY much were in a cold war..and the French used the US as a Proxy. Kinda like what Russia did with Vietnam.

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by Ryzorian

Sigh, Freedom demands the blood of those who would be free. That's what I'm saying. Those who fought for freedom..REGAURDLESS of thier method, had to shed their blood to win it. By the way, very few "peaceful" atempts win..they useually get run over by tanks, like what happened in China.

If that is all your point was then that really goes without saying.

I thought you were implying that the Syrians were not "bleeding" for their freedom and that armed resistance was the only way for Syrians to succeed.

But in fact I've just realised that you're implying something much worse.

That you don't care because you're American.

As for your "Islamic Brotherhood" bullsh*t.... You see what I mean Ohaiyou?

[Ryzorian]

NO Ronin, I don't care. They didn't care when The towers were destroyed, I don't care what happens there. That's THEIR problem, they can handle it. If you want to help in thier plight, then I suggest you buy a ticket, fly to Syria and put your money where your mouth is. I'm on the side of Isreal and will allways be.

As to The Islamic Brotherhood, I know where I stand, they know where they stand. You may be forced to choose sides in a Global war you don't understand, and if you choose poorly, you will not know mercy.

[DragonNL]

Originally Posted by Ryzorian

Sigh, Freedom demands the blood of those who would be free. That's what I'm saying. Those who fought for freedom..REGAURDLESS of thier method, had to shed their blood to win it. By the way, very few "peaceful" atempts win..they useually get run over by tanks, like what happened in China.

There you say that freedom DOESN'T demand a blood price.
So you do know the truth but,

A) you're ignoring it because you like violence.
or
B) you're too lazy to work a little harder for your freedom and you just go with the majority of people..

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by Ryzorian

NO Ronin, I don't care. They didn't care when The towers were destroyed, I don't care what happens there. That's THEIR problem, they can handle it. If you want to help in thier plight, then I suggest you buy a ticket, fly to Syria and put your money where your mouth is. I'm on the side of Isreal and will allways be.

As to The Islamic Brotherhood, I know where I stand, they know where they stand. You may be forced to choose sides in a Global war you don't understand, and if you choose poorly, you will not know mercy.

You're an idiot.

[Ryzorian]

Honestly Ronin, I would rather be an idiot who was right, than a brilliant person who was wrong. But then it doesn't matter does it? Niether of us are in a position where we can change what is going to happen in the Middle East, reguardless of who believes what.

Dragon NL; I'm telling you that if you want to be free you have to shed your blood for it, and yes, more than likely, shed the blood of those who will take your freedom from you. Your not going to get it singing "kumbahya give peace a chance." Those who want to be free, have to fight for it because those who don't want you to be free will kill you for even thinking about it.

History is the proof, those who want freedom suffer for the wanting. They are killed, butchered and tortured for dareing to dream, because the powers that be, WON'T allow anyone else access to the same power they have. Freedom is ultimate power..the power to live life how you choose..and it is a threat to those who would trample on others for thier own selfish ends.

[pumpum]

Saying that the arabs problems are their own and that they must all "bleed" for their freedom is fine if you come from some countries but not if you are from AMERICA.

America does owe and does have responsibilities to the arabs because for the last 50-60 years it has underhandedly dictated how those lands have been shaped due to its own greed and ends. This is a fact and it also applies to other areas such as South America.

Americas interference, support and indeed supply of weapons to murderous tyrants for their own benefit has left to millions of people living without the same freedom they hypocritically champion at home.

I could type so much here but i really cant be arsed, even those who will blast my point of view, know really that it is the truth. My view is not Anti-american it is just Human.

To me america had a oppurtunity to truly make the world a better place because of the power it held but instead it only focused on supplying itself with everything at the cost of most of the rest of the world, in doing so it has shaped the rest of the world to act in its image and so more chaos and devastation is assured.

Instead of recognising their role in F***ing up the world, now to sit back and say the arabs must fend for themselves against tyrants they helped prop up, is disingenuous to say the least. Americas problem is tha they dont seem to understand it is easy to break stuff but much harder to fix it and of course the stuff that you break is not gonna like you, but does that mean you havent got any responsibility to fix it? of course not.