Ableton Forum

I'm with Keyser Soze on this one.

I just wanted to add that as human beings we are sheep. No matter what individuals may think, the responsibilities and actions fall upon entire nations, not individuals. The sad fact is that of all the smart people taking an active part in discussions like this (and most are smart as you can tell from the rational viewpoints and well structured arguments) around the world, we only represent a tiny portion of the worlds population. A majority of people will just "go with the flow" and do whatever everyone else does.
Classic examples of this are the Crusades and the Islam reaction to the recent cartoons. As far as I know, most religions advocate peace but are corrupted by greeed and personal values and the followers do exactly that. They follow others. People get caught up with emotions and lose all sense of individuality and reason.
I'd like to think I'm not a pessimist but I don't see an end to all of this.
I do agree however that Islam may have it's good sides, but the bad things in it and the extremists certainly aren't helping the rest of the world to see their religion as anything more than a westerner hating and freedom opressing religion.

M. Bréqs wrote:To bring this back to the subject of Ahmadinejad's letter;

What a f*cking joke. This is a letter, purportedly one of "peace" from a guy who wants to eradicate an entire nation, full of civilians.

Regardless of what you think of the current US administration or the world situation, nothing justifies this hypocritical psycho's self indulgent diatribe.

It's conciliatory, but it's also bullshit. Ahmadinejad has an agenda for his propaganda, just like EVERYBODY else. Sheesh.

Ableton Forum regulars, why the heck do so many of you turn off your critical mind when insane Jihadist freaks start spouting, but if a Republican were to tell you that water boils at 100 degrees celcius at normal pressure at sea level, you'll call "bullshit"?!?!

Give me a break.

word.

rob.

robtronik wrote:

M. Bréqs wrote:To bring this back to the subject of Ahmadinejad's letter;

What a f*cking joke. This is a letter, purportedly one of "peace" from a guy who wants to eradicate an entire nation, full of civilians.

Regardless of what you think of the current US administration or the world situation, nothing justifies this hypocritical psycho's self indulgent diatribe.

It's conciliatory, but it's also bullshit. Ahmadinejad has an agenda for his propaganda, just like EVERYBODY else. Sheesh.

Ableton Forum regulars, why the heck do so many of you turn off your critical mind when insane Jihadist freaks start spouting, but if a Republican were to tell you that water boils at 100 degrees celcius at normal pressure at sea level, you'll call "bullshit"?!?!

Give me a break.

word.

rob.

What I don't get about your statement is it disregards that he actually tried to communicate in the first place..... GWB and crew simply aren't interested in talking to LEADERS of nations they oppose, that's total BS IMO.
Whatever you can say about the man, he tries as best as he can ( albeit he is a religious nut, take that into consideration ), to understand the intentions of GWB, and to ask him not to commit acts of war in the name of god. To me, that's pretty decent.
Sure, he's a fundamentalist, but GWB isn't that far removed from that particular brand of religious fervor either. Seriously, do you really think it's up to GWB to decide what is best for sovereign nations? Do you seriously think invading Iran will stabilize the middle east and protect Israel?

In my opinion, all countries ruled by governments that have total allegiance to a single religion, and ethnic people are a problem. Israel is a problem IMO in the same way Iran is a problem, it's a country made up of a single ethnic group, and religious teaching, no balances.....

I'm pretty surprised people are angry about this? What did you expect from this guy?
"gee Mr. Bush, we've decided that we shouldn't further develope nuclear, and any other possibly dangerous technological science. It will be in your hands, we see how well you handled Iraq, and we know if we step out of line, we will be treated as fairly and decently. We are hoping Haliberton will come in and make us a nice solar panel system for power, and we will start selling you oil at a markedly reduced price.
We love the USA, the CIA were so cool when they came in and started a military coup that reinstated the Sha of Iran, we know they only had our best intentions in mind, and probably just didn't notice that he tortured and killed us in droves...... sorry about being all huffy about that and holding the US embassy hostage in retaliation. We now know that the US just wanted a firm grasp on our oil, and were afraid that the USSR was going to get it all, so we forgive you.
We offer our government over to you, it seems that only you can fix it, the US did such a great job with the Sha, well, OK, not so good, but WTF? you get another chance! We'll do whatever you say, because we know you just want us to be free!"

Would that work for you?

Sorry for the obvious sarcasm, but seriously, what do you want from the guy? I'm of the opinion that any attempt to rectify the situation between Iran and the USA is a good thing, whether it comes from GWB, Jimmy Carter, or Ahmadinejad.

Do I trust any of the three above? not for a moment, but two of them are seriously dangerous people! and the peanut farmer isn't in that pairing.

Machinesworking wrote: What I don't get about your statement is it disregards that he actually tried to communicate in the first place..... GWB and crew simply aren't interested in talking to LEADERS of nations they oppose, that's total BS IMO.

Ummm... If you think that Ahmadinejad's intended audience was GW Bush, I suggest you do some reading about PR or Information Operations / Psyops. There's common doctrine on the difference between the apparent target audience (in this case bush) and the actual target audience.

The actual intended audience for this letter was the Western Media, and the Left wing elements of the European / American public. In no way does Ahmadinejad credibly believe that GW Bush will sit down and say "Gosh gee Mahmoud. you're right - I've been a total shit! Wow, I'm sure glad SOMEBODY had the balls to let me know they weren't satisfied with my performance... If only somebody said something sooner!"

No, it's most likely just a tool to garner sympathy for the Iranian administration by calling into (possibly legitimate) question US policy. That said, don't think for a minute that Mr. Ahmadinejad is actually trying to communicate with the President of the US openly. I would argue that that's naive.

Machinesworking wrote:
Sorry for the obvious sarcasm, but seriously, what do you want from the guy? I'm of the opinion that any attempt to rectify the situation between Iran and the USA is a good thing, whether it comes from GWB, Jimmy Carter, or Ahmadinejad.

You make a good point about "what do I expect from Ahmadinejad..." But I disagree with you that it's an attempt to rectify jack shit. It's a stalling tactic and a PR stunt.

But, I could be wrong and Ahmadinejad could be sincere. Then again, Santa Claus could exist too, and maybe he could mediate the negotiations.

M. Bréqs wrote:But, I could be wrong and Ahmadinejad could be sincere. Then again, Santa Claus could exist too, and maybe he could mediate the negotiations.

I think it's sincere in the sense that neither does he want a war with the US, nor does he want to abandon his nuclear program, and he knows that the US has the upper hand in an armed conflict, period. Nobody can match our air force, and in a desert environment, they are simple, easy targets.
You act like Iran, in all it's blustery egotism is any threat at all to the US. It simply isn't, and we have a proven history of aggression against that particular country, yet you throw out jingoistic BS about psy ops etc. EVERYTHING these people do is done for the winning of hearts and minds, period. All I'm asking is why is it so impossible for you to look outside of your continual painting of any supposed threat to western military dominance? Why do you consistently tout a hard line against anything that isn't in total support of western power?
There are people I've wronged in my life, and I've been man enough to make amends. Iran has been shit on historically by the USA, there is no doubt about that, if you bother to read up on it, if you have any sympathy towards human rights, you will agree. You cannot deny the CIA coup, or the funding of a particular tyrant in Iraq's eight year war against them by a certain country....
Admitting that isn't being a pussy liberal or any other such nonsense, it's being man enough to admit when a mistake has been made by your own country.

That Iran swung hard right into fundamentalism is no mystery given the circumstances, and any action taken by the United States is just going to make the hatred towards us swell to even higher levels... it will solve nothing.

I just don't understand you? how can you possibly think that taking a hard line against a fundamentalist in this particular case is going to do any good? Jesus man, we fucked up and scared the shit out of the iranian people when they had a moderate in office, and in fear, they voted in this loser, and now we talk about attacking them in public.... after we have attacked them in the past, military coups, and financial backing to their enemies, yet a few typically harsh words about Israel is enough to forget who the real aggressor is?

I mean WTF? who the fuck are we to say who should or shouldn't have nukes based on the likelihood of using them? Considering we are the only country that has used nuclear weapons in warfare, what country would you say is capable of using their supply? Do you ever consider what other countries must think of that? The shear hypocrisy of that?
We truly have to think some day about returning to thinking in terms of old america, when we cared about our own back yard, and stayed out of other people's business a little.

Lets make it simple for you. Without the west the world will be a very nasty place in which even you socialists would dread living. If you cannot graps this simple concept and you truly think it is a good idea for Iran to have nukes, well then...me thinks you are hopeless. Stick to making music and leave world affairs to the grown ups.

Heironymous wrote:Lets make it simple for you. Without the west the world will be a very nasty place in which even you socialists would dread living. If you cannot graps this simple concept and you truly think it is a good idea for Iran to have nukes, well then...me thinks you are hopeless. Stick to making music and leave world affairs to the grown ups.

????

what a bizarely "simple" (in the sense of "simpleton") and insular, not to mention apallingly arrogant comment to make. The world would probably be a much nicer place without the "west", considering it has been predominately the west that has stirred everything in the modern world up.

How the fuck do you know anyway? how many countries outside the "west" have you actually lived in, made friends in, married in and had children in and experienced all the experiences of life in??

Sure all those ragheads look evil on the telly when they put the sinister music behind them, and make them look like "freedom hatin evil doers", choose the nastiest looking frown for the mugshot, quote them saying something inflammatory but then so would you if the TV producers and spin doctors wanted.
Actually, I think you'll find alot of these "non western" cultures actually want the same thing all humans want - a nice life. The only difference is they're not doing it by greed which the west is.

Jesus, thats one of the most idiotic things I've heard - yep fuck em all! lets nuke em and start fresh and this time keep out any non westerners, because it's all those nasty foreign people who fuck it up for all of us!

you cant even spell grasp.

M. Bréqs wrote:

Machinesworking wrote: What I don't get about your statement is it disregards that he actually tried to communicate in the first place..... GWB and crew simply aren't interested in talking to LEADERS of nations they oppose, that's total BS IMO.

Ummm... If you think that Ahmadinejad's intended audience was GW Bush, I suggest you do some reading about PR or Information Operations / Psyops. There's common doctrine on the difference between the apparent target audience (in this case bush) and the actual target audience.

The actual intended audience for this letter was the Western Media, and the Left wing elements of the European / American public. In no way does Ahmadinejad credibly believe that GW Bush will sit down and say "Gosh gee Mahmoud. you're right - I've been a total shit! Wow, I'm sure glad SOMEBODY had the balls to let me know they weren't satisfied with my performance... If only somebody said something sooner!"

No, it's most likely just a tool to garner sympathy for the Iranian administration by calling into (possibly legitimate) question US policy. That said, don't think for a minute that Mr. Ahmadinejad is actually trying to communicate with the President of the US openly. I would argue that that's naive.

Machinesworking wrote:
Sorry for the obvious sarcasm, but seriously, what do you want from the guy? I'm of the opinion that any attempt to rectify the situation between Iran and the USA is a good thing, whether it comes from GWB, Jimmy Carter, or Ahmadinejad.

You make a good point about "what do I expect from Ahmadinejad..." But I disagree with you that it's an attempt to rectify jack shit. It's a stalling tactic and a PR stunt.

But, I could be wrong and Ahmadinejad could be sincere. Then again, Santa Claus could exist too, and maybe he could mediate the negotiations.

Wow. I just read this thread from beginning through to the end. I appreciate your input and your voice of reason. Thank you for

A: Establishing credibility by reinforcing your opinions with facts and observations drawn from a clearly dedicated passion for history/

and then...

B: Putting out the effort to clarify what in fact the intentions of this letter are, on top of challenging all sides in this argument, while simultaneously trying to maintain a universally reasonable debate.

Thanks.

LOFA wrote: Wow. I just read this thread from beginning through to the end. I appreciate your input and your voice of reason. Thank you for

A: Establishing credibility by reinforcing your opinions with facts and observations drawn from a clearly dedicated passion for history/

and then...

B: Putting out the effort to clarify what in fact the intentions of this letter are, on top of challenging all sides in this argument, while simultaneously trying to maintain a universally reasonable debate.

Thanks.

You're welcome, and thanks for your comment... I apprecaited it a lot!

I enjoy debate, but I get really tired sometimes of bothering to debate on the internet. It takes soooo much effort to stay reasonable when people are granted the anonymity of aliases when posting. I often bet a lot of these folks who post personal attacks or merely shout down their opposition would not send a letter to the editor of their local paper with their real name signed on it.

Yeah, I have my opinions, and they're not always in line with what the majority of the world (or even my community) believes, but if I just rant, nobody will ever agree with me. So, it's not so much that I am trying to be a nice guy, I'm just trying to convince people of my way of thinking; and you can't do that with name-calling.

erm...sarcasm?

No. No sarcasm at all. I opted to take a Political Philosophy course this semester because I realized I was under-educated with regards to politics and philosophy. My school is currently ranked neck and neck for first palce in the US for Philosophy (PITT), and is well respected for it's Law School. This class, unfortunately, just ended. It was really challenging and informative. I know I can expect this quality of insight and wisdom from some of the people on this forum. It is still always a pleasant surprise when it happens.

forge wrote:erm...sarcasm?

Actually forge, I generally (though not always) find your posts interesting. You're not too difficult to read, and you seem to have a measure of respect for your opponents. That's not universal on this forum unfortunately.

Right, issues have nothing to do with it, it's all about whether or not a person retains a certain amount of civility and personal charm, that's the important part!

I remember Jerry Falwell debating Jessie Jackson on apartheid and South African sanctions. Falwell was definitely wrong, but his debate style was miles above Jackson's.
Anyway, of course I wouldn't bother debating somebody if they can't even hold their end of the conversation up....[cough]heironymous[cough]

M. Bréqs wrote:It takes soooo much effort to stay reasonable when people are granted the anonymity of aliases when posting. I often bet a lot of these folks who post personal attacks or merely shout down their opposition would not send a letter to the editor of their local paper with their real name signed on it.

Or would they act the same way if we were all, say, sitting in a local coffee shop talking politics.

Probably not.

I've found recently that I do not agree with your politics, but bravo for your composure and if I ever find myself in Montreal I'd still like to hook up. Maybe we can debate over a cup or two.

smutek wrote:
I've found recently that I do not agree with your politics, but bravo for your composure and if I ever find myself in Montreal I'd still like to hook up. Maybe we can debate over a cup or two.

Agreed.

Though I live in Ottawa now (that's why I changed my handle) we could still meet in either city; Montreal is like 90 minutes away, so I visit often just for kicks. I'll look ya up if I'm ever in Baltimore too.

If we go have coffee, I guess we can go for a cup of fair trade organic coffee from a small independant coffee shop I presume? My girlfriend tells me it supposedly tastes just as good as my commercially marketed highly processed genetically modified Choco-coffee produced in a corporate farm in a third world Extra-Territorial Economic Zone. It's the blood and sweat of the oppressed 11 year old bean pickers that just adds just a touch of that deliciously salty taste of injustice, but I'll try anything once.