3 ms·

I don't know what to tell you. You're restating the paradox of tolerance. You should probably come to some philosophical resolution regarding that before you ke

by mhb 7mo ago

I don't know what to tell you. You're restating the paradox of tolerance. You should probably come to some philosophical resolution regarding that before you keep digging.

applfanboysbgon 7mo ago
What I have said has nothing to do with the paradox of tolerance. I am firmly on the side of not tolerating the intolerant, but stating that, "not tolerating" does not extend to "starting wars in an attempt at world conquest to rid the world of the intolerant".
- mhb 7mo ago
  If "not tolerating the intolerant" is not actionable, it is just mindless rhetoric.
  - applfanboysbgon 7mo ago
    It is actionable. That action is simply not "world conquest", jesus fucking christ. Is America itself a society in which the intolerant have no power? No, it is not. Maybe first it could think about clearing things up in its own borders before trying to use that excuse to invade the whole goddamn world. Indeed it is the intolerant who currently have power in the US. You seem to be projecting your own desire for invading Iran, which is completely incompatible with the people in power's actual reason for invading Iran. They are not invading Iran to make life better for Iranians. But you believe invading Iran to make life better for Iranians is justified, so you lend your support to the current administration, even though that is explicitly not what is going to happen as a result of your support. You are, in short, a useful idiot[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot
    - trimethylpurine 7mo ago
      Regardless of why we're there, did you want to keep Khameini in power while he coordinates terror? What is your solution for that?
- wholinator2 7mo ago
  [flagged]
  - applfanboysbgon 7mo ago
    > We tried the nuke deal and they lied and kept building This is a lie. A complete fabrication. Trump says this, completely baselessly, without a shred of evidence, as known liars are wont to do. They allowed inspectors in and not one of them ever suggested they were violating the terms of the deal. > How many have to die for us to decide to act. This is a murky question, but if anybody was going to intervene in a country's domestic affairs, it would need to be by broad international consensus to have any legitimacy. It absolutely cannot be a unilateral invasion where one country decides who is worthy of invading and who is not. Moreover, that is not why they were invaded. Whatever qualms you have with the Iranian regime, this war is not a war to instate democracy in Iran. We already saw with Venezuela literally just two months ago that Trump invaded and deposed the leader, only to keep the current regime in place with an agreement to serve as his country's economic vassal. Stop projecting your own justifications for why you would invade Iran if you were President of the United States, to justify the actions of the current one who is not invading for those reasons. The only thing you are doing by justifying his invasion for unrelated reasons is giving your support to the death of more innocent Iranians that you ostensibly want to help.
    - trimethylpurine 7mo ago
      Do you support Khameini's call and platform to fund the export of Islamic Revolution? Do you believe that other countries should be allowed to defend themselves from the import of Khameini's Islamic Revolution? Or did you not know that this was his openly stated purpose? How many people have to die before you start blaming the international community for inaction or worse, you start to feel that the international community is complicit because they prevent one country from acting while another funds terror attacks with impunity?
      - applfanboysbgon 7mo ago
        I don't know why you decided to hop to multiple unrelated threads of conversation with other people while ignoring my reply to you on this subject specifically earlier, but to restate: wholesale violence does not solve terrorism. You already fucking tried this in Afghanistan, and failed, badly. The solution to terrorism is to stop giving people reasons to be terrorists, which means you must stop killing their people and trying to conquer their land/resources, as the US has been engaged in constantly for the entire post-world-war period. A commitment to peace won't make all of the terrorists disappear overnight, so you will have to deal with a long tail of violence against you for years to come, which is known as "consequences for your actions". You have a right to take measures to defend yourself against individual terrorists, but if you ever want actual peace, those measures can't include actions that will create new generations of terrorists, like invading a fucking country, assassinating its leader, bombing schools, sinking ships on diplomatic missions, and destroying infrastructure. Every single one of these actions will create new terrorists who hate your country so much they will lay down their lives to hurt it. Actually, not only did you ignore my reply, you're ignoring the post you're replying to as well. THIS WAR IS NOT EVEN A REGIME CHANGE WAR. STOP PROJECTING YOUR OWN MOTIVATIONS ONTO THE US GOVERNMENT.

by mhb 7mo ago

I don't know what to tell you. You're restating the paradox of tolerance. You should probably come to some philosophical resolution regarding that before you keep digging.

applfanboysbgon 7mo ago

What I have said has nothing to do with the paradox of tolerance. I am firmly on the side of not tolerating the intolerant, but stating that, "not tolerating" does not extend to "starting wars in an attempt at world conquest to rid the world of the intolerant".

mhb 7mo ago
If "not tolerating the intolerant" is not actionable, it is just mindless rhetoric.
- applfanboysbgon 7mo ago
  It is actionable. That action is simply not "world conquest", jesus fucking christ. Is America itself a society in which the intolerant have no power? No, it is not. Maybe first it could think about clearing things up in its own borders before trying to use that excuse to invade the whole goddamn world. Indeed it is the intolerant who currently have power in the US. You seem to be projecting your own desire for invading Iran, which is completely incompatible with the people in power's actual reason for invading Iran. They are not invading Iran to make life better for Iranians. But you believe invading Iran to make life better for Iranians is justified, so you lend your support to the current administration, even though that is explicitly not what is going to happen as a result of your support. You are, in short, a useful idiot[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot
  - trimethylpurine 7mo ago
    Regardless of why we're there, did you want to keep Khameini in power while he coordinates terror? What is your solution for that?
wholinator2 7mo ago
[flagged]
- applfanboysbgon 7mo ago
  > We tried the nuke deal and they lied and kept building This is a lie. A complete fabrication. Trump says this, completely baselessly, without a shred of evidence, as known liars are wont to do. They allowed inspectors in and not one of them ever suggested they were violating the terms of the deal. > How many have to die for us to decide to act. This is a murky question, but if anybody was going to intervene in a country's domestic affairs, it would need to be by broad international consensus to have any legitimacy. It absolutely cannot be a unilateral invasion where one country decides who is worthy of invading and who is not. Moreover, that is not why they were invaded. Whatever qualms you have with the Iranian regime, this war is not a war to instate democracy in Iran. We already saw with Venezuela literally just two months ago that Trump invaded and deposed the leader, only to keep the current regime in place with an agreement to serve as his country's economic vassal. Stop projecting your own justifications for why you would invade Iran if you were President of the United States, to justify the actions of the current one who is not invading for those reasons. The only thing you are doing by justifying his invasion for unrelated reasons is giving your support to the death of more innocent Iranians that you ostensibly want to help.
  - trimethylpurine 7mo ago
    Do you support Khameini's call and platform to fund the export of Islamic Revolution? Do you believe that other countries should be allowed to defend themselves from the import of Khameini's Islamic Revolution? Or did you not know that this was his openly stated purpose? How many people have to die before you start blaming the international community for inaction or worse, you start to feel that the international community is complicit because they prevent one country from acting while another funds terror attacks with impunity?
    - applfanboysbgon 7mo ago
      I don't know why you decided to hop to multiple unrelated threads of conversation with other people while ignoring my reply to you on this subject specifically earlier, but to restate: wholesale violence does not solve terrorism. You already fucking tried this in Afghanistan, and failed, badly. The solution to terrorism is to stop giving people reasons to be terrorists, which means you must stop killing their people and trying to conquer their land/resources, as the US has been engaged in constantly for the entire post-world-war period. A commitment to peace won't make all of the terrorists disappear overnight, so you will have to deal with a long tail of violence against you for years to come, which is known as "consequences for your actions". You have a right to take measures to defend yourself against individual terrorists, but if you ever want actual peace, those measures can't include actions that will create new generations of terrorists, like invading a fucking country, assassinating its leader, bombing schools, sinking ships on diplomatic missions, and destroying infrastructure. Every single one of these actions will create new terrorists who hate your country so much they will lay down their lives to hurt it. Actually, not only did you ignore my reply, you're ignoring the post you're replying to as well. THIS WAR IS NOT EVEN A REGIME CHANGE WAR. STOP PROJECTING YOUR OWN MOTIVATIONS ONTO THE US GOVERNMENT.