ForumGarden

caesar777

SlipStream;715469 wrote: snap

That's what I said. You're going backwards!

PANS

caesar777

caesar777

<t>That is true Ted, wisdom can be taught in many ways. The story of the boy who cried wolf teaches us that it is foolish to lie and the story of king Midas teaches us that money is not everything, but I don't believe these stories to be true. The bible is full of similar stori...

caesar777

caesar777

The best way to read the bible is with a suspension of disbelief.

View it as you would any good fairy tale.

It's very entertaining, although frightening when you realise that some people actually believe it to be true.

caesar777

<t>Far Rider;690654 wrote: 1. Salvation occurs when:____________. 2. God is (as best you can define him/her/it in human terms) ____________. 3. I must avoid_____________ in order to be in right standing with God. 4. I must do ______________ in order to be...

caesar777

<t>We have no choice but to believe. We have no knowledge of anything other than that our minds exist, everything else could be just a figment of our imaginations. It's the old idea of a brain in a jar. To say that you "know" anything to be true is to "believe" that ...

caesar777

<t>jamiebocc;607756 wrote: He is willing to go but everyone around him will be in more danger. What made you think he wouldn't go. He has said if they don't send him he is going to quit. If he poses a danger to his comrades then he shouldn't go. If he shouldn't go then d...

caesar777

jamiebocc;605804 wrote: The problem is he will create more danger for the people around him.

Then why join up in the first place if he won't serve alongside his comrades (or subjects)?

caesar777

And so he should go. If the ordinary soldier goes then why should he be spared?

We should send Blair and Bush's children too, then they'd think twice about wether or not ANYBODY should be there.

caesar777

<t>He's been there ten years now, a milestone some think he has been waiting to reach. Personally, I think he'll stay until he overtakes Thatcher's eleven year record. Neither were in office for the good of the people, only their own well being and to be remembered by history. ...

caesar777

Of course you have my best wishes.

I will think of you and your father in law as I meditate on an end to suffering for all those in this world, the dying, the sick, the poor, the homeless and all others.

May the peace of Krishna be upon you all.

caesar777

TerahEl,

Please answer the question for us.

Everyone else,

Please stop insulting each other over use of capitals and other minor issues and hear what he/she has to say.

Thanks.

caesar777

K.Snyder;500471 wrote: Who's "us" exactly?...

I would have picked them up without thinking about...I don't know about anyone else.

People in general, whatever race or nationality they are.

caesar777

Some would call him a terrorist, others a freedom fighter.

It all depends on your point of view.

If his cause is succesful, history will remember him as a hero, if not he will be regarded as an evil criminal.

caesar777

RedGlitter;500465 wrote: I don't believe so, no.

As Ghandi said "An eye for an eye will make the world blind."

Two wrongs don't make a right.

caesar777

The part about the ship load of refugees is true, at least I've read about it. We tend to keep things that show us in a bad light quiet.

caesar777

<t>Yes we (our governments) knew what was happening. We (Britain) didn't go to war because of how he treated his population, but only because of his empire building. The USA only joined because of pearl harbour. Today similar things (but on a smaller scale) still go on and our governments...

caesar777

<t>RedGlitter;500461 wrote: What suffering? You think he cared while on earth what he did? Nah. Some of us believe his suffering has just begun. I"m not *happy* that he's dead. No rejoicing. I'm saddened that he could have done something for humanity and instead he...

caesar777

To kill people is wrong, that is why Saddam was killed. What hypocrasy!

Do as I say, not as I do.

Saddam should have spent the rest of his natural life incarcerated, a miserable existance. Now his suffereing is over.

caesar777

<t>Galbally;496681 wrote: OK, like accountable, I don't want you to think I am getting at you, I am sure you are a decent fella, but seriously. How are you going to "enforce" any sanctions or for that matter any system of law on anyone, if you are attempting to remove all ability for any...

caesar777

I remember in the '80s you could buy Hedgehog flavour crisps, but they were very similar to roast chicken.

caesar777

<r>Accountable;495807 wrote: Sleep deprivation is torture?!? Most college professors and teaching hospitals deserve prison then. <E>:D</E> Paper cuts are painful but no one would seriously call it torture. Do you see how difficult nailing down a definit...

caesar777

<t>Accountable;495811 wrote: So correct me if I'm wrong. You're willing to risk nuclear war - killing possibly millions - to save future generations from war. Is that about right? I am willing for sanctions to be applied against nations who refuse to disarm. This could le...

caesar777

<t>Accountable;495781 wrote: All right, so now we're inclluding pain, discomfort, and fear. That's a tremendously huge gray, or grey, area. Do you really think it's possible to clearly define where one crosses the line from interrogation to torture? It's hard. Fear for your life is ...

caesar777

<t>Accountable;495777 wrote: I don't think we're off-topic at all. If you try to force another government to disarm, you risk war - the very thing you're trying to avoid - aren't you? Yes. Most nations must first agree to disarm, then all should impose sanctions on nations who don't...

caesar777

<t>Accountable;495769 wrote: Only pain? Not simple discomfort? I ask because some believe sense deprivation to be torture. Water boarding, holding a person under water until just before drowning, isn't painful but it's scary as hell. Yes, I would include that as torture. Thank you f...

caesar777

<t>Accountable;495698 wrote: Through choice or force of law? Laws, brought in by govt. which is elected by the people. If any nation's people wished to leave a world nation then it would be free to do so. Aren't we getting off the topic here? Ban the bomb, save the planet...

caesar777

<t>Diuretic;495704 wrote: Too many absolutes, the world is full of non-absolutes. Context is everything. Torture isn't always wrong. Murder is a socio-legal concept and by definition is "wrong". There's a tautology in there and it would be better to talk of "killing humans."<b...

caesar777

<t>Diuretic;495570 wrote: A cogent observation. I dislike prefabricated thinking. "Torture is always wrong" is such a gross generalisation as to be rendered almost useless. But I say again, I don't think this thread is about "torture". Enigmatically yours D <br...

caesar777

<t>Accountable;495671 wrote: AHA!! :yh_idea I think you've hit Caesar's real agenda, Spot. He wants global government. Global government is not possible if countries have the means to resist. Outlawing nukes makes nations vulnerable to attack. Thus, they will unite in collective defense (but against...

caesar777

<t>Accountable;495249 wrote: More nukes, less chance. BTS, don't you have that Florida stat about looser gun control reducing crime? If there were no nukes there would be no chance. A few years ago I saw a story on the news of a brit who went to the...

caesar777

Torture is wrong and can NEVER be justified.

caesar777

<t>Even if the chart were accurate the murder rate is still much lower than that of the US. If homicides are rising in the UK imagine how much worse they'd be if guns were widely owned. My point still stands. More guns= more murders, more nukes = more chance of nuclear war.</t>

caesar777

<t>To torture is wrong. The sort of people we fight against condone torture, we don't. Besides which, torturing some body does not necessarily save lives, and may cost more as people who weren't fighting now do as they see us as evil torturers. Torture is wrong, full stop.</t>

caesar777

anastrophe;494018 wrote: that's certainly not a given.

I think it is. India and Pakistan are keen to keep their western allies, and I doubt that North Korea would take on the whole world, with or without nukes.

caesar777

<t>anastrophe;494000 wrote: i'm not sure why you persist with questions that aren't meaningful in reality. but i'll indulge, sure. if the US had never had nuclear weapons, I'd not want us to build them. fair enough? now, in the real world, we have nuclear weapons, as do a doze...

caesar777

Diuretic;493964 wrote: So is it permissible to do something which is not right to make sure something worse doesn't happen?

Not for me, others can make their own decisions.

caesar777

anastrophe;493932 wrote: i can see no rational argument that would suggest that it's good for non-nuclear countries to begin building nuclear weapons.

Then if USA had none you would not want to begin building them?

caesar777

<t>Diuretic;493946 wrote: But what's better? Not torturing someone and letting your troops die or torturing the person and ensuring your troops live? It's only torture after all, you're not going to kill the bloke. In a hypothetical situation where If I tortured some body then no bo...

caesar777

<t>anastrophe;493910 wrote: the weapons, ultimately, are not what matter. the intent of those who hold them is what matters. feel free to explain in detail how to disarm a person who is capable of choking someone to death. You are right, the intent is what ULTIMATELY mat...

caesar777

<t>Diuretic;493772 wrote: But you'll be okay with letting them die because you don't want to torture someone? You'd let someone else pay the ultimate price for your principles? Is it right and good to do that? How can I be sure that by torturing one man I save the lives of others?<b...

caesar777

Raven;493372 wrote: It's a mute point till people stop killing in the name of God.

Unfortunately they have, for as long as there have been religions.

Jesus must be turning in his grave...:rolleyes:

caesar777

<t>anastrophe;493348 wrote: i'll congratulate us plenty, thank you very much. We're getting rid of our nuclear weapons, while other countries build new ones, or try to build them. if you want to dismiss any positive accomplishments, feel free; i suppose i'll dismiss the UK's very small reductions in...

caesar777

<t>Diuretic;493701 wrote: You'd allow one group of people to die because you didn't want to hurt an individual? Try that one in the real world and see how it feels. Yes I would. I'm not the one killing them, I couldn't do that either. Thankfully I will never be in the position of Ji...

caesar777

<t>anastrophe;493146 wrote: at the end of the cold war, the US had in excess of 23,000 nuclear weapons stockpiled. today, the total stands at about 5,700 weapons, with about another 3,600 classified as spares (that is, not maintained in a state of readiness, and may eventually be destroyed). product...

caesar777

Raven;158944 wrote: Welcome to Europe.

Don't blame europe for problems caused by our own government. If we had the foresight of the french we wouldn't be in this position now.

caesar777

<t>K.Snyder;493126 wrote: Yes, if I'm not mistaken it also speaks of vengeance as well. I know one thing, if I get bombed by a nuclear warhead, I sure as hell am not going to offer up my children in response. Wasn't that the old testament? I thought what Jesus himself sai...

caesar777

<t>Sorry if this is an old topic, but I can't find any threads on here relating to the subject. Have any of you, or do any of you know someone who has had a near death experience? What do you remember of it, if anything. I'm just as interested if you nearly died and had no "vis...

caesar777

No-one should have nuclear weapons, but if one has then everyone will want.

Outlw them at the UN, then all nations use conventional arms on any nation that does not comply.

I'm being idealistic again, of course this would lead to nuclear war, not peace as intended.

Search found 150 matches