America should die

Post Reply New Topic

Ok, one poster, Hyperlexian, actually pointed out this idea:

"show me how the united states (and/or canada) has not been responsible for killing hundreds or thousands of innocent people all around the world in the name of war or other military actions. perhaps we ALL deserve to die for that, as much as ALL muslims are guilty because of 9/11?"

Now, this is an interesting idea, because part of the claim that Muslims should be eliminated for 9/11 often tends to be behavioral. That is that Islam is an inherently dangerous religion and that getting rid of it will make the world a better place. However, the US has had a very destructive foreign policy as well, and in the future may very well continue this destructive foreign policy. Is there a good utilitarian case for killing off large numbers of Americans, possibly even all Americans? (Note: if you only kill off most, the remaining number might seek revenge, or suffer extreme societal collapse causing major disintegration of important social norms) Even further, is American foreign policy an expression of the belligerence of the American people, elements of the ideology of America, or of the political framework that America exists in, such as its military power and large economy?

If you had the power to kill as many Americans as you want without their ability to seek revenge against you, then which Americans would you kill? How many Americans would you kill? What rationale would you use for killing the Americans that you did kill? How about if you were the leader of an anti-American private organization located outside of the US, rather than some seeming form of deity?

Ok, firstly you do realize that you're drawing dangerously close to being Echleon-tagged* for your comments? The FBI takes threats to American national security VERY seriously. I know that this is a purely theoretical conversation, but others might see it as a threat or a prelude to a threat. Just be careful what you say.

That said, I don't think any Americans need to die, but that we seriously need a regime change. The bipartisan BS in our government needs to stop. I don't think we need another system of government, we just need to cleanse our current system by forcing everyone out of office that is currently in office, and replacing them with people who actually CARE about this country and aren't doing it for the kickbacks by the corporations. Of course, it would only be right if we avoided spilling blood as much as possible. No one needs to die specifically, but there does need to be a major attitude change in the American populace.

*An Echleon tag is placed on certain names or keywords, and pulls up a red flag whenever it appears when the FBI is monitoring communications, such as telephone, internet, etc. If a certain number of tagged keywords comes up, the FBI will look into identifying the poster. For example, the name "Osama bin Laden" is most likely Echleon-tagged.

Honestly, my attitude is sort of "f**k 'em". I am not a threat to American interests. Even further, the FBI cannot practically search do much about any nut who says anything absurd(of which there are a VERY LARGE quantity of people who say or do something absurd). If there actually are trackers, they probably follow my activity everywhere anyway.

There are some who believe that 911 was "karma", a 'consequence' of the US actions and foreign policy.


This is a US and likely a conservative perspective about Islam as a whole, I would have to point out that the issue with Islam is that, in the middle east, it doesn't seem that it has evolved or shaped in accord to western philosophies and the enlightment, unlike Christianity, which this is why it is perceived to be like that, I mean, the Bible seem to advocate for violent acts, as the claim as the Koran does, but western christianity has had evolved within western philosophy, and so condemns such acts.

One issue with the US is that, practically, it can get away with anything, without an international action against it. How are the odds that if america does something, it can be succesfully punished under international law?



Yeah, that is why I rather not to go along with the hypothetical scenario a bit further. How the moderation team would see this, I wonder (a bit paranoid perhaps)

It is not hate speech.

Nobody really needs to go further anyway. I think some people might say "I hate republicans". Others might say "the rich must die". I'll probably really side with the following approach:
1) Nobody should die at all, as deaths are very socially disruptive.
2) The US's belligerence is partially a culture issue as the US is more black and white than other nations. This will make excessive realism or even neoconservative idealism rather tempting in US politics.
3) The US is partially dealing with a problem with government. Although US authorities may think that their protection efforts are justified, there is a real reason to feel threatened by the military complex of the US, given actions such as the Patriot act, and also given the bloated defense budget which is larger than our nearest competitors combined.
4) The US was partially thrust into its position of leadership given its economic strength and military power. This would tend to push it towards having that Cold War with the USSR and other things.
5) Even if the US government is not the best force for promoting the welfare of the world, I think American culture is a boon, and has a lot of richness that I would hate to ever see destroyed. This includes our strong individualism, our strong view of liberty, and our fierce anti-authority and deeply egalitarian attitudes.(the latter not referring to richness so much as the fact that America doesn't self-identify as much by class as other nations might) There is no doubt that American intellectuals are some of the finest intellectuals in the world.

Forgive my coarseness. I suppose what I wanted to say was, innocent people should not be killed, no matter how tyrannical their government may be. But I suppose that's the hard thing about war and conflict. People who live under bad rulers pay the price with their lives, even though in essence they having to do with decisions those in power make.

Last edited by i_wanna_blue on 24 Sep 2010, 5:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.

well, I'm not saying it is hate speech, but rather related to Roxas_XIII's post, wether it can be considered something dangerous along the lines of the us patriot act or the like. Yeah, probably this just being paranoid.

About destroying America, well if there is a way to destroy the right-wing mindset, such as all realising it is crap But, how can we force people to not be idiots without some casualties?

The US has done some terrible things, but if they weren't the leader of the world, it would be some other country taking the position as the supreme power, drawing the world's damning and absorbing all the bad karma til it would be possible for other countries to absorb only good karma.


The US's foreign policy is that of a premiere power.

He asked how many and who you would kill so arguing that the innocent shouldn't die is largely irrelevant unless your comparing them to who you want to kill or unless you believe that every American is innocent. (and if you just don't believe in killing people this conversation probably isn't for you unless your willing to ignore that for a bit.)

I just don't find this funny or clever.

But hey, I'm from no sense of humour police state land.

If you are bored with the Islamists I hear the Irish are on the move again.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11408758

What about the Basques
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7019931232

Do you really think that they wouldn't Echelon-tag 'Echelon-tagging'? Or 'FBI'? You already mentioned that 'Osama bin Laden' is likely tagged, and in saying so a 'red flag' should have been raised.

I wouldn't worry about tagging. I'm sure this place is most likely already tagged considering the extreme views that tend to get expressed here in general and the type of discourse that goes on.

And given AG's history, I'm sure it probably generated a blip that was as quickly dismissed as it was found.

After reading the OP, I can only say, "Awesomelyglorious" that, for your sake, I hope your nick refers to quality of your penis, because you got nothing else going for you.

smite the heretic?

Yeah, but all that the tags to is to alert officials when that particular word is mentioned in electronic communication. Whether or not they choose to investigate it is decided on a case by case basis.

Oh, and concerning First Amendment rights, since I'm sure the issue will come up: the OP's would be considered outside the scope of the First Amendment, because it is adovcating overthrow of the government by violent means. Mine would be touching the line, as I did mention overthrowing the government, but also advocated for as little violence as possible. Besides, even with the First Amendment, America's black-ops tactics towards people suspected of threatening national security would still be a problem.

The plans would be fowarded to the leaders and miliary for clearance and cooperation, and then my organisation could proceed to neutralize key media business members, including but not limited to Stefani Germanotta, The entire Bungie software team, Stephenie Meyer and Justin Beiber.

Germanotta would be considered a hard target, and saturation bombing would be required from the air force to ensure victory.