69 million page views

maths is dispassionate

Reader comment on item: Uncovering Early Islam
in response to reader comment: What to do? Fight Islamophobia as your idols do!

Submitted by the Grand Infidel of Kaffiristan (Australia), Jun 24, 2012 at 00:45


"GIK > But whether it' right or wrong - Mann's insight makes perfect sense (as does yours) . If you want outcome A - use methods B and C. <

Ianus: "...Have you ever thought about such questions before praising the American wisdom of choosing the right method to achieve this nasty outcome ?"

Actually my point was - NOT whether it was right or wrong - or any shade in between - just that it made sense.

GIK: >Do we want superpowers acting irrationally?<

"There is rationality of a thug and rationality of a non-thug.Which rationality would you like to be confronted with ?"

At the risk of stating the obvious - to the thug, his thinking makes perfect sense otherwise he would not act in the way he does.

GIK - >"....But is it only the USA with such grand designs? Who wrote 'the Art of War'? Don't other countries vying for 'superpowerdom' also have professional strategists? (OK, it seems the EU doesn't so leave them out)<

"And whose country's military budget accounts for 45.7 % of total military spending by the world's 171 governments and territories?What professional startegists can do with such a monstrous war machine according to you?"

It's not 'whose is the biggest?' - my point was that other countries also vying for economic and political dominance have strategists with goals as bad or worse than any the USA might have. It is easier for the USA to spend a larger absolute amount on defence than any other country - simply because it has the world's largest economy. What is possibly more relevant is the aims of those countries who spend the highest percentage of GDP on defence. And especially if that rate has increased over the last decades. America's per capita spending is not the highest in the world - though as far as we know twice as high as Russia or China's . Having said that - defence expenditure is not necessarily always a bad thing as there are many spinoffs in terms of technology flow downs and inputs to the domestic economies. Plus the obvious one - defence!

GIK > Well - treating all phenomena and values dispassionately and simply as inputs in an equation - he could make those definitions<

"....Your comment reminds me of Rudolf Hoess - the commandant of Auschwitz who declared something to the same effect during his trial."

Well, being brutally honest - and taking all humanity and value judgements away - he was correct.
Stating the obvious does not make me Rudolph Hesse.

">If the outcome is the diabolical one described above, then definitely there is no better method to the best of my knowledge."

".....There are 7 bln people in this world. Haven't you heard complaints about that from certain powerful circles?The world population must be reduced by a few billion or else ... How?"

Volunteers first, hopefully. And then certain followers of a certain religion who boast about loving death more than life.

>These gentlemen intend to exterminate a few billion "useless" souls which will make Hitler, Stalin and Mao put together look like green horn amateurs by comparison.

Unfortunately you may be correct in that supposition. Though you would think that these gentlemen would like 7 billion slaves rather than 4 billion corpses.

>Well, you can fight Islamophobia e.g. as people whose credibility and reliability you have tried to restore in my eyes.

??? I'd rather see the spread of Islamonausea. Islamists themselves help a lot in this regard.

"One of these "despicable" Islamophobes persecuted recently turns out to be great American patriot and thinker Army Lt. Col. Matthew A. Dooley. ...
Clear, bright and courageous ideas of a man who proved his patriotism in action and knew what he was talking about spurred fat spineless generals with long standing Moslem connections...........

I've read of this case - though not much more than an article. It is truly despicable - but probably at the heart of this are connections between ass kissing politicians and Saudi petro dollars. There are some people on the scene who won't be shackled so easily - Major Alan West has managed to bypass the censors and be in a position to say what he thinks - probably because he is no longer in the mlitary

"In short, if you want to do something to convince me that you acknowledge Aristotle's principle of non-contradiction, then I am afraid that you have no other option but either to reject the case of Lt. Col.M. Dooley and forget it "

I can't 'reject' it - because it has occurred. I can disapprove of it and make facts known.

".....or reject the belief in your US idols "

Tsk, tsk....there you go with your straw man tactic again. Building up a situation which does not exist - then attacking it.

"who in my eyes are no more than mean and disgusting mediocrities,spineless bastards and common traitors working for the cause of Islam . i.e. for our destruction !"

When in doubt - follow the money. That's why most of those fat spineless bastards do what they do. And perhaps a few of them do so out of pure malice.


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2023 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)