Biden's Victory Speech

[onlinebiker]

A good guy?

Bwaaaahahaha.

He was a paranoid troll with the morals of a rabid racoon....

And quit deflecting. Nobody said ending the war was the wrong thing to do.


The problem is the doublespeak Biden spewed to try to make a total failure look like a victory going off on schedule....

[Fake Messiah]

The problem is the doublespeak Biden spewed to try to make a total failure look like a victory going off on schedule....

What did you expect as a victory?

If you compare it to the WW2 victory in Europe, after the war there was also a period of denazifying Europeans with anti-nazi film reels and also the introduction of American culture, like movies with Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers, but in Afghanistan, deislamization was not on the menu.

Soldiers, or whoever was in charge, had to show respect towards the backward ideology that they were fighting against. So they weren't fighting against the ideology but just trying to catch few bad guys which turned into a giant expensive mess that is now over, and Afghanistani people went back to their centuries of patriarchal oppression.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Best take on the speech and an epic middle finger to all of Biden critics

[WinterHold]

Hitler ignored the historic evidence that shows that people who commit "mass murders and crimes" always lose and get defeated even if it's on the long run; being despised by the oppressed people's sympathetics & become despised and feared even by your closest people are two direct indications that Hitler's brain couldn't get that his actions will bring his doom.

I bet one of the causes for the defeat of his forces were his lieutenants becoming sick of him.

That wasn’t what I asked you, you question-dodging troglodyte. I’ll try again, and we’ll take it in small steps, so we don’t overtax your few working brain cells.

1. You claimed that that which is pragmatic is decent and wise.

2. Hitler’s goal was to destroy ‘European Jewry’.

3. To accomplish #2, the Nazi regime instituted a pragmatic programme of mass murder.

4. Do you think this genocide was decent and wise?

Boru

You're the one calling "Hitler" pragmatic, and treating the ethnic cleansing of Jews and gypsies as a "pragmatic deed", and I quote here where you did that:

https://atheistforums.org/thread-63256-p...pid2059043

BrianSoddingBoru4 said:

As an extreme example, the Nazi death camps of WWII were a pragmatic application of Hitler’s belief that Europe should be free of Jews, homosexuals, dissidents, Gypsies and others, that their possessions (property, money, teeth, skin, hair, bones) should be taken from them and used to help support the Nazi war effort.

You're the one calling "mass murder a "pragmatic solution" !

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

That wasn’t what I asked you, you question-dodging troglodyte. I’ll try again, and we’ll take it in small steps, so we don’t overtax your few working brain cells.

1. You claimed that that which is pragmatic is decent and wise.

2. Hitler’s goal was to destroy ‘European Jewry’.

3. To accomplish #2, the Nazi regime instituted a pragmatic programme of mass murder.

4. Do you think this genocide was decent and wise?

Boru

You're the one calling "Hitler" pragmatic, and treating the ethnic cleansing of Jews and gypsies as a "pragmatic deed", and I quote here where you did that:

https://atheistforums.org/thread-63256-p...pid2059043

BrianSoddingBoru4 said:

As an extreme example, the Nazi death camps of WWII were a pragmatic application of Hitler’s belief that Europe should be free of Jews, homosexuals, dissidents, Gypsies and others, that their possessions (property, money, teeth, skin, hair, bones) should be taken from them and used to help support the Nazi war effort.

You're the one calling "mass murder a "pragmatic solution" !

I know what I said. Under the definition you provided, yes, it was pragmatic. What I want to know is if you think it was 'decent and wise'.

Try to think of it like this: Per your definition, pragmatism may be thought of as the plan most likely to lead to the achievement of a particular goal. I'm trying to get you to understand that if the goal is an horrific one, pragmatism cannot be either decent or wise.

Kindly stop dodging the question.

Boru

[arewethereyet]

You're the one calling "Hitler" pragmatic, and treating the ethnic cleansing of Jews and gypsies as a "pragmatic deed", and I quote here where you did that:

https://atheistforums.org/thread-63256-p...pid2059043


You're the one calling "mass murder a "pragmatic solution" !

I know what I said. Under the definition you provided, yes, it was pragmatic. What I want to know is if you think it was 'decent and wise'.

Try to think of it like this: Per your definition, pragmatism may be thought of as the plan most likely to lead to the achievement of a particular goal. I'm trying to get you to understand that if the goal is an horrific one, pragmatism cannot be either decent or wise.

Kindly stop dodging the question.

Boru

I think he's being an ostrich...

[HappySkeptic]

I know what I said. Under the definition you provided, yes, it was pragmatic. What I want to know is if you think it was 'decent and wise'.

Try to think of it like this: Per your definition, pragmatism may be thought of as the plan most likely to lead to the achievement of a particular goal. I'm trying to get you to understand that if the goal is an horrific one, pragmatism cannot be either decent or wise.

Yeah, I thought this is what pragmatic meant too -- and pragmatism in pursuit of an evil goal is still evil.

However, no dictionary agrees with me.  Pragmatism is supposed to be reasonable, logical and pertain to the practical and not the ideological or theoretical.  That means it cannot be in pursuit of some ideological ideal.

But, if pragmatism is supposed to be reasonable, how do you determine what is "reasonable" without an underlying set of principles or values?


I think dictionaries are extremely off-base here.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I know what I said. Under the definition you provided, yes, it was pragmatic. What I want to know is if you think it was 'decent and wise'.

Try to think of it like this: Per your definition, pragmatism may be thought of as the plan most likely to lead to the achievement of a particular goal. I'm trying to get you to understand that if the goal is an horrific one, pragmatism cannot be either decent or wise.

Yeah, I thought this is what pragmatic meant too -- and pragmatism in pursuit of an evil goal is still evil.

However, no dictionary agrees with me.  Pragmatism is supposed to be reasonable, logical and pertain to the practical and not the ideological or theoretical.  That means it cannot be in pursuit of some ideological ideal.

But, if pragmatism is supposed to be reasonable, how do you determine what is "reasonable" without an underlying set of principles or values?


I think dictionaries are extremely off-base here.

The most practical way for Hitler to rid Europe of undesirables was to kill them on the spot. Given the choice between that or paying to ship them out, Hitler chose the (to him) reasonable and pragmatic course.

To be clear - although this is something I shouldn’t  need to emphasize - this is NOT a defense of the Final Solution. It is, as I said earlier, an extreme example meant to show that a pragmatic course of action is not necessarily ‘decent and wise’.

To return to our muttons, I pointed out that the Taliban assisted in the evacuation in the hope of attracting foreign investment, which would allow them to fund future terrorist operations. Winter, without referring or objecting to the ‘terrorism’ bit, said that this course of action was decent and wise.

Boru

[arewethereyet]

[The Architect Of Fate]

You're the one calling "mass murder a "pragmatic solution" !

No, he's not he's pointing out Hitler saw the Jews as a problem and saw the pragmatic solution was to wipe them out. Of course, this was all a lie and immoral but you can't argue it wasn't a pragmatic solution. The same goes for the Taliban those degenerates will side with us not because they have a sense of honor or morality but because it will line their pockets. They are common street thugs masquerading as a legitimate government. Ironically enough just like the Nazis.