- Joined
- Jul 28, 2008
- Messages
- 45,596
- Reaction score
- 22,536
- Location
- Everywhere and nowhere
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
So, as I said -- they arent fighting for freedom, they are fighting for power.
Freedom is power.
So, as I said -- they arent fighting for freedom, they are fighting for power.
"Insurgent" and "terrorist" and "murderer" do not have a noble ring to them, and so, to paint a better picture of people you like, you choose the term "freedom fighter".
Not in this context.Freedom is power.
Another useless drive-by posting by the master of same.This proves 'One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter'? You use terms that you don't consider to be noble to describe those you dislike and who's ideology you oppose while describing those you do support and who's ideology you believe in as something noble? Thanks for proving it Goobie.
Not in this context.
Fighting for the power to oppress and murder people is not fighting for the freedom of those people.
Another useless drive-by posting by the master of same.
:yawn:
Not in this context.
Fighting for the power to oppress and murder people is not fighting for the freedom of those people.
As noted before, if they are fighting for the power to oppress and murder, their present situation isnt relevant to them not fighting for freedom.Well, you never answered my contextual question. Are they being opressed by the current regime? Yes or no?
If you want to make that argument, go ahead; doing so doesnt invalidate the poistion that to be an actual freedom fighter, you have to be fighting for actual freedom.Then by that definition, the founding fathers were not freedom fighters. Do you agree?
If you only paid attention, you'd see how patently silly your posts here really are.Awww I'm sorry? Is logic and consistency that big a deal for you conservatives? Alright fine here I'll stop making it painfully available to you.
If you only paid attention, you'd see how patently silly your posts here really are.
...for the power to create a murderous, oppressive, theocratic government, are you fighting for freedom?
If not, then can you be a 'freedom fighter'?
Please explain your answers.
Yes. You are.I'm sorry?
Yes. You are.
10x more so that the one I responded to.that's a constructive post
The question asks if fighting for that specific power is, indeed, fighting for freedom.I need you to clarify something for me.
Is the first question whether you're fighting for that power, or if you're fighting for fredom?
As noted before, if they are fighting for the power to oppress and murder, their present situation isnt relevant to them not fighting for freedom.
Main Entry: free·dom
Pronunciation: \ˈfrē-dəm\
Function: noun
Date: before 12th century
1: the quality or state of being free: as a: the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action b: liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another : independence c: the quality or state of being exempt or released usually from something onerous <freedom from care> d: ease , facility <spoke the language with freedom> e: the quality of being frank, open, or outspoken <answered with freedom> f: improper familiarity g: boldness of conception or execution h: unrestricted use <gave him the freedom of their home>
2 a: a political right b: franchise , privilege
If you want to make that argument, go ahead; doing so doesnt invalidate the poistion that to be an actual freedom fighter, you have to be fighting for actual freedom.
The question asks if fighting for that specific power is, indeed, fighting for freedom.
Which definition of freedom are you using?
see post number #2. Goobieman doesn't wish to "play."
The question asks if fighting for that specific power is, indeed, fighting for freedom.
How about this:Let's clear this up. Which definition of freedom are you using? (From Webster's)
See above. Fighting to gain power to do what YOU want isn't in any way necessarily fighting for freedom.If the person doing the fihgting is under "The power of another", under "constraint of choice or action" or being denied a "political right", then they are, by definition, freedom fighters. They are seeking freedom.
What they want to do to otehrs is what is irrelevant. There are no definitions of freedom that RELATE to others.
No. Both fight for power, and nothng more.The subjugated groups is also fighting for their own freedom against the oppresive regime that currently exists.
Again, this is fighting for personal power, not freedom.Freedom fighters don't need to fight for a "free-society", they just need to fight for a society where they themselves are free while they themselves are curently not free.
How about this:
"Freedom" is the societal and political condition -you- must enjoy in order for you, yourself, to be able to call youself a free person.
I dont mean what you would call it if you were a member of the Taliban or a Ba'athist, or a Nazi, but what you, personally, right now, call it.
Now, I dont want to actually speak for you, but I'd wager dollars to doughnuts that at least part of that definition invloves a societal and poitical structure containing popular self-detemination, the plenary ability of people to act as they please so long as they do not infringe on others, and the knowledge that you are safe from capricious and arbitrary acts against you by the government.
Um.... no.I think I've got it now. But just to be clear, basically, you are asking how I would feel if I were part of the society that these people were fighting to gain power in knowing I would be in the oppressed population if these people gained control.
As I suspected :mrgreen:My personal views are very much in line with this.
As I suspected :mrgreen:
Thus, we need not have a long discussion as to what it means to 'actually fight for freedom'.
I do find it disturbing that while our leadership was getting us all focused on the terrorists attacking freedom and our rights...we were actually being "pick-pocketed" of the very same while our attention was turned.
So who is the bigger terrorist against freedom?
This reminds me of some of the famous quotes by great people (Presidents, Einstein, etc.) years ago who talked about how the real threats will be in the guise of fighting a foreign threat.