On Cowards and Heroes

[ok doser]

Right now his right move would be to shut up and close this dung heap of a thread. Only a total knob would start a "topic" like this one. Nicely taken down GD.

make your case, artie, if you can :idunno:


explain to all of us how watching your classmates get slaughtered while sitting there watching in fear is not displaying a want of courage in the face of danger, pain, or difficulty



but no, you won't because you can't

and knowing that frustrates you because you have an emotional investment in the story, having followed it on the news, having watched the interviews and the talking heads bloviating

so you're stuck with relying on emotion and just flinging feeble insults

what a pathetic loser :nono:

 

[ok doser]

I've mentioned Todd Beamer a couple of times in this thread, because he was at the epicenter of a paradigm shift wrt hijackings

Before the September 11, 2001 attacks, most hijackings involved the plane landing at a certain destination, followed by the hijackers making negotiable demands. Pilots and flight attendants were trained to adopt the "Common Strategy" tactic, which was approved by the United States FAA. It taught crew members to comply with the hijackers' demands, get the plane to land safely and then let the security forces handle the situation. Crew members advised passengers to sit quietly in order to increase their chances of survival. They were also trained not to make any 'heroic' moves that could endanger themselves or other people. The FAA realized that the longer a hijacking persisted, the more likely it would end peacefully with the hijackers reaching their goal;[15] often, during the epidemic of skyjackings in the late 1960s and early 1970s, an inconvenient but otherwise harmless trip to Cuba for the passengers.

The September 11 attacks presented an unprecedented threat because it involved suicide hijackers who could fly an aircraft and use it to deliberately crash the airplane into buildings for the sole purpose of causing massive casualties, with no warning, demands or negotiations, and no regard for human life. The "Common Strategy" approach was not designed to handle suicide hijackings, and the hijackers were able to exploit a weakness in the civil aviation security system. Since then, the "Common Strategy" policy in the USA and the rest of the world to deal with airplane hijackings has no longer been used.

Since the attacks, the situation for crew members, passengers and hijackers has changed. United Airlines Flight 93 crashed into a field as flight attendants and passengers—who had heard about the other three hijacked planes ramming into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon—fought hijackers who were probably aiming to crash the plane either into the White House or the United States Capitol. As on Flight 93, crew members and passengers now have to calculate the risks of passive cooperation...

in the past, the goal for hijackers was transport or money

and the goal for those dealing with them was survival of the hostages



now, the goal for hijackers is the slaughter of innocents, the more the better, including the hostages

now, for those dealing with hijackers, survival by compliance is no longer an effective approach


and so, we have the emergence of those who, like Todd Beamer, put aside their fear and face danger, pain and difficulty and confront evil



eta: i had forgotton that i had mentioned him in the thread that inspired this one:

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4479159&postcount=14

 

[ok doser]

Another paradigm shift at play - i'm only going to bang out a small excerpt because there's no transcript to cut and paste, but I recommend listening to the whole thing:

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/talking-philosophy-war-and-peace-part-1-1.3312875

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/popup/audio/player.html?autoPlay=true&clipIds=2678669856

47:45 rethinking the rules of war "The rules of war...were codified during a period in which our enemies were states that looked and thought sort of like us. And increasingly that's not true. The Islamic State is eager to have the trappings of a political community, but it's also a terrorist organization - not just a terrorist organization but it happens to have some territory attached to it. Now there are many questions here - how do we even conceive of this - the usual rules we have been discussing are premised upon the possibility of continued good relations, upon the possibility of surrender, the possibility of not destroying the other side utterly so that peace is maintained. In contrast, there's no possibility of the Islamic State being an agency with which we have good relations... and the other is, given that their intentions are uniformly to be.... utterly opposed to the Geneva Conventions in all forms, is it right for the people fighting the Islamic state to be bound by these conventions, given that they have no difficulty at all with violating the terms of war, are those terms binding on those who fight them?

we saw this conundrum at play during the Iraq war, wrt extraordinary renditions, Gitmo, abu ghraib, waterboarding, etc


for that matter, we saw it at play during WW2, when civilian populations became legitimate targets if they provided military support

 

[ok doser]

still waiting for town, anna, artie, etc to respond

if the actions of Todd Beamer and crew were worthy of being called "heroic", explain why those who cowered in fear, unable to act, aren't deserving of being called cowards

 

[annabenedetti]

still waiting for town, anna, artie, etc to respond

if the actions of Todd Beamer and crew were worthy of being called "heroic", explain why those who cowered in fear, unable to act, aren't deserving of being called cowards

You already have my response to your sorry thread. Post #87 is all you get.

I haven't followed this on the msm at all, so I'm working from wiki:

At 10:38 a.m. PDT, the first 9-1-1 call was made from Snyder Hall on the school campus reporting shooting.[5] Students reported that the shooting began in Classroom 15, where English and writing classes are conducted.[6][7]
Harper-Mercer, who was a student in the writing class, shot the assistant English professor at point-blank range. Some witnesses said he then forced fellow students to the center of the classroom[8] and asked several for their religion before shooting them.[9] Other witnesses said he asked if students were Christians, mocking those who replied in the affirmative that they would go to heaven as he shot them.[a] Some students were shot multiple times;[9][12][13] one woman was struck several times in the stomach while trying to close a classroom door.[14] One witness said he made a woman beg for her life before shooting her, and also shot another woman when she tried to reason with him.[15] One victim, Sarena Dawn Moore, was killed while seated in a wheelchair.[16] Another witness said Harper-Mercer deliberately spared one student's life so that student could deliver a package from him to police,[17] and forced him to sit at the back of the classroom and watch as he continued shooting.[18]

contrast the actions of those victims with the following:

According to a witness, Chris Mintz, a U.S. Army veteran who was studying fitness training at the college,[38] ran to the library, where he began pulling alarms and telling people to run away.[39] He then ran into the building where the shooting was taking place and attempted to block Harper-Mercer from moving out of Classroom 15. Mintz was shot three times while standing and another four times while on the floor, but survived.

in the first case, the victims act as society has trained them to act - as sheep, with the only act of resistance being an attempt to reason with an insane person

In the first case, the professor and students were surprised and trapped in a classroom. You weren't there. You don't know how it all went down, all you can do is bloviate from the safety of your computer desk.

The person who attempted to reason with him was a woman. The student who begged for her life was a woman. The student in the wheelchair was a woman. And you call them cowards.

You pathetic sack of crap.

in the second case, we have a man who runs toward the danger to confront it and confine it, with no regard for his own safety

In the second case we have the hero Mintz (and he is a hero) "telling people to run away." Are you saying that he was telling people to do something cowardly?

You don't deserve any response at all to this thread. You made it just to get a rise out of people but I suppose the only good thing about it is it illustrates your sickness for those readers who don't know you well enough to know you get your jollies by being this sick.

 

[ok doser]

In the first case, the professor and students were surprised and trapped in a classroom.

this is true

You weren't there.

this is also true

and irrelevant

I wasn't at the battle of hastings either, but i can discuss it

You don't know how it all went down, all you can do is bloviate from the safety of your computer desk.

rather, i can discuss it using the information posted on wiki

same as if i'm discussing the battle of hastings

The person who attempted to reason with him was a woman.

true

and irrelevant

The student who begged for her life was a woman.

also true

and irrelevant

The student in the wheelchair was a woman.

true again

and irrelevant

And you call them cowards.

why does their gender matter?

i judge their cowardice or lack of based on their actions

begging for your life is cowardly

begging for someone else's life is heroic

You pathetic sack of crap.

you pathetic emotion driven loser :idunno:

In the second case we have the hero Mintz (and he is a hero) "telling people to run away."

right - he was heroic because he was risking his safety to ensure the safety of others, which the others, being cowards, didn't

Are you saying that he was telling people to do something cowardly?

not at all anna - there's nothing cowardly about running away (and hopefully getting help) if you aren't in a position to help others

now, if they ran away screaming, running down the slower students, then i would say that was cowardly

You don't deserve any response at all to this thread.

and yet here you are

again :chuckle:

You made it just to get a rise out of people

no, that's an emotional assumption based on your visceral dislike of me

i made it to discuss the cowardly behavior of those who acted cowardly

but I suppose the only good thing about it is it illustrates your sickness for those readers who don't know you well enough to know you get your jollies by being this sick.

rather, it serves as a perfect illustration of the sickness and hatred that drive you



now, how about them normans, eh?

 

[ClimateSanity]

this is true



this is also true

and irrelevant

I wasn't at the battle of hastings either, but i can discuss it



rather, i can discuss it using the information posted on wiki

same as if i'm discussing the battle of hastings


true

and irrelevant



also true

and irrelevant




true again

and irrelevant



why does their gender matter?

i judge their cowardice or lack of based on their actions

begging for your life is cowardly

begging for someone else's life is heroic


you pathetic emotion driven loser :idunno:






right - he was heroic because he was risking his safety to ensure the safety of others, which the others, being cowards, didn't



not at all anna - there's nothing cowardly about running away (and hopefully getting help) if you aren't in a position to help others

now, if they ran away screaming, running down the slower students, then i would say that was cowardly



and yet here you are

again :chuckle:



no, that's an emotional assumption based on your visceral dislike of me

i made it to discuss the cowardly behavior of those who acted cowardly



rather, it serves as a perfect illustration of the sickness and hatred that drive you



now, how about them normans, eh?

Why does their gender matter? Because anything that involves a female is special and requires us to bow at the knee in awe.

 

[ok doser]

Why does their gender matter? Because anything that involves a female is special and requires us to bow at the knee in awe.

well, of course

but i was curious to see if anna would be honest enough to admit that's why she kept mentioning their gender - as if that should excuse their cowardly behavior

 

[annabenedetti]

Why does their gender matter? Because anything that involves a female is special and requires us to bow at the knee in awe. well, of course but i was curious to see if anna would be honest enough to admit that's why she kept mentioning their gender - as if that should excuse their cowardly behavior

 

[bybee]

Jeepers! The sandbox bullies are also crybabies!

 

[ok doser]

:baby:

not interested in addressing my response with anything other than trolling?

 

[quip]

not interested in addressing my response with anything other than trolling?

Nope.

as if.... :chuckle:

 

[ok doser]

as an example of acting courageously:

(CNN)A man wielding a machete stormed a restaurant in Columbus, Ohio, and attacked several people before he was killed by police, authorities said Thursday.

The suspect was the only one killed. Nobody inside the Nazareth restaurant and deli said they knew him, according to police.

"(He) immediately began swinging a machete at customers and employees inside," Columbus police Sgt. Rich Weiner said. "There was no rhyme or reason as to who he was going after as soon as he walked in, according to some of the witnesses."

Police have tentatively identified the suspect but would not reveal his name or age.

"Right now there's nothing that leads us to believe that this is anything but just a random attack," Weiner said.

Karen Bass was inside the restaurant when it all happened.

"He came through the front door and then started just systematically hitting people," she told CNN affiliate WSYX. "I thought it was a personal thing, and then he just started down the row hitting everybody."

Four people were injured and transported to the hospital.

One victim who was in critical condition underwent surgery and is now "stable," Weiner said.

The chase

The suspect was seen 30 to 45 minutes earlier entering the restaurant and speaking with an employee. Police would not discuss details of that conversation.

He left, came back at around 6 p.m. and then attacked a man and woman at a booth just inside the door, Weiner said.

Two men immediately ran out and called 911 while another engaged in a "physical altercation" with the suspect. Some patrons started throwing chairs.

An employee then "grabbed something from behind the register" and stopped the attack, according to Weiner.

"There's blood all over inside the restaurant," Steven Bass, Karen's husband, told WSYX.

Witnesses were able to give authorities enough information about the suspect's vehicle that another officer spotted it soon after, and a chase began.

Once authorities were able to get the suspect off the road, he tried to exit from the passenger side of the vehicle and an officer unsuccessfully tried to use a stun gun on him, Weiner said.

The suspect eventually made it out of the vehicle with a machete and another knife in hand.

Then, "he lunged across the hood at the officers," Weiner said. "Another officer in a cruiser fired a couple shots at him and put him down."

The FBI is helping local police with the investigation, which includes trying to determine the attacker's motive, a U.S. law enforcement official said on condition of anonymity.

 

[Crucible]

I don't think 'cowardly' is an applicable word to describe the immediate actions of unwary, unarmed civilians getting bullets shot in their direction.

The coward is the one who goes and shoots unwary, unarmed civilians because they don't have the courage to fight the enforcing institution they are opposed to.

But that's just me :idunno:

 

[jgarden]

I'll come back to this later to support my statement that most of the victims in the Umpqua shooting (as well as the Colorado movie theater shooting) acted cowardly

I plan to use dictionary definitions! :banana:

and logical analysis!! :banana::banana:



i expect my opponents will use emotion :darwinsm:



go ahead and start if you like, i have a test looming and a paper to write, but i will be back

"Ok doser" is being a little harsh, given that none of really know how we would react under similar circumstances!

History has taught us that there is no formula to predict how individuals will react to life threatening situations.

 

[ok doser]

"Ok doser" is being a little harsh, given that none of know how we would react under similar circumstances!

History has taught us that there is no formula to predict how individuals will react to life threatening situations.

not sure why people think that figgers into it :idunno:

 

[ok doser]

I don't think 'cowardly' is an applicable word ...

that's why i provided a definition! :banana:

 

[jgarden]

not sure why people think that figgers into it :idunno:

There is a reoccurring theme in the Bible where God selects individuals whom society would judge as the least likely candidates to bravely proclaim His intentions.

David and Goliath would be the most apt analogy in this situation - a giant has intimidated the whole Israelite army hostage until a shepherd boy intervenes in a situation where logic would dictate that he has no forseeable means of surviving!

 

[ok doser]

There is a reoccurring theme in the Bible where God selects whom society would judge as the least likely candidate to bravely proclaim His intentions.

David and Goliath would be the most apt analogy in this situation - a giant has intimidated the whole Israelite army hostage until a shepherd boy intervenes in a situation where logic would dictate that he has no forseeable means of surviving!

by your measure, since i have never been in david's position, i have no standing to call him courageous

 

[jgarden]

by your measure, since i have never been in david's position, i have no standing to call him courageous

By any measure, who are we to judge the actions of others if we haven't been subjected to the same trials and tribulations!

Who qualifies as a hero in the New Testament - the Roman soldiers, the Jewish zealots, the chief priests, the Pharisees?

There is a disconnect for what passes for heroism in the secular world and the spiritual one!