Abusing The Word "coward"

[flash2015]

Where is Jamiet? Perhaps he can set us straight. He can always be relied on to add some careful, nuanced, impartial thought to any discussion...

[Fluminator]

It's cowardly to blow up 3 kids with you to avoid capture. Nothing brave about dying if you're convinced you got a bunch of virgins waiting for you in the afterlife.

[Octavious]

What is more dangerous or painful than death?

Pretty much everything? Death is not at all painful as you're far too dead to notice. I dare say dying is, but the amount of time you spend dying when you explode a grenade in your face is damned near infinitesimal. As for danger... danger of what? You're hardly in danger of death because that's your goal, and would be as ridiculous as saying swimmers are in danger of getting wet. I suppose that there's a small risk of the bomb not working and you might end up in the embarrassing situation of being caught looking like a pig with an apple in its mouth wearing uncomfortably wet underwear, but that pales into insignificance compared to the dangers and pain of living.

So you were expecting a conversation about the motivation of lying to the people and the benefits or otherwise of propaganda, and hadn't even considered the possibility that other people may not share your definition of cowardice? Well bad luck. You should be delighted that this small area of your ignorance has been identified so that you can remedy it, rather than complaining about not having the argument you imagined.

[Octavious]

In the end all I hear from your explanation is that he is cowardly because Trump says so. I don't know why you repeat that he killed two children as well when he blew himself up as if it meant something.

It means he's robbed innocent people of their lives so that he can take the easy way out, you ignorant twat.

[orathaic]

In the end all I hear from your explanation is that he is cowardly because Trump says so. I don't know why you repeat that he killed two children as well when he blew himself up as if it meant something.

It means he's robbed innocent people of their lives so that he can take the easy way out, you ignorant twat.

I can't possibly justify the murder of children (though too many fathers have killed their own children and then themselves). But a parent is responsible for keeping their children safe, and in this case they are safe from American influence.

This individual also attempted to create a world which would be good for his descendants to live in. I mean I absolutely abhor the concept of an Islamic State, and the realities of how the power militant fundamentalists was abused in said state - though I don't think this makes them unique among states, I also abhor the abuse of power by those US citizens working in the Abu Ghrabi prisons - I can at least acknowledge that he believed he was building a better world (he was not, and religion is poisonous, but that is what he believed).

[Octavious]

I can at least acknowledge that he believed he was building a better world (he was not, and religion is poisonous, but that is what he believed).

I can acknowledge it's a possibility, and I can accept that it's a possibility that you believe to be true, but my assessment is that the balance of probability is heavily in favour of the wretch being a coward.

And to return briefly to the OP, I think it is clear that Trump believing him to be a coward is perfectly plausible, and I would suggest is more likely than the alternative hypothesis that Trump believes he's rather brave but is lying about it for political effect.

[orathaic]

I can at least acknowledge that he believed he was building a better world (he was not, and religion is poisonous, but that is what he believed).

I can acknowledge it's a possibility, and I can accept that it's a possibility that you believe to be true, but my assessment is that the balance of probability is heavily in favour of the wretch being a coward.

And to return briefly to the OP, I think it is clear that Trump believing him to be a coward is perfectly plausible, and I would suggest is more likely than the alternative hypothesis that Trump believes he's rather brave but is lying about it for political effect.

That seems fair, though I will go ahead and doubt Trump believes anything. He just says whatever he thinks sounds good at a given time. No belief required...

That aside, I could equally argue that all religious believers are cowards, unable to face the reality of their own mortality and the need to reflect on and make their own morality (rather than taking it from their authority figures...).

But nihilism and existentialism aside; religion is usually used as an excuse to claim goodness of your selfish politics. Which is what I would claim to be the case for IS.

[Kingdroid]

everyone is a coward.

[MajorMitchell]

Touching on this supposed reward in heaven for Jihadist Martyrs, the forty virgins to serve the Jihadist Martyr for eternity ( there are some different numbers of aquiescent heavenly virgins quoted by different Imans)... Do these Jihadist clowns ever think that through ???
First​ point.. in the afterlife there is no physical existence, it's a spiritual existence, so there is NO SEX. So these Jihadist clowns are lining themselves up for a possible eternity surrounded by forty Fatimas with whom they can not have any SEX. So what's the point of signing up for that ?
I do dearly love my Adorable Fire Breathing MemSahib Her Serene Imperiousness Indoors lying on a sofa eating cakes, and am most fond of beautiful Princess Estelle, but I can assure readers that I have absolutely no desire to spend eternity with either of these good women. (Or most others that I meet or observe)
Spend eternity getting nagged about pruning the heavenly rose gardens by Her Imperiousness Indoors ? No thanks. My life in this mortal, breathing world with them will certainly suffice and after that time is run, then peaceful Oblivion will suit me fine.

So these Jihadist clowns are just not thinking it through in my opinion, spending eternity being surrounded by a bunch of Fatimas & never getting a moments peace and no sex is hardly my idea of heaven.
So I'm good with my Lovely Fire Breathing MemSahib getting into heaven, without my company.

[MajorMitchell]

Returning to the topic of this thread, the possible misuse of the word coward by Trumptoad. I've seen a bit more if Trumptoad's forty odd minute announcement. One of his statements that I think employs a questionable use of a word is Trumptoad's statement that the United States had delivered "justice" to Baghdadi and I pondered upon that.
Justice implies legal process and I see no evidence of that. Now I'm not defending Baghdadi, clearly he was a terrorist leader and had to be stopped from continuing his evil ways.
But I am far from convinced that sending an elite military assault team to kill Baghdadi in a location where the United States has no legal authority constitutes either legal process or justice.

[MajorMitchell]

I forget the exact statement, it might have been that the United States had bought Baghdadi to justice, not delivered justice to Baghdadi, but it was the use of the word justice that caught my attention. And I certainly care more about justice, legal process than I do about calling a person a coward.
It could be argued that Trumptoad ordered an unlawful killing. Shouldn't the correct lawful action have been, capture Baghdadi and deliver him to the international Court in Europe that has tried a number of war criminals ? Or capture him and prove his guilt in a US Court ?
But as others have posted, Trumptoad was never going to let Baghdadi face proper legal process.
So I suggest that there is a significant degree of dishonesty in the way Trumptoad has described what occurred when he used the word justice.
But then there's no surprise in Trumptoad being dishonest in his statements, he's got quite a lot of form at the dishonesty caper imho.

[flash2015]

In the end all I hear from your explanation is that he is cowardly because Trump says so. I don't know why you repeat that he killed two children as well when he blew himself up as if it meant something.

It means he's robbed innocent people of their lives so that he can take the easy way out, you ignorant twat.

Ugh, again I condemn in the stongest possible terms that he killed the two children with him. But it still doesn't make him cowardly! Resorting to juvenile insults doesn't change the definition of the word.

Thanks for the conversation though. I can see you getting really emotional over this. This is why such conversations can't be had...because the jingoism in so ingrained in so many people. I guess I should have anticipated this response from you especially because it is consistent with the extreme patriotism/nationalism of your Brexit stance.

[MajorMitchell]

I don't believe that any of us will ever know the complete truth of what occurred when Baghdadi was killed. The Christian biblical passage that states that those who live by the sword shall die by the sword is imho appropriate for Baghdadi, in that he promoted violence, employed violence, often against innocent persons and has suffered a violent death as a consequence.
I agree with flash that we should try to discuss issues in a civil conversation, but I would suggest, with some tolerance for mocking and clever insults.
I reiterate my concerns regarding the use of the word justice by Trumptoad, I think that is perhaps mire worthy of discussion than the use of the word coward.
Given Trumptoad's form for being "careless with the truth", and I think that is an extremely moderate description of his habit of making statements that are factually incorrect and clearly untruthful, I would suggest that it is extremely foolish to attribute truth to anything that Trumptoad says or tweets without having subjected his statements to a good amount of scrutiny, sceptical consideration and verification from independent sources.

[MajorMitchell]

I'm of the view that calling someone else an ignorant twat lacks either cleverness or humour. Octavious is certainly capable, imho, of delivering a much cleverer and more amusing riposte, so if anything, he's rather let himself down with that comment. (in my opinion)

[Octavious]

In the end all I hear from your explanation is that he is cowardly because Trump says so. I don't know why you repeat that he killed two children as well when he blew himself up as if it meant something.

It means he's robbed innocent people of their lives so that he can take the easy way out, you ignorant twat.

Ugh, again I condemn in the stongest possible terms that he killed the two children with him. But it still doesn't make him cowardly! Resorting to juvenile insults doesn't change the definition of the word.

Thanks for the conversation though. I can see you getting really emotional over this. This is why such conversations can't be had...because the jingoism in so ingrained in so many people. I guess I should have anticipated this response from you especially because it is consistent with the extreme patriotism/nationalism of your Brexit stance.

Yes, killing kids to take the easy way out does make him cowardly. I can think of no clearer definition of cowardice than that. That you refuse to accept anything other than your own narrow definition makes you ignorant.

Speaking of your ignorance, what exactly do you think my Brexit position is?

[flash2015]

What is more dangerous or painful than death?

Pretty much everything? Death is not at all painful as you're far too dead to notice. I dare say dying is, but the amount of time you spend dying when you explode a grenade in your face is damned near infinitesimal. As for danger... danger of what? You're hardly in danger of death because that's your goal, and would be as ridiculous as saying swimmers are in danger of getting wet. I suppose that there's a small risk of the bomb not working and you might end up in the embarrassing situation of being caught looking like a pig with an apple in its mouth wearing uncomfortably wet underwear, but that pales into insignificance compared to the dangers and pain of living.

So you were expecting a conversation about the motivation of lying to the people and the benefits or otherwise of propaganda, and hadn't even considered the possibility that other people may not share your definition of cowardice? Well bad luck. You should be delighted that this small area of your ignorance has been identified so that you can remedy it, rather than complaining about not having the argument you imagined.

Again, just to make sure it is clear, I think ISIS is evil. As an agnostic/atheist (if there is an afterlife that is a bonus so I can't completely be atheist ), I regard theocracy in all its forms as fundamentally morally wrong...so in no way shape or form am I defending Al-Baghdadi in any shape or form..

Anyway, getting to your response, the fundamental forces which drive all life are self-preservation and procreation. With Al-Baghadi, he overcame not one but both (I understand they were his children) of these primal forces. If all he wanted was death, why didn't he do it before? He could have easily got it over with a decade ago by strapping a bomb to his chest. But he didn't. Instead as head of ISIS, hated on all sides (Syria, Turks, Kurds, US, Russia, EU) he lived in more danger than almost any person currently living on this planet, certainly more than you, I or President Bone Spur ever will. It just boggles the mind how you can get "coward" from this.

Do you really know anything about religion? A fundamental idea of faith, especially in Christianity, is that you look up to those whose faith is so strong that they can overcome their fear of death to promote religious objectives. In Christianity, we often call these people "Saints". In previous discussions, if I remember correctly, YOU were one who allegedly admired religious people for their faith. But by saying that faith makes choosing death an easy option, you are effectively calling everyone from Jesus on a coward. Have you changed your mind about religion perhaps? Do you no longer admire the religious? This inconguity in your position has been made multiple times in this thread. Are you actually going to answer this time? Just to be clear by saying Al-Bagdadi is not a coward DOES NOT in any way imply that he is anything other than evil. Coward and evil, however, are NOT synonyms.

I can understand you getting emotional here because I think I am hitting a discordance in a core belief of yours. In other arguments you weren't so emotionally invested. You need to step back and show us this calm level-headedness that you are supposedly so famous for.

[Octavious]

Ah, I begin to understand... You are basing your arguments against me on a number of false assumptions.

You need to step back and show us this calm level-headedness that you are supposedly so famous for.

That's news to me. I have never claimed to be especially calm, nor am I particularly famed for it. Nor for anything else, for that matter. The days of the forum being home to big personalities is long gone, and I don't think anyone qualifies as famous anymore. That being said, I'm not all that emotionally invested either. The primary purposes of the forum are (or perhaps more accurately were) to advertise games, relax between phases, and to practice various forms of expression and argument. As important to Diplomacy as seeming relaxed and friendly when speaking to someone you can't stand, is being able to seem properly peeved when you wish to.

But by saying that faith makes choosing death an easy option, you are effectively calling everyone from Jesus on a coward.

Sorry, but where on earth did you drag that idea from? I said no such thing. I imagine that in most instances religion makes suicide somewhat harder, especially suicide combined with murder, as there's often a lot of eternal damnation attached to such actions. But for those of us without religion death is the easy way out, the stress free option when life becomes too difficult. It creates a host of problems, but generally speaking only for the living.

If all he wanted was death, why didn't he do it before?

Who said he desired death? I dare say he enjoyed the power and respect that came from being a leader. I dare say he enjoyed all sorts of little bonuses and pleasures having such a position gave him access to. But the American attack limited his options to going down fighting, being captured and having to live for years deprived of his little perks and striving for minimal gains that may or may not make any difference, or saying blow this for a game of soldiers and fleeing both the prospect of short term pain and long term hard labour with little reward by ending his life. One might argue that it was his life to end, and if it was just his life then fair enough. However it wasn't. Out of fear of pain and shame and a future deprived of glory and full of labor, he not only killed himself but took innocent lives with him. He is a coward of the vilest kind.

[Octavious]

Also I am still keen to hear what you think my Brexit position is, and what about it is extremely nationalistic or patriotic. It'd be nice to think you have some evidence in the form of some quotes to back it up, but I suspect that you have simply invented a narrative that suits your purposes that you've then convinced yourself is fact. It seems to be a habit of yours.

[orathaic]

I forget the exact statement, it might have been that the United States had bought Baghdadi to justice, not delivered justice to Baghdadi, but it was the use of the word justice that caught my attention. And I certainly care more about justice, legal process than I do about calling a person a coward.
It could be argued that Trumptoad ordered an unlawful killing. Shouldn't the correct lawful action have been, capture Baghdadi and deliver him to the international Court in Europe that has tried a number of war criminals ? Or capture him and prove his guilt in a US Court ?
But as others have posted, Trumptoad was never going to let Baghdadi face proper legal process.
So I suggest that there is a significant degree of dishonesty in the way Trumptoad has described what occurred when he used the word justice.
<snip>

OK, let's be clear. Justice in this case is not legal process. What is also clear is that any US president can get away with killing 'foreign enemies' - whether Obama, Bush... They've all done it. Obama's use of drones was notable for a few reasons. Executive orders, new technology, lack of congressional oversight.... But the principle of the US govt being able to kill whoever it likes is not new.

It is also not justice. So I entirely agree with Mitchell's issue with the word 'justice', the acts justified in the name of national security are not acts of justice. And not only that the political establishment doesn't care. They are trying to impeach Trump not because of how he treats US allies, or kills enemies without getting congressional approval. They are only trying to impeach him because he tried to abuse the office of the president to harm the democratic establishment.

[MajorMitchell]

Thanks Orathaic. I understand that we live in an imperfect World and have to be pragmatic, but I do see some hypocrisy in the attitude of POTUS and others who castigate China for flouting the international "rules based systems", and China is a totalitarian state with all the horrors of such a diabolical system, but when it suits the USA, that nation's leadership are quite prepared to flout the principles and the international "rules based systems" that they claim to value highly.
Trumptoad has said that the future belongs to patriots, not internationalists, and he demands respect for the rights of sovereign nations. But when it suits his nation's interests, he is willing to trample all over the sovereign rights of other nations. And Orathaic has noted, this is something that previous POTUSs , Obama, Bush have done. Even the great JFK made that mistake with Cuba (Bay of Pigs fiasco).
To paraphrase the great writer, George Orwell, all nations have equal rights of soveriegnty, it's just that some nations are more equal than others in that respect.