Iran seizes Marshall islands vessel and crew of 34

Heat Miser wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:maybe while small government republicans are advocating that the government kill its own citizens during a riot, they could also kill the morons...

When you say things like this Bob, you force threads to be moved to the Swill Bin.

that's all it takes?  

Heat Miser wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

More than anything I want peace.

And yet you say this:

LooseGoose wrote:Doesn't change the fact that we must attack if our word means anything.

Bullies and criminals thrive in a world without consequences.
Assuring swift and certain punishment is the best way to eliminate that behavior.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:maybe while small government republicans are advocating that the government kill its own citizens during a riot, they could also kill the morons...

When you say things like this Bob, you force threads to be moved to the Swill Bin.

that's all it takes?  

Yes. Try & leave out the politics. I believe it's possible to discuss these things rationally without getting political.

I.B. Fine wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

More than anything  I want peace.

And yet you say this:

LooseGoose wrote:Doesn't change the fact that we must attack if our word means anything.

Bullies and criminals thrive in a world without consequences.
Assuring swift and certain punishment is the best way to eliminate that behavior.

The old peace thru war doctrine? Seems we've done that for decades & the behavior hasn't been eliminated. Should we use that philosophy with children too?

Heat Miser wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
that's all it takes?  

Yes. Try & leave out the politics. I believe it's possible to discuss these things rationally without getting political.

can I still pray in public?

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:
that's all it takes?  

Yes. Try & leave out the politics. I believe it's possible to discuss these things rationally without getting political.

can I still pray in public?

I'd prefer you didn't. People will think you're a Republican.

Heat Miser wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:can I still pray in public?

I'd prefer you didn't. People will think you're a Republican.

Heat Miser wrote:

I.B. Fine wrote:

Bullies and criminals thrive in a world without consequences.
Assuring swift and certain punishment is the best way to eliminate that behavior.

The old peace thru war doctrine? Seems we've done that for decades & the behavior hasn't been eliminated. Should we use that philosophy with children too?

Absolutely with children, and I prefer to call it 'creating respect'.
I also beg to disagree with how successfully it has been implemented over the years. We have had a distinct falloff in its use over the last 6-7 years much like during the later half of the 70's and mid-late 90's

I.B. Fine wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

The old peace thru war doctrine? Seems we've done that for decades & the behavior hasn't been eliminated. Should we use that philosophy with children too?

Absolutely with children, and I prefer to call it 'creating respect'.
I also beg to disagree with how successfully it has been implemented over the years. We have had a distinct falloff in its use over the last 6-7 years much like during the later half of the 70's and mid-late 90's

this.

I.B. Fine wrote:Absolutely with children, and I prefer to call it 'creating respect'.

I.B. Fine wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

I.B. Fine wrote:

Bullies and criminals thrive in a world without consequences.
Assuring swift and certain punishment is the best way to eliminate that behavior.

The old peace thru war doctrine? Seems we've done that for decades & the behavior hasn't been eliminated. Should we use that philosophy with children too?

Absolutely with children, and I prefer to call it 'creating respect'.
I also beg to disagree with how successfully it has been implemented over the years. We have had a distinct falloff in its use over the last 6-7 years much like during the later half of the 70's and mid-late 90's

To what degree shall we beat the children? Just short of leaving a mark? Surely we don't want to incur medical expenses? And what level offense shall be grounds for a good beating? Forgetting to take out the garbage?

Heat Miser wrote:

I.B. Fine wrote:

Absolutely with children, and I prefer to call it 'creating respect'.
I also beg to disagree with how successfully it has been implemented over the years. We have had a distinct falloff in its use over the last 6-7 years much like during the later half of the 70's and mid-late 90's

To what degree shall we beat the children? Just short of leaving a mark? Surely we don't want to incur medical expenses? And what level offense shall be grounds for a good beating? Forgetting to take out the garbage?

If you don't want them to forget the garbage again, then yeah, whoop their ass. How else you going to get shit done around here?!

Heat Miser wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

More than anything I want peace.

And yet you say this:

LooseGoose wrote:Doesn't change the fact that we must attack if our word means anything.

Wanting peace doesn't mean I wouldn't honor a treaty, that's dishonorable.

LooseGoose wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

And yet you say this:

Wanting peace doesn't mean I wouldn't honor a treaty, that's dishonorable.

Are you a Klingon?

Heat Miser wrote:

I.B. Fine wrote:

Absolutely with children, and I prefer to call it 'creating respect'.
I also beg to disagree with how successfully it has been implemented over the years. We have had a distinct falloff in its use over the last 6-7 years much like during the later half of the 70's and mid-late 90's

To what degree shall we beat the children? Just short of leaving a mark? Surely we don't want to incur medical expenses? And what level offense shall be grounds for a good beating? Forgetting to take out the garbage?

Where did I say anything about beating children? Is that the only form of punishment you know?

I.B. Fine wrote:

Heat Miser wrote:

I.B. Fine wrote:

Absolutely with children, and I prefer to call it 'creating respect'.
I also beg to disagree with how successfully it has been implemented over the years. We have had a distinct falloff in its use over the last 6-7 years much like during the later half of the 70's and mid-late 90's

To what degree shall we beat the children? Just short of leaving a mark? Surely we don't want to incur medical expenses? And what level offense shall be grounds for a good beating? Forgetting to take out the garbage?

Where did I say anything about beating children? Is that the only form of punishment you know?

"Peace thru war" applied to children to me implies beating or some other form of corporal punishment. But if it means a stern talking to, groundings, & taking away iPods to you, then you have my apologies.

Heat Miser wrote:

I.B. Fine wrote:
Where did I say anything about beating children? Is that the only form of punishment you know?

"Peace thru war" applied to children to me implies beating or some other form of corporal punishment. But if it means a stern talking to, groundings, & taking away iPods to you, then you have my apologies.

The trick is to leave all options on the table, let them use their own imagination as to what the punishment might be, scarier and a better deterrent than spelling it out for them.
Works in foreign policy, too, just not the way this administration handles it.