BREAKING: US Launches Tomahawks Into Syria

If he had voted, would anything be different at all?

If you had abstained, would anything be different at all?

Voting doesn't gain you anything, and abstaining doesn't lose you anything.

On anything but the smallest and most local of levels, it's nothing but an irrelvant distraction.

So why bother?


It appears absolutely nothing can be done.
 
Sorry, I live in the real world where the events that cause one person to abstain cause thousands of others to abstain. Had I chosen to abstain, the beliefs/events/influences that caused me to abstain would have caused thousands more to do the same, and could have swayed the election. Therefore, it's impossible to say that in the real world, my abstaining would have made zero difference.

So you don't have any actual answers to those questions - just a circular casuistry to the effect that there are causes for peoples' decisions to vote or not ...
 
Last edited:
17504455_10154165017437574_4813122040628524882_o.png
 
Last edited:
I am fairly certain that power is not something that is equally distributed among human beings. I am also fairly certain that individual power is going to fluctuate depending on circumstances and relationships between people.

In the context of voting, I am attempting to influence the direction of a much larger source of power. If no one attempted to do this, that larger source of power would still exist. It almost seems pointless to try and exert any influence since the power of an individual anonymous vote is infinitesimal compared to just the power of me deciding where I might shop for groceries. Bordering on almost non existent when considering how that vote might influence the massive social structures in a country of 300 million where that country is also dealing with external influence of a world of 10 billion.

Yet, that act, no matter how small and insignificant as it may seem doesn't give or take any power from anyone. It only expresses an individual will. It's a token reminder that as an individual, I have power that may influence another. Regardless if it does or does not it's still an expression that cannot simply be ignored. I am going to vote one way or another. So will you.

And I'm fairly certain that the more power government has the less power the individual has, regardless of circumstances and relationships between people.

But keep on giving consent to your overlords.
 
Last edited:
Do what has to be done to save the world.
The US will be destroyed either way.
Civil War.

Damned if we do, damned if we don't.

Well ultimately what will be done to save the world is...

Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

I've never had any illusions that any politician can "save the world" and that includes Ron Paul. He just would have made things somewhat better had him been elected either time. I'm absolutely convinced of that. He wouldn't be dragged into war by some obviously questionable chemical attack. He would be using toned down rhetoric right now, telling the world and the American people that while this attack, regardless of how it happened, is certainly terrible and regrettable, that it must be put in the proper context, that war is never "humanitarian", and that the way to peace is to de-escalate, not escalate. To those who tried to call him callous, he would point to Jesus and Ghandi. But he ain't Jesus.
 
Isn't Assad working with Russia against ISIS? The whole conflict is confusing, it seems like each 'side' is equally villainous.

Please watch me through your logic how a country fighting terrorism within its borders is equally villainous with a country supporting terror outside its borders. This is a new idea of false equivalence that I have never though of.

Thanks
 
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard:

“It angers and saddens me that President Trump has taken the advice of war hawks and escalated our illegal regime change war to overthrow the Syrian government. This escalation is short-sighted and will lead to more dead civilians, more refugees, the strengthening of al-Qaeda and other terrorists, and a direct confrontation between the United States and Russia—which could lead to nuclear war. This Administration has acted recklessly without care or consideration of the dire consequences of the United States attack on Syria without waiting for the collection of evidence from the scene of the chemical poisoning. If President Assad is indeed guilty of this horrible chemical attack on innocent civilians, I will be the first to call for his prosecution and execution by the International Criminal Court. However, because of our attack on Syria, this investigation may now not even be possible. And without such evidence, a successful prosecution will be much harder.” -TG
 
If Trump thinks he is proving himself tougher than Obama, all he has done is prove himself just as weak - spineless, weak and a patsy for the Neocons/MIC.
 

And ^that was the beginning of some of us in the liberty movement being suckered into the idea that Donald J. Trump was non-interventionist. Some of us work up during the campaign when we learned Donald J. Trump lied when he said he was against the Iraq and Libyan wars from the beginning. Some of us work up once Donald J. Trump became president and started acting more and more interventionist. Some of us work up yesterday with the attack on Syria. And some of us...sadly...will never wake up.
 
Back
Top