What to do when you encounter a peace rally.

[Memo]

What to do if you happen upon a peace rally by stupid naive hemp-shirt-wearing college idiots, to teach them why force is sometimes needed:

1) Approach ignorant student talking about "peace" and saying there should be, "no retaliation."

2) Engage in brief conversation, ask if military force is appropriate.

3) When he says "No," ask, "Why not?"

4) Wait until he says something to the effect of, "Because that would just cause more innocent deaths, which would be awful and we should not cause more violence."

5) When he's in mid sentence, punch him in the face as hard as you can.

6) When he gets back up to up to punch you, point out that it would be a mistake and contrary to his values to strike you, because that would, "be awful and he should not cause more violence."

7) Wait until he agrees that he has pledged not to commit additional violence.

8) Punch him in the face again, harder this time.
Repeat steps 5 through 8 until they understand that sometimes it is necessary to punch back.

[speedracer120]

ROFLMAO!!!

Oh dang dude. I'd like to watch a videotape of that.

[sbp]

[pennypinch]

If you punched me in the face, how do you figure you're innocent? How would you feel if you punched me and I went and punched your mother?

[sbp]

"How would you feel if you punched me and I went and punched your mother?" I'd shoot ya.

[BrewMaster]

Originally posted by UT Memo
What to do if you happen upon a peace rally by stupid naive hemp-shirt-wearing college idiots, to teach them why force is sometimes needed:

1) Approach ignorant student talking about "peace" and saying there should be, "no retaliation."

2) Engage in brief conversation, ask if military force is appropriate.

3) When he says "No," ask, "Why not?"

4) Wait until he says something to the effect of, "Because that would just cause more innocent deaths, which would be awful and we should not cause more violence."

5) When he's in mid sentence, punch him in the face as hard as you can.

6) When he gets back up to up to punch you, point out that it would be a mistake and contrary to his values to strike you, because that would, "be awful and he should not cause more violence."

7) Wait until he agrees that he has pledged not to commit additional violence.

8) Punch him in the face again, harder this time.
Repeat steps 5 through 8 until they understand that sometimes it is necessary to punch back.

HAHAH! I'll have to remember that. What made you post that UT Memo? Just curious.

[Nija]

*wipes tear from eye* oh stop it... can't take anymore...

Nija

[Memo]

Well, basically, if you've ever seen the movie PCU.....That is what UT is like right now. Everyday, gotta be harassed by anti-war hippies trying to hand me fliers full of propaganda. They're always protesting something. The was a big march onto the Capitol building too. Silly pacifists

[BrewMaster]

haha it's becoming a slugfest in here!

[Burzhui]

UT, you crack me up dude, i was laughing for a while and then immagined this whole scene and laughed a bit more... if you got those hippies there make a tape and post it, i'd love to download that movie

[zenbooty]

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority is a good time to reflect and reevaluate.

[mojo]

Originally posted by pennypinch
If you punched me in the face, how do you figure you're innocent? How would you feel if you punched me and I went and punched your mother?

sounds like you got the point...violence could make retaliation necessary to prevent further acts of the same. you're either agreeing...or you're saying that the terrorists are innocent. but of course you're not saying that.

ut memo has earned my respect with his insight.

however, what to do when they don't want to punch you back, but just wish to press charges? that's a different story i'm thinkin. bring a lawyer to this event, kiddies

[jase71]

For what it's worth, I support military action against the terrorists, but this little "story" is pretty one-sided and unrealistic.

You can write it the other way as well.

1) Approach dumb rich ignorant student talking about "war" and saying
there should be, "retribution and revenge."

2) Engage in brief conversation, ask if military force is appropriate.

3) When he says "Yes" ask, "Why?"

4) Wait until he says something to the effect of, "Because I believe in an eye for an eye. A quick strike is a deterrent to further attacks. Because violence is the only way to get through to these bastards. Because we need to deliver a strong message."

5) When he's in mid sentence, punch him in the face as hard as you can.

6) When he gets back up to up to punch you, point out that you're only using his own values on him. Point out that you're making a strong statement. You're only making sure he doesn't ever DARE to hit you, in case he was thinking about it. And this is apparently the only way he'll listen.

7) Punch him in the face again, harder this time.


Repeat steps 5 through 7 until he understands that violence always comes at the expense of one side, and that it's more "fun" to dish it out than it is to take it. And that someone always ends up suffering as a result of violence. Violence only determines WHO suffers, it doesn't eliminate suffering.

[brainsmile]

I'm dying here

[Grimm]

Originally posted by pennypinch
How would you feel if you punched me and I went and punched your mother?

I would miss you. I would go to your funeral if they ever found your body. No, I wouldn't do anything. I wouldn't have to. Where do you think evilc got his evil from???

Even when you believe in peace, there comes a time when you have to accept that there must be violence.
When another group of people will kill you for having beliefs different from your own, including being peacful, something must be done.
You can try economic and social pressure, as we have in the past. But when they start coming to you and killing your people just because we aren't just like them? It's time to show them why we can afford the luxuries like protesters, peaceniks, pacifists, and peace rallys. Because our system of government and beliefs makes us stronger than all the suicide bombers, hijackers, and terror squads they can muster.

There is a time for peace and a time for war. Shift change, it's time to punch the clock people.

[chrissy]

Originally posted by evilcyclops


I would miss you. I would go to your funeral if they ever found your body. No, I wouldn't do anything. I wouldn't have to. Where do you think evilc got his evil from???

Even when you believe in peace, there comes a time when you have to accept that there must be violence.
When another group of people will kill you for having beliefs different from your own, including being peacful, something must be done.
You can try economic and social pressure, as we have in the past. But when they start coming to you and killing your people just because we aren't just like them? It's time to show them why we can afford the luxuries like protesters, peaceniks, pacifists, and peace rallys. Because our system of government and beliefs makes us stronger than all the suicide bombers, hijackers, and terror squads they can muster.

There is a time for peace and a time for war. Shift change, it's time to punch the clock people.

Like that...

[Burzhui]

Originally posted by jase71
For what it's worth, I support military action against the terrorists, but this little "story" is pretty one-sided and unrealistic.

You can write it the other way as well.

1) Approach dumb rich ignorant student talking about "war" and saying
there should be, "retribution and revenge."

2) Engage in brief conversation, ask if military force is appropriate.

3) When he says "Yes" ask, "Why?"

4) Wait until he says something to the effect of, "Because I believe in an eye for an eye. A quick strike is a deterrent to further attacks. Because violence is the only way to get through to these bastards. Because we need to deliver a strong message."

5) When he's in mid sentence, punch him in the face as hard as you can.

6) When he gets back up to up to punch you, point out that you're only using his own values on him. Point out that you're making a strong statement. You're only making sure he doesn't ever DARE to hit you, in case he was thinking about it. And this is apparently the only way he'll listen.

7) Punch him in the face again, harder this time.


Repeat steps 5 through 7 until he understands that violence always comes at the expense of one side, and that it's more "fun" to dish it out than it is to take it. And that someone always ends up suffering as a result of violence. Violence only determines WHO suffers, it doesn't eliminate suffering.

Umm dude you are forgetting that the rich kid did not punch anyone... therefore you have no right to punch him back.

[jase71]

Originally posted by Burzhui


Umm dude you are forgetting that the rich kid did not punch anyone... therefore you have no right to punch him back.

Umm, dude, read the first example. The pacifist student in the first story didn't punch anyone either. Therefore no one had any right to punch him first.

The punch comes out of the blue in both versions.

Both are equally flawed, which was kind of my point...

[Burzhui]

Hold up, the pacifists are protesting military acction against afghanistan.

Some rich kid will not go and protest for violence if nothing has happened therefore he does not need to be taught.
Plus i really don't think that you would want to come up to someone at a rally for retaliation and punch them, you will get ripped to shreads

[jase71]

Originally posted by Burzhui
Hold up, the pacifists are protesting military acction against afghanistan.

Some rich kid will not go and protest for violence if nothing has happened therefore he does not need to be taught.
Plus i really don't think that you would want to come up to someone at a rally for retaliation and punch them, you will get ripped to shreads

You're reading too much into it. Nowhere in the original example does it list what the protest is about. It says nothing about Afghanistan. It doesn't list a date when it occurs. It says nothing about what sparked the protest. It could be in the 60's for all we know. Or the 70's. Or the 80's.

I've seen variations of this story several times over the last 10 years, so it was around long before the WTC issue. I didn't assume it was referring to it.

I don't think you really want to come up to someone at ANY rally and punch them unprovoked. You'll go to jail for assault. So why worry about whether it's realistic to do it at a peace rally or a retaliation rally? It's illegal in either case, and the law makes no issue of what kind of rally it might have been.

The point is, the original story was unrealistic and silly. And my example was just as unrealistic and silly in counterpoint.

Hypothetical little stories like this are fun when they reinforce what you believe. But how useful are they, really?

[Burzhui]

damn it, i guess i did read too much into it... but i like UT's version of the story better