If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
I am with Vlad on this one, even though he is yet to say that I am correct on the things that I wrote. Even though he did not specifically say I was wrong. :)
If Bin Laden was in the same room as you right now and he had a gun, he would kill you, like any other member of similar organizations. If he could have killed 3 million people on 911, instead of 3 thousand, he would have. People like that are not to be negotiated with or reasoned with. They are only to be killed or they will kill you. He was not active as he was a coward, hiding out.
They did not lower themselves to his level when they killed him. He was a sick animal that killed thousands of people who had nothing to do with him. The US killed him for doing it and other things. If you wanted to use that arguement to say drone strikes are bad, I would agree. But not on the specific act of killing him.
Last edited by Brian Profit; Monday, 12th December, 2016, 10:50 PM.
They did not lower themselves to his level when they killed him. He was a sick animal that killed thousands of people who had nothing to do with him. The US killed him for doing it and other things. If you wanted to use that arguement to say drone strikes are bad, I would agree. But not on the specific act of killing him.
And that's the point. As bad as Bin Laden was, the US should have kept the highest possible moral standard. Capture him, interrogate him and have him stand trial.
I'm not saying you should try to reason or analyze a criminal like Bin Laden. You arrest him and have him stand trial. That's what civilized people do. Killing him was uncivilized. Exactly as he would have wanted the US to become. Uncivilized.
And that's the point. As bad as Bin Laden was, the US should have kept the highest possible moral standard. Capture him, interrogate him and have him stand trial.
I'm not saying you should try to reason or analyze a criminal like Bin Laden. You arrest him and have him stand trial. That's what civilized people do. Killing him was uncivilized. Exactly as he would have wanted the US to become. Uncivilized.
You make a good argument, Mathieu, but in bin Laden's case there may have been a serious downside to the U.S. taking the high road. I would guess that the intelligence benefits from interrogating Osama would have been minimal. And how would you have tried him? In the U.S. court system where a skillful defense team might stretch out the trial for months or even years? And meanwhile Osama would have been a focal point for Islamic terrorists - might there been a risk of increased terrorist activity as a consequence? Also, a lengthy trial might have given Osama and his supporters a golden opportunity to use the ever-inquisitive 'mainstream' news media to showcase their anti-U.S./anti-Israel/anti-infidel beliefs. And no matter how carefully American prosecutors argued their case, wouldn't there still be hundreds of millions around the world who would view the whole effort as nothing but an American show trial? In an evil world sometimes even good people have to make practical decisions: I say thumbs down to Osama and thanks to the U.S. for taking out an asshole.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Bin Laden wasn't shooting at anyone when they killed him.
I really don't care. Bin Laden got what he deserved.
The rules of civilized society only apply when dealing with civilized people. In some situations it is kill or be killed.
There were people who took issue with the policeman who killed the Ohio Somali terrorist who stabbed ten or eleven people. Are you one of them?
And speaking of saving lives... Has it crossed your mind that he had critical information on an important terrorist organization? In that context, information can save lives...
He had lots of written information and thumbdrives which they duly collected.
Raiding his compound and killing a mostly defenseless Bin Laden was a huge mistake. He was a barbarian, I know. He deserved punishement, I agree. But it doesn't mean the US had to lower themselves to his level for that.
He beareth not the sword in vain. We shall have to agree to disagree.
Historically, the US military could always pretend on having the high ground in terms of morals. This is no longer the case and the Bin Laden killing was just an example. I never thought Obama would let something like that pass, but apparently he did.
That is just silly. Don't you know anyone who has been in a war? There is no high moral ground. It is mostly just killing people before they can kill you.
I really don't care. Bin Laden got what he deserved.
The rules of civilized society only apply when dealing with civilized people. In some situations it is kill or be killed.
There were people who took issue with the policeman who killed the Ohio Somali terrorist who stabbed ten or eleven people. Are you one of them?
Don't get me wrong. If innocent people are in immediate danger, I'm all for 'neutralizing' the threat.
My point is that Bin Laden was no longer an immediate threat. Not even close. Historically speaking, it would have been a very strong statement by the US to capture him and have him stand trial. However hard that would have been (as Peter rightfully mentionned).
This is a very interesting thread. I realize that I shall have to choose my words very carefully, lest I be misunderstood and insulted.
On the Nobel Peace Prize, did they not give one to a man who was involved in the horrible murders of Israelis during the 1972 Munich Olympics?
On Obama, have race relations in America been this bad since the 1960s?
On bin Laden, if they had proven him guilty through some form of legitimate and accepted judicial process, then I would have had no problem with them killing him like a dog.
On bin Laden, if they had proven him guilty through some form of legitimate and accepted judicial process, then I would have had no problem with them killing him like a dog.
Considering we have video evidence of him saying he organized the whole thing, it shouldn't be much of a problem.
My educated guess is that the US didn't want to cause trouble with Saudi Arabia in one form or another.
My educated guess is that the US didn't want to cause trouble with Saudi Arabia in one form or another.
My completely uneducated guess would be to suggest that bin Laden died in early December of 1991, in Afghanistan, as was reported by mainstream American media at the time. Further, I do not believe that this guy had anything to do with the events of September 11, 2001. But for those of you who believe the mainstream media let me ask you a question: How did bin Laden knock down three buildings, all of them huge skyscrapers, with two airplanes? And with respect to the "official" government report, does anyone think it odd that the collapse of a huge skyscraper was NOT mentioned in the report? Does anyone think it odd that the collapse of a huge skyscraper, as a result of its not being mentioned at all in the report, is implicitly deemed to be an extraneous event that was completely unrelated to the other events of that day, which events included among other things two huge buildings collapsing?
Something does not add up with the official story.
My completely uneducated guess would be to suggest that bin Laden died in early December of 1991, in Afghanistan, as was reported by mainstream American media at the time. Further, I do not believe that this guy had anything to do with the events of September 11, 2001. But for those of you who believe the mainstream media let me ask you a question: How did bin Laden knock down three buildings, all of them huge skyscrapers, with two airplanes? And with respect to the "official" government report, does anyone think it odd that the collapse of a huge skyscraper was NOT mentioned in the report? Does anyone think it odd that the collapse of a huge skyscraper, as a result of its not being mentioned at all in the report, is implicitly deemed to be an extraneous event that was completely unrelated to the other events of that day, which events included among other things two huge buildings collapsing?
Something does not add up with the official story.
Do you have a link to your "official" report? Also, where was the third skyscraper located?
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Hint No. 2: There were 2 "huge skyscrapers" hit by hijacked planes on 9/11. The third building was only 5 stories high. Not even in Dogpatch would they consider that third building to be a skyscraper.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Hint No. 2: There were 2 "huge skyscrapers" hit by hijacked planes on 9/11. The third building was only 5 stories high. Not even in Dogpatch would they consider that third building to be a skyscraper.
I haven't checked but I believe much of the Rant is covered in the various conspiracy theory websites... {sigh}
I haven't checked but I believe much of the Rant is covered in the various conspiracy theory websites... {sigh}
Keep in mind that the official theory is itself a conspiracy theory. The government report states that a man in a cave in Afghanistan conspired with about a dozen men armed with box-cutters.
Tweet
Comment