Top 10 Most Wanted Fugitives
Published on July 28, 2008 - 172 Comments
There was jubilation last week as Radovan Karadic (the most wanted man in Europe) was caught after 13 years on the run. The worst crimes on his indictment are the 43-month siege of Sarajavo in which 10,000 civilians were killed and the massacre of 7000 Muslim men and boys in Srebrenicain in July 1995. There are thousand of fugitives around the globe including terrorists, killers, drug smugglers, and war criminals. This is a list of 10 such fugitives - 10 of the world’s most evil and dangerous men on the run. Many more could have made this list, so this is just a brief account of some of the well-known and not so well-known criminals from around the globe.
He escaped from a prison transport van in June 2003, he was being taken from Brixton prison to face charges over a £1.25 million security van heist in which the driver of the van was shot in the knee after he was ordered to open the door while his colleague was pistol-whipped. His partner in crime was convicted in February of using a gun to escape from the van. Detectives have vowed that Cunningham will have his day in court.
Linked to 18 murders he has evaded the FBI for 9 years. Known as Whitey, the 78-year-old Boston crook is on the U.S. 10 most wanted list for drug dealing, money laundering, extortion, murder and other organised crimes. He is known to use disguises to visit libraries and historic sites. The FBI is offering $1 million for information leading to his arrest.
The top target of American drug enforcement administration, also known as Shorty, the 54 year old heads the Sinaloa Cartel International drug traffickers, he reputed pays up to $2 million to lieutenants to keep him safe and is said to change mobile phones after each conversation. Loera follows the Sinaloan credo of not killing innocent people and is regarded as a Robin Hood type character.
In 1990 following the collapse of his Polly Peck business empire he fled from the UK to northern Cyprus. He was prosecuted on various counts of theft and fraud but failed to appear for trial in 1993 having absconded to the unrecognised Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus - which has no extradition treaty with the UK. He is wanted on theft charges of 34 million. In 2003 he vowed to return to clear his name but refused until the British Government promised not to remand him in jail until his trial.
The former KGB spy aged 42 is wanted in the UK for the murder of soldier and spy Alexander Litvinenko, who died in 2006 after being poisoned with radioactive polonium-210 in London. The authorities say they have enough to charge Lugovoi but the Russians refuse to hand him over. He protests his innocence from Moscow and claims MI6 spies, the Russian Mafia or Kremlin opponent Boris Berezovsky carried out the killing.
So far 83 people wanted for genocide by the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (UN-ICTR) have been apprehended. Augustin Bizimana is the most senior of the 13 remaining still at large. The 54 year old former defense minister faces charges over the massacre of 800 000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus in 1994. Six years ago the U.S. offered a $5 million reward for his capture but he has evaded capture.
The UN says the ethnic cleansing carried out by Sudanese dictator Omar Hassan al-Bashir left 300 00 dead and 2.5 million homeless in the Darfur region, where his regime used rape as an instrument of terror. International Criminal Court prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo requested a warrant to arrest him on 10 charges genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity but critics said it would make matters worse for the people of Darfur. Last week al-Bashir, 63, danced in front of a massive crowd and gave a defiant speech during a visit to Darfur.
Known as Dr Death SS officer Dr Aribert Heim is accused of the killing and torture of inmates at the Mauthausen concentration camp. Now 94, his methods included injecting toxic compounds into the hearts of victims and performing surgery without anaesthetic. He is one of the last major Nazi fugitives still at large. He fled Germany in 1962. This month, it was revealed he was living in Chile. The Simon Wiesanthal Centre and German and Austrian governments are offering a $495,000 reward.
Mladic, 66, was Bosnian Serb leader Karadzic’s army chief and a key figure in the ethnic cleansing of Croats and Muslims. He was indicted for genocide by the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (UN-ICTY) at The Hague in 1995. The Serbia government is offering $1 million for his capture while the USA is offering $5 million. He is one of only two of 161 wanted by the UN-ICTY who remain free. The other is Goran Hadzic who faces 14 counts of war crimes.
The man allegedly behind the world’s worst terror attack continues to evade justice almost seven years after 9 /11 in which 3000 people died. Saudi Arabian Osama Bin Laden, 51, has also been indicted over the 1998 embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya. There is almost $50 million reward on his head. His most likely whereabouts are thought to be around the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan. US intelligence officials believe that he no longer uses a cell phone.
Contributor: Tamala
Related ListsTop 10 Bizarre CoffinsTop 5 Worst Thanksgivings Top 10 Outstanding US Presidents Top 10 Greatest Albums Of The Nineties |
SubscriptionsLike this article? Subscribe to the RSS feed to keep 'em coming, or subscribe via email: |
If you find this site helpful, please leave a donation so you can enjoy the spirit of giving too.
Email This Post
1. Subsistence. - July 29th, 2008 at 3:47 am
Entertaining list, keep it up.
2. romerozombie - July 29th, 2008 at 3:49 am
According to celestial formations, Bin Laden will be caught this year.
3. Star - July 29th, 2008 at 3:55 am
Excellent list
4. bushdick - July 29th, 2008 at 3:56 am
laden is not really a ‘fugitive’, is he? great list but laden, come on… the citizens of the western world open your eyes.
5. sharlu - July 29th, 2008 at 3:59 am
kinda freaky knowing these people are still out there :S
6. Vespoidea - July 29th, 2008 at 4:17 am
great list as always! quite a few spelling mistakes though.. (The Andrei Lugovoi section) sorry for being an ass!
7. Josh Lops - July 29th, 2008 at 4:18 am
nice list, but there is spelling mistakes in number six and seven Whish (which) and inj (in)
8. Tempyra - July 29th, 2008 at 4:24 am
Cool list
Haha… when I got to number 9 (James J Bulger) I was momentarily confused - James B. Bolger is a former prime minister of New Zealand. I am glad they’re not the same person
9. Barabas - July 29th, 2008 at 4:25 am
Not sure but I think bin laden is searched by the FBI only for the attacks in 93 (?) .
10. Tamala - July 29th, 2008 at 4:30 am
Vespoidea yeah yuor rghit tehre are a fwe holwers, i unfoertuantely ruhsed it a ibt, but as tdoay is ym brtihady, i’ll frovige msyfel jsut tihs ocne
lamo
11. jfrater - July 29th, 2008 at 4:39 am
I will edit the spelling errors out - I published with only half the spell check done by mistake - I am not at home at the mo but it will be fixed within the hour.
12. jfrater - July 29th, 2008 at 4:43 am
Oh - and Tempyra: to make things even more confusing, James Bulger was the name of the little boy slaughtered by the scummy English children who are now roaming the streets of England free! More on that on this list - item 4.
13. Josh - July 29th, 2008 at 4:43 am
bushdick…..wow, do you really believe that Osama bin Laden is not a fugitive? He was behind the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center, the US Cole bombing in Yemen, the attacks on the US Embassies mentioned in the list, and let’s not forget the failed 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. So, don’t tell the Western world to open our eyes…open your eyes, my friend
14. Diogenes - July 29th, 2008 at 4:50 am
Way to pull the punches out this tuesday on listverse!
Your story bit on Joaquin Guzman Loera made me think of the patron saint of/to drug dealers/trafficers/lords– one Jesus Malverde. He had become a “folk hero”, also represented as a “robin hood” of the peole. Real “cocaine songs” have been made about him.
15. Mom424 - July 29th, 2008 at 4:59 am
Happy Birthday Tamala!!!! How come we get the present?
Good job. Nice List.
16. Tamala - July 29th, 2008 at 5:03 am
ty MOM424
Josh, i had a feeling the inclusion of Bin Laden would fuel some debate, i almost left him out, there seemed no point in putting him at no2 or no7, he was either no1 or nowhere. The term fugitive implies that someone is on the run while others are actively trying to catch them. My personal opinion is that for various reasons this is NOT the case with Bin Laden.
A list like this will be viewed by most people in the context of their own geographical and social conditions, -one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter- kind of thing, many others could’ve made this list including North Korea’s Kim Jong-il, Burma’s junta leader Than Shwe, Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe and Uzbekistan’s Islam Karimov, and lets not forget, former U.S. secretary of state Henry Kissinger has been accused of committing war crimes in Indochina, Bangladesh, East Timor, Chile, Cambodia, and Vietnam amongst others.
17. AmazingThor - July 29th, 2008 at 5:04 am
Some of these guys could double as the most evil men list. I didn’t know there were Nazis we still hadn’t caught. Where does he get the money to keep people from turning him in?
18. Tempyra - July 29th, 2008 at 5:14 am
jfrater: Yeah that occurred to me after posting my first comment, that the name was familiar for more than one reason.
I recall reading somewhere in the last year that one of those kids (who killed the child James Bulger) was now living in Australia. Dunno if it was fact or rumour though.
19. Avi - July 29th, 2008 at 5:15 am
Wow i can not believe Nazis are still on the run like that. i guess some people never die. i almost thought it was a wasted effort to keep searching for them cause old age should have killed any of the survivors but at 94 i bet he thought he got away for good. i hope he is caught and a message is sent that no one can run from justice if you have truely committed crimes against humanity like they did.
20. Tempyra - July 29th, 2008 at 5:17 am
Tamala - Thanks for the list! Hope you have a lovely birthday
21. Cyn - July 29th, 2008 at 5:20 am
edit done.
22. Tamala - July 29th, 2008 at 5:25 am
ty Tempyra :), in my home town of Paisley, Scotland we recently had a case where someone living here was accused by locals of being Robert Thompson, one of the murderers of James Bulger, he eventually left town after the police failed to give commitments concerning his personal safety, the other murderer, Jon Venables, was indeed roumored to have relocated to Australia.
23. jfrater - July 29th, 2008 at 5:27 am
Cyn: many thanks - to be honest - in my state of sobriety (or lack thereof) I think I would have made things worse!
24. jfrater - July 29th, 2008 at 5:30 am
AmazingThor: more to the point - how old must these nazis be now? Is it worth the expense and effort to track them down when they are living in hiding and have no chance of normal life before they die? Maybe it is - I don’t know.
25. Silarulz! - July 29th, 2008 at 5:30 am
Cmon jfrater…
Where are the real fugitives? People like Félicien Kabuga, there is a $5 million dollar reward out for his capture!
26. jfrater - July 29th, 2008 at 5:32 am
I guess it is ironic that the convicted murderer of James Bulger should have moved to Australia - for reasons that will be obvious to those who know Aussie’s history
27. jfrater - July 29th, 2008 at 5:33 am
silarulz!: according to Wikipedia: “According to June 2008 reports by the Norwegian-based African Press International (API) Kabunga was in hiding in Oslo, Norway and might be seeking to turn himself in.” - hardly fugitive if he is considering turning himself in
28. Tamala - July 29th, 2008 at 5:40 am
Jfrater first of all let me apoligise for the shocking spelling mistakes, completely unforgivable and thanks to Cyn for the edit, as you know this is only my 3rd list on here, so have to do better in future.
your comment @ 24 i completely agree i really cant see the purpose of hunting for these people anymore.
@ 26 exactly what i was thinking when i was writing the reply lol
29. jfrater - July 29th, 2008 at 5:45 am
Tamala: no probs on the spelling issue - I normally do a better job of checking but as I said, we hit a glitch today
Diogenes: I don’t say this often enough, but I do love reading your comments - they are a breath of fresh (albeit often unusual) fresh air
30. jake - July 29th, 2008 at 5:47 am
man those are some mean sons of bitches i didnt know that humans could have so much disregaurd for there fellow man thats crazy
31. timmie - July 29th, 2008 at 5:52 am
Great list!
I was going to say that Victor Bout should be on the list but remembered that he’d been caught just this march.
32. trojan_man - July 29th, 2008 at 5:54 am
jfrater and tamala: Maybe the “old” Nazis are being hunted to help his victim’s families. I don’t think it is a case of whether or not it is “worth it the expense”. Maybe it is for closure. If you have ever truly been a victim of this type, you would know what I am saying.
33. jfrater - July 29th, 2008 at 5:56 am
trojan_man: having never been a victim of genocide I shall have to take your word for it - thank for replying to my question!
34. Eve - July 29th, 2008 at 6:20 am
Dr.Death was recently exposed by a tabloid in the UK(if I remember correctly)-I couldn’t believe that even at 94 he was having no remorse whatsoever about his victims and was boasting about his terrible deeds.
It seems that so many people nowadays are compared to Robin Hood -the poop guy has become the most used and abused comparison figure in history.It is time for somebody to put together Top 10 Robin Hoods of our time….
35. astraya - July 29th, 2008 at 6:21 am
There are now visa requirements for British criminals to come to Australia!
36. dan231 - July 29th, 2008 at 6:25 am
I agree with trojan_man - for the crimes the Nazi’s perpetrated against humanity, they all should be brought to justice no matter how long it’s been or how old they are. It would almost be like they got a free ride. All time spent in hiding true, but they still hadn’t stood trial for their crimes.
37. Sharki - July 29th, 2008 at 6:35 am
To be fair, Bin Laden has never been charged with the Sept. 11th attacks. Technically he is only wanted for the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania.
38. Ruairi - July 29th, 2008 at 6:41 am
I second the notion of a list of the Top 10 Real Robin Hoods… i could make it myself but i cant as i cant read or write.
maybe im just too lazy.
39. dangorironhide - July 29th, 2008 at 6:50 am
Good list, it’s interesting to read about these people.
40. Silarulz! - July 29th, 2008 at 6:57 am
Jfrater: Kabuga is in Kenya. I saw him today on my way to work!
41. Cyn - July 29th, 2008 at 6:58 am
@ Tamala
np
@ J
42. Mac - July 29th, 2008 at 7:01 am
Interesting list, though Asil Nadir (no 7) seems to stick out like a sore thumb amongst the perpetrators of murders and genocide (though I know nothing of him beyond what is mentioned here).
NOT that Nadir’s fraud is justifiable at all or that he shouldn’t be punished, but you would think there are *more* wanted and dangerous killers or something. He just doesn’t seem to fit in with the rest of the list. Curious.
43. Ghidoran - July 29th, 2008 at 7:05 am
Cool
44. Tempyra - July 29th, 2008 at 7:05 am
jfrater:
“I guess it is ironic that the convicted murderer of James Bulger should have moved to Australia - for reasons that will be obvious to those who know Aussie’s history :)”
A subtle piece of Aussie-baiting lol
Tamala: Wow, wouldn’t it be horrible if the guy wasn’t him? Being compelled to leave a town because people might think you’re a child killer.
If I recall correctly there were lots of rumours going around (here in Aussie-land) that Jon Venables was involved in the murder of a small girl at a shopping centre in Western Australia. I think the police decided it was someone else entirely, but a lot of people were pretty annoyed (having found out through the publicity of the murder) that another government let the guy come here like a normal immigrant.
45. Grace M - July 29th, 2008 at 7:45 am
Interesting list. One comment about hunting down Nazi criminals. I know they’re old, most of them are dead, but hunting them down does serve a purpose. Many would be members of regimes around the world who are committing crimes now should be aware that once they stop they can’t just live peacefully for the rest of their days. They will have to look behind their shoulders forever. It’s not a punishment to equal the atrocities they’re committing but it doesn’t give them a free ride. It seems somehow inadequate but it really does need to be done.
46. Csimmons - July 29th, 2008 at 8:00 am
great list, very entertaining, keep up the good list!
47. Iain - July 29th, 2008 at 8:17 am
Personally, I think it’s entirely appropriate that someone from Paisley should come up with a list of ne’er-do-wells and all round ’scunners’.
Iain (ex-Greenock)
48. Joshua - July 29th, 2008 at 8:22 am
A good number of people think Bin Laden is dead…
49. Flock O’Seagulls - July 29th, 2008 at 8:23 am
Tamala, “bushd***” (classy name, btw)–so, Bin Laden isn’t really a fugitive and might even be classified a “freedom fighter,” huh? I tell you what–let’s set up a situation where you are faced with the choice of diving off a skycraper or roasting alive–the situation the 9/11 victims faced. You people literally make me ill.
50. SocialButterfly - July 29th, 2008 at 8:35 am
Well done on the list Tamala… great read it was informative without being too much.
Oh and btw: HAPPY BIRTHDAY!
51. jake - July 29th, 2008 at 9:07 am
id love to catch Bin Laden id take a blow tourch to his whole body
and some one up there said that Bin Laden wasnt a fugitive and that we need to opean our eyes you my friend are RETARTED take a second and think about what you just have said yeah every one on this list is a bad person and they all needa be delt with….. im just sayen to me Bin Laden is pure evil to have his followers do something like 9/11 or the many more attacks that he has been behind im glad he needs to be number one
52. Tamala - July 29th, 2008 at 9:18 am
Ian @ 47 lmao i see these scunners everyday as you know
SocialButterfly @50 tyvm
Flock O’Seagulls @49 i didnt say Bin Laden was a freedom fighter i was merely quoting an old saying to demonstrate how different people with different belief systems from around the world can have entirley different opinions. I neither said he wasnt a fugitive or that he was a freedom fighter. Please read comment 16 again
53. Hobolad - July 29th, 2008 at 9:21 am
@Jake: I’ve not read the argument so far, but do you not see the irony?
Bin Laden I won’t defend, his actions are abhorrent. *But* how is it any different from the actions of those hunting him? Or the actions of our own countries past and present?
When Bin Laden kills innocents, it’s *evil* right? When we kill innocents, it’s a means to an end. We think we’re allowed, but we’re just the same.
I mean, take Hiroshima & Nagasaki for instance- the largest loss of life by terrorist action (if I’m not mistaken). You can say we murdered all those innocents as a means to an end, so it’s okay. But isn’t Bin Laden doing exactly the same thing- killing as a means to an end?
Again, not defending him- I see him as guilty as you do, but if he’s “Pure Evil” then what does that make us, killing innocents in an attempt to fight him/killing innocents to fight faux-Communism/killing hundreds of thousands of innocents to display nuclear power to the Soviets/killing innocents for resources/killing innocents to protect the interests of companies abroad etc etc etc?
I don’t reckon there’s such a thing as “good” and “evil”, but whatever.
54. Hobolad - July 29th, 2008 at 9:22 am
Nice list by the way, I’ll keep an eye open just in case
55. Rey - July 29th, 2008 at 9:24 am
Emmanuel Goldstein … er, sorry, Osama bin Laden, died in December, 2001. Killed by Omar Sheikh. His funeral was well reported in Pakistan and Syria. Both Pervez Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto - leaders of a country that would be in position to know - have made public comments about this. Khalid Sheikh Muhammed has also told this to American officials, but of course, the CIA has admitted that they destroyed the tapes of his interrogation. As for his inclusion on the most wanted list? Get real. As Richard Myers said, “The goal has never been to get Bin Laden.” Pretending he is still alive makes for a convenient boogie man to inspire fear and terror whenever the current administration needs the public to feel fear and terror - witness the visceral comments to this very article - but it’s naive to believe he’s still out there on the run.
56. Tempyra - July 29th, 2008 at 9:40 am
“you my friend are RETARTED”
Comment of the day?
57. Tamala - July 29th, 2008 at 9:45 am
Rey “As Richard Myers said, “The goal has never been to get Bin Laden.” that was another reason i thought twice about including Bin Laden, as i said in an earlier post i didnt believe he was in the true sense of the word a *fugitive*
he aint hiding, and no1 is looking for him!!!
58. bucslim - July 29th, 2008 at 9:53 am
Hobolad, how exactly was Hiroshima and Nagasaki a ‘terrorist action?’
59. Mike D - July 29th, 2008 at 9:55 am
Fascinating group of criminals but I can’t figure out why Dick Cheney isn’t listed.
60. kowzilla - July 29th, 2008 at 10:06 am
Temyra (56)
Nay.
Comment of the YEAR.
61. Randall - July 29th, 2008 at 10:12 am
Hobolad:
I was going to tear you apart, but I find it makes me feel dirty to even get near defending the current administration’s actions, and as such therefore I find some of what you say to be sensible.
However, this nonsense about Hiroshima and Nagasaki… is just that. Pure nonsense. It’s utter cant to call the action of bombing those cities “terrorism.” Don’t give me the moral relativist arguments here Hobolad. They won’t wash.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were actions taken during *wartime* in a declared war between nations. This is completely different, yes, from the actions of individuals murdering hundreds of people in an undeclared action of terrorism.
My arguments regarding Hiroshima and Nagasaki have been covered in full in the commentary under the Harry Truman list here:
http://listverse.com/people/to.....ry-truman/
I suggest you read my comments there.
62. Phil - July 29th, 2008 at 10:13 am
“you my friend are RETARTED”
That is classic alright. Slogan for listverse tshirt perhaps.
63. Phil - July 29th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Bit like, “Get a Brain Morans”
64. Bob - July 29th, 2008 at 10:24 am
What’s with the “crimes against humanity” thing, anyway? Sounds rather grandiose to me. How about “crimes against these particular humans”? You convict a person for a particular crime. When you start convicting for vague statements that preach well, down the line it isn’t “humanity” that suffers, but humans.
65. Ro - July 29th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Dictator Omar Hassan al-Bashir is no fugitive. He’s the dictator of Sudan and can be seen on the media. If any government feels that some action is needed to oust him, they they can go ahead and do it, given they are capable of the task. He’s always there on Sudan and is not fleeing from anything because he does’t have to. Nobody is applying that kind of pressure just yet. So how is he a fugitive?
66. Randall - July 29th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Phil:
“you my friend are RETARTED”
That is classic alright. Slogan for listverse tshirt perhaps.
—-actually, that is the best suggestion I’ve heard in ages.
67. bucslim - July 29th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Just lying in wait Randall, the posse is here and we got yer back.
No need to raise an eyebrow, you can go back to your Obama shrine and “Change We Can Believe In” chants knowing your neocon friend is pooh-poohing the revisionists. (giggle, snort, titter, guffaw, harrumph)
I just hope they aren’t teaching that bullshit in school, damned hippies!
68. bucslim - July 29th, 2008 at 10:52 am
RETARTED - to have once been a tart, then repented, then began tarting again.
alt: to eat a tart, then consume a second tart, then reporting such action to a good friend.
“That schmores pop tart was so good, I retarted.”
69. deepthinker - July 29th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Wow… is it really that easy to evade capture? I can’t even hide from my family for 5 minutes, without being found! Cell phones… blessing, or curse?
70. Callie - July 29th, 2008 at 10:58 am
bucslim my coworker just looked at me funny cause I laughed rather loudly.
Jake thinks he’s a lolcat. “I are retarted. for realz. nom nom nom nom.”
71. dan231 - July 29th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Bob - 64
What’s with the “crimes against humanity” thing, anyway? Sounds rather grandiose to me.
It is grandiose, but it also fits in with what the Nazi’s had done. They didn’t target individuals, but complete races. That is humanity as a whole. You can charge them with the killing and suffering of how many thousands or hundreds of thousands, but in the end, they really committed crimes against humanity in general.
IMHO it lessens the crimes to call it crimes against these particular humans.
72. bucslim - July 29th, 2008 at 11:01 am
That’s some funny shit Callie, I think I’m going to start using that word in my everyday conversations.
73. JayArr - July 29th, 2008 at 11:09 am
I heard that Dr. Death is Dead.
Interesting list, though I would not have put 10, 7 and 6 on this list… they are pretty tame by all accounts in comparison to others (too many for me to name here) who’d be better candidates for this list.
74. Hobolad - July 29th, 2008 at 11:13 am
I don’t particularly care if they are technically “terrorism” or not- doesn’t change a damn thing about what happened. I, as merely a layman, I would call any targeting of civilians as terrorism- hell, all those civilians didn’t declare war on anyone.
You say I’m revisionist, I say you’d be making excuses for a heinous act- if of course you’d given me the dignity of actually giving an argument rather than expecting me to take your word for it, or read through some 120-odd comment list.
So, really- calling it terrorism or not, it’s still a dickhead thing to do, if not technically “terrorism”, it’s on the same level, in that it’s the killing of innocents to achieve an end. It’s no better.
Not sure who the “Obama” comment was directed at- if it was me, well, I’m foreign, and anyway I find him to be just another hypocrite politician (I’ll wait for a relevant list to pop up though- or at least give him a chance at actually doing stuff before passing “final” judgement) albeit better than the competition.
75. kowzilla - July 29th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Callie, bucslim, et al.
That is the reason that you ALWAYS read over your comments before you post them on ListVerse.
76. Randall - July 29th, 2008 at 11:19 am
buc:
I love it when you come in here all wasted.
What relation does “retorted” bear to “retarted”? Is it something to do with Goldmember’s torturous pronunciation, “toit like a toiger”?
77. Callie - July 29th, 2008 at 11:28 am
Randall- Peace offering?
Sandy MacReedy: I want you to kill every gopher on the course.
Carl Spackler: Correct me if I’m wrong, Sandy, but if I kill all the golfers they’re gonna lock me up and throw away the key.
78. Callie - July 29th, 2008 at 11:32 am
just the first thing your post reminded me of
79. bucslim - July 29th, 2008 at 11:32 am
Hobolad - the first comment I made was directed at you and it’s obvious that you haven’t read a history book or have any idea what the War in the Pacific was headed toward. To suggest that it was a terrorist act is ignorant at best. Even a casual skimming of the history would reveal that the bombs actually saved many lives and put an end to a long drawn out conflict. To not drop the bomb meant a torturous and grueling invasion of Japan, where every single citizen would have fought to the death which was proven over and over and over again in the tiny islands of the South Pacific. To drop the bombs were grave decisions indeed, but righteous in every respect.
The second comment was directed at my tree-hugger friend Randall. I was his posse.
80. Silenus - July 29th, 2008 at 11:37 am
bucslim:
According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, Terrorism is defined as “the systematic use of terror, especially as a means of coercion.”
People have been conditioned by the Establishment to think that terrorism is only violence committed against… the Establishment.
But I’d label both the attack on Pearl Harbour and The dropping of the A-bombs on Japan as acts of terrorism.
After all, the purpose of both of these acts was to instil enough terror in their enemy to conquer them.
81. Randall - July 29th, 2008 at 11:42 am
Hobolad:
War is what it is, Hobolad. Particularly in byegone ages when technology didn’t allow for true “precision bombing” (as much as such a thing really even exists today, which is debatable). In such circumstances, it’s naive and precious-minded to think that civilians shouldn’t be targeted or can go unharmed. And I beg to differ anyway–the citizens of Japan DID play a willing part in their country’s declaration of war upon the United States; the mere fact that neither Germany nor Japan were democracies does not excuse the German or Japanese people from culpability in what their leaders chose to do.
People like you show a remarkable inability to place yourselves back into the mindsets of those who lived through history. Now the fact is if you had simply stated that all war is wrong and all forms of killing wrong, I’d think you were standing on a firmer and better leg. But you object only to the killing of civilians–which shows you simply don’t understand a thing about history and are just a whinging, prissy moralist with little grasp of reality. Yeah, Hobolad, it’d be nice if only soldiers had to die in war, but it’d be nicer if NO ONE had to die. It’d be nicer if wars simply didn’t happen, period. But they DO. And the reality is that a war like WWII was the bloodiest, nastiest, most godawful conflict in human history (and hopefully the last of its nature) and given the kind of war it was, and the circumstances of it, it is entirely understandable how it became a Total War between peoples, not merely a war between armies and navies. If you don’t understand this or appreciate it, well… it would take too long to get you to see reality, I’m afraid.
You see, to paint the victims of Hiroshima merely AS victims ignores half the story. The other half of the story is the culpability of Japan itself in the war it had unleashed in the Pacific–in the atrocities committed by the Japanese–in the fact that, had Japan been able to do so, it most certainly would have annihilated American civilians as readily as it annihilated Chinese, Korean, and Filipino civilians (and others).
Hiroshima and Nagasaki are *tragedies* of humanity, Hobolad. Not “acts of terrorism.” To call them that brings them down to the level of a street suicide bomber. They were much more than that, much more. Hiroshima was both wrong AND right, good (in that they brought an end to the war) AND horrible and horrific… but no more crimes than the fact that war itself is a crime.
I’m not making excuses for Hiroshima–I’m pointing out to you that your naivete clouds your judgement on the issue.
As for giving you an argument–you want it, I got it. But don’t blame me for your own laziness. I gave you the link to list with my earlier statements, and you needn’t look through a “120-odd comments.” My statements are near the end of the commentary and are clearly marked with my name. It was an argument between myself and someone named “Steve.” The only reason I don’t wish to reprint all that here is because it wastes everyone else’s time and takes up too much space. If you insist on it though, I’d be glad to slam you down on this point as readily as I did Steve.
I am not happy that hundreds of thousands of Japanese had to die in those two cities (but it’s also a myth that only civilians died there—both cities were military bases and many soldiers and sailors were killed). I’d rather that entire war had never happened. But to call the Japanese citizens of those cities “innocents” ignores the whole truth of that period of history–and your persistence in so calling them so is inane and ignorant of reality.
82. Randall - July 29th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Callie:
Sure thing. I never carry things over from one list to another. It simply isn’t done.
or.. well, I shouldn’t say never. We’re all only human.
83. Randall - July 29th, 2008 at 11:45 am
buc:
Bless my posse and all who feed them.
And I haven’t hugged a tree in ages, man. ‘cept the mast on my boat–and that’s aluminum, so it doesn’t count. Plus, sounds dirty… “hugging the mast.”
84. CacophonyCentral - July 29th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Randall:
“the citizens of Japan DID play a willing part in their country’s declaration of war upon the United States; the mere fact that neither Germany nor Japan were democracies does not excuse the German or Japanese people from culpability in what their leaders chose to do.”
So, by extension, the victims of September 11th desrved what they got, because they were culpable for what Bush et al did in the Middle East?
And Randall, I’ve just read the comments between you and Steve in the Truman list and no, you didn’t “slam him down.” In fact, his posts were much more erudite and eloquent than your own, and tempered with a gallant politeness which you yourself lacked.
Please. You’re not as clever as you think you are.
And don’t bother responding to this post with your usual string of playground insults, as I’ve got better things to do than sit around in this comments section waiting for you to call me an idiot, or dickhead, or whatever word that calling me makes you feel better about yourself.
85. Blogball - July 29th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Very nice list Tamala. Good job.
By the way We just hade an earthquake here in the LA area 5.8 in Cino Hills. Felt pretty strong even 60 miles away whare I am.
86. Randall - July 29th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Cacophony:
We, as citizens, ARE to some degree responsible for what our countries do, yes. Did that justify September 11? No. But 9/11 is not WWII, nor is the reverse the case. And I would love to see you try to prove it so.
As for your opinions about the argument between myself and “Steve,” you of course can say and think what you like, asshole. (There. There’s a playground insult for you. You find it immature? Too bad. I don’t play gloved games with idiots who pretend they know what they’re talking about when in fact it’s clear they don’t. I never have and never will. You can call that “rude” and impolite all you like; I am no hypocrite when it comes to these matters nor am I some phony hiding behind kind words to moral pinheads).
As for Steve having been more erudite and eloquent than me—get off it. His opinions boiled down to nonsense he’d reaped from ONE book as I recall, garnered from a small set of voices speaking on the subject. Erudition? Hardly.
Whereas my opinions are backed up by historians and military minds from across the spectrum, from as widely varied sources as Paul Fussell (no right winger, I assure you) to General Çurtis LeMay (a hawk to end all hawks). Steve was a distorting revisionist; I based what I had to say on the real history of what went on during WWII.
As for eloquence, to each his own. My prose speaks for itself. Clearly someone who doesn’t like what I have to say is going to attack me irrationally if rationality fails them–as it does you.
Lastly, if YOU have better things to do than to wait around to be insulted by me, then I invite you to go do them, Cacophony… or Steve, if that is in fact who you really are. (I’d be willing to bet money on it). In any case it hardly matters; I too have better things to do than to waste time with the likes of you.
If you’re sincere then, go away and let us both continue on here in peace.
87. Hobolad - July 29th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
“Hobolad - the first comment I made was directed at you and it’s obvious that you haven’t read a history book or have any idea what the War in the Pacific was headed toward. To suggest that it was a terrorist act is ignorant at best. Even a casual skimming of the history would reveal that the bombs actually saved many lives and put an end to a long drawn out conflict. To not drop the bomb meant a torturous and grueling invasion of Japan, where every single citizen would have fought to the death which was proven over and over and over again in the tiny islands of the South Pacific. To drop the bombs were grave decisions indeed, but righteous in every respect.”
Speculation- I guess we’ll never know, but from a casual skimming of wikipedia I see many generals and admirals and whatever saying it was completely unnecessary, that the Japanese had already sued for peace, that it was a show for the Soviets, etc.
Still- this returns to my original point- we justify it as a means to an end, but when others do so we call them “pure evil”, when I’d imagine it’s exactly the same from their point of view. As soon as you start killing innocents, you’ve lost the moral high ground, end of.
88. bucslim - July 29th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Hobolad - You skimmed too much:
“When Japan continued to reject the Potsdam terms, the United States then dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in early August.”
“On July 27, the Japanese government considered how to respond to the Declaration. The four military members of the Big Six wanted to reject it, but Tōgō persuaded the cabinet not to do so until he could get a reaction from the Soviets. In a telegram, Shunichi Kase, Japan’s ambassador to Switzerland, observed that unconditional surrender applied only to the military and not to the government or the people, and he pleaded that it should be understood that the careful language of Potsdam appeared “to have occasioned a great deal of thought” on the part of the signatory governments — “they seem to have taken pains to save face for us on various points.” The next day, Japanese newspapers reported that the Declaration, the text of which had been broadcast and dropped on leaflets into Japan, had been rejected. In an attempt to manage public perception, Prime Minister Suzuki met with the press, and stated, “I consider the Joint Proclamation a rehash of the Declaration at the Cairo Conference. As for the Government, it does not attach any important value to it at all. The only thing to do is just kill it with silence (mokusatsu). We will do nothing but press on to the bitter end to bring about a successful completion of the war”.
The meaning of the word mokusatsu, literally “kill with silence”, is not precise; it can range from ‘ignore’ to ‘treat with contempt’ — which actually described fairly accurately the range of effective reactions within the government. However, Suzuki’s statement, particularly its final sentence, leaves little room for misinterpretation and was taken as a rejection by the press, both in Japan and abroad, and no further statement was made in public or through diplomatic channels to alter this understanding.”
That was taken directly from wikipedia. They weren’t suing for peace.
89. Randall - July 29th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Hobolad:
Wikipedia is no primary source for these matters. It can be a starting point, but it is no substitute for volumes of history and analysis.
The search for truth is worth more, and should take more time, than a quick Google search or a cursory reading of a Wiki entry.
90. Hobolad - July 29th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Randall:
War is what it is, Randall. Particularly in deprived countries where technology doesn’t allow for true “precision bombing” (as much as such a thing really even exists today, which is debatable). In such circumstances, it’s naive and precious-minded to think that civilians shouldn’t be targeted or can go unharmed. And I beg to differ anyway–the citizens of America DID play a willing part in their country’s declaration of war upon Iraq; the fact that the USA is a democracy does not excuse the American people from culpability in what their leaders chose to do.
Etc etc etc. Where’s the difference? Do you have children Randall? Do they have any say over what their leaders do? Do *you* have any more of a say than they do, really?
“People like you show a remarkable inability to place yourselves into the mindsets of those who lived through history. Now the fact is if you had simply stated that all war is wrong and all forms of killing wrong, I’d think you were standing on a firmer and better leg.
But you object only to the killing of civilians–which shows you simply don’t understand a thing about history and are just a whinging, prissy moralist with little grasp of reality. Yeah, Hobolad, it’d be nice if only soldiers had to die in war, but it’d be nicer if NO ONE had to die. It’d be nicer if wars simply didn’t happen, period. But they DO. And the reality is that a war like WWII was the bloodiest, nastiest, most godawful conflict in human history (and hopefully the last of its nature) and given the kind of war it was, and the circumstances of it, it is entirely understandable how it became a Total War between peoples, not merely a war between armies and navies. If you don’t understand this or appreciate it, well… it would take too long to get you to see reality, I’m afraid.”
None of this came from me, point out what you’re referring to Randall- at the moment you’re arguing against comments you’ve conjured up yourself. If you’ll read my comments, I’m saying that we can’t call terrorists “evil” for killing innocents and then in the same breath justify our own killing of non-combatants. “Total War”- I’m sure it wasn’t the fishermen or the factory workers or even the soldiers who made it “total war”. It was only like that ’cause the leaders decided it was so- that’s no justification.
“You see, to paint the victims of Hiroshima merely AS victims ignores half the story. The other half of the story is the culpability of Japan itself in the war it had unleashed in the Pacific–in the atrocities committed by the Japanese–in the fact that, had Japan been able to do so, it most certainly would have annihilated American civilians as readily as it annihilated Chinese, Korean, and Filipino civilians (and others).”
You’re confusing “Japan” with “the people of Japan”, who didn’t have any kind of say in it all- like the people of all countries involved. And them killing innocents is, again, no justification. It exactly as bad, no more no less.
“Hiroshima and Nagasaki are *tragedies* of humanity, Hobolad. Not “acts of terrorism.” To call them that brings them down to the level of a street suicide bomber. They were much more than that, much more. Hiroshima was both wrong AND right, good (in that they brought an end to the war) AND horrible and horrific… but no more crimes than the fact that war itself is a crime.”
Plenty disagree that it brought the end to the war, and even if that was true- that is the logic the suicide bomber must use. “Regrettable but necessary to achieve… whatever goal”, and anyway Truman didn’t really voice much regret, with his whole “the Japanese people are merely beasts” or whatever it was.
“I’m not making excuses for Hiroshima–I’m pointing out to you that your naivete clouds your judgement on the issue.”
I would judge calling terrorist acts “evil” naive- sticking with a “Good versus Evil” fairytale.
“As for giving you an argument–you want it, I got it. But don’t blame me for your own laziness. I gave you the link to list with my earlier statements, and you needn’t look through a “120-odd comments.” My statements are near the end of the commentary and are clearly marked with my name. It was an argument between myself and someone named “Steve.” The only reason I don’t wish to reprint all that here is because it wastes everyone else’s time and takes up too much space. If you insist on it though, I’d be glad to slam you down on this point as readily as I did Steve.
I am not happy that hundreds of thousands of Japanese had to die in those two cities (but it’s also a myth that only civilians died there—both cities were military bases and many soldiers and sailors were killed). I’d rather that entire war had never happened. But to call the Japanese citizens of those cities “innocents” ignores the whole truth of that period of history–and your persistence in so calling them so is inane and ignorant of reality.”
I call them “innocents” in the same way victims of terrorist attacks are called “innocent”, or I would call the civilians of any country.
You write long posts, which is a surprise. There’s nothing there that requires it. Every arguing I’ve seen you in has been like this, long inane posts about how everyone else is naive or stupid or is just wrong, with no realy explanation, just long post after long post full of straw man argument.
I’m gonna state my position plainly, I don’t have to hide my flimsy position behind long-winded posts, so here goes.
*We call terrorists “evil” for killing innocents/civilians/non-combatants, as a means to an end.
*We justify our own killing of innocents/civilians/non-combatants as a means to an end, and claim the moral high ground.
*This I believe to be wrong- terrorists believe they’re acting for the best, as do we. It’s no different, just different points of view.
*Hiroshima/Nagasaki may or may not have been necessary to win- still, we can’t claim moral superiority over others. Had the Axis won the war wouldn’t their atrocities be justified the same way? And wouldn’t ours be condemned?
*I would prefer if no one got killed ever, of course. But it would be highly impractical to expect no one to ever die in wars. Non-combatants, however, aren’t quite the same as soldiers. Their killing can never be justified, intentional or accidental.
91. Hobolad - July 29th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
“Hobolad:
Wikipedia is no primary source for these matters. It can be a starting point, but it is no substitute for volumes of history and analysis.
The search for truth is worth more, and should take more time, than a quick Google search or a cursory reading of a Wiki entry.”
It should, if whether it ended the war or not was the point- which it isn’t. Did or didn’t, it’s exactly as justifiable as the actions of terrorists, in that it uses the ends to justify the means.
And, Randall- I mean come on. You’re painting it out to be a rock solid fact, when it’s something obviously heavily debated in academic and military circles to this day. It’s pure small-mindedness, where if you’ll notice I acknowledge that it could be either conclusion, because I don’t know- just like you don’t know.
92. segue - July 29th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
“the citizens of Japan DID play a willing part in their country’s declaration of war upon the United States; the mere fact that neither Germany nor Japan were democracies does not excuse the German or Japanese people from culpability in what their leaders chose to do.”
Yes, the bombs stopped the war quickly, surely, and months, if not longer, ahead of what it would have taken had they not been dropped…but to assume that Japanese housewives, Japanese children, Japanese aged “got what they deserved”, is absurd.
By this twisted logic, America being a Democratic Republic (it’s *not* aDemocracy folks, get over it), only the victims of 9/11 who voted for Bush “got what they deserved”. What about the rest of the victims?
What about my friend, a passenger on American Airlines Flight 11, which flew into the North Tower, who had not been a Bush supporter? She had, in fact, worked hard against him. Yet she died a horrible, horrible death anyway. Was this by accident? Collateral damage?
Why didn’t the hijackers take a poll of the passengers, and the employees of the Towers, find out who supported Bush, and give the rest time to escape?
Oh, yeah, that would have spoiled the surprise, huh?
*EVERYONE* Osama Bib Ladan is a terrorist. He could never be confused with a freedom fighter. Just look at the adjectives. Jumpin’ Jehosephat! They explain exactly what each is! One spreads terror. One fights for freedom.
Could it be any simpler?
**84. CacophonyCentral ** Randall actually is quite bright. Yes, he sometimes gets a bit wordy and overwrought, but if you plough through to the core of what he has to say, he is usually right on. Ignore his insults. He doesn’t mean them but for the moment, anyway, and search out his central message. It’s worth it.
93. Randall - July 29th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Hobolad:
Okay, you want short and sweet because your mind can’t take it, fine.
“*We call terrorists “evil” for killing innocents/civilians/non-combatants, as a means to an end.”
WRONG. The “means to an end” crap is a smokescreen. We call terrorists evil for killing innocents because in doing so, they act outside of generally-accepted parameters which describe justified acts vs. unjustified or cowardly acts. NOW, as it happens you are not entirely off the mark on this matter as far as I’m concerned. I’m not one of these knee-jerk types who feel that terrorists are doing what they do simply out of “evil.” *Of course* many of them have convictions and ideas behind their deeds, and we should pay attention to this, as it’s often true that people act out when they feel oppressed or brutally treated. But let’s not fool ourselves *too much* in that direction either. Sometimes people act brutally when they feel they’ve been treated brutally–when in fact they’re largely to blame for their own problems. Human beings are as ready to play the victim, often, as they ARE actual victims.
“*We justify our own killing of innocents/civilians/non-combatants as a means to an end, and claim the moral high ground.”
You are ignoring the fact that war is not just a crime, in itself, Hobolad–it is also the *punishment* of a crime. Oftentimes we claim the moral high ground because we are, in fact, the injured party. This is my problem with this kind of moral relativism. I understand it and even sympathize with it–it’s often true that one man’s crime is another man’s salvation. But it isn’t ALWAYS so, either.
“*This I believe to be wrong- terrorists believe they’re acting for the best, as do we. It’s no different, just different points of view.”
Hardly. It’s easy to succumb to that way of thinking–in part because it carries some truth in it. But it is not *wholly* true… and I would ask you then–why do you live in a society with laws and police to back them up? Isn’t a criminal’s point of view as valid as yours? Yet you have the police to protect you, and courts? If you mean to live by this conviction you’re speaking out for, Hobolad, then I find hypocrisy in your words. Drop out of modern society, then. It’s the only way to really live by the things you’re saying.
“*Hiroshima/Nagasaki may or may not have been necessary to win- still, we can’t claim moral superiority over others. Had the Axis won the war wouldn’t their atrocities be justified the same way? And wouldn’t ours be condemned?”
This IS true. But does that mean neither side was right? If so, then you’re saying you would have been fine with the Axis winning the war. Is that the case? I doubt it. I doubt it very much.
“*I would prefer if no one got killed ever, of course. But it would be highly impractical to expect no one to ever die in wars. Non-combatants, however, aren’t quite the same as soldiers. Their killing can never be justified, intentional or accidental.”
Not so, Hobolad, and that’s where you slip into cant. Granted, there’s a fine line of distinction between the soldier and civilian–but it’s a fine one. This is why war is to be avoided, and why we don’t simply breed professional soldiers to fight our wars for us, who serve no other purpose. Soldier or not, we’re all human beings, and it works both ways–if the soldier is to die, then the civilian faces much the same risk, in war. It isn’t nice, or pleasant, but it is reality.
94. goof_ball - July 29th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
i will keep my eyes out for these people. lol =D
95. Hobolad - July 29th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Hobolad:
“WRONG. The “means to an end” crap is a smokescreen. We call terrorists evil for killing innocents because in doing so, they act outside of generally-accepted parameters which describe justified acts vs. unjustified or cowardly acts.”
And who gets to decide? Generally accepted by who? Not by the terrorists themselves for sure, and when it comes to their actions I shouldn’t think they give a damn about what their opponents judge unacceptable if they don’t themselves. Morality is subjective.
“NOW, as it happens you are not entirely off the mark on this matter as far as I’m concerned. I’m not one of these knee-jerk types who feel that terrorists are doing what they do simply out of “evil.” *Of course* many of them have convictions and ideas behind their deeds, and we should pay attention to this, as it’s often true that people act out when they feel oppressed or brutally treated. But let’s not fool ourselves *too much* in that direction either. Sometimes people act brutally when they feel they’ve been treated brutally–when in fact they’re largely to blame for their own problems. Human beings are as ready to play the victim, often, as they ARE actual victims.”
I’m not trying to call them victims, or trying to pass blame. I put the blame on them for their actions, no matter that they’d justify those actions by their own morality- exactly the same as I would judge anyone, on whatever side. That’s what I’m saying.
“You are ignoring the fact that war is not just a crime, in itself, Hobolad–it is also the *punishment* of a crime. Oftentimes we claim the moral high ground because we are, in fact, the injured party. This is my problem with this kind of moral relativism. I understand it and even sympathize with it–it’s often true that one man’s crime is another man’s salvation. But it isn’t ALWAYS so, either.”
One thing all of this supposed trawling through history books has done is identify people as their countries. When people say “Britain invaded wherever” or “Britain beaten whatever prisoner to death” I don’t count the civilians of Britain as any more responsible than the civilians of the injured party. They’re just people with no say in anything, with no knowledge even of much that goes on and I’m the same. I’m not “Britain”- I just live there, and I wouldn’t confuse foreigners as being responsible for their countries misdeeds either.
“Hardly. It’s easy to succumb to that way of thinking–in part because it carries some truth in it. But it is not *wholly* true… and I would ask you then–why do you live in a society with laws and police to back them up? Isn’t a criminal’s point of view as valid as yours? Yet you have the police to protect you, and courts? If you mean to live by this conviction you’re speaking out for, Hobolad, then I find hypocrisy in your words. Drop out of modern society, then. It’s the only way to really live by the things you’re saying.”
Yes, a criminals point of view on morality is as valid. As is society’s. I wouldn’t class criminal justice as a *moral* issue, however. It’s about what’s convenient and useful for society. Crime and morality cross over, but they aren’t the same. I’m no law expert, but morality is subjective- the law isn’t (unless you’ve money). Murder is murder, and it’s considered unlawful- no kind of justification can see the murder of an innocent in a positive light. At the very best it’s necessary for a cause, in all cases.
And why would I need to drop out of modern society? I don’t plan on killing civilians if I stay, so… what?
“This IS true. But does that mean neither side was right? If so, then you’re saying you would have been fine with the Axis winning the war. Is that the case? I doubt it. I doubt it very much.”
I don’t tend to think in such black and white terms. I’m glad the allies won, I even see them as “in the right”. I don’t deify it to “good versus evil”. It was side versus side, with an allied win securing a better situation for myself, and probably most. But they did some pretty despicable things to do so, which I acknowledge may have been necessary- it doesn’t make it moral.
“Not so, Hobolad, and that’s where you slip into cant. Granted, there’s a fine line of distinction between the soldier and civilian–but it’s a fine one. This is why war is to be avoided, and why we don’t simply breed professional soldiers to fight our wars for us, who serve no other purpose. Soldier or not, we’re all human beings, and it works both ways–if the soldier is to die, then the civilian faces much the same risk, in war. It isn’t nice, or pleasant, but it is reality.”
Does that make it morally justifiable? I don’t believe so as like I’ve said, the ends don’t justify the means. I don’t condone the killing of soldiers- in the case of a draft the distinction is further blurred, but I don’t elevate their killing to the status of Morally Good merely because it’s necessary.
96. logar - July 29th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Hobo-
I’m f-ing sick of your half-assed justifications for 9/11. Why don’t you come out and say it? You think America deserved what it got, don’t you?
Either you condemn it or support it. Which is it?
There is no such thing as a moral high-ground, you dolt. No nation is innocent. Every nation has always and will always try to assert its will upon other nations.
Randall has already torn you down much better than I could have regarding WWII. There is no comparison between what the US did back then, and what is happening now. Osama was and is not a sovereign nation with whom we are at war- he’s merely a religious nutcase trying to bend the WORLD to his will who flew airplanes into a couple buildings (and a field) to give a message to the United States to stop opposing him.
Ahhhhh… You think that if the US had just laid down it’s arms years ago, apologized, and tried to keep from influencing the region, we wouldn’t have anything to worry about. Riiiight.
To sum it up: When you say this- “Bin Laden I won’t defend, his actions are abhorrent. *But* how is it any different from the actions of those hunting him? Or the actions of our own countries past and present?” You’ve just defended him and his ilk. You qualify your unqualified abhorrence.
The *real* world is not black and white, princess. It’s grey. I like to think that for the most part, the US and it’s ideals are on the lighter shade of the spectrum. Where does bin-Laden fall?
You, sir, are RETARTED.
97. Hobolad - July 29th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
“Hobo-
I’m f-ing sick of your half-assed justifications for 9/11. Why don’t you come out and say it? You think America deserved what it got, don’t you?”
No.
“Either you condemn it or support it. Which is it?”
Condemn.
“There is no such thing as a moral high-ground, you dolt. No nation is innocent. Every nation has always and will always try to assert its will upon other nations.”
Exactly my point.
“Randall has already torn you down much better than I could have regarding WWII. There is no comparison between what the US did back then, and what is happening now. Osama was and is not a sovereign nation with whom we are at war- he’s merely a religious nutcase trying to bend the WORLD to his will who flew airplanes into a couple buildings (and a field) to give a message to the United States to stop opposing him.”
The comparison is that civilians died in both cases. In both cases because of what someone/some people deemed moral. I would judge 9/11 an immoral action- Bin Laden and his supporters would see it differently- they’d see it as a means to a moral end (by their morality).
“Ahhhhh… You think that if the US had just laid down it’s arms years ago, apologized, and tried to keep from influencing the region, we wouldn’t have anything to worry about. Riiiight.”
The US and it’s allies aren’t completely blameless, they aren’t the sole bearers of blame either.
“To sum it up: When you say this- “Bin Laden I won’t defend, his actions are abhorrent. *But* how is it any different from the actions of those hunting him? Or the actions of our own countries past and present?” You’ve just defended him and his ilk. You qualify your unqualified abhorrence.”
That’s not defence of any kind. He acted on his morality, which I disagree with, we act on our morality, which others disagree with. An immoral action is not justified by a moral intention, as morals are subjective.
“The *real* world is not black and white, princess. It’s grey. I like to think that for the most part, the US and it’s ideals are on the lighter shade of the spectrum. Where does bin-Laden fall?”
Bin Laden would say Bin Laden falls in the lighter shade and the US in the darker. I wouldn’t, but he would. Morality is subjective.
98. Hobolad - July 29th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
A Bergman film is on in a minute, gonna have to say toodle-oo for now.
99. logar - July 29th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Hobolad, you need to descend from your cloud and start thinking about what YOU feel is right, and what YOU feel is wrong.
I get it. You think morality is subjective. bin-Laden thinks he’s fighting for a just cause. The US kinda brought it on themselves, kinda not. We think one way, they think another. The winner writes the history books. Blah blah. Killing a civilian is killing a civilian- apples to apples. We should all just get along.
Ok… So if bin-Laden is a terrorist, then we are all terrorists. Fair enough. Let’s drop all pretense and simply say that Bin-Laden is a douche bag leader of a bunch of other douche bags that threaten me and my way of life, and he should be hunted down like the dog he is. I don’t care what he thinks of my morality, and you shouldn’t either, unless you want his thrust upon you on the wings of a jumbo-jet. He is a criminal and a murderer by any mine and my countrymen’s moral standards, as well as most of the rest of the world. He is not a nation, Hobolad, and he should not be looked at in that light.
Back to the actual topic at hand, I most definitely think he deserves #1 on the list, and am currently considering getting a petition together to send Rambo into Af/Pak to bring him to justice. But what is justice, other than one groups values opposing anothers, who have a right to their own. Bullocks!
100. Matt - July 29th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
FYI…Jack Nicholson’s character in The Departed is based on James Bulger.
101. Cedestra - July 29th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
Whitey Bulger is actually related to a former mayor of Boston (brothers).
What were the criteria used to make this a top 10 list?
bushdick: Osama bin Laden is fleeing persecution from the U.S.- whether you believe it’s justified or not, he is a fugitive and he is wanted. Purely on semantics, you’re wrong.
No need to go further.
Barring the typos and run-on sentences, I enjoyed this list.
102. Cedestra - July 29th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
goofball: I was thinking, with a little time and patience, you could be a millionaire! If only I had superpowers…
103. Hobolad - July 29th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
“Hobolad, you need to descend from your cloud and start thinking about what YOU feel is right, and what YOU feel is wrong.”
I do act that way, that’s why I take issue with actions incompatible with my own morality being justified with “good intentions”. That leaves the door open to anything, it leaves the door open for the torture and murder of prisoners detained without trial for example. I’m not trying to place Bin Laden’s immoral actions on the same level as our own, I’m trying to place our own immoral actions on the same level as his. If I was in Afghanistan and the US took the place of Bin Laden in this discussion, and vice versa, I’d make the same argument but the other way round.
“Ok… So if bin-Laden is a terrorist, then we are all terrorists. Fair enough. Let’s drop all pretense and simply say that Bin-Laden is a douche bag leader of a bunch of other douche bags that threaten me and my way of life, and he should be hunted down like the dog he is. I don’t care what he thinks of my morality, and you shouldn’t either, unless you want his thrust upon you on the wings of a jumbo-jet. He is a criminal and a murderer by any mine and my countrymen’s moral standards, as well as most of the rest of the world. He is not a nation, Hobolad, and he should not be looked at in that light.”
I’m pretty sure the innocents killed by us as a means to an end take issue with that, too. Had the US’s “Operation Northwoods” plan been put into action, it could be justifiable as a means to an end- I can’t think of many (outside the 50’s/60’s US military) who’d justify that. I don’t really see what being a nation has to do with it, though- the act would be the same.
I don’t think we’re all terrorists, though- a person isn’t responsible for the actions of their leaders or their country. A person is a person, y’know?
There was a break in the film
Back on now, see ya’ll.
104. logar - July 29th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
Hobolad,
Thankfully, not everyone feels the same as you do you regarding the actions of their country.
Many here in America would feel the direct opposite. That is why I am deeply ashamed of *our* alleged torturing of prisoners- trials, charges, or no. That is also why I use my vote to attempt to get a government in place that reflects my opinions. Idealistic, no? It’s what we got, and it’s better than most places. There are probably dozens of other offenses that would I would be ashamed of, if I was aware of them. But I take ownership of our flaws, and try to correct them. And so does the majority of this Country.
Now, a democratically elected government is one thing, a dictatorship or a monarchy is another.. Or is it? A despot only has as much power as the masses allow him to have, either through their actions or inactions.
If the Afghanistanis have problem with the US invading their country, tough shit. The leadership cooperated with and harbored Bin-Laden, and refused to hand him over when confronted with that fact. I don’t care if they think Bin-Laden was right for what he did or not, any more than they care about what I think. It’s a nasty little circle.
Operation Northwoods? Are you Wiki-ing again? Bad boy! Why would you whip out something that the US *didn’t* do? Allegedly. Try using something that the US has done in recent times, pre-9/11. As far as I can tell, you skipped your modern American history class after mid-semester.
105. Wally - July 29th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Ahh Randall… “slamming people down” and “tearing people people apart”. A true hero for all of us. Your little sarcastic spins on the end hoping to appeal to all the other Nobel Laureates on this site (or a sad cry for their approval?).
As George Eliot wrote “..like a cock who thought the sun had risen to hear him crow.”
Some valid points you consistently make sir, but are you so unaware that your constant descent into aggressive bluster impresses few but the slack-jawed?
106. jfrater - July 29th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
I have to say that the comments have been particularly amusing today
Funny that that would be the case on such a serious list - but I guess that is the listverse way 
Oh - and I have made a note about the top 10 Robin Hoods - it is a good idea - feel free to email me suggestions on who you think should be on it.
107. munro - July 29th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
the interesting thing is. these people who are running are living a life of lies, fear, and paranoia. thats not a life i’d want to live. as well i’m sure plenty of these fugitives feel at least partially terrible for the atrocities they’ve committed. i mean a 94 year old nazi doctor must realize by now that he has done wrong.
really what is “justice” going to serve a man that has had to live with himself and his deeds for over sixty years. another year in prison? maybe the death penalty? most of his victims who survived are dead.
just interesting to think what good “justice” does?
108. Diogenes - July 29th, 2008 at 6:26 pm
to #107- i dont know munro. I think if he’s still living (94yrs) and has felt the guilt and “living a life of lies, fear, and paranoia” he would have pulled his own plug by now (only he knows). I dont think any of these guys think of themselves responsible for anything close to an “atrocity” (without ego or denial or “justification taking over).
Unless backed in a tight corner and forced to look and recognize their darkest of dark-they are surviours on a different plane than most all of us. And invincibility, unfortunately, becomes a part of their pychological armour. But I don’t know. Just my thought reply.
to #29 jfrater: Thanks, i’m touched. Hope you see that there is such a patron saint of which I mentioned, and I wasn’t pullin legs for pullin leg’s sake.
109. segue - July 29th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
****
107. munro
…i mean a 94 year old nazi doctor must realize by now that he has done wrong.
***
**Oh? Most of the Nazi’s captured after 30, 40, more, still believed that what they did was right. Why would he be different?
***
really what is “justice” going to serve a man that has had to live with himself and his deeds for over sixty years…
***
**”Justice” is going to punish him for what he did to his helpless victims. “Justice” is going to give the families of his victims a modicum of relief, and him his share of fear.
***
…most of his victims who survived are dead.
just interesting to think what good “justice” does?
**As I said above.
110. sol - July 29th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
Hmnn Randall did you actually live through the WWII??
I’m with Hobolad on this.
We all never live through the eyes of the people in the period during WWII what makes you the right to say that the bombing of Hiroshima/Nagasaki is the way to end the war?As far as I know there are two sides to a coin.
We NEVER know what would have been if the bombing of Hiroshima/Nagasaki did not happen at all.
All you can conclude and say is all the IFs.
“IF I’d taken that chance my life would have been better” Dont we all?
We are not god to pass such judgement that we can say for sure this bombing was the absolute best solution to end all wars.You never know the other side did you?
So what if you ARE well VERSE in this war history from those little books your garnered from across the spectrum…All I see is this books that you’ve gathered,are all that they want to let you see/read.Were you there to see the catastrophe?
Hobolad just merely points out the most logical explaination of why he thinks that the bombing was inhumane because it killed thousands of INNOCENT lives.That is why humans are different from animals because we all have what is called COMPASSION.Do you not experience such feelings?
Oh btw how is bush any different from osama bin laden?
WHERE IS THESE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTIONS in iraq?????
111. jfrater - July 29th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
wow - every list ends up in a religious debate or political debate!
112. MPW - July 29th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
Nice list! I hope these guys are caught someday.
113. Peter Thunder - July 29th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
i was watching the news dys ago and saw something abot doctor death. i was like “oh fuck not again” he is not the first nazi-related person who ends up hiding way south in chile or argentina, but the other ones were not major nazi chiefs.
114. Temian - July 29th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
logar’s posts are extremely similar to Randall’s in structure, punctuation, verbiage, and insolence.
logar also seems to be arguing Randall’s own points to Hobolad, Randall’s adversary for this list.
and logar’s written to Hobolad how “Randall has already torn you down much better than I could have regarding WWII.”
hmm… Something you don’t want to tell us, Randall?
115. Vera Lynn - July 29th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
What no one has mentioned, and what I think is scary, is that in the past 2 American elections for president, there has been an ENORMOUS amount of grey as far as to who really won. The citizens no longer have control over who our elected leaders are. This is all being decided for us.
Bucslim: I too laughed out loud. Very funny.
Tempyra (56)Yes! I agree with whomever said Comment of the Year.
Segue: Do you actually read Randall’s comments to find the meaning? Girl, you have too much time on your hands. I don’t have the patience.
Randall: I think you’re right. They are the same person. I don’t often agree, but on this, yes.
116. bucslim - July 29th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
sol - did you read the quote I took from wiki? The Japanese viewed the Potsdam peace terms with utter contempt and decided to fight to the bitter end. Just like on countless islands in the Pacific - they fought to the death to the last man.
I had an Uncle on the St. Louis in the South Pacific. You are right in saying I didn’t live through it, but he did and would most certainly faced death a number of times. And for that I say thank God Truman ended the war! To ask those men to retake every single miniscule island fighting an enemy who considered it an act of worship to die for his emperor is just flat out dead wrong. My uncle, and countless other US uncles, dads and granddads are alive today because of that decision. And don’t forget that countless Japanese uncles, dads and granddads and women are alive because of that decision. I’m sure the people suffering in the Phillipines and China and other Japanese occupied territory would agree. As terrible as it may seem and as regrettable as it might be looking back with 21st century eyes, that was the right decision and I will argue that with anyone who says differently. You simply cannot negotiate with people who are trying to kill you, who refuse to lay down their arms and will fight till the last man is dead.
The casual arrogance to sit here, today and argue the rightness or wrongness of that decision is appalling, shameful and insulting to the memory of those who died bravely fighting for their country on both sides. Y’all can sit on your soft little asses and type out the most meaningless crap because THOSE MEN DEFENDED YOUR RIGHT TO DO SO! It is our duty to honor our brave dead and hope for a time when such decisions don’t have to be made.
117. sol - July 30th, 2008 at 1:08 am
bucslim what about those innocent lives that died because of the bombing of hiroshima/nagasaki?
How can you tell what the people under the japanese occupation faced during that period?
I for one,never got a chance to know my grandad because he died during the japanese occupation.
He was shot dead by the japanese army and accuse of being a traitor just because he was sheltering a british army personnel.
I actually LIVE in asia and my country was britain’s worse defeat in history.It fell to the japanese occupation in
just 6days during the war.
My grandma lived and spoke of the terror and she never fail to shed a tear everytime she spoke of my grandad(god bless his soul).
She kept the family alive by growing sweet potatoes and yam.
I wasnt born to witness all this but my grandma told me of the monstrosity through her very own eyes.
If you ask me am I angry at the japanese?
hell YES i am very angry.
But my hatred was only towards the japanese army who acts like beast during WWII.
I am all for the end of war but those who actually suffered were the innocent civilians, who had no guns nor bombs to
protect themselves.Who were just powerless in defending themselves.
To say that it is right for the bombing to happen to end the war just so we are better off now is downright selfish.
We all knew that this was at the expense of the innocent japanese women and children who never lived to see their grandchildren just as what my grandad never did.
What makes it any better??
Point is that,we should all have a little more compassion for those that suffered be it the japanese or the middle
east.Because ultimately killing innocent lives can never really justify these tragedy were merely what needed to be done.
118. chunkylover77 - July 30th, 2008 at 1:26 am
Hobolad and Randall
Please give it a rest. If you two need to really hash it out,then open your own forum. My great-uncle was 19 years old when he was killed by a Japanese sniper in the Philippines,he was part of MacArthur’s invasion force. The Japanese mainland was next and they were going to fight tooth and nail to the end. There was also one last bombing raid done after the A bombs, and the Japanese Army was trying to usurp the Emperor’s power because he wanted to surrender and they did not. That was a war started by greedy, delusional men who wanted more power , that seems to be the basis for most wars.
Randall seems to understand WWII a little better than Hobolad, who needs to look at history without being so judgmental as to how the U.S. was the worst evil in