[Quay]

So confronting Hitler in the 30's would have been a "military adventure."....

:devil::devil::devil:

Congratulations to Cruiser, this thread's winner of the Bringing Up the Hitler Bogeyman Award. The BUHBA will be awarded to anyone who inserts that most despised Austrian into a thread not about the second world war. (Extra point for bringing it up in a thread originally concerning Vietnam but a deduction for non sequitur insertion.)

The prize committee is currently on vacation but the BUHBA itself, an upside down marzipan black eagle shoved into a block of lard and mounted on a board of solid genuine immitation oak veneer, will be sent to the winner COD.

With best wishes from the committee,
A.Q.

 

[Mike Petrik]

The ever-popular Hitler bogeyman accusation is itself a type of false argument. Hitler is often brought up as an example to test the validity of someone's sweeping assertion, and there is nothing wrong in doing so if, in fact, the assertion is truly tested by the example. In this case, I suspect that is exactly what Cruiser was doing as a consequence of misinterpreting, presumably, Jack's statement, which was unintentionally ambiguous in that it could be read as referring to one who would oppose all military engagements. In contrast, I interpreted Jack to mean that the term "pacifist" should not be applied to person just because he refuses to favor each and every proposed military engagement. But the statement could be construed in the manner that Cruiser did, in which case his reference to Hitler would be perfectly sound. No one's at fault here. Jack's assertion was grammatically correct and certainly said what he intended to say, but it could also be read in the way Cruiser read it, in which case his Hitler reference would be sensible, even if widely considered objectionable for reasons I fail to understand.

 

[Laxplayer]

Godwin's Law

There are many corollaries to Godwin's law, some considered more canonical (by being adopted by Godwin himself) than others invented later. For example, there is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress. This principle is itself frequently referred to as Godwin's Law. It is considered poor form to raise such a comparison arbitrarily with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely recognized codicil that any such ulterior-motive invocation of Godwin's law will be unsuccessful (this is sometimes referred to as "Quirk's Exception"). For example, there is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever
Godwin's Law applies especially to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one's opponent) with Hitler or Nazis or their actions. It does not apply to discussions directly addressing genocide, propaganda or other mainstays of the Nazi regime. Whether it applies to humorous use or references to oneself is open to interpretation, because although mentioning and trivializing Nazism in an online discussion, this would not be a fallacious attack against a debate opponent.
However, Godwin's Law itself can be abused, as a distraction or diversion, that fallaciously miscasts an opponent's argument as hyperbole, especially if the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate. A 2005 Reason magazine article argued that Godwin's Law is often misused to ridicule even valid comparisons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

 

[Quay]

It would seem that even with a grinning green face, three devils, marzipan, lard and cheap veneer staring at them, those that chose to will gladly overlook the obviously farcical in order to insert their own pedantic views.

And rightly so. The world is a much better place since it daily demonstrates an inconceivable diversity of persons that makes life always surprising and often astonishing.

Wishing all an early start to a pleasant holiday weekend,
A.Q.

 

[Acct2000]

Hitler. (Do I get a silver medal. I seldom win anything - - -)

 

[Laxplayer]

It would seem that even with a grinning green face, three devils, marzipan, lard and cheap veneer staring at them, those that chose to will gladly overlook the obviously farcical in order to insert their own pedantic views.

And rightly so. The world is a much better place since it daily demonstrates an inconceivable diversity of persons that makes life always surprising and often astonishing.

Wishing all an early start to a pleasant holiday weekend,
A.Q.

No views stated, just putting the definition out there for those that do not know the "rules" of Godwin's Law.

 

[Quay]

Hitler. (Do I get a silver medal. I seldom win anything - - -)

Dear Sir Forsberg,

You win the Silver Cup of Brevity, farthest of cousin to the BUHBA. It is finely wrought and is said to have once been owned by Talleyrand. And in view of your selection you may asked it filled as much as you like with any beverage you choose.

May your holiday weekend be full of good cheer,
A.Q.

 

[Cruiser]

Congratulations to Cruiser, this thread's winner of the Bringing Up the Hitler Bogeyman Award.

With best wishes from the committee

I'd like to thank the committee, my family, and all of the others who have stood by me as I could not have done this alone. I accept this award with humble gratitude while at the same time never forgetting what George Santayana said in Reason in Common Sense,

"Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it."

Cruiser

 

[Mike Petrik]

It would seem that even with a grinning green face, three devils, marzipan, lard and cheap veneer staring at them, those that chose to will gladly overlook the obviously farcical in order to insert their own pedantic views.

And rightly so. The world is a much better place since it daily demonstrates an inconceivable diversity of persons that makes life always surprising and often astonishing.

Wishing all an early start to a pleasant holiday weekend,
A.Q.

I apologize if I was pedantic. I honestly was just trying to be helpful. You are correct that I probably did not direct enough attention to the emoticons (is that the right word?) -- probably a disability associated with my age. In any case I did sense that you probably misunderstood Cruiser precisely because you properly understood Jack, but any more explanation may risk pedantry so I'll sign off.
(see of that works).

And Laxplayer, thanks for your explanation. I actually found it quite informative.

 

[Quay]

I'd like to thank the committee, my family, and all of the others who have stood by me as I could not have done this alone. I accept this award with humble gratitude while at the same time never forgetting what George Santayana said in Reason in Common Sense,

"Those who cannot remember the past, are condemned to repeat it."

Cruiser

Thank you for your gracious acceptance. :icon_smile: My first professor of history had that aphorism on a framed print that took it to new levels as the quote was translated into 15 languages so no one who entered his office would fail to note it. I appreciate your quoting it correctly, too, as I'm sure you know it's been corrupted so many times especially in the service of advertising.

Cordially,
A.Q.

 

[SkySov]

Bleh. Pacifism = Hitler I don't get. I don't know. Ya war is alright sometimes. But I don't like that idea of starting wars to not start a war. I forget what that's called preliminary attack or something. But McCain has that look like he is someone that will do that. For fun or because he honestly thinks it's best. It may sound bad but I think if our country is going to attack another country it should be attacked first. That way we have history on our side saying we're "the good guys." I rather take the risk of being killed in a terrorist attack than live in a country that goes around invading nations and blowing up families because a terrorist might live in the area. If that makes any sense. Oh, and I think it's kind of lazy to say anyone who doesn't support war and all soldiers (i.e. McCain) spits on them all too btw. Even lazier than bringing up Hitler when disputing a credit charge.

 

[Quay]

I apologize if I was pedantic. I honestly was just trying to be helpful....

Kind sir, no apologies necessary on my account. One's honest reactions are always appreciated although perhaps not as well as intended. Such are the constrictions, trials and troubles of these little virtual boxes where even at the best of times what seems clear to some may be opaque to others. No great matter unless it all gets taken too seriously -- and even then it does not last.

Cordially,
A.Q.