₦airaland Forum

brain54:
Come back when someone explains to you my comment...


Then you would realize who the joker is!

+
So after being escapist you have the nerve to say someone else should explain your obvious daft joke.

I really don't know how old you are or what school you went to.

Jakumo:
These powerful and pertinent points you have highlighted about American foreign intervention cannot be refuted, yet the gradual spread of Nigeria's kidnapping and rural massacre epidemic has thus far confounded all countermeasures attempted thus far by the Nigerian military, while the terror gangs have already begun to use consumer-level drones to drop fragmentation grenades on Nigerian military emplacements.

Leaving the Nigerian military alone to fend for itself against a powerful and well funded Islamist enemy that is likely financed by Middle Eastern players who would love to see the entire Nigerian federation reduced to an Islamic caliphate, is a worst-case scenario that can only be averted by calling in the US, but NOT China or Russia, as a counter balance that will checkmate the terror infestation in Nigeria for better or for worse.

.

+
The real problem is that the terrorism is in fact mostly funded by politicians and agents within the Nigerian Government.

All that is needed is the political will from a truly sincere President.

BAT is not that person.

If he was, there is no reason why a State of Emergency has not already been declared in a number of Northern States.

It's also odd to say that what's going on bears the hallmark of any political masterstroke of BAT. The little diplomatic engagement going on with the USA is one that has been forced by Trump and not any strategy of the Bourdilloun Bullion Van thief.

BAT also does not have any altruistic interest in Nigeria. His primary purpose is corrupt self enrichment at all costs.

brain54:
I have answered your question...


But you are too blind to see it. Ask any sensible person around you to explain my comments. That's if you aren't doing it deliberately!

+
It's obvious you are joking.

budaatum:
I know you did not create the idea of caused and uncaused. It is the underpinning of just about every religion and ideology that has a creator, and I did mention Aristotle's 'unmoved mover', which is the same thing.



Time is the measure of the passing of periods.

+
What caused periods then, if you like. Time is not a measure. Time is self existent and permanent, intangible. It is the void into which events are interpolated.

Time it was created by human beings for that purpose of measurement.

+
Time was created by humans?

Nothing caused time.

+
But you just said humans created time. Can you see the problem?

Or rather, human need to measure caused humans to create time.

+
I trust you can see your confusion.

Please know that I suspect this is not the "time" you mean, but your question is no different to 'what is a ruler'. So, I suggest a rephrase.

+
I refer to infinite and stagnant time which self exists and cannot but exist. In philosophy, it is a necessary thing, as opposed to a contingent thing.

brain54:
You claim the US army did not achieve their goal of restoration of security in Afghanistan...

And I said they left not because the Talibans defeated them militarily but because it was was costing them too much to execute. And it wasn't really their fight.

+
Do you not understand written English? Who asked whether they were defeated or not?
The question was what did they achieve security wise in 20 years there?

The thread is about military action in tackling insurgency. So what is too difficult for you to understand?

+
The question is simply if American involvement, from their antecedents, will do anything positive security wise.

Jakumo:
Bin Laden fled to Pakistan from Afghanistan across the mountains ,and would not have needed to do so if the US did not launch that Afghan operation.

+
Therefore, they eventually found him in a country where he was not initially. Do remember a few things.

1. Bin Laden was a Saudi National. Did they ever invade Saudi to look for him?

2. Bin Laden was trained by the CIA to resist the invasion of Afghanistan by Russia. He is a product of the CIA and US double faced imperialism itself.

3. Bin Laden was one man. Are you saying they were hunting one man for twenty years and only found him when he was in Pakistan (an American ally), where he had been living in a compound for several years already?

4. But here is the question I repeat: did the security situation in Afghanistan improve? Hell no. The Taliban remains firmly in charge today with the benefit of billions of dollars of abandoned US weapons.

Overall, you have to see the trajectory over history.

They have pretty much failed in any so called effort to bring security to any country.
In Libya, we see what happened. In Somalia, we see what happened. In Iraq, we see what happened.

Not to speak of the spectacular failure in Vietnam in the 60s. But you will say technology was different. Regardless, the same issues remain.

Nigeria is more complex than every one of these countries. It is also a black nation which the US looks down on far more than any of these countries. It will have no altruistic intention for Nigeria. If at all it does anything, it will deliberately and intentionally destabilize Nigeria further and take advantage of the fallout to make Nigeria a client state.

brain54:
No body is being escapist...

You are the one expanding the argument.

But good luck!

+
Lol.

First you came in with a response about the US not being defeated. Which was not the question.
Next when reminded of the question - what did they achieve security wise, you said the answer is embedded in your response that they were not defeated.

Lol.

People sha.

You just cant admit the obvious so you deflect, dodge and pretend.

Good luck too.

brain54:
The answer you seek is embedded in what you quoted Sha...

+
Stop being escapist.
Point it out.

Look, everyone knows that all of those countries they have intervened in are worse off security wise.

Jakumo:
Afghanistan was a failure in general terms but it was subsequent to that conflict that the dreaded and elusive terror mastermind Osama Bin Laden was finally located and terminated with extreme prejudice before he could hatch any further terror attacks on the free world.

+
He was located in Pakistan.

brain54:
America leaving Afghanistan was more political than military defeat...


They were spending a lot of money on a war that wasn't their "fight". A lot of Americans weren't in support of the war.

It wasn't because Afghanistan defeated them militarily.

Americans were having a lot of casualties and spending resources that they felt just wasn't worth the effort.

And so they left!

+
My question was what they achieved security wise, not if they were defeated.
Tell me what they achieved.

You may also wish to add Libya, Iraq, Somalia and Vietnam to the same question.

Jakumo:
You are right that I was wrong about the time scale. It is the Iraq conflict that is twenty years old, and not Afghanistan. All the same, the capabilities of drones today can make a huge positive difference in Nigeria's war on terror.

+
Can you point to one thing they achieved in Afghanistan?
Anything which has improved the security in Afghanistan?

Jakumo:
Drone technology has advanced in leaps and bounds since the US involvement in the Afghan conflict two decades ago. The ultra-high level of image magnification and resolution that drone cameras offer today mean that specific individuals' facial features can be identified and compared to database libraries of wanted people's faces in real time, while a surveillance drone loiters too high up to even be audible on the ground.

Once positive identification has been made via imagery AND communication signals intercepts, the fire directive can be issued to a nearby ground attack drone, or to a SWARM of small and nimble kamikaze exploding drones programmed to dispatch multiple targets simultaneously. Eliminating Islamist terrorists in northern Nigeria will prove to be an exciting video game with real bloodshed in store for the losers - the terrorists, WHEREVER they may lurk amid the desert scape of northern Nigeria.

+
I am certain you know the US left Afghanistan in a disgraced haste only four years ago, not two decades ago.

Such a haste that they abandoned billions of dollars of weapons for the Taliban.

This alone is enough to tell you that your argument doesn't work.

Jakumo:
This is a fallacious presumption that only a chronic Play Station video game armchair warrior could dream up. The USA has for over twenty years been selectively culling known terror kingpins in Somalia and Sudan, using clinically precise drone strikes.

The same methodology of signal interception, overhead surveillance, leading up to precision annihilation of terror gang leaders has been honed to a fine art by the US military, who are more than welcome to expand this special service to protect the Nigerian state from Islamization by force of arms.

+
Just the way they successfully pin pointed and eliminated the Taliban in Afghanistan after twenty years of trying right?

Come on.

Meedon:
I wish to see their UFO one day.

+
Many people have that wish, however they dont know if they can psychologically cope with such an experience.

There is the fear that humanity is not mature enough for the full reveal.

I would advise you to focus on your dreams at night.

If you get to the stage of lucid dreaming, you may be ripe enough for extra dimensional visitations and experiences.

Meedon:
Do you believe in ET then?

+
It is unquestionably true that extra terrestrials exist and have also been in and around Earth for probably millions of years.

Jakumo:
Man pikin will spend his very last penny just for a taste of the Promised Land for which every beautiful woman is the expensive gatekeeper.

+

Meedon:
So it is humans that formed it from their imagination. But Otem revealed in his book that Yahweh does truly exist, but locked up in a prison.

+
Well, Otem is mostly a person who dwells in fantasies and imagination.

However the idea that Yahweh is actually an Annukaki god comes from the theory of ancient aliens, beings who lived in another planet and came to Earth to mine gold particularly, to save their dying atmosphere. In this you will find Anu, Enki and Enlil, and the suggestion is that Yahweh is actually one of them.

All of these are entirely unproven and quite imaginary.

However Ancient Sumerian texts make it obvious that there has indeed been extra terrestrial intervention in the history of man.
So also do ancient Hindu texts.

Meedon:
I have read the Old testament countless times during my adolescent age. I used it to pass away time because my parents won't allow me to go out and play after school or church. I used to marvel at Yahweh's doings that period but when I become of age, I began to question these doings of His and I found out that he is barbaric and blood thirsty and did not deserve to be worshiped or praised.

Then I used to be very afraid of His hellfire, but now I don't fear it no more.

+
Good. You have said it all.

So you know that whatever we call the uncaused cause of all reality cannot be Yahweh.

Yahweh is simply a figment of the imagination of patriarchal ancient men.

Meedon:
This got to show that everyone has his or her own God according to their own understanding or upbringing. No wonder MacinDHouse did not believe Yahweh throw sinners into hell even though he believes in Yahweh and his only begotten son Yesusss Kristaaa.

While someone like righteousness89 believe that yahweh will throw sinners into the burning lake of fire at the time of their demise.

+
Have you read the Old Testament and what is your opinion of the actions of Yahweh there.

budaatum:
You say, "that nothing could exist or move in the first place", and then you create an "uncaused cause" to exist and move in that first place that you yourself say could not exist.

Is that logical at all, and not contradicting yourself?

And assuming an infinite regression is impossible, why stop at the first regression, and not the second or third or fourth regression?

For your information, an infinite regression is not a mathematical impossibility, as in does often occur. Example are found in calculation of pi and ⅓, and counting backwards a la 0, -1, -2, -3 to infinity, and more complex maths. It is only a metaphysical impossibility, and I'd argue that's due to the limits of thought, as I've proposed above.

We can at least regress to the tenth point, or the fiftieth or even the hundredth regression, but here am I being asked to stop at the second or third and insert an "uncaused cause" just because we don't actually know past the first?

My mind would not allow me to do that I'm afraid, and if I tried, it would laugh at me in mockery and emphatically tell me to pull the other one why don't you buda. But I can understand if your mind does not mock you like buda's mind would mock me when I present it with what it would flag as wuruwuru logic.

+
I am most certainly not the creator of the uncaused cause.

How shall I put it simply enough.

Alright.

Let's start here.

What is time and what created or caused it.

budaatum:
Deepsight, I'm currently listening to CSpan as I do for another thread we engage in, and coincidentally the topic being discussed is infinite regressions regarding God, and I have been reminded of the Fibonacci sequence, another infinite regression that mathematically exists.

+
Mathematics is not a casual sequence.
It is a mental sequence of gradations for purposes of thoughts alone.

Pure maths is neither self existent nor brings anything into existence.

Therefore you cannot use maths as an example of infinite regressions in the existential cosmological sense.

VOsimhen144:
You have a valid point, it’s either.. The bandit know something incriminating about this government or na the government they use the bandit they launder money

+
Simple.

Jakumo:
Over time this Man of Culture has squandered enough money on wine, women and song to fund a presidential campaign, but when I consider the returns on my investment, averaged over time, I can attest with full authority that all is well in the known universe at this time.

+
The poor gentleman has not seen where men spend millions only to be ghosted.

Meedon:
Is this God Yahweh that promised to send sinners to hell?

+
Certainly not.

Meedon:
Can't you or budaatum help me out?

+
The universe exists.
It also began from a point.

The expansion called the big bang.

For anything to begin to exist, or even move, there must be a cause.
.
Therefore the next question is what caused that cause.

This leads us to an infinite regress of causes.

An infinite regress of causes is impossible because it would mean that nothing could exist or move in the first place.

This leads us to the idea of an uncaused cause. Something permanent that necessarily self exists. It exists because its nature is existence itself. It is self existent. It is uncaused.

Time, for example is self existent and uncaused and so is space. Spacetime.

In this we understand that there is fundamentally and necessarily an uncaused cause, a permanent and eternal root of all reality.

That uncaused cause is what I personally call God.

I have also before defined it as the sum of all self existent laws.

Jakumo:
His Excellency President Bola Tinubu has proven himself to be a thinking and fearless leader

+
God have mercy. For the great love of you which I have, I am going to have to pretend I didnt read this.

The recently pledged US military intelligence assistance that is now in the pipeline for Nigeria hints at further political masterstrokes bearing the Tinubu hallmark.

+
God have mercy. I will unsee this somehow. I didnt just read this.

LordReed:
I can only but join you to laugh at the mental gymnastics.

+
It reminded me of the word "good" does not mean "good" . . . .

Kukutente23:
Jesus is God because God made him equal to him in power and glory.

+
I really dont know how you cant see the absurdity here. If God gave someone power and glory, how is that same person both the giver and the receiver?[/quote]But in name, God is greater than him. It is not such an absurdity.[/quote]+
Biko, if someone is greater than another person, how can the greater person be the same person as the lesser person?

We see in Exodus how Pharaoh the king of Egypt made Joseph equal to him in power and authority "except for the throne".

+
Was Pharaoh Joseph? Was Joseph Pharaoh?

I hope, without hope, that you see the point here.

Also, the bible says God made man in his image. That is, God bestowed upon man his image and appearance. If God can do such for man his creature, how much more his son who he begot of himself?

+
What is your understanding of the the term "monogenes?".
+

There's a difference between the Son of God and a son of God. Just as there is a difference between God and gods.

+
This is why I ask about your understanding of the term "monogenes" . . . . So, according to you, Jesus is the ONLY begotten Son of God.

How can it be that the begetter is the same person as the begettee?

Also, when we say "a Son of God" - how is it that such "sons of God" (as Adam, You, men generally, angels generally, Lucifer inclusive) are not begotten of God?

If not, where or who were they begotten from?

I hope you see the point. Because they necessarily all are begotten of and from God, and yet you try to insist that Jesus is the only begotten.

You really need to read the Grail Message.

I already explained to you that Jesus prayed to God even while he was in heaven. Do you now still call that God praying to himself?

+
It is you that says he is God, therefore the contradiction is yours to resolve. How can he be God and be praying to God?

I don't know how much of divine justice you know. Perhaps you have your own understanding but biblically, it is very possible for one to suffer for the sins of another. The earth was cursed because of Adam. God destroyed the tower of babel and split the tongues of men. And so it is till this day.
Dathan, Koran and Abiram died along with their family for the sin of rebellion committed by the three of them.
Haman was going to kill all the Jews for the "sin" of Mordecai. But he ended up getting killed along with all his family instead.
There are many more examples.
Achan was killed along with his family for stealing

+
As an agnostic, I dont know if Divine Justice exists.

But I understand the concept and the concept is completely at odds with punishing an innocent person for the crimes of a guilty person.

This also means the idea of original sin being inherited is absurd.

Kukutente23:
?

What I meant is that Jesus while on earth was the Son of Man. It does not mean he stopped being the son of God but this time, he took on the attribute of a man.

+
The mental gymnastics made to justify the abominable idea that a Jewish man is God.

Jesus in the divine order is the son of God.

+
Is he not also God himself according to you?

And wait, are you not also a Son of God?

Even the bible calls Lucifer a Son of God as well.

While in heaven, he prayed to God.

+
Right. So God was praying to himself in heaven. Got it.

Jesus is God because he carries the power and the authority of God not because he is God himself.

+


LordReed abeg helep me check this statement!

If you make a mockery of the concept of one dying for the sins of another, can you explain why a man must die for his sins in Islam? What justification do you have for killing a man who blasphemes? Do you kill him to save his soul or you kill him to damn him eternally?

+
Leave Islam. The bible itself says whatever a man sows the same shall he reap. In Divine Justice, it is absurd to say that one person is punished for the sins of another.

Kukutente23:
If you do not understand the doctrine of Trinity, seek knowledge. Do not be like the islamists who glory in their ignorance while worshipping an Allah they do not even know.
I don't know who the grail message says the son of Man is. I've never studied it. I only know of its existence

+
It says the Son of Man is the writer of the Grail Message, Abd Ru Shin. (Oskar Karl Bernhardt). And that he, along with the Father and Jesus (the Son of God), is the third member of the Trinity.

Regardless of this obvious lie, it is a work you should read. It will enlighten you greatly.

Quit the tears though. I think I have given you enough evidence in each circumstance to buttress my point while you assume a posture of an unquestionable authority whose words should be law

+
I will not go further on all this. You know the truth in your heart. Pride will simply not allow you to say it. The pride of an ant.
+

Moh be flawed us an historical fact. A fact intentionally ignored by his followers who keep praying for him to have peace. Yet they insist he's the most perfect man!!

+
Moh is not just flawed. Saying that he is flawed is saying that he was a good man with normal flaws.

No. He was a fundamentally evil man.