RE: An example of why our military loves the press ....

RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

herfacechair -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 2:50:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Since my ass is brighter than your brain, the following are the ones that don't answer my question. Oman Turkey Armenia Cyprus Actually, they DO answer your Red Herring question: “Can you name a Middle East country other than Israel the West has not invaded, occupied, or overthrown their government?” - SimplyMichael The poster you addressed had a better grasp on history than you did. Modern day Western Civilization, including the U.S., could trace its origins to the Greeks and the Romans. Roman civilization never died, but transformed to what we’d associate with the medieval period during the Late Antiquity. We got the “west” label because of our geographic location. The Huns looked west to see the Western Empire. For centuries, the leading European nations were former provinces in the Western Roman Empire. Before the Romans, it was the Greeks, and their being west of the Persians. Having said that: Parts of Turkey came under Greek control, then were conquered by the Romans. http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/firsteuro/imgs/map2.html Armenia came under Roman control. http://www.world66.com/europe/armenia/history quote: For a time, Armenia was one of the most powerful states in the Roman East. It came under Roman control in 66 BC, and the Armenian people adopted a Western political, philosophical, and religious orientation. Cyprus came under control of each of the powers that controlled the Eastern Mediterranean. This included its coming under Roman control. The Portuguese captured and controlled many of their (Oman’s) cities for over a century. Also, the area containing Israel was under Roman Control. Parts of the area covered by Israel were captured by the Crusades. All this ties in with my first post. That this has played out throughout our history in Europe, Asia, the Americas, and Africa. quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Smart people don't ask questions that make them look like fools and prove the other person's point. None of the other posters asked you questions that proved your point, or made them “look like fools”. What I’ve seen is that their questions prove their point, not yours. For example, TreasureKY’s questions emphasized your question’s red herring statements. Your question does illustrate the point that I made in my first post. A part of the picture anyway.

philosophy -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 2:52:13 PM)
...you're a page or two late on this sub-topic.......however why are you surprised there is a socialist movement in the US? Isn't freedom of speech, and by extension freedom of thought a cornerstone of US society? Or ought we go back to the McCarthy era and make all socialist type thinkers societally untouchable?

SimplyMichael -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 2:52:54 PM)
This would be amusing if it wasn't so utterly tragic. You do realize that the natives living in America before the arrival of savages lived longer, were healthier, and in general were far more civilized than the savages from Europe? Or that North America supported a far larger population that Europe? Of course you won't get that in your standard High School history class but education does broaden the mind. quote: The War on Terrorism is an asymmetrical war. You should view this as such, otherwise, you’re begging to lose the war. Wow, you learned a big word! Can you point to anywhere that this administration has used any of the standard COIN strategies and can you explain why when they finally did so it was only YEARS after the fact? Can you explain why riding in an armored vehicle is directly counter to standard COIN strategy and is in fact one of the GOALS of "terrorists"

herfacechair -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 2:53:52 PM)
SimplyMichael: If she were she would know that Republicans are allergic to proof, evidence, and in most cases, the blatantly obvious. LOL, the statement that brought me into this thread! On the contrary, our side of the argument is presenting a factual, reasoned, argument. We’re the side that delivers the goods when it comes to facts, evidence, proof, and on pointing out the obvious. For example, the blatantly obvious threat that we face: http://switch5.castup.net/frames/20041020_MemriTV_Popup/video_480x360.asp?ClipMediaID=60227&ak=null We have ruled the world before And by Allah, the day will come when we will rule the entire world again The day will come when we will rule America The day will come when we will rule Britain and the entire world… quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Look at my little exchange above, somebody lists all the countries in the ME thinking that is somehow going to show how wrong I am, after showing how it proves my point, she concludes she won. It showed that you were trying to distract this argument from its course. A check of your response showed that she was right after all in making that point, throwing your red herring action back on you. SimplyMichael: I think that explains how they can watch FEMA propaganda and cheer it on as news. There’s a law, on the books that supports government monitoring of people communicating with the enemy. And there’s another law that specifically authorized the president to do this without a warrant. NOTE: Search and Seizure protects you from UNREASONABLE searches. It doesn’t protect you from REASONABLE searches. Like one involving a person’s (in the US) communication with a member of Al-Qaeda overseas. Monitoring what could be our enemy’s coordinating an attack on our soil, or on another country, is very reasonable.

pinkme2 -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 2:55:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail LOL, which terrorist group came out publicly for Kerry? Well, several of them actually. But the main one that caught my eye was Osama Bin Laden. New York times article.. about his video stating he'd spare any state that voted against Bush. quote: So, you think that they thought that their support of Kerry was an enhancement? Well, he told Spain he'd spare them if they pulled out and they did. shrug His thought process isn't the same as ours. quote: You don't think that they would have got the idea that they would make people wanna distance themselves from Kerry? It ain't like they could vote. Well, you'd think they'd be smarter and realize that the American populace can't be told or threatened how to vote.. but there you have it. quote: Now, assuming that there are some attributes to these folk that make them dangerous, and plotting and capable of intrigue-------waltz me thru the downline on that would you? Umm.. waltz you through what exactly? Threatening to bomb people who don't vote how you want them to is pretty much standard operating procedure for these guys. quote: Maybe I am confused, but I really gotta say I fuckin' doubt it. Frankly I'm shocked. But the fact that 9 out of 10 terrorists support Democrats ought to tell you something. [8D]

philosophy -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 2:58:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: herfacechair We have ruled the world before And by Allah, the day will come when we will rule the entire world again The day will come when we will rule America The day will come when we will rule Britain and the entire world… ...yup, thats an extremist.....and so's this.... "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." Anne Coulter ......i don't think any side has a monoploy on extremists......

herfacechair -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 2:58:58 PM)
philosophy: i do take issue though with your inference that protesting against the Iraq war is somehow about weakening the national identity of the USA. Our enemies thrive on wartime dissent back in the US. They know this all to well from the Vietnam War. They can’t take our forces on in battle. But all they have to do is hold on until wartime dissent gets its way. If they succeed in Iraq, they’ll have the wartime dissenters to partially thank for it. Just ask the Vietnamese, who have a section in their war museum dedicated to our anti war movement. If we pull out of Iraq because of war dissent back home, that would be the beginning of our decline as a superpower, because we’d be militarily and politically paralyzed. Then they’d move and get us out of Afghanistan, and out of the Middle East in general so that they could start working on removing Israel. philosophy: Arguably protesting such things is part of the USA's strength. Only if those protesting have the facts straight. I don’t see that with the anti Iraq War crowd. In that situation, you have a bunch of people arguing the same thing the enemy argues--for us to get out of Iraq. Notice how their talking points are similar to that of our anti Iraq War protests. philosophy: Morale can not be based on falsehood, not if truth is our aim. Then I don’t see that moral among the anti Iraq War crowd. Out of the solutions they’ve offered, I’ve only seen one person give something that would actually contribute to “solving” the problem. I don’t agree with this solution, but I give this person credit for coming up with one that recognizes the reality that we face. Unlike what other anti war people have recommended. This person recommend that we convert to Islam. If truth is your aim, then you’d gather the facts as to what’s really going on, beyond what the mainstream media says, listen to what our enemies are saying, etc. philosophy: Therefore such issues must be critically examined, and if it turns out that mistakes have been made they must be owned up to. I’ve done that, and I’ve seen that others on my side of the argument have done that. And that’s why we come up with our position. Trying to nit pik Iraq mistakes is asinine considering that we’ve made serious mistakes in every war that we’ve fought. This isn’t unique to the United States, or to the rest of the West. Heck, if it weren’t for serious mistakes the British made during the Revolutionary war, we would’ve LOST. I guarantee you that the next several wars, whether their our wars or other country’s wars, will see a series of mistakes as well.

philosophy -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:00:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pinkme2 But the fact that 9 out of 10 terrorists support Democrats ought to tell you something. [8D] ...yup, tells me that they're much more worried about Democrats.........propaganda is a dark art........

pinkme2 -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:00:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ......you're making a rather sweeping assumption. i would be considered on the 'peace' side of things....yet i try to be reasonable. You may even agree that i try to be reasonable. i think you're charcterising an entire position based on the extremists. Well, I do argue with those that try to lump moderate muslims in with the terrorists... So on one hand you are right. But on another, I find that the anti-war moderates behave in very similar fashion to the extremists, even if they are rather agreeable, like you. quote: ...i'd argue they did so in order to make sure Bush won. Terrorists know they have little or no constituency in the US. By backing a candidate they didn't want in, they make it easier for the one they want to get in. First, it'd make no sense to want Bush in office still. Second, when Bin Laden is making threats against states that vote for Bush, my guess is that he's pretty serious about not wanting him to win. So again I ask, why? Why do terrorists support Democrats? Why do communists participate in the peace process? Do you get what I'm trying to say here? quote: ...i'd agree with the whole paragraph if the word 'many' was replaced by 'some'. Cool. :)

herfacechair -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:01:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael quote: I think mistakes can be uncovered, discussed and prosecuted after we've won. It's all about perception, not truth. And of course you haven't a clue what "victory" looks like outside of a fairtale story but I do believe you that you believe perception is more important than truth, it's is after all sort of the Republican way. I don’t see that at all with her argument. She’s simply telling it like it is. She’s got a better grasp of history, as it relates to warfare, than the people that she’s arguing against. Months after the NAZIs surrendered in Europe, we had articles talking about how America was losing the victory in Europe. But what many people don’t understand is that we can’t just set a demarcation line in Iraq, or any other conflict that we’re involved with, and say this is what victory is. We’ve got one main objective in Iraq, and several supporting objectives. Those supporting objectives have supporting objectives as well. Each time we accomplish an objective, we score a victory. We score victory on the tactical, operational, and strategic level. We’ve done a lot on the first two, and are headed toward the third one. The only fairy tale that I see is the idea that we’re going to wake up one day and hear about a “victory”, where we could pack up and leave right afterwards. Because the actual victory is being accomplished on three main levels, and over a period of time. As for the comment on the Republican way, my side of the argument brings the goods - facts - to the table. The other side of the argument tends to bring emotion to the table.

pinkme2 -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:01:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: pinkme2 But the fact that 9 out of 10 terrorists support Democrats ought to tell you something. [8D] ...yup, tells me that they're much more worried about Democrats.........propaganda is a dark art........ You're demostrating absurdity by being absurdly funny, right? The Democrats whole plan for beating terrorism is... umm... what again? Being nice and appeasement?

herfacechair -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:05:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pinkme2 quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael quote: I think mistakes can be uncovered, discussed and prosecuted after we've won. It's all about perception, not truth. And of course you haven't a clue what "victory" looks like outside of a fairtale story but I do believe you that you believe perception is more important than truth, it's is after all sort of the Republican way. Do you have a point in your rant? Is there a question in there? No where did I say perception was more important than truth. Often, truth is in the eye of the beholder and becomes very difficult if not impossible to find... especially when you are dealing with a whole world, classified info and different people's take on the same situation. So that's why I say it's about perception. You are extremely rude. If you want me to answer you in further posts, please debate respectfully. That’s precisely what he wants you to do, not engage in debate with him. I’d recommend that you keep engaging him, no matter how rude he gets.

SimplyMichael -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:06:21 PM)
Yeah, how many Democrats vs. Republican's can you name that were doing business with Nazi Germany? Banking anyone? LOL! Wasn't it the Muslims who had an empire so large the sun never set on it? Is that why Arabic is spoken widely in South America and Africa? And it would be the fault of the protestors that we get pushed out of Afghanistan? Must be why the Russians pulled out, it was those massive protests in Red Square that did them in!

philosophy -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:07:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: herfacechair If they succeed in Iraq, they’ll have the wartime dissenters to partially thank for it. Just ask the Vietnamese, who have a section in their war museum dedicated to our anti war movement. .......ah yes, the fabled domino theory. The reason the US was in Vietnam to begin with. Did it actually occur? Was there a sudden shift to communism in the region? Vietnam was a war fought not for any reason except paranoia. Paranoia that history has proven baseless. Much of what you have written in predicated on some form of mass Islamic masterplan. It wont happen. Just as the domino theory never happened. Stop being paranoid, just make your own society the best, the most free, the most prosperous that you can. Keep your defences up of course, but put them at your own borders. That example by itself will win the war on terror......by making it abundantly clear that peacefully getting on with things is its own reward and that interfering in other countries is a path that only leads to destruction.

FirmhandKY -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:07:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael KY, I know you think you are quite slick but once again you can't respond to anything I have posted and insult me. There are posters here I disagree with vehemently with but have the utmost respect for, Merc of Merc&Beth is not exactly the poster child for liberalism and yet him and I not only debate civility, we greatly enjoy spending time together. Caitlyn and I have had some violent disagreements and while I object to her conclusions I have stopped bothered trying to check many of her facts because she HAS an actualy base of knowledge to draw from. I have spent a lot of time in the small arms business, another thing not famous for being a hotbed of liberalism but I have many friends who I disagree with but can do so on the basis of the conclusions they draw not on their lack of a grasp of history. I have answered any number of questions in this thread but have yet to have any of mine answered. As usual, when Republicans face off against someone who doesn't have a mushy grasp of history they resort to name calling and or hand wringing over our "irrational hatred of Bush" which is amusing coming from people who were screeching to impeach Clinton over a simply lie about sex and mine comes from a complex undermining of the values and constitution of the country I love. KY, I know you think you are quite slick but once again you can't respond to anything I have posted and insult me. Poor sentence construction. I'm not sure what you are saying, so I can't effectively respond. There are posters here I disagree with vehemently with but have the utmost respect for, Merc of Merc&Beth is not exactly the poster child for liberalism and yet him and I not only debate civility, we greatly enjoy spending time together. Caitlyn and I have had some violent disagreements and while I object to her conclusions Perhaps you could have productive conversations with many others, if you'd reduce the amount of venom and insults you sling around so easily. I have answered any number of questions in this thread but have yet to have any of mine answered. Why should I or anyone else waste our time trying to actually engage you in anything of weigh or substance? The reason that no one is "answering your questions" are likely: 1. No one believes that you have any real interest in what they have to say, or their point of view. You simply want ammunition to continue your screeds, sarcasm and belittling tirades. 2. Your questions aren't pertinent to the other posters' point, or thread. ... you think you are quite slick but once again ... ... her facts because she HAS an actualy base of knowledge to draw from ... ... Republicans face off against someone who doesn't have a mushy grasp of history ... This post was one of the less vitriolic of yours, yet you must still insult me at least three times. What's up with that? In all the discussions you've ever had with me, you were civil exactly one time, in one single post. I posted a civil response back. You then reverted to form and went ape-shit with the insults and grandiose pronouncements of hatred and ignorance. You can't seem to help yourself. shrugs I stand by my analysis that I posted earlier. Prove me wrong, and I'll apologize. I won't be holding my breath. Firm

herfacechair -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:08:00 PM)
SimplyMichael: You have never shown the ability to grasp, let alone answer, my questions I’m going to use your western country invasion related question on this. Your question doesn’t support your argument, or detract from hers. They’re the type of questions that are designed to draw away from the debate. The fact that she’s grasped your questions is precisely why she doesn’t answer them. SimplyMichael: and I haven't been rude I just treat you with the minimum level of civility required here. “Since my ass is brighter than your brain,” - SimplyMichael “And of course you haven't a clue what "victory" looks like outside of a fairtale story” - SimplyMichael This is precisely what I think the moderator is touching on when he/she jumped into this thread. Something that wouldn’t be required if you were using a minimum level of civility. SimplyMichael: You claimed anyone interested in the peace process is directly or indirectly manipulated by communists, based on the most ridiculous assumptions that wouldn't pass in any decent college class on logic let alone the real world. First, she didn’t claim that anyone interested in the peace process, she indicated people involved with the anti war movement, under the banner of the “peace” movement. And she was spot on. I believe she indicated that she left a link that lead to information that proved her point. However, since that’s not convincing to you, I’ll give you an example of what she’s talking about: http://www.protestwarrior.com/videos/answer_infiltrated.php http://www.protestwarrior.com/videos/ai_alans_commentary.php And let’s not forget these: http://www.protestwarrior.com/gallery.php?group=lefties&pic=7 http://www.protestwarrior.com/gallery.php?group=lefties&pic=8 http://www.protestwarrior.com/gallery.php?group=lefties&pic=10 http://www.protestwarrior.com/gallery.php?group=lefties&pic=13 SimplyMichael: Oh, and some would consider that a rather large and ugly insult so before you whine about other's casting stones, you might wonder why you can look through the walls of your house. Telling someone that your hind end is smarter than their brains doesn’t fall in the same category as pointing out communist influence, or involvement, with our “peace” movement. However, the point that you mention here is precisely why I didn’t bring up more examples of your rudeness. SimplyMichael: When I debate with someone who impresses me with their command of the subject at hand I show my respect for them. I’ve watched you debate in the other threads, and this isn’t what I see. Based on what you told a 20 year old on this message board, I’d say that you don’t show respect to anybody that disagrees with you. You erroneously mistake “command of the subject at hand” with like minded viewpoints. To prove my point, I’m going to make note to your replies to me. SimplyMichael: You have yet to write anything worthy of any respect which is why I treat you with a minimum of civility. She’s got mine, as well as that of others. she knows what she’s talking about.

SimplyMichael -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:08:00 PM)
quote: Months after the NAZIs surrendered in Europe, we had articles talking about how America was losing the victory in Europe. Do you know WHY that was being said? Do you know what we did about it? Do you know why they were right?

pinkme2 -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:08:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael quote: The terrorists see any sign of apology or breakdown in unity as a weakness and exploit it as such. How exactly can you exploit that as weakness? The vast majority of people in the US who now oppose the war are only recently doing so and do so because they can plainly see what people like myself saw before the war started. They oppose the war because of anti-war propaganda. Which is why I say that communists masquerading as "peace" activists are so detrimental to our nation. quote: Putting the Shia in charge of Iraq is a strategic mistake which is why when the rose up after GWI, Bush father allowed Saddam to massacre them along with the Kurds. Whatever can be salvaged from this massive strategic blunder can only be done so diplomatically, not at the end of a bayonet. Speaking of which can you name the last time there was a bayonet charge? Probably not but I think it is so cool! Umm... We play out each action without the benefit of hindsight. Furthermore, you have no guarantee that any other action would have yeilded a better result. So, we're back to what we have NOW, and can quit looking back and wishing it were different. quote: It is the incompetence of this administration, like Custer's, that has emboldened our enemy. This war isn't being lost because some grandmother is standing on a streetcorner with a sign saying "surrender now" (or whatever) but because Bush has made blunders at every level from strategic to tactical. So you have a high level security clearance? quote: If everyone in America wanted to surrender to the Muslims but our military and diplomatic assets were doing what they should be doing, Iraq AND Afghanistan would be prosperous countries by now and nobody could stop them. The only thing standing in the way of our troops winning is this administration, not some grandma with a peace sign. You are minimizing and belittling the whole movement by your faulty characterization. The peace movement isn't a grandma holding a sign. They are well financed and organized groups with an agenda that has nothing to do with peace. And why are you suggesting that "grandmas" are harmless?? I know many who are forces to be reckoned with on the "progressive" side of things.

herfacechair -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:11:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 So if I have this correct, Pink said, "What? You deny that communism isn't around anymore? Who is the main financier of most peace rallies? The communists." on page 4 Which simplymicheal translates into "You claimed anyone interested in the peace process is directly or indirectly manipulated by communists," and continues to say,"based on the most ridiculous assumptions that wouldn't pass in any decent college class on logic let alone the real world." Can anyone tell me what logic says about simplymicheal's grasp of logic? What is the term for mis stating your opponents position, and arguing against it? It has always seemed to me to be an admission of defeat to resort to such a basic fallacy. No one is saying that anyone who is against the Iraq war is a communist. The provided links show that Communists are heavily involved in the leadership of these groups. Most people do not know that ANSWER actually supports the dictatorship of N Korea. The whole tactic of joining popular fronts, to get whatever benefit of weakening the State to be overthrown was written down in the 19th century by the Marxists. Lenin had the pacifists and anarchists slughtered after he soldified powercalled them. Usefull Idiots is what he called them. Thank you for pointing the elephant in the room out. That last sentence is very applicable to those that argue against the Iraq War. Many of the people that makeup allot of these peace rallies would have the most to lose should North America become a series of Islamic Caliphates and Emirates.

pinkme2 -> RE: An example of why our military loves the press .... (10/29/2007 3:12:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: herfacechair We have ruled the world before And by Allah, the day will come when we will rule the entire world again The day will come when we will rule America The day will come when we will rule Britain and the entire world… ...yup, thats an extremist.....and so's this.... "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." Anne Coulter ......i don't think any side has a monoploy on extremists...... You spelled her name wrong. And she's not an extremist in the least. She only uses words to put liberals in their place, not swords.

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.711914E-02