RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ...

RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (Full Version)

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

Message

TreasureKY -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 7:25:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn You cannot win a discussion with self-superior people. You continue to start real and reasoned posts that are worth intelligent discussion (not that I agree with any of your post, mind you), but then get dragged into this babble by those that are just too smart for the rest of us ... just ask them. You are anything but dumb, cait. You are quite right, too. Nonetheless, that is half the fun here. You never know what is going to be said next. [;)]

stella41b -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 7:31:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b I don't know what the problem is here, whether it's not having reasons or logic to back up your arguments or just a lack of comprehension of the English language. Tell you what Firm, you go get a stepladder and come back and let me know, because it appears that the points I'm making are going way over your head. Otherwise I'm through with this thread. First, personal attacks are uncalled for, unnecessary and unhelpful. Not to mention against the rules of the forum. Second, you have to start before you can be done. Third, I'm fairly confident that anyone of reasonable intelligence, reading your post once before your latest would have the same head-scratching experience that I had. I simply asked for clarification. Which you refuse to provide. Therefore, unless you are willing to give some kind of explanation for some of your comments (such as "What US invasion of Iraq?"), I don't see that I have any burden on attempting to engage in whatever mind game that you are playing here. Perhaps you were trying to make a point that it was a Coalition operation? And that the invasion of Germany was as well? I'll buy that, to an extent, certainly. If that is your point ... how does that play into the topic of this thread? However, feel free to not respond. You've not substantially contributed to the thread yet, anyway. Firm This is my EXACT point. You wrote "Perhaps you were trying to make a point that it was a Coalition operation? And that the invasion of Germany was as well? I'll buy that, to an extent, certainly. If that is your point ... how does that play into the topic of this thread?" You mean you're not sure whether the invasion of Iraq was a coalition operation? And you have some doubt as to whether the invasion of Germany during the Second World War was a coalition operation? These aren't my opinions. These are established facts. This is why they mention the Allied invasion of Germany, the Allies landing on the Normandy beaches on D Day. These are facts taught to children in school. I was actually responding to points you raised. As for the personal attacks, I take people at face value. If you come across as an idiot I'll treat you as one. If you have some doubt as to who carried out the invasions of both Germany in 1945 and Iraq in 2003 then I'm sorry but I rest my case.

caitlyn -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 7:35:32 AM)
As long as you are having fun ... [;)]

kittinSol -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 7:38:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn As long as you are having fun ... [;)] Relief is here!

caitlyn -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 8:08:25 AM)
Endless thanks! Do you have anything for a hangover so bad, I skipped my first day of classes in six semesters?

meatcleaver -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 8:51:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn You cannot win a discussion with self-superior people. You continue to start real and reasoned posts that are worth intelligent discussion (not that I agree with any of your post, mind you), but then get dragged into this babble by those that are just too smart for the rest of us ... just ask them. Are you saying the war in Iraq is reasoned? If the war in Iraq lacks reason, then asking if there is significant progress also lacks reason. If you think the war in Iraq is reasonable. Then I think any objective view must see that there has been no significant progeress. Considering the US's strategic interests in the region are worse now than before the war started.

TreasureKY -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 9:02:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn You cannot win a discussion with self-superior people. You continue to start real and reasoned posts that are worth intelligent discussion (not that I agree with any of your post, mind you), but then get dragged into this babble by those that are just too smart for the rest of us ... just ask them. Are you saying the war in Iraq is reasoned? lol... Caitlyn said that Firm's posts were reasoned. She said nothing about the war in Iraq.

Zensee -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 9:23:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn You cannot win a discussion with self-superior people. You continue to start real and reasoned posts that are worth intelligent discussion (not that I agree with any of your post, mind you), but then get dragged into this babble by those that are just too smart for the rest of us ... just ask them. Are you saying the war in Iraq is reasoned? lol... Caitlyn said that Firm's posts were reasoned. She said nothing about the war in Iraq. Making up reasons for the unreasonable is called rationalisation. And "self-superior" is a term pointed enough to be name calling yet obsucre enough to be essentially meaningless. Z.

caitlyn -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 9:25:46 AM)
Not to worry ... I've become an expert at reading responses to things I never said in the first place, and reading insinuations in the forms of questions, about point I never even made. In fairness, on this forum it comes almost exclusively from the left, and, a) makes me embarrassed to be a liberal, b) gives me an understanding of why the right keeps kicking our ass, even though I feel they are wrong on most major issues.

caitlyn -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 9:50:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zensee And "self-superior" is a term pointed enough to be name calling yet obsucre enough to be essentially meaningless. There are a double handfull of posters on here that have openly claimed to be smarter than everyone else, and that anyone that doesn't agree with them, is just not smart enough to understand their points. They claim that only stupid people voted for President Bush. When they debate on this forum, every exchange turns in to the same exchange of insulting jabs, be it stupid, uneducated, war monger, facist, or whatever. What is obscure about that ... and if that isn't self-superior, than what is it? (and I mean those as honest questions ... my apologies if they come off as snarky ... that not being my intent) [:D]

FirmhandKY -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 10:05:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro I think you two warmongers are wasted here stateside - you clearly belong where you can sacrifice yourselves to the cause you so wholeheartedly support. You belong where you can oppress and dictate terms to a people that have never done you any harm. I am willing to accept your silence as a sign of your imminent departure for Iraq. I could say that you will be missed, but you won't be. First, I thought we arrived at the conclusion that I wasn't a "warmonger"? Second, you are the one who is continuing to attempt to "dictate" terms to people (here on the forum). You show no interest in understanding - even if you disagree - what others may believe or say. You simply ignore, mis-characterize and use logical fallacies in an attempt to bully others to accept your point of view. Sounds like "oppression" to me. Third, you are attempting the fallacious "chicken-hawk" argument about the war in Iraq. This is one of your logical fallacies, and an attempt to belittle and denigrate, without resort to reason. Just FYI, I've served my time in Iraq during wartime. Treasure has served in the military as well. And, as was already mentioned, both Treasure and I have sons serving, or about to serve in Iraq. In fact, my son was driving a HMMV just this week, and his gunner was killed during combat. When was your military service, and in what war zone did you serve? Whether or not you "miss" us is immaterial. Whether or not you agree with our service, and the service of our sons is immaterial. We subscribe to the American belief that while we may not agree with what you say, we have already demonstrated, and continue to demonstrate that we are willing to die to give you the right to say it. I feel this puts us on a different moral plane than you have displayed so far in this discussion. Firm

SugarMyChurro -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 10:06:29 AM)
Those words have meanings and often they apply. Again, it's not an insult if the word can be shown to be demonstrably true based on things a certain speaker has posted. In such a case the word is merely descriptive. I could call a person a fascist and it's demonstrably true if that person holds political views that joins the power of the state with that of corporate entities. That's basically the definition of fascism. So yeah, I guess some of us are smarter after all... [8\|]

FirmhandKY -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 10:09:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b This is my EXACT point. You wrote "Perhaps you were trying to make a point that it was a Coalition operation? And that the invasion of Germany was as well? I'll buy that, to an extent, certainly. If that is your point ... how does that play into the topic of this thread?" You mean you're not sure whether the invasion of Iraq was a coalition operation? And you have some doubt as to whether the invasion of Germany during the Second World War was a coalition operation? These aren't my opinions. These are established facts. This is why they mention the Allied invasion of Germany, the Allies landing on the Normandy beaches on D Day. These are facts taught to children in school. I was actually responding to points you raised. As for the personal attacks, I take people at face value. If you come across as an idiot I'll treat you as one. If you have some doubt as to who carried out the invasions of both Germany in 1945 and Iraq in 2003 then I'm sorry but I rest my case. Perhaps you were trying to make a point that it was a Coalition operation? And that the invasion of Germany was as well? I'll buy that, to an extent, certainly. If that is your point ... how does that play into the topic of this thread? Firm

NorthernGent -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 10:43:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY That the simple presence of American troops is defined as success, and that any actions that lead to an American presence is therefore justified. How the heck do you get that from anything I've said? Feel free to defend the point and give an example of a situation that you would deem to be unsuccessful. quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY is the instinctual need of humans to make the most of their abilities and to strive to be the best they can. Working toward fulfilling our potential, toward becoming all that we are capable of becoming. Are you the judge and jury in this matter? Perhaps they think they have a better chance in the event they're left to do their own thing? Perhaps they think your idea of "best they can be" is not for them? quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY You have a problem with trying to bring this to the people of Iraq? Firm Have they tendered a request for your benevolence?

Politesub53 -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 11:03:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro If someone doesn't favor the war, how could they make statements to the effect that things were going pretty well overall? Please, some reasonableness would be refreshing. I oppose the war - ergo, I think that every minute an American remains in Iraq is a foreign policy disaster. In other words, I don't think things are going pretty well overall. Invading a foreign country on the flimsiest of pretexts is an international crime. [8\|] If you support the war, then you must also agree to support every effect of war. [N.B. And that's for you, Level.] War has a foreseeable cost - it's either worth paying that cost or it's not. There will be collateral damage, things will get out of hand, propaganda will go into overdrive, rapes may occur, children may get killed, etc. All are the foreseeable results of war as understood by us adults that oppose war. There's no "do overs" with war. One atrocity follows hard upon another. People die and that's that. I cant agree with your assertions here Sugar. I was against the idea of going to war, so if i was to say things seem to be going well ( security wise ), how would that make me a warmonger. Taking into account i have been against it ? Add to that the fact its hard to incite a country to go to war, five years after the event. I also dont agree that even those who supported getting rid of Saddam, by association support the torture of prisoners. That would make everyone in the US military guilty of torture, and surely you dont believe that. Many kids join the army as a way to get out of crime, or because there isnt much of an alternative where they live. I would bet the majority abhor torture. Caitlyn, i know im not American but i was compelled to speak. [;)]

OrionTheWolf -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 11:40:02 AM)
Is there a #&$@ award you are trying for or something? quote:* ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro I think you two warmongers are wasted here stateside - you clearly belong where you can sacrifice yourselves to the cause you so wholeheartedly support. You belong where you can oppress and dictate terms to a people that have never done you any harm. I am willing to accept your silence as a sign of your imminent departure for Iraq. I could say that you will be missed, but you won't be.

OrionTheWolf -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 11:42:07 AM)
BULLSHIT You and everyone reading it knows that your intention is to insult. Hiding behind "well if it is the truth" reminds me of all the people that do not want to accept personal responibility. caitlyn has it pegged. Own up to it or examine that part of you and if you cannot accept it, then change it. quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro Those words have meanings and often they apply. Again, it's not an insult if the word can be shown to be demonstrably true based on things a certain speaker has posted. In such a case the word is merely descriptive. I could call a person a fascist and it's demonstrably true if that person holds political views that joins the power of the state with that of corporate entities. That's basically the definition of fascism. So yeah, I guess some of us are smarter after all... [8\|]

FirmhandKY -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 12:19:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro Those words have meanings and often they apply. Again, it's not an insult if the word can be shown to be demonstrably true based on things a certain speaker has posted. In such a case the word is merely descriptive. I could call a person a fascist and it's demonstrably true if that person holds political views that joins the power of the state with that of corporate entities. That's basically the definition of fascism. So yeah, I guess some of us are smarter after all... [8\|] Maybe. Fascism - as most famously expressed in the National Socialist Party of German - was primarily a Socialist movement that was focused on building Socialism with a national face (hence National Socialist Party), as opposed to International Socialism of the USSR's Communist party. It's why the Nazis and the Communist hated each other. The International considered Fascist as heretics of the Church of Socialism. As such, Fascist wasn't necessarily about corporatism. It was about the power of the national state, and subordinating all businesses, and all social and economic parts of society to the state. Here is the Merriam Webster 11th Collegiate editions definition: Main Entry:fas£cism Pronunciation:fa-shi-zm also fa-si- Function:noun Etymology:Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces Date:1921 1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition 2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control early instances of army fascism and brutality — J. W. Aldridge* –fas£cist \-shist also -sist\ noun or adjective , often capitalized –fas£cis£tic \fa-shis-tik also -sis-\ adjective , often capitalized –fas£cis£ti£cal£ly \-ti-k(-)l\ adverb , often capitalized Here are many definitions of fascism from Google: Fascism: Look it over, and you might notice that "business" or "corporations" as an defined part of Fascism is pretty rare. You even have to hunt for it. In fact, the elimination of capitalism was seen by many as a major goal of Fascism. In truth, following the social darwinist movement, many successful business were encouraged, but were still very much subordinate to the state. Dunno. Seems like your definition of "Fascism" is a little self-serving, and not that accurate. Just like your definition of "warmonger". Just like your definition of "dittohead" You are very well aware that all of these words are "fighting words" in the world of politics. The are used primarily as insults from the left to anyone who disagrees with them, in an attempt to avoid having a discussion on the issues. In cold reality, what you are trying to avoid admitting is that you are using them as insults, but you and I know that is exactly your intent. Firm

Marc2b -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 1:01:00 PM)
I warmed you Firmhand against questioning your moral and intellectual superiors. Two books you may be interested in: Hitler: A Study in Tyranny. The Vision of the Annointed: Self Congratulation as Social Policy. The first is hands down the best biography of Hitler I’ve ever read. I do believe that I did not truly understand the meaning of the phrase the banality of evil until I read it. Part of the book deals with the conflicts within the nazi party over the fact that many in the party took its socialist platform seriously while Hitler saw it only as a means to dupe German workers into voting for him. Hitler couldn’t care less about economics because his economic plan was very simple – steal from others. Anyone who reads the second book will have no problem seeing that Obama’s "cling to guns and religion," statement is in fact that it is a true reflection of his, and liberalism’s in general, condescending attitude toward anyone who disagrees with them. It truly baffles them that the unlettered peons won’t shut the fuck up and do as they’re betters tell them. Finally, as someone who has come no closer to combat than watching the opening twenty minutes of Finding Private Ryan I would like to thank you and Treasure for your service and I pray both your sons come home healthy and hearty.

caitlyn -> RE: SIGNIFICANT progress ... (4/21/2008 1:09:59 PM)
Building talking points around who is smart, and who isn't, makes about as much sense to me as building talking points around someone's race or weight. Race is something over which you have no control. The people that created you is also something over which you have no control. In my instance the woman that carried me, also carried a cocaine habit. I would bet that Sugar, and most others here are smarter than me. Fucking pointless though, I have no control over it ... its like picking on something that is helpless. Weight, most people have total control over. A major jerk might say that they have nothing to learn from someone that can't master pushing a plate away. A person also has control over what they learn and what they do with what brains they have been given. I do my best ... I attend a good school and get good grades ... I also can't stop drinking and can't keep a boyfriend very long. I may be a total fucking idiot, or just another person that does well sometimes and not so well others. Either way, that is fucking pointless too ... its just hammering on people's weakness. The biggest difference I see, is that most people here don't build talking points around things that people can't control, or are points of major weakness for things they can. Sugar however, and several others, do exactly this in most of their posts. Just my opinion.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.125