RE: Gun control - FAIL

RE: Gun control - FAIL (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

thompsonx -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/25/2013 1:23:25 PM)
quote: I admit that wasn't asked properly. My mistake. No your mistake was in believing I would fall for such a stupid ploy. quote: So, choose from the following: Are you going to claim that 16 oz. of a heavily sweetened drink is somehow healthy? Are you implying that 16 oz. of a heavily sweetened drink somehow is healthy? What I am saying is that the state has the right and authority to limit the sale of some products that present a public safety hazard especially when the vendors and manufacturers of such products engage in fradulant sales practices. When th state limited the size of the drink to 16 ounces do you feel that the state was saying that 16 oz is good for you and 16 1/2 oz is bad for you? If you do then you need to go back to school and learn english....but...we know that is not the case you just want to try to play a word game.

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/25/2013 2:28:34 PM)
quote: Perhaps that is the problem...you do not understand what the word choice means. In order to make a valid choice one needs all of the factual data to make that choice. The soda companies do not provide that data. I am not a soda drinker, nor a fan.... However, what constitutes 'all the factual data?' You are placing a very subjective stardard on this. I don't see the soda companies behaving like the cigarette companies of the 50's and 60's basically saying they were endorsed by medical personel. While they may not be forced to lable, their product as harmful, do they need to? One cigarette has no value, whatsoever. It is poison, period. One soda, while having no nutritional value and only some caloric value, is not harmful. 5 sodas a day is. There has been a decades long campaign against soda, and I am sure if you put a bottle of water and a can of pepsi on a table and asked the average schmo which is better for you 99.9/100 would choose the water. If you then asked if drinking a lot of soda was harmful, 90+ would say yeah. So I have to say it is just one more case of the consumer saying, 'fuck, I know it is bad but it tastes good, so fuck it anyways.' I know that's how I felt back when I was a smoker. A better look is a alcohol. Repeatedly, they say drink responsibly, and don't drink and drive, yet it is a common occurance for people to not only binge drink but drink and drive as well. It illustrates how a consumer is fully aware of the risk, yet chooses to be an ass anyways. What is funny is that: Sure you can't buy more than 16oz of soda which will eventually make you fat, if you consume it regularly, don't exercise and/or eat a generally bad diet as well. Yet, you can buy 1.75 liter bottles of whiskey which if consumed in that quantity rapidly will kill you. If not the full bottle, it is more than enough to make you a public menace and a threat if you get behind the wheel. The soda ban boils down to silly bickering about the petty issues of the day. If one truly cared about public safety, that energy could be applied in better directions. Like why permit more than the sale of a six pack, or more than three drinks at a bar. That would curb, drinking and driving as well as a lot of domestic violence as well. Having said all that, I do not advocate it, I am just making a point.

DomKen -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/25/2013 3:59:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 That is pretty much the opposite of what happened, Dr. Massadegh was a reformer not an Islamist. quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The fall of the Shah led directly to the taking of the tehran embassy (twice) The radicals who ruled the "democraticaly elected" government led to the jihadest movement. Keep in mind that the elected candidates were hand picked by anti American radicals. And it was not the good Dr who ended up on power now was it. He rode in on the wave of Islamic fundamentalism and by the end of 77 at the time of the first takeover of the Tehran embassy the radicals were in charge. Do you have any idea what you're talking about? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Mosaddegh

DesideriScuri -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/25/2013 4:40:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: Really? Are people that ignorant, or are they just stupid? It's got to be one or the other. Are there still people in the US that haven't been told of the risks of cigarette smoking? Consuming large quantities of alcoholic beverages? Bungee Jumping? Etc.? Fast Food? Yet, we allow those things, don't we? Funny you would like to insert bungie jumping and make it somehow equivilant to the fraud that the tobacco companies and soda companies perpetrate. You may be too young to remember this but it was proved that the tobacco companies committed fraud against the consumer...how is this different? It's more likely that people would much rather drink those sugar-laden drinks than not. Actually it is hfc and not typically "real" sugar. quote: And, that choice is up to them. And, they should deal with whatever consequences that entails. Perhaps that is the problem...you do not understand what the word choice means. In order to make a valid choice one needs all of the factual data to make that choice. The soda companies do not provide that data. The issue with tobacco companies is that they were the only ones doing any research, no? Did they lie? Absolutely. Were they wrong to do so? Absolutely. Should they have faced the consequences? Absolutely. What data is missing from the nutritional panel on the labels? Isn't Government forcing food manufacturers to put the nutrition labels that include ingredients and the RDA's? Don't get me wrong, I'm perfectly okay with them doing that. That is maintaining a level field as it pertains to information. Has there been a call for increased labeling that "Big Cola" has quelled? You are advocating for Government to prevent you from making a decision that is yours to make. To make this cola thing like tobacco, you would have to have information going out that tells the truth. Then, a "valid" choice can be made. But, they aren't doing that. They are simply preventing free choice. Same thing happened with trans-fat oils. Instead of letting the public know the truth and keeping them informed as to who was using what, they banned the use of it (NYC). Don't let the Market make the decisions, just stomp all over liberty and let Government do it for you.

BamaD -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/25/2013 10:16:24 PM)
quote: Ok, this is getting scary... You guys, both, you are really sure about what you are writing here...? Thanks, this explains why I did not recognize the good doctor. I apologise for my error I assumed he had found a frontman of no importance for the fundementalists and was claiming he replaced the Shah since it was the overthrow of the shah we were talking about. This puts us back to where I started at the time the choice was between the Shah and the fundementalists. He was by far the lesser of evil. If we had had the choice of backing Gandi that would have been my prefference but we didn't. Again sorry about the mistake and thanks for the info.

BamaD -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/25/2013 10:19:10 PM)
quote: Moral equivilance??Lets see the u.s. murdered how many native americans whose only crime was being a native american in public. Stalin murdered how many members of the aristocracy who's only crime was the rape pillage and plunder of the masses of russian people for about a thousand years and their henchmen the kulaks. Where do you see the moral equivilancy there? I did point out that the government in both the ussr and the u.s. are chosen in the same manner.Both are republics.Only the votes for "approved" candidates are meaningful. This also is not a moral equivilancy. (in reply to BamaD) Profile Stalin also murdered a couple of other people, for example when he purge the army in the late thirties killing tens of thousands of officers.

BamaD -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/25/2013 10:20:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: Not on this planet. So Iran is run by reformers and their developement of nucular weapons, not to mentions the calls for genocide and the twoo captures of the American embassy are fiction. The world is a better place with Islamic fundementalist in charge? Any validation for the call for genocide? Other than that the prime minister has called for it several times?

Powergamz1 -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/26/2013 8:14:01 AM)
Except of course, that isn't what you said: "He {Mosaddegh, 1951-1953} rode in on the wave of Islamic fundamentalism ..." You didn't 'assume' any such thing, you looked up Mossadegh and the dates, so you knew good and well that we were talking about the first time the Shah was pushed out, not the second in '79. And there is no credible reference out there using Mossadegh's name and those dates that would support your deliberate and specific claim that he 'rode in on the wave of Islamic fundamentalism'. quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: Ok, this is getting scary... You guys, both, you are really sure about what you are writing here...? Thanks, this explains why I did not recognize the good doctor. I apologise for my error I assumed he had found a frontman of no importance for the fundementalists and was claiming he replaced the Shah since it was the overthrow of the shah we were talking about. This puts us back to where I started at the time the choice was between the Shah and the fundementalists. He was by far the lesser of evil. If we had had the choice of backing Gandi that would have been my prefference but we didn't. Again sorry about the mistake and thanks for the info.

SpanishMatMaster -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/26/2013 10:23:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD This puts us back to where I started at the time the choice was between the Shah and the fundementalists. He was by far the lesser of evil. Ok. Glad to be helpful. However, IMHO the choice was never between the Shah and the fundamentalists. First it was between the Shah and "something else", and then it was between the western-oriented, the communists and the fundamentalists. I really recommend you "Persepolis". Best regards.

BamaD -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/26/2013 3:38:06 PM)
quote: You didn't 'assume' any such thing, you looked up Mossadegh and the dates, so you knew good and well that we were talking about the first time the Shah was pushed out, not the second in '79. And there is no credible reference out there using Mossadegh's name and those dates that would support your deliberate and specific claim that he 'rode in on the wave of Islamic fundamentalism'. No I didn't I did make that statedment wrongly thinking that you were hanging your hat on a figurehead, Every date I referenced was in the 70's so I could not be talking about someting that happened in the 5-'s You have combined the posts of 2 different people. Since I was talking about Carters actions angain I could not have been talking about the 50's as you know Carter wasn't elected until 76 and by Dec of 78 had so encouraged (not on purspose) the fundementalists to the extent that they stormed the Tehran embassy. They gave it back in Feb 79 and then took it again in Nov of that year.

BamaD -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/26/2013 3:42:29 PM)
quote: Ok. Glad to be helpful. However, IMHO the choice was never between the Shah and the fundamentalists. First it was between the Shah and "something else", and then it was between the western-oriented, the communists and the fundamentalists. I really recommend you "Persepolis". Best regards. Intellectually you are right. But I was working at NSA at the time and with what we saw there were only the two realistic possibilities.

DomKen -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/26/2013 4:12:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: Ok. Glad to be helpful. However, IMHO the choice was never between the Shah and the fundamentalists. First it was between the Shah and "something else", and then it was between the western-oriented, the communists and the fundamentalists. I really recommend you "Persepolis". Best regards. Intellectually you are right. But I was working at NSA at the time and with what we saw there were only the two realistic possibilities. Only because we made it that way.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/26/2013 4:18:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: Ok. Glad to be helpful. However, IMHO the choice was never between the Shah and the fundamentalists. First it was between the Shah and "something else", and then it was between the western-oriented, the communists and the fundamentalists. I really recommend you "Persepolis". Best regards. Intellectually you are right. But I was working at NSA at the time and with what we saw there were only the two realistic possibilities. Only because we made it that way. We ain't that damn powerful as much as we would like it. It's probably fortunate in the long run.

DomKen -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/26/2013 4:25:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: Ok. Glad to be helpful. However, IMHO the choice was never between the Shah and the fundamentalists. First it was between the Shah and "something else", and then it was between the western-oriented, the communists and the fundamentalists. I really recommend you "Persepolis". Best regards. Intellectually you are right. But I was working at NSA at the time and with what we saw there were only the two realistic possibilities. Only because we made it that way. We ain't that damn powerful as much as we would like it. It's probably fortunate in the long run. We had supported the Shahs from Ike to Carter no matter how brutally they treated dissent. We particularly helped his secret police go after the labor unionists, socialists and communists. So when the people had finally had enough and his governments corruption caused it to be unable to function the mullahs were the only alternative. What is so sad is the Persians have long been more cosmopolitan an western looking than the Arabs and would make a natural ally for the US. As a matter of fact by all accounts the american people and culture have remained very popular in Iran despite the efforts of the mullahs. It is only our government that the Iranian street still distrusts.

BamaD -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/26/2013 6:47:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: Ok. Glad to be helpful. However, IMHO the choice was never between the Shah and the fundamentalists. First it was between the Shah and "something else", and then it was between the western-oriented, the communists and the fundamentalists. I really recommend you "Persepolis". Best regards. Intellectually you are right. But I was working at NSA at the time and with what we saw there were only the two realistic possibilities. Only because we made it that way. Again we are back to my originalstatement that Carter undermined the Shah and made way for the extremists. Never said we did not have a large portion of the blame.

DomKen -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/27/2013 6:42:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: Ok. Glad to be helpful. However, IMHO the choice was never between the Shah and the fundamentalists. First it was between the Shah and "something else", and then it was between the western-oriented, the communists and the fundamentalists. I really recommend you "Persepolis". Best regards. Intellectually you are right. But I was working at NSA at the time and with what we saw there were only the two realistic possibilities. Only because we made it that way. Again we are back to my originalstatement that Carter undermined the Shah and made way for the extremists. Never said we did not have a large portion of the blame. The Shah was ging to be over thrown unless we sent in the Marines. His government collapsed due to endemic corruption and the people hated it. It was previous adminstrations that encouraged the Shah to brutally oppress the people of Iran that made the Iranian Revolution inevitable. Carter was simply the President in office when it finally fell apart, as all the US installed dictatorships eventually did.

BamaD -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/27/2013 9:47:22 AM)
quote: The Shah was ging to be over thrown unless we sent in the Marines. His government collapsed due to endemic corruption and the people hated it. It was previous adminstrations that encouraged the Shah to brutally oppress the people of Iran that made the Iranian Revolution inevitable. Carter was simply the President in office when it finally fell apart, as all the US installed dictatorships eventually did. Leftest montra If they are U S allies anything will be an improvement. If they hate the U S any change will only make things worse.

mnottertail -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/27/2013 9:48:43 AM)
It would be mantra, and if by leftist you mean real and factual, then yes. anything else is asswipe.

thompsonx -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/27/2013 10:09:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: Moral equivilance??Lets see the u.s. murdered how many native americans whose only crime was being a native american in public. Stalin murdered how many members of the aristocracy who's only crime was the rape pillage and plunder of the masses of russian people for about a thousand years and their henchmen the kulaks. Where do you see the moral equivilancy there? I did point out that the government in both the ussr and the u.s. are chosen in the same manner.Both are republics.Only the votes for "approved" candidates are meaningful. This also is not a moral equivilancy. (in reply to BamaD) Profile Stalin also murdered a couple of other people, for example when he purge the army in the late thirties killing tens of thousands of officers. Didn't the officer corps come from the aristocracy? Which of those officers were innocent? Does the state not have the right to require loyality from their military officers?

thompsonx -> RE: Gun control - FAIL (4/27/2013 10:16:40 AM)
quote: Again we are back to my originalstatement that Carter undermined the Shah and made way for the extremists. Never said we did not have a large portion of the blame. That is the mother fucking point... You said that "carter undermined the shah" but here you admit that our previous actions and not carter were to blame. Because as you admit you "never said we did not have a large portion of the blame" Do you even read this shit before you post it?

Page: << < prev 5 6 7 [8] 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625