Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute...


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 2:44:36 PM   
RottenJohnny


Posts: 1677
Joined: 5/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

What you consider disingenuous, bullshit, or stupid is irrelevant to me. But it seems that any discussion involving provocation is precisely about who did what first.
My point is that in all the wars that the u.s. has been in we have been the aggressor. Nothing in the constitution supports this sort of behavior. To continue to claim to be the victim is not supported by history.


Do you consider the attack on Ft. Sumter to be the result of U.S aggression. If so, why?

Since both sides of that conflict were americans the answer is a resounding yes...duuuhhh

But didn't that occur after South Carolina left the union?

_____________________________

"I find your arguments strewn with gaping defects in logic." - Mr. Spock

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry

I believe in common sense, not common opinions. - Me

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 2:47:12 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie
Guess it was kinda like this one - not something to go to war over.



Most scholars are aware of the fact that the u.s. was aware ,in advance, of the timing of the pearl harbor attack.
Google could be a friend here...it sometimes keeps ignorant people from getting both feet in their mouth at the same time.
Otoh those who rely on john wayne movies and the history chanel to educate them will only be embarrased when they repeat that ignorant shit in educated company.


Because we knew in advance that there was going to be an attack on Pearl Harbor, we were the aggressor? How does that work?


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 2:56:31 PM   
RottenJohnny


Posts: 1677
Joined: 5/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Most scholars are aware of the fact that the u.s. was aware ,in advance, of the timing of the pearl harbor attack.
Google could be a friend here...it sometimes keeps ignorant people from getting both feet in their mouth at the same time.
Otoh those who rely on john wayne movies and the history chanel to educate them will only be embarrased when they repeat that ignorant shit in educated company.

So is it your opinion that simply knowing an attack might occur and waiting to see what happens constitutes an act of aggression?

(Sorry, DS. Didn't catch your post prior to mine.)



< Message edited by RottenJohnny -- 9/25/2013 2:59:29 PM >

_____________________________

"I find your arguments strewn with gaping defects in logic." - Mr. Spock

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry

I believe in common sense, not common opinions. - Me

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 2:57:13 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		But didn't that occur after South Carolina left the union?
So the confederacy ceased being american

(in reply to RottenJohnny)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:02:24 PM   
RottenJohnny


Posts: 1677
Joined: 5/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

But didn't that occur after South Carolina left the union?
So the confederacy ceased being american

That was the point of the CSA, wasn't it? To not be part of the U.S.?

_____________________________

"I find your arguments strewn with gaping defects in logic." - Mr. Spock

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry

I believe in common sense, not common opinions. - Me

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:02:29 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		It was not an issue of whether or not south carolina left the union. They left December 20, 1860, and we started what? February of 1861? They forgot to give our federal reservation back and all up in the bedrooms, digging thru our cupboards, and whatnot acting the fool like they owned it. We was all good friends till they did that shit.

< Message edited by mnottertail -- 9/25/2013 3:05:05 PM >

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:04:50 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		Because we knew in advance that there was going to be an attack on Pearl Harbor, we were the aggressor? How does that work?
Would you like to join this discussion?
If so, perhaps one should acquaint themselves with the particulars of that conflict before they seek to discuss it.
Are you aware of the the embargos placed by the u.s. and it's allies against japan?
Were you aware that there are many legal scholars who will agree that an embargo is an act of war?
Since you are aware of the fact that the u.s. knew in advance of the attack and it's timing how should we discribe the failure to sink the japanese fleet while it's planes were on their way to p/h?
If you are unaware of the particulars wouldn't you think it prudent to educate yourself before embarassing yourself?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:10:04 PM   
Phydeaux


Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Because we knew in advance that there was going to be an attack on Pearl Harbor, we were the aggressor? How does that work?
Would you like to join this discussion?
If so, perhaps one should acquaint themselves with the particulars of that conflict before they seek to discuss it.
Are you aware of the the embargos placed by the u.s. and it's allies against japan?
Were you aware that there are many legal scholars who will agree that an embargo is an act of war?
Since you are aware of the fact that the u.s. knew in advance of the attack and it's timing how should we discribe the failure to sink the japanese fleet while it's planes were on their way to p/h?
If you are unaware of the particulars wouldn't you think it prudent to educate yourself before embarassing yourself?


Completely avoiding the question. But I do I have found my signature line: The US: Aggressors in WWII.


< Message edited by Phydeaux -- 9/25/2013 3:14:50 PM >

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:10:19 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny


quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

But didn't that occur after South Carolina left the union?
So the confederacy ceased being american

That was the point of the CSA, wasn't it? To not be part of the U.S.?

Young man please do not try that "walk around the shit house" with me.
My statement was and is that both sides were american...put any kind of lipstick on that pig that will fit and it is still a pig.
Perhaps a quick refresher as to the causes of the american civil war would be helpful in disabusing the ignorance of your post.

(in reply to RottenJohnny)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:11:54 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Because we knew in advance that there was going to be an attack on Pearl Harbor, we were the aggressor? How does that work?
Would you like to join this discussion?
If so, perhaps one should acquaint themselves with the particulars of that conflict before they seek to discuss it.
Are you aware of the the embargos placed by the u.s. and it's allies against japan?
Were you aware that there are many legal scholars who will agree that an embargo is an act of war?
Since you are aware of the fact that the u.s. knew in advance of the attack and it's timing how should we discribe the failure to sink the japanese fleet while it's planes were on their way to p/h?
If you are unaware of the particulars wouldn't you think it prudent to educate yourself before embarassing yourself?


LMAO!!

Someone brings up Pearl Harbor as an example of us not getting into WWII (or declaring war on Japan) as the aggressor, and you reply that the US "was aware ,in advance, of the timing of the pearl harbor attack. " That was it. That was your proof that we were the aggressors.

I find it difficult to comprehend how our not sinking their ships makes us the aggressors, too. That's another stretch that is beyond me.

Why did we issue an embargo on Japan?

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:14:00 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Most scholars are aware of the fact that the u.s. was aware ,in advance, of the timing of the pearl harbor attack.
Google could be a friend here...it sometimes keeps ignorant people from getting both feet in their mouth at the same time.
Otoh those who rely on john wayne movies and the history chanel to educate them will only be embarrased when they repeat that ignorant shit in educated company.

So is it your opinion that simply knowing an attack might occur and waiting to see what happens constitutes an act of aggression?


For fucks sake that is not what I said.
The record is quite clear that the u.s. knew in advance of the timing of the p/h incident.
It was not a question that an attack might occure.
If one is unaware of the facts in a situation why do they feel compelled to add their ignorant opinions?

(in reply to RottenJohnny)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:16:31 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		Why did we issue an embargo on Japan?
Would you like to join this discussion?
If so, perhaps one should acquaint themselves with the particulars of that conflict before they seek to discuss it.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:18:29 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Why did we issue an embargo on Japan?
Would you like to join this discussion?
If so, perhaps one should acquaint themselves with the particulars of that conflict before they seek to discuss it.


No discussion, then, eh? Nicely played.

Enjoy.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:18:30 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		Someone brings up Pearl Harbor as an example of us not getting into WWII (or declaring war on Japan) as the aggressor, and you reply that the US "was aware ,in advance, of the timing of the pearl harbor attack. " That was it. That was your proof that we were the aggressors.
Would you like to join this discussion?
If so, perhaps one should acquaint themselves with the particulars of that conflict before they seek to discuss it.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:25:38 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Why did we issue an embargo on Japan?
Would you like to join this discussion?
If so, perhaps one should acquaint themselves with the particulars of that conflict before they seek to discuss it.


No discussion, then, eh? Nicely played.

Enjoy.


How can we have a discussion when I am the only one who seems to know why the u.s. and their allies embargoed japan.
When you wish to discuss something I am here.
I am not here to teach the fundamentals of ww2.
I am not here for you to send me running errands...do your own mother fucking research.
If I make a statent I can back it up.
If you do not agree that the u.s. knew about the attack in advance that is a bit of information that is ubiquitous.
What the "enumerated powers" are is rather murkey and they are not ubiquitous. Thus my desire for you to enucniate what you believe them to be.
As I said before:
Any time baby.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:30:48 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Because we knew in advance that there was going to be an attack on Pearl Harbor, we were the aggressor? How does that work?
Would you like to join this discussion?
If so, perhaps one should acquaint themselves with the particulars of that conflict before they seek to discuss it.
Are you aware of the the embargos placed by the u.s. and it's allies against japan?
Were you aware that there are many legal scholars who will agree that an embargo is an act of war?
Since you are aware of the fact that the u.s. knew in advance of the attack and it's timing how should we discribe the failure to sink the japanese fleet while it's planes were on their way to p/h?
If you are unaware of the particulars wouldn't you think it prudent to educate yourself before embarassing yourself?


Completely avoiding the question.

Really???what was the question?

But I do I have found my signature line: The US: Aggressors in WWII.

You were aware that the u.s. navy was attacking german subs in the atlantic before dec 7 1941?
Hmmm not at war but using the navy to attack someone we are not at war with?????

(in reply to Phydeaux)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:46:45 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Why did we issue an embargo on Japan?
Would you like to join this discussion?
If so, perhaps one should acquaint themselves with the particulars of that conflict before they seek to discuss it.

No discussion, then, eh? Nicely played.
Enjoy.

How can we have a discussion when I am the only one who seems to know why the u.s. and their allies embargoed japan.
When you wish to discuss something I am here.
I am not here to teach the fundamentals of ww2.
I am not here for you to send me running errands...do your own mother fucking research.
If I make a statent I can back it up.
If you do not agree that the u.s. knew about the attack in advance that is a bit of information that is ubiquitous.


I did not challenge your assertion that we knew in advance of the attack. I did ask how that made us the aggressor.

quote:

What the "enumerated powers" are is rather murkey and they are not ubiquitous. Thus my desire for you to enucniate what you believe them to be.


For someone who sends people to read the US Constitution, you don't seem to know that much about it. Perhaps your reading the US Constitution would help you to find the enumerated powers of the Federal Government. If not, then, there isn't anything I can do to help you with that.

quote:

As I said before:
Any time baby.


Thanks, but you're not my type.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:49:13 PM   
RottenJohnny


Posts: 1677
Joined: 5/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
Young man please do not try that "walk around the shit house" with me.

Why not? I'm having a blast.
And just for the record, the "I'm older than you therefore I know better" attitude does not impress me.


quote:

My statement was and is that both sides were american.

But your comment was in regard to U.S. aggression. South Carolina was not part of the union.


quote:


...put any kind of lipstick on that pig that will fit and it is still a pig.

That goes both ways.

_____________________________

"I find your arguments strewn with gaping defects in logic." - Mr. Spock

"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry

I believe in common sense, not common opinions. - Me

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 3:57:06 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		I did not challenge your assertion that we knew in advance of the attack. I did ask how that made us the aggressor.
I pointed out the embargoes and I get this coy shit about "why did the u.s. embargo japan?
If you don't fucking know why continue this discussion until you go find out. If you do know then lets discuss it instead of playing coy.
Like I said:
Would you like to join this discussion?
If so, perhaps one should acquaint themselves with the particulars of that conflict before they seek to discuss it.


< Message edited by thompsonx -- 9/25/2013 3:58:28 PM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... - 9/25/2013 4:03:42 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		What the "enumerated powers" are is rather murkey and they are not ubiquitous. Thus my desire for you to enucniate what you believe them to be.

For someone who sends people to read the US Constitution, you don't seem to know that much about it.

I know enough that you refuse to enunciate what you feel are the "enumerated powers"

Perhaps your reading the US Constitution would help you to find the enumerated powers of the Federal Government. If not, then, there isn't anything I can do to help you with that.
That would be because this bullshit about "enumerated powers" is a fiction of someone's mind.
If they exist then one ought to be able to list them.
So far that has not been done.
Thus prima facia evidence that no effort is being made towards discussion.
Is that list so fragil that it cannot stand the scrutiny of open discussion?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Interesting article from the Cato Institute... Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.141