|
|
Peacemaker
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Peacemaker = double entendre
|
posted April 24, 2003 02:30 AM |
|
|
Peacemaker (eyes crossed)
Whew, that was heavy. dArGOn, did you and I just get caught in a logical loop or what? 
LOL!!
I didn't mean to suggest the utterance of the term (an exercise of free speech in itself) was "anti-american." What I MEANT was the allegation -- the IDEA -- that someone is "anti-american," simply because their point of view does not comport with a certain pro-government point of view (or your own in this care) is counter to the precepts of free speech, the right to disagree without being conisidered enemies of the state or whatnot.
(Eyes cross again)
Did that make any more sense the second time around?
Also dArGOn, I note at least a couple of ad hominum arguments in your last post. So you're not immune to fallacy either, as PH' post would suggest.
____________
I have menopause and a handgun. Any questions?
|
|
bort
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Discarded foreskin of morality
|
|
posted April 24, 2003 02:46 AM |
|
|
Rupert Murdoch (Fox)
Jack Welch (CEO of GE, which owns NBC)
Michael Jordan (not that one, the one that is the head of CBS)
And, just for fun...
Rev. Sun Myung Moon (yes, THAT Rev. Sun Myung Moon. Owns the Washington Times)
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted April 24, 2003 02:51 AM |
|
|
Murdoch owns Fox? That ******* is most unpopular here! He keeps getting called the Dirty Digger (Brit term for an Australian) all the time! 
So I take it that like him the others are pretty much just to the left of Hitler then?
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
Lews_Therin
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted April 24, 2003 03:13 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Have you ever debated a Nazi? There comes a point when you come to realize that no matter how much logical debate and facts you apply that they will remain steadfast in their hatred. Likewise with the anti-american group here.
Yes Dargon, people who disagree with your nationalist, conspiracy theorist and religious fundamentalist opinions are all evil creatures, who do not have any constructive convictions (what could anyone have against dropping a few thousand bombs on an Arab country anyway?), but instead are driven by nothing but their hatred against America. They act like Nazis. Not you, no no, they.
____________
|
|
GeneralBore
Tavern Dweller
The Consummate Jackass
|
|
posted April 24, 2003 11:17 PM |
|
|
Syria is next
War is a sad necessity, but Bush and Blair would be gravely mistaken to stop now. Our nations must confront and eliminate ALL countries who harbor terrorists and political madmen. Until these evil persons have been neutralised, there can truly be no peace in our world.
____________
Just listen to, and agree with, ME. I am never wrong.
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
|
posted April 24, 2003 11:23 PM |
|
|
If we stop now we will be in Syria in another 12 years!
____________
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted April 25, 2003 12:08 AM |
|
|
Quote:
War is a sad necessity, but Bush and Blair would be gravely mistaken to stop now. Our nations must confront and eliminate ALL countries who harbor terrorists and political madmen. Until these evil persons have been neutralised, there can truly be no peace in our world.
Harbouring terrorists and political madmen huh? Find a nation that doesn't frankly. I'm pretty sure there's probably at least on ex-IRA member somewhere in the USA that no-one's bothered to look for anymore. Britian probably harbours a few ex UDF terrorists that we don't mind living here. I look forward to the day when you suggest we invade say Russia, Chechnya, India, Pakistan or...... China (all of whom probably harbour terrorists, and you can't tell me you find Putin a sane and reasnoble leader) To get rid of these people then. Until people figure out violence breeds violence, that terrorists thrive on violence for their support the better It doesn't help that invading one Islamic nation after another when there's a few dozen other dodgy and sufficently minor countries round the world who are not Islamic does kinda show either ulterior motives or just plain selective blindness.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
TonyJT2471
Bad-mannered
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted April 25, 2003 12:32 AM |
|
|
Hey y'all
Quote:
War is a sad necessity, but Bush and Blair would be gravely mistaken to stop now. Our nations must confront and eliminate ALL countries who harbor terrorists and political madmen. Until these evil persons have been neutralised, there can truly be no peace in our world.
|
|
TonyJT2471
Bad-mannered
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted April 25, 2003 12:36 AM |
|
|
I got my last post cut off :(
Anyways, as I was sayin, we have a new thread in this forum called "ATTACK SYRIA".
Peace out
PS I wasnt trying to offend you PH, or whoever else, my bad Party on people!
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted April 25, 2003 12:36 AM |
|
|
Which begs the question, how many more wars? How many more deaths? How big is our armed forces going to need to be? Will there ever be peace with that attitude?
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
TonYJT2471
Bad-mannered
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted April 25, 2003 01:50 AM |
|
|
Attitude?
Just raising a hypothetical situation, yo!
____________
|
|
SirDunco
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted April 25, 2003 10:09 PM |
|
|
did anyone notice the backround and stage at herrs bushes last speach. The people behind him and the two tanks? seems a bit dictator-like...
i don't think syria will be next, it may be N. Korea though ... after the current flow of events it appears to have taken #1.
____________
|
|
bort
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Discarded foreskin of morality
|
|
posted April 25, 2003 11:08 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Which begs the question, how many more wars?
17 (although we will classify 5 of them as "conflicts," 3 as "incidents," and 1 as a "snafu.")
Quote:
How many more deaths?
7,384,214. We prefer the term "strategic reclassification of vitality."
Quote:
How big is our armed forces going to need to be?
According to recent ads, we only need an "army of one." Preferably several million of them.
Quote:
Will there ever be peace with that attitude?
I think it's pretty obvious that there will be.
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted April 26, 2003 01:16 AM |
|
|
LOL @ Bort 
Presumably we will have peace then when the rest of the world are either:
A) Dead
B) Friendly dictatorships
C) Democracies - Hey we ALL know democracies are lovely and peaceful and don't fight wars for bad reasons right?
D) Enemies - ie those who don't support our efforts - a category soon to be moved to A)
God bless the world
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
|
posted April 26, 2003 05:28 AM |
|
|
Amen da dat bruder!
____________
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted April 26, 2003 08:03 AM |
|
Edited By: dArGOn on 26 Apr 2003
|
“Again, remind me who died and made you the final say on logic and emotion?”
Well obviously not you. Logic is an objective criteria to which all can measure easily if they have been trained. Emotion…well I would say that I do have a much more formal education on that subject than most….but again it is simple for one to step back and analyze a situation to see if it is being made from a solely emotional state of reference. These are simple deductions and inductions that anyone can make…. no one has to die…so lets not be so emotional about it
Quote
“Also dArGOn, I note at least a couple of ad hominum arguments in your last post. So you're not immune to fallacy either”
I welcome pointing out my logical mistakes so feel free to point them out when I make them. I don’t think I used ad hominum arguments as formally understood though a critique could be made that I did enlist hyperbole, labeling, and sarcasm. I generally exempt sarcasm and labeling (within reason) for this board…they are not logical though at times reasonable, but I find them satisfying and more effective in rhetoric
Quote
“What I MEANT was the allegation -- the IDEA -- that someone is "anti-american," simply because their point of view does not comport with a certain pro-government point of view (or your own in this care) is counter to the precepts of free speech, the right to disagree without being conisidered enemies of the state or whatnot.”
Agreed.
Quote
“So I take it that like him the others are pretty much just to the left of Hitler then?”
Illogical, faulty, labeling, straw man, scare tactics, horse laugh, begging the question, red herring, and emotional reasoning. I guess someone did die and make me the final say
Again the libs have no concept of freedom of speech and cower in fear that the
Right and Middle is finally making some inroads.
Which makes a very interesting point…where oh where are the libs and their affirmative action? Given that Republicans make up about ½ the population, but only constitute about 10% of news media, entertainment, and education jobs…where is the outcry from you tolerant and caring libs? Shows the hypocrisy. Here we have institutions that should be the MOST protected if any in regards to diversity….given that they are the BIGGEST SOURCE of FREE SPEECH, communication of ideologies, and the exchange of ideas.
Yet the libs sit by smugly in their ivory towers as they virtually own all exchange of ideas on a mass public forum. Where oh where is your outrage libs? Why haven’t you advocated affirmative action to create much needed diversity in these major forums of freedom of speech???? You libs should be at the forefront of establishing a quota for Republicans to be hired in the news media, education system, and entertainment industry if you truly believed what you preach.
Funny how a compassionate conservative has to be the one who originates the idea about how lacking affirmative action is needed in critical mass due to its importance as related to freedom of speech.
Well personally I don’t believe in affirmative action (30 years and more there may of been a need) so I don’t think any is needed even if the libs are keeping republicans out intentionally and prejudiciously. But I do find it of the utmost hypocrisy that all the affirmative action people don’t fight for it..and even more disconcerting is how the “caring”, “tolerant”, “open” lib media aren’t raising the subject themselves.
Instead what do we find….we find that the second conservatives and moderates get maybe a 3% of the mass media forum that the libs start whining, quaking, complaining, and discounting any media that is not liberal as not “objective”….very funny….actually kind of sad and pitiful
Conservatives and moderates have through sweat and tears finally begun to gain a voice in the public forum….primarily through Rush Limbaugh revolutionizing talk radio about a decade ago and attracting 20 million listeners. Then finally Fox broke the glass ceiling and provided TV news that wasn’t put through the liberal filter and censorship endlessly.
Quote
“The reporters are generally liberal, but the people who own the papers and who comprise the editorial staff -- ie, those who actually decide what gets shown/printed are generally conservative.”
I don’t know the people you list as owners except for Rupert Murdoch (who is conservative).
But even if what you say is true….facts are facts…it has been shown endlessly in research that the media, education, and entertainment mediums consistently and repetitively give credence/support to lib views and negative spin on conservative views. Take any issue…abortion, gun, affirmative action, global warming, etc. and the bias is screaming at the top of its lungs.
Lets even do a quick test to see how brainwashed we are on say gun control. Without doing any research on the internet…what is your gut estimate (I am seriously interested in what Bort, PH, PeaceMaker, etc have to guess without low balling) of how many children under age 5 die each year from gun accidents in the USA? How about kids under age 10? Or how about what is the number range of crimes averted by victims who brandishe a handgun during a crime?
Why is it that when an permitted and armed school vice principal got his gun to stop further bloodshed in a mass murder shooting at a school in Pearl Mississippi in 1997 that only 19 of 687 articles mention him? I could go on and on and this is just one subject to which the liberal press is so astonishingly biased. But gun control isn’t the issue at hand….liberal control of all forums of public discourse (except AM talk radio) is blatant.
Quote
“Will there ever be peace with that attitude?”
While I agree with your sentiment that we can’t engage in military action to every nation that may or may not need a regime change. I do find your question ironic. Can you name me any significant period in history where there has “ever been peace”. Perpetual peace is a noble pursuit…but as realistic as unicorns. You would of thought with all of our enlightenment since the enlightenment period would of at least taught us this basic reality of life.
Quote
“17 (although we will classify 5 of them as "conflicts," 3 as "incidents," and 1 as a "snafu.")”
LOL bort. You must get double credit for using the word “snafu”…what a great yet completely underutilized word.
Though you were joking I would say that 17 number is not quite low…the answer to how many wars there will be is “endless”…as history has continually affirmed to anyone who bothers to pay attention.
____________
Humans are gods with anuses -Earnest Becker
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted April 26, 2003 08:11 AM |
|
|
Quote
"did anyone notice the backround and stage at herrs bushes last speach. The people behind him and the two tanks? seems a bit dictator-like... "
LOL...so a definition of "dictator-like" is anyone who is standing by a tank. Time to study up on what a dictator is...ROFLOL. I will give you a hint...the definition doesn't mention anything about tanks.
____________
Humans are gods with anuses -Earnest Becker
|
|
SirDunco
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted April 26, 2003 09:15 AM |
|
|
dargon what i meant that it seems very war-hawk like, militaristic and yes dictator like with all the people behind him...him shaking hands with them, it seem as though it needed to be shown(just like saddam and other dictators did) that the people were supporting him and send this message into the world(just like what saddam and other dictators did)
also the tanks were a symbol of power showing that the US is strong and unchallanged and feels the need to send this out to the world(quite simmiliar to what other dictators did)
____________
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted April 26, 2003 01:56 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Well obviously not you. Logic is an objective criteria to which all can measure easily if they have been trained. Emotion…well I would say that I do have a much more formal education on that subject than most….but again it is simple for one to step back and analyze a situation to see if it is being made from a solely emotional state of reference. These are simple deductions and inductions that anyone can make…. no one has to die…so lets not be so emotional about it
I disagree, logic differs from one culture to another, person to person and situation to situation. As does common sense, it's not something that can be precisely defined by anything more than each individual. Just becuase it's logical to you does not mean it is logical to everyone else. Emotionally.... everyone gets emotional here, I could dig up enough things you've posted (or for that matter, PM, Wolfman, Me etc as you're probably aware, so this is not the province of just me or the "anti-american" crowd either.
Fact is you don't have the right to say that a statement is irrelevant or illogical to anything more than your opinion. Nor can anyone else
Quote:
Illogical, faulty, labeling, straw man, scare tactics, horse laugh, begging the question, red herring, and emotional reasoning. I guess someone did die and make me the final say
Nah I was assuming that if they were lumped together they had the same attitudes. Having read some of Murdoch's papers, and seen his general attitude and morality I'm not very inclined to listen to much he or his networks say frankly.
Quote:
But even if what you say is true….facts are facts…it has been shown endlessly in research that the media, education, and entertainment mediums consistently and repetitively give credence/support to lib views and negative spin on conservative views. Take any issue…abortion, gun, affirmative action, global warming, etc. and the bias is screaming at the top of its lungs.
Man you REALLY need to read english papers Try the Daily Mail or the Sun, they're right up your street for anti-liberal strong conservative views
Quote:
Lets even do a quick test to see how brainwashed we are on say gun control. Without doing any research on the internet…what is your gut estimate (I am seriously interested in what Bort, PH, PeaceMaker, etc have to guess without low balling) of how many children under age 5 die each year from gun accidents in the USA? How about kids under age 10? Or how about what is the number range of crimes averted by victims who brandishe a handgun during a crime?
I abstain, I don't know anything like enough of america such as the population figures, gun death figures overall etc to know those kind of facts to be honest. I argue on what I know about, I don't like guesswork.
Quote:
Perpetual peace is a noble pursuit…but as realistic as unicorns
Funny that, I'd say exactly the same about this so-called war on terror. It simply won't stop terror.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
|
posted April 26, 2003 02:31 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Again the libs have no concept of freedom of speech and cower in fear that the
Right and Middle is finally making some inroads.
Which makes a very interesting point…where oh where are the libs and their affirmative action? Given that Republicans make up about ½ the population, but only constitute about 10% of news media, entertainment, and education jobs…where is the outcry from you tolerant and caring libs? Shows the hypocrisy. Here we have institutions that should be the MOST protected if any in regards to diversity….given that they are the BIGGEST SOURCE of FREE SPEECH, communication of ideologies, and the exchange of ideas.
Yet the libs sit by smugly in their ivory towers as they virtually own all exchange of ideas on a mass public forum. Where oh where is your outrage libs? Why haven’t you advocated affirmative action to create much needed diversity in these major forums of freedom of speech???? You libs should be at the forefront of establishing a quota for Republicans to be hired in the news media, education system, and entertainment industry if you truly believed what you preach.
Funny how a compassionate conservative has to be the one who originates the idea about how lacking affirmative action is needed in critical mass due to its importance as related to freedom of speech.
Well personally I don’t believe in affirmative action (30 years and more there may of been a need) so I don’t think any is needed even if the libs are keeping republicans out intentionally and prejudiciously. But I do find it of the utmost hypocrisy that all the affirmative action people don’t fight for it..and even more disconcerting is how the “caring”, “tolerant”, “open” lib media aren’t raising the subject themselves.
Instead what do we find….we find that the second conservatives and moderates get maybe a 3% of the mass media forum that the libs start whining, quaking, complaining, and discounting any media that is not liberal as not “objective”….very funny….actually kind of sad and pitiful
Conservatives and moderates have through sweat and tears finally begun to gain a voice in the public forum….primarily through Rush Limbaugh revolutionizing talk radio about a decade ago and attracting 20 million listeners. Then finally Fox broke the glass ceiling and provided TV news that wasn’t put through the liberal filter and censorship endlessly.
Liberals are ruining this country! Get them out of here! dArGOn read my "Hollywood then and now" you would get a kick out of it. PH already said that that liberal crowd doesn't need to be in the military so they don't enlist. But if they wanted to and they felt any pride in their country they would, it would also make them look good to the people. Make them look a lot better than saying that they are ashamed of their president.
____________
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
