|
|
| Normal Rooms | | General | 4 users
AntiStaticCleaningWi, melinda_halliwell_tu, Mistress_SinisterLov, littlegothgirlthatco |
|
|
|
|
|
Currently no members online:)
You are an anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here |
We have 36 guests online !
|
|
|
 |
 |
Forums
You are not logged in | | |
|
|
|
| Board Index > Politics > Gag order on Professors of Drake University concerning a peaceful protest over the war |  |
callei
Extreme Fanatic   Posts: 759 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 13/2/2004 at 11:02 AM |
I cant find any good statistics on thier rate of abject poverty as compared
to ours.
I cant find any reliable data on thier rate of female education (applicable
education even) to ours.
I cant find thier rape rates to compare to ours.
Thier infant mortality is a bit higher than ours, but thier rate of defects
is about the same.
and if you factor out the oil thing (please mono dont spazz i am going
somewhere with this and i do know hte "oil thing" is a big thing) then why
the hell do we care so much about them possibly throwing an ethnic
cleansing?
We didnt care when 7 african nations were (are) doing it, or when eastern
Europe decided to do it (until we had to, then we bombed the hell out of
everyone and faked evidence to say that it was ok). We left all those
either to the country itself or to the UN, or in one or two cases, to
France to clean up.
The only "reason" we give a shit about them is the oil. After all, the
"terrorism" is from other countries, well other people that LIVE in other
countries.
And the point about the poverty and infant mortality and so forth is: how
can we condem for being so bad to thier own people when we have millions of
starving, uneducated abused people in side our own "borders"? Can we
really, as a nation, be that hypocritical? And can you support that level
of hypocracy? that we should spend BILLIONS to "save" some people that may
live better than the people in your own city? ____________________
Real goths wear silver and crosses to keep the werewolves and vampires
away.
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic  Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 13/2/2004 at 03:43 PM |
I'm not saying that we should have this GIANT war on terrorism, but I still
strongly feel that we should have went after Bin Laden.
As far as the starving and poverty rate in our country, I really do think
whoever gets in office should fix the economy. However, on the "poor
people" issue, a person making 14000 dollars a year pay 1400 in taxes, but
actually get back more than double the amount...and if they have two
children, they get an extra 1000 on top of all of that. So no one can say
that they're not really getting any form of wellfare or that the tax cuts
only benefitted the rich.
Despite all of that, there's still loopholes that allow rich people to get
away with not paying taxes, but no one can really say that the poor are
only getting poorer. If you personally ask me, I think the middle class
suffers the most in either case...at least until those loopholes are
closed.
If anyone has any other source on the poor vs. rich thing, I'm willing to
evaluate them and and alter how I feel, but I do not think anyone has the
right to say that the poor suffer the most. They probably have a low
income, but they really get back more than they pay in. I think if a poor
family had enough patience and endurance, they could easily rise from their
poor state.
The tax-cut system could be revised a bit, but it's the natural thing to do
in a bad economic situation. You just gotta figure out which people should
pay the least taxes and which ones should pay the most. THEN people can
start raising taxes again to put money back into government spending.
The poor and abused are always going to be there, whether we condone it or
not. Some people that're somehow classified as poor, though, abuse the
system badly...making it where the starving and most suffering individuals
cannot get as much care. For instant, I seen a Mexican husband and wife
with two children get nearly double the amount of Social Security than a
white family with four children and a crippled husband (not picking on
Mexicans, just jabbing the way our government still uses quotas). I guess
a lot of people are too busy kissing their ass, trying to please the Latino
population, to do anything...
I would like to say a lot of the poor population can come from the lack of
people using birth control methods...that hurts people financially as well
as economically. Thanks to greedy business men (and definitely some
radical unions), we're losing jobs from them moving over seas...heh.
Despite how conservative I can be, I really do think that education needs
improvement so that people can be more informed, can have more "responsible
(or educated if you want to call it that)" sex, and job creation.
Anyway, there's a bit of a brain-fried rant...I'll have more later.
|
| |
Monolycus
Fanatic   Posts: 580 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 13/2/2004 at 09:35 PM |
callei: I wasn't going to spazz... I saw where you were heading, and I
agree. To those who keep going on and on about how "humanitarian" it is
and how "morally necessary" it is that we kill impoverished people who
"just happen" to live in resource rich countries, I only have one word to
say: "Rwanda".
Of course we want Iraq's friggin' oil. Of course we are going to get
Iraq's friggin' oil at all costs. Of course we are going to perform
atrocities while we do it. The bottom line is: We want oil and we want
justification to pursue behaviours that we would condemn if someone else
had done them. Endlessly playing the rationalisation game only makes one
sleep better at night, but it doesn't change these facts.
Anya: Kudos to George the Elder for inventing Osama... you can't even
discuss problems nowadays without ascribing every bad thing that has
happened in the last fifty years to a single individual. It's apparent to
anyone who has given things half a moment's thought (and not one second
more!) that if we "get bin Laden" there will be no more terrorism, crops
will grow, all injustices that have ever been perpetrated will be instantly
redressed, the world economy will grow infinitely, rain forests will
recover, the blind will see and the Prince and the Princess will live
happily ever after. You wouldn't think it would be so difficult to find
someone with those little devil horns and pointy tail.
As far as the "this-is-my-opinion-and-I-am-entitled-to-it-so-take-that"
argument goes, you can convince yourself of anything you like. If you
share it with the group, however, and your sacrosanct opinion is based upon
flimsy or fallacious reasoning, I will nail you to the wall for it. Please
continue to share your opinions and grow from the criticisms... if you are
just going to stagnate in petulance because someone doesn't agree with you,
though, you might want to consider keeping it to yourself because I have a
very short fuse and a hair trigger on my sophistry detector.
Every pearl came originally from an irritation... we'll see how this goes.
I am, as always,
your faithful servant,
~M.
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 13/2/2004 at 11:17 PM |
I don't think that everything will be fixed by going after him, but I have
a gut feeling that he'll be an issue later. Then again, if you ask my
uncle, he thinks that Bin Laden is sitting on a beach side in Jamaica,
enjoying all the money he has from 9/11.
On the opinion thing, I think it could go for both sides. A lot of
liberals feel strongly that anti-war is the way, while your more moderate
crowds or anti-transcendentalist crowds think it is a necessary evil.
Either way, I think both arguments are valid in their own way.
Anti-transcendental leaners think that humans cannot avoid war period,
because it's part of their nature while the more anti-war crowds feel that
through non-violent means everything can be achieved...then you have those
pro-war crowds that get a turn on from all the war mongerers out there.
I didn't mean to sound like I was condemning you for not agreeing with me,
but there has been some people who fused on me for having a different
opinion...especially in California (and some people on the web). I also
been frustrated myself that these people will go on and accuse me of
supporting a Nazi and being a Nazi. That isn't the case. (Funny how they
accuse me of being a "Nazi" for disagreeing with them.) However, I'm
willing to practice reservation if I really have to...I been nailed many
times before because no one liked how I saw things.
We either have some really idiotic generals in there, or something is going
bad. Part of me REALLY does want the troops to come home, but we made a
big mess there and I think we definitely need to help clean it up before
giving the country back to its people (hence I think we need better
stradegy). I feel it'd be irresponsible otherwise.
What would be real nice is if we could help train the Iraqi people to
defend their own home land and then rebuild before pulling out...but I
guess we'll have to see what happens. Regardless, it's a tense situation.
I just think it'd be too waste of time, as well, if we didn't fix what was
started. What would those troops have died for? It's bad enough the
government has been accused of special interests by a lot of people, I do
not want them to have died in vain...Whoever takes the seat in re-election,
I really think we should start restoring foreign relations so that we can
handle this issue easier. As I said, I really want our troops to come home
too, but I'm not sure how much better things would be if we did it without
fixing things...
(Just got off the phone with grandpa and he thinks it's another Vietnam, or
at least will turn into one soon...you'll have all those factions
separating the country since he doesn't think we went in there "to win" for
lack of better words.)
Your arguments are interesting...they actually remind me of the points that
Michael Moore tend to make, or at least are similar. He's REALLY big on
government conspiracy and did a video on how Saudi Arabian planes were
allowed in the US sometime before 9/11 (and other international planes were
stopped). Do you happen to take from him?
[Edited on 2/14/2004 by Anya]
|
| |
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic  Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 12:25 AM |
by waging war... we become terrorists...
waging a war on terrorism is like fucking for virginity...
____________________
The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
|
| |
Monolycus
Fanatic Posts: 580 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 04:18 AM |
Anya: I'll try to respond point-by-point. Of course Osama bin Laden will
be an "issue" later... he is the best smokescreen the federal government
has currently when they want to justify doing something terrible or take
your mind off of how badly they've fucked up the domestic economy. You
have my personal guarantee that the closer we get to an election and the
more the present administration's approval ratings tank, the more of an
"issue" Osama bin Laden will become. Now, ask yourself how it is that a
man who can not pick up a telephone for fear of being "captured" somehow
orchestrates a shadowy, world-wide network of highly mobile, trained, elite
terrorists who spend their entire lives waiting for the opportunity to blow
themselves up. Put a white cat in Osama's lap and you've written a movie
that even a 14 year old boy would think was too cheesey to be believed.
Sure, there's an Al Quaeda... and when they aren't secretly insinuating
themselves quietly into the fabric of society, they live at the North Pole
and make toys with elves. I'd rather discuss REAL problems, thank you,
instead of waging wars against faerie tale "bad guys" and "evil-doers".
Yes, the "opinion thing" could go either way... which is why I have no
interest in hearing groundless opinions. If you lay out your chain of
reasoning, I will form my own opinion. You have done well to provide the
reasons underlying your conclusions, and I support that, but in this case
your reasoning is weak and will not support your conclusions. I've tried
to point up the flaws in your logic (as I would do for anyone, and anyone
is pretty good about returning the favour) so that you might reconsider. I
become impatient (and downright rude) when the following happens: 1.)
Someone refuses to acknowledge that they might be mistaken, misinformed, or
downright wrong. 2.) Someone is so in love with their "opinion" that they
prefer to alter the facts to fit the conclusion instead of vice versa. 3.)
there is no three. Finally, and most of all 4.) when I detect that someone
is putting forth an "opinion" just to argue, derail a conversation, hear
themselves talk, feel important or simply watch me get pissed off. Be
honest in your criticism of me and I will do the same for you... as
brutally honest as I have to be.
Yes, there do seem to be more idiots than there used to be.
I don't even know what it would mean for the troops to have "died in vain".
All dying is vain... and the only cause they were fighting for was because
they were told to be there. Stop romanticising... that particular fallacy
is called ad misericordian in logician's circles and has no place anywhere
unless you are addressing an audience of people who cry during chick
flicks.
If we wanted to work with and train the Iraqi people to defend themselves,
the first thing they would do is kick us the hell out of their country. If
we were interested in installing a genuine democracy there, the first thing
they would do is to elect a Shia majority which would be more anti-U.S.
than Fidel Castro. Nobody is genuinely interested in helping the Iraqis
achieve either of these goals... or as an Arbusto might drawl "Ain't gonna
happen".
There is a world of difference between the quagmire of Viet Nam in the late
1960's-early 1970's and the quagmire of Iraq in the present. One was begun
on false pretenses (the incident in the Gulf of Tonkin), and the other...
um... well... was started about imaginary weapons of mass destruction...
or... um... unestablished ties with terrorist organizations... or...
well... or... the imminent threat that they could launch an air strike
within 45 minutes... um. Viet Nam is a jungle and Iraq is in the desert.
They are entirely different!
I have seen a total of two minutes from "Bowling for Columbine". Apart
from that, I have never read, watched, touched, tasted or smelled Michael
Moore. I am flattered by the comparison, though... I've heard good things
about him.
~M.
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 09:34 AM |
How is my reasoning weak? Just because I acknowledge that war is going to
happen no matter what? If you ask me, I personally think it'd be too
idealistic to think that everyone would be okay without war...no matter
what. I'm no war mongerer or anything, but it's bound to happen when one
side (pick and choose) will not listen. I just accept that as normal,
it'll pass and time will fix things...in one way or another.
Yes, we do have REAL problems. In fact, I think the Patriot ACT is useless
and we still got some jobs to be made. *also isn't looking forward to a
rumored Draft, which would also be useless* I'll not deny that. I still
felt that Bin Laden should have been targetted (and not Hussein), but our
internal problems should be taken care of as a first priority. We also
need to increase our defenses and close some corporate loopholes. That, to
me, will help with a lot of things.
As far as the conspiracy of "Bin Laden being caught just before
re-elections", I'd not be surprised, but it'd not affect how I vote so you
don't have to worry about that - I look at other things in the candidates
before I vote. It'd be too convenient for me unless I get some more
details than the media. (By the way, am VERY curious now on what happened
with good ol' Hussein, Rumsfeld got pissed in an interview when people
asked about torture.)
Groundless opinion? *laughs* I think mine is fairly valid in its own way.
Rarely in history do you see people solve things by non-violence. Ghandi
is perhaps an exception, but all other things eventually lead to war.
Whether it is the government's fault or not, it was bound to happen...and
all the protesting is not going to help it. Granted, people are entitled
to their beliefs, but stopping traffic over it is going too far (I would
say the same about the pro-lifers as well). Not all humans are that
evolved to where they can reason without war...they haven't been for many,
many years. Even our early primates fought over things. Whether this was
a vaild war or not, there was bound to be bloodshed later on. I guess it's
time for people to go out and start voting or campaigning, eh? Even if it
means voting the lesser of the two evils (not saying you don't do it, but
there's many people out there who still don't vote)...
I could be mistaken, but so could you. Keep in mind that all the media and
all sources are still biased in their own way. That's why I look at
articles from Fox, CNN, AND some international sources to come to my own
conclusions. In fact, I had friends in the military that were in Iraq,
some of them coming back with a DIFFERENT story from the media. Either
way, though, they're all biased and everyone will end up having to pick a
side. I picked mine, you picked your's. As far as the thought that I'm
doing this to piss you off, that's not my intent, but if me disagreeing
with you is going to do that, then I'm not worried. (That would actually
amuse me considering that my "weak reasoning" is such a thorn on your
ambition.) I'll only stop expressing my opinions if the pantheon demands
it.
The reason why my grandpa felt that it was a Vietnam situation is because
we're going in there and it seems the majority of the people (apart from
the Kurds) want us out. Vietnam, apart from a several government
officials, did not want us there. I guess time will tell and prove me
wrong, which is okay.
|
| |
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 01:10 PM |
Ok... I keep my opinion on iraq on a low burner...  callei has heard it
once... long ago at poppy's... I met her right after my discharge...
I was over there in dessert storm...  I was young,
and Idealistic... I thought that the us was a shining example of what the
world should be...
they didn't want us there... we were told to go home by almost everyone
that we came across. I was in the airforce as a pilot (civil air defense
allows for early enrolment and louisianna is one of the few places that
stil has CAD.) And my air crew and I were chosen for PRD (public relations
duty)... we were handing out chocolate bars... hershey's with
almonds.(trust me, I remember that bit clearly)
The child was only about 2.5 feet tall... under a meter... he came up
slowly, took him about 10 minutes to get close enough... gave him the candy
and he ran... came back about 5 minutes later with his hands behind his
back. (we got that a lot, as the culture only alows gifts between friends,a
s a general rule, almost everything requires return...) he walked right up
to me... brought his hands around in front of him... and shot me... point
blank with a WWII issue german luger...
The bullet impacted my left shoulder... While I was wearing my second
chance vest (flack jacket), he missed it entirely (american af flight crews
get to wear a sleeveless flack arrangement to prever mobiity) I was blown
out of the back of the Humvee, and came down hard on my back... before I
could regain the breath to speak... my crew... turned that child into
ground beef...
A child is a product of his environment... the people there wanted us gone
so bad... that their hatred of us... caused a child to shoot me...
To top it all off... do some research... you will find that bush gave
hussein permission to be in kuwait...
Jordan, Kuwait, iran, vietnam, bosnia... this country has a history of
being where they are not wanted... and then wondering why people hate us...
So many people think that we are in the right... but no one realises how
little information is allowed to filter down to us... all but 2 countries
in the UN counted us as their allies before DUH-bya... after we invaded
iraq, again... we have 3 allies left, and in those... 2 of them, only the
governments, the people hate what has been going on...
Our actions as the "last superpower" are only going to get us in deeper and
deeper as more countrys are developing nuclear technology... eventually...
they are ging to spank us for indescretions, and as a country, we can
bullie the little nations, but china, pakistan, india... 3/5 of the worlds
population is right there... we have not the technolog or the manpower to
stand against the rest of the world... and if the american government
continues on it's obsessive christian leader bent... that is EXACTLY what
will happen
The kicker is this... as I was falling... all I could think was "if you
don't like hearshey's with almonds... just SAY SO..."
[Edited on 2/14/2004 by feralucce] ____________________
The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
|
| |
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 01:26 PM |
anya:
quote:
Rarely in history do you
see people solve things by non-violence.
This statement is fallacious... The UN, the Kyoto accord, Nato... all
peaceful resolutions... the UN LITERALLY makes hundreds of peaceful
resolutions a year... but they are not exciting, therefore not
publicized...
This example, while overly simplified, makes my point well... On an outting
with friends... When it is time to decide where to eat... everyone has a
different opinion, but you work it out. You forget about taht instance as
there is no "emotional charge." NOW... ever gotten into a quarrel (or in my
case a screaming rowe) over where to eat (I know more than one person here
has.) you'll remember and comment on that for years...
Now... Name one thing in history that was ACTUALLY SOLVED through war?
Solved, not ended...
Feral ____________________
The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 01:40 PM |
This almost makes me want to go back to the WWII times, where everything
was in strict self-defense. The reason why I have that "dammit, it's going
to happen anyway so quit stopping traffic" mindset is that no matter what,
people in this area have to whine about the government. It's not perfect,
but they'll find the littlest thing to scream about. Even if the
government didn't go to war, they'll whine just because the government
isn't "saving the world."
Anyway, I extend my sympathies to you Feral and apologise for what you had
to go through due to Desert Storm. We should have got rid of Hussein just
back then, I personally felt the timing was bad this time. So now we have
soldiers dying over there. For what? I really am confused on that now.
Granted, I give kudos for catching Hussein, but I grow skeptic
too...despite my more conservative side.
I've always been a fan of assassinations and great stradegy, for if we have
to shed blood, those usually do the least of it. However, it's "illegal"
to do those things...despite the several times we supported assassinations
in the past.
As far as your question, Feral, the US going to war in WWII stopped us from
having to speak German and being anti-Jewish today (or Japanese, whatever
you wish to use). In World War I, going to war helped end yet another war.
There are probably other times in history when people didn't go to war,
they'd be taken over by some other culture. Maybe it's more justified in
the defense areas...then again, some people do think Hussein was a threat.
I didn't think he had anything to do with 9/11, but what do I know.
quote:
This statement is
fallacious... The UN, the Kyoto accord, Nato... all peaceful resolutions...
the UN LITERALLY makes hundreds of peaceful resolutions a year... but they
are not exciting, therefore not publicized...
Interesting, I'm interested in seeing them. Though I do think war should
be a last resort, there are those rare occasions when it's necessary. If I
made an error on clarifying that, then I apologise.
|
| |
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 01:50 PM |
quote:
As far as your question,
Feral, the US going to war in WWII stopped us from having to speak German
and being anti-Jewish today (or Japanese, whatever you wish to use). In
World War I, going to war helped end yet another war. There are probably
other times in history when people didn't go to war, they'd be taken over
by some other culture. Maybe it's more justified in the defense
areas...then again, some people do think Hussein was a threat. I didn't
think he had anything to do with 9/11, but what do I know.
Actually, Hitler completely outlined his plan... America was not in it...
but you missed my point entirely... I did not ask what the US going to war
solved... I asked for one example where war was the answer... the war
started before our involvement... and it solved nothing... literally
created more problems than was there... BTW... we'd have been speaking
japanese... war takes two sides in a conflict... so there is no such thing
as a war of self defense... and it has NEVER solved one thing... the taking
over a culture example... the offender STILL wants to take it over... the
issue is not resolved... as for hussein... name one way how he was a
danger to us? They found two things whenw e went in... jack, and shit...
and jack left right after... there was no WMD... WE PUT HIM IN POWER... we
should be more careful about what e do then we can avoid having to clean up
after ourselves...
Feral ____________________
The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
/>
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 02:00 PM |
Well, entering WWII still stopped the Japanese from taking over us. Then
again, some argue that the second bomb was unnecessary and that Hirohito
would have surrendered after the first bomb.
As far as the Iraqi situation, we're not finding WMD or Al-Qaeda
connections, but we are finding mass burials and those things... Fox
suggested that we found some stuff buried in the sand, but other sources
will say otherwise. That's why I say that all sources are biased.
I thought that Hussein was the vice president of another guy? Oh
well...according to my previous American History instructor, we put Castro
in power too. He's a bit laid back now, probably from age. What's a big
irony is that half of these guys were trained by us before they started
trouble.
|
| |
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 02:07 PM |
YES... it did stop them... BUT THAT WAS NOT THE ISSUE... it stopped them,
but the solution was not that... WHAT MADE THEM WANT TO... that is what
needed to be solved... it solved nothing... just changed actions... I state
again...
quote:
I asked for one example
where war was the answer... the war started before our involvement... and
it solved nothing... literally created more problems than was there...
BTW... we'd have been speaking japanese... war takes two sides in a
conflict... so there is no such thing as a war of self defense... and it
has NEVER solved one thing... the taking over a culture example... the
offender STILL wants to take it over... the issue is not resolved...
____________________
The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
/>
/>
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 02:52 PM |
Okay, I get you now...you can't force something on anyone, right? They
have to change on their own...maybe I'm on the wrong track here, trying to
understand what you're pointing at when you say war solves nothing. Either
you are suggesting that someone entering a war later can stop the plans of
another, but the person who had the plans cannot excecute them because not
everyone agrees with them? Hope I'm making sense here...just trying to
understand your side of the argument...
|
| |
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 03:16 PM |
| pre-ficking scisely!!!! ____________________
The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
/>
/>
/>
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist
|
| |
callei
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 759 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 06:37 PM |
I sorta hate to mention this but im going to do it anyways.
Lots of america DOES speak german, always has since they came over some
300 years ago. And LOTS of people speak Japanese, because it is teh
language that thier parents speak, because tehy had to learn it for
work/love, or because they grew up in an area with lots of people that
spoke it.
____________________
Real goths wear silver and crosses to keep the werewolves and vampires
away.
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 14/2/2004 at 08:26 PM |
Okay, you got a point there. But those languages would be THE dominant
language here if one of the two Axis Powers took over.
|
| |
Monolycus
Fanatic Posts: 580 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 15/2/2004 at 02:47 AM |
Anya: I call bullshit. This particular German speaker is now done trying
to add a third dimension to your two dimensional politics. Since you think
that "non-violence" is never an effective way to resolve anything, why
haven't you threatened to come and kick my ass yet?
"That would actually amuse me considering that my "weak reasoning" is such
a thorn on your ambition"
Back to the kiddie table with you now. The only "ambition" I had by
responding to your comments was to try to get you to introduce some colour
beyond black and white to the palette of your world view, but it has become
apparent that isn't going to happen. The only other response I could
possibly have is "what the fuck is she smoking?" Machst du spass mit dem
boesem Mensch.
~M.
|
| |
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 15/2/2004 at 09:30 AM |
quote:
Back to the kiddie table
with you now. The only "ambition" I had by responding to your comments was
to try to get you to introduce some colour beyond black and white to the
palette of your world view, but it has become apparent that isn't going to
happen.
If that is the case, you're seeing things just as black and white as I am.
You're fixed on your views, just as I am. Just now I tried to consider the
other views on why people do not think war that high, but I guess me
thinking that violence is sometimes a necessary evil is the only thing you
see in that. And of course, I always am for trying diplomacy before doing
any of the mentioned... As far as the "non-violence" comment, I said that
it doesn't ALWAYS work...if I gaffed, then that's my problem and I'll admit
not clearing that up......and apologise for that.
If I'm going to be considered close-minded and only seeing things
two-dimensional, just because I do not agree with your views, then you are
just as close-minded and two-dimensional as I am. Simple as that.
PS: It'd also be childish to threaten an ass-kicking just for disagreeing
with me. ANND unconstitutional... 
[Edited on 2/15/2004 by Anya]
|
| |
callei
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 759 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 15/2/2004 at 09:47 AM |
it might have been childish if he had, but it would be constitutional. you
are guarenteed to be treated as equal to a man (whatever) so you get to
face physical violence just like the boys. If you want to debate that, go
and ask the women and men that go out there day after day protesting,
marching, and petitioning and ask them if girls dont get hit. Or killed. or
crippled. Please anya dont pretend that this is "free soeach". It only
shows that you didnt pay attention in Gov'. class.
____________________
Real goths wear silver and crosses to keep the werewolves and
vampires
/>
away.
|
| |
|
|
|
