Let's start another debate here shall we?


Postby aturner » Mon Jan 29, 2007 4:53 pm

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="tahoma,verdana,arial" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by DR
[br]You agree that the purpose of the US is to spread democracy? (You answered: "Fair enough"). But you have a problem with someone who thinks that the people to whom we are spreading this democracy are going to turn on us because they are not loyal?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I agree that the spread of democracy is a very noble goal. But when it becomes a central dogma, then things can get out of hand. When all means are justified by such a noble end, then problems can arise.

What I have a problem with, is when Nav portrays all Muslims as evil people that are not trustworthy and are deserving extermination. So my question to Nav is why does he seem to think we can liberate Iraq and spread freedom there? If they are going to turn on us anyway, then why bother?
aturner
 
Posts: 1470
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 1:50 pm
Location: USA
 

Postby BewareOfDog » Mon Jan 29, 2007 5:05 pm

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="tahoma,verdana,arial" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><b>Originally posted by aturner</b>
Yes DR, you've got me pegged.

And you are still resorting to the only viable tool at your disposal. When folks like you and Nav fail to win an argument, you resort to <b>name calling, labels,</b> etc. I believe this tactic would be known as an "ad hominem" attack, and you are a master at it.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I'm no master, I'm just playing along by following your preferred method of attack, labeling/referring to people as :

<li>captain obvious - Page 1 Posted - Jan 11 2007 : 23:32:12</li>
<li>peter pan - Page 2 Posted - Jan 12 2007 : 12:07:28 </li>
<li>Bill Clinton - Page 3 Posted - Jan 15 2007 : 16:27:12</li>
<li>John Kerry - Page 3 Posted - Jan 15 2007 : 16:27:12</li>
<li>John Kerry - Page 3 Posted - Jan 15 2007 : 21:47:17</li>
<li> forum bodyguard - Page 3 Posted - Jan 28 2007 : 20:43:34 </li>
<li>Neo Con - Page 4 Posted - Jan 29 2007 : 08:08:12</li>
<li>Wilsonian - Page 4 Posted - Jan 29 2007 : 08:08:12</li>


You seem to label people much better than I do! :D

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="tahoma,verdana,arial" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
So, how's the weather in Utah? Wilsonian?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

See for yourself: <a href="http://www.wunderground.com/US/UT/">Weather in Utah</a>

How's the weather in North Carolina? I would think there's a lot of <a href="http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dict.asp?Word=smug">SMUG</a> where you are?
BewareOfDog
 
Posts: 4306
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 12:37 am
Location: USA
 

Postby aturner » Mon Jan 29, 2007 9:34 pm

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="tahoma,verdana,arial" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by DR
[br]You seem to label people much better than I do! :D<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
LOL!

On Jan 29 2007 : 14:40:29, you made a post <b>solely</b> to apply labels to me. Have I done that? No.

And how many "liberal" labels do you think have been applied to me in this one single topic?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="tahoma,verdana,arial" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">How's the weather in North Carolina? <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Free.
aturner
 
Posts: 1470
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 1:50 pm
Location: USA
 

Postby An Appple Pie » Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:55 pm

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="tahoma,verdana,arial" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><I>Originally posted by DR</I>
<br>Anyone who is against the war in Iraq, or will bad-mouth our President, seems to have "conveniently" forgotten that the President declared a "War On Terrorism" shortly before invading Iraq.

They also seems to conveniently look past the fact that the <b>"former Iraqi Regime of Saddam Hussein trained thousands of radical Islamic terrorists from the region at camps in Iraq over the four years immediately preceding the U.S. invasion, according to documents and photographs recovered by the U.S. military in postwar Iraq".</b>

They also seems to conveniently forget the fact that the men and women who have <b>voluntarily</b> joined the United States Armed Forces, swore an oath to defend this nation. - They knew full well that there may have come a day when they were called upon to honor this promise.

I could rant on, but what good would come of it? All I really have to say is if you do not like the way things are run here in the United States, then pack a [intercourse]in' bag and move your sorry-ass somewhere else!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I'm going to have to disagree here. You seem to be forgetting that our [presidential administration's] justification for starting the current war was on the faulty assumption that Iraq had WMD's and was related to the 9/11 bombings. Just because Bush said he is going to fight a "War on Terror" doesn't give the United States the right to invade any country we deem "dangerous" to our safety. And the UN didn't officially support the US' entry into Iraq.

True, Saddam probably funded terrorist operations. But we captured him relatively quickly, and killed him relatively recently. I'm pretty sure things have gotten worse since.

US troops volunteered to defend our nation in times of crisis, when the risks of their lives outweigh the harm that would result from remaining defenseless. We started a pre-emptive war. We were never attacked and American lives weren't in danger. US troops never volunteered to defend the citizens of Iraq.

Granted, we didn't officially know that the WMD information was incorrect until after the invasion, but unfortunately we are unable to make a reasonable exit plan because we acted too soon. So the US is still fighting in Iraq. We have to weigh the risks of staying in Iraq to send off more Americans to their death, and leaving early. The latter could have terrible consequences in terms of foreign relations and general attitude towards the US, but we've already had that going for us since the beginning. So is it worth it?
An Appple Pie
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 5:39 pm
 

Sponsored

Sponsor
 
 

Postby BewareOfDog » Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:59 pm

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="tahoma,verdana,arial" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><b>Originally posted by aturner</b>
On Jan 29 2007 : 14:40:29, you made a post <b>solely</b> to apply labels to me. Have I done that? No.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Congratulations!- You get a coookie for not making posts <b>solely</b> to label people. Shall I start pouting now?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="tahoma,verdana,arial" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
And how many "liberal" labels do you think have been applied to me in this one single topic?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Hey, if the shoes fit....
BewareOfDog
 
Posts: 4306
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 12:37 am
Location: USA
 

Postby Navigator7 » Tue Jan 30, 2007 12:10 am

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="tahoma,verdana,arial" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by An Appple Pie
I'm going to have to disagree here. You seem to be forgetting that our [presidential administration's] justification for starting the current war was on the faulty assumption that Iraq had WMD's and was related to the 9/11 bombings.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Start by getting your facts straight.
The fact America and the president is fighting two wars....which has been established...might lead you to the second clue...it doesn't serve the liberal media to show Bush succeeding in any endeavor.

A history lesson will show the entire Left and the Right believed Saddam was a threat to the world and said so on many occassions.

What is unusual is somebody took action.

Your statement above is just canned spam no fit enough to feed a feral cat.
Navigator7
 
Posts: 2635
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: USA
 

Postby Navigator7 » Tue Jan 30, 2007 12:15 am

aTurner.....You are running on rims......no traction.
DR has you pegged to a tee.
Yes....I am calling you a name...Not Dr's name. I like my own....You are a Weather Vane.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="tahoma,verdana,arial" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">aTurner~What I have a problem with, is when Nav portrays all Muslims as evil people that are not trustworthy and are deserving extermination. So my question to Nav is why does he seem to think we can liberate Iraq and spread freedom there? If they are going to turn on us anyway, then why bother?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Because it's the right thing to do. It's not the easy thing to do....but it is the right thing to do.
We take our freedoms for granted. Live without yours for a week and see.
The world...let alone America should never allow genocidal dictators to experience comfort even for a moment.

Reason #163 to hate America.
Navigator7
 
Posts: 2635
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: USA
 

Postby Mr.Plow » Tue Jan 30, 2007 1:35 am

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="tahoma,verdana,arial" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
We take our freedoms for granted.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Damn straight. Bush should back off and stop backing the renewal of the Assault Weapons Ban. That idiot has no idea what the Second Amendment was intended to be. If we can't present a reasonable defense against the government -lest they become infiltrated with facist forces like Hitler's democratic takeover of Germany-, then we've failed by Jefferson's standards.
Mr.Plow
 
Posts: 3932
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 11:48 pm
Location: USA
 

Postby BewareOfDog » Tue Jan 30, 2007 6:24 am

OK Mr.Plow, I've Googled for information about Bush backing the renewal of the assault weapon ban, but every article is dated 2-3 years ago.
Have you got a current link?
BewareOfDog
 
Posts: 4306
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 12:37 am
Location: USA
 

Postby aturner » Tue Jan 30, 2007 8:42 am

DR-
Yesterday you responded to the first post of my double post:
Jan 29 2007 : 15:36:06

Thanks once again for showing your true interest. Your choice shows that you have no desire to talk about the issues. Your sole purpose is to slap labels on anyone that disagrees with you. Sure, I give out backhanded complements and insulting labels as good as anyone, but I always try to steer things back on topic. And I'm also willing to accept it when I've been caught in an inconsistency--that's life....and part of the learning process.

Nav-
You responded to the second post from my double post:
Jan 29 2007 : 15:53:18

Hot damn! I honestly expected both you and DR to ignore the second message, b/c it was an attempt to steer the discussion back to a discussion, rather than a mud slinging (name calling) contest.

Now that the reason for my double post is clear, I'll try it again!
aturner
 
Posts: 1470
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 1:50 pm
Location: USA
 
 
PreviousNext

Return to Political Rants, Discussions & Debates

cron